Date: Sat, 19 Apr 1996 18:05:04 -0400
To: crosstalk@info.harpercollins.com
From: stevan davies
Subject: Mark or Thomas

My goodness, Greg did just what I've done, split the Mk and Th parts
and look at them in parallel.

Greg wrote: 

> Some comments: There is much to reflect on.  Both stories end on a note of
> judgment, both include a secrecy motif, both have Jesus singling out one
> disciple for special attention--Peter and Thomas respectively.  I find it
> striking that in Thomas, only Thomas is granted the secret knowledge
> whereas in Mark, all the apostles are in the know.

I was interested in Greg's observation that in the fifth
section we have rocks mentioned in one and Rocky mentioned
in the other. But this might just be coincidence.

I have put three sections in {{ }} brackets because they are
unquestionably Mark's creation. Few things are more certain
than that Mark added the travel motif (he does so for all
three passion-predictions in chapters 8-10), and the 
"Messiaic secret" motif, and the "suffering Son of Man" motif 
and a contrast with his previous mentions of Jesus teaching
"in parables" where now he speaks "plainly." . 

Therefore we KNOW that Mark has considerably changed
some original into what he has in his gospel.

Mark's central section (8-10) makes it abundantly clear that
he disapproves of one or more disciples claiming precedence
over others. I very strongly suspect that he here starts off
by hammering Peter (Get behind me Satan) and then in
chapter 10 moves on to hammer James and John in their
quest for precedence, thus covering all of the big three in
one place or another by name. Hence I strongly suspect that
the final section should be labeled Markan redaction as well.

I think these considerations show two things. First, Thomas
13 and Mark 8:27ff are closely related versions of one
original thing. Second, the one original thing is not what
we find in Mark.  Either, then, there is a tertium quid, an
X the unknown version which both Thomas and Mark
are revising. Or Mark is revising the Thomas version.

We do know that Mark's central section is written in 
part to maintain Mark's thesis that there is not and should not
be any one top disciple. Thus if he knew of a tradition that
maintained the primacy of one disciple he would have had
a motivation to revise and reverse it.

Finally, isn't it interesting that the two opinions of Jesus
given in Thomas match the two major schools of Jesus
The Teacher in 1996. On the one hand he is a messenger
(messenger of God, one assumes, a prophet), on the
other hand a wise lover-of-wisdom (wisdom sage). Thus,
the answers to Jesus' initial question in Thomas may well 
be just plain true, that is what people said Jesus was like.

There is certainly an interesting difference between 
Thomas' question of "what category am I put in"
and Mark's question of "what person am I said to be."
The latter is a pretty odd question, when you think about it.

Is it not true that only from Mark (6 and here) do we 
find reports that anyone thought Jesus was John the Baptist?
I'm not sure that this can be said with confidence to be
redactional, but it may well be.

I'll pause here. What do crosstalkers think is going on here?

Steve