Summary In the Abbé Jean Carmignac’s short book, The Birth of the Synoptic Gospels (Chicago: Franciscan Herald Press, 1983), he identifies and classifies Semitisms in the synoptic gospels. He evaluates the value of the listed Semitisms as supporting evidence for his theory that the synoptic gospels were originally written in a Semitic language (GMark and…
Category: Gospel of Mark
The Carmignac Challenge, Part I of III: Yes, a Hebrew Gospel of Mark
Executive Summary The Abbé Jean Carmignac was a learned translator of the Dead Sea Scrolls. When he translated the Gospel of Mark from Greek into Qumran Hebrew, Carmignac noticed that the translation was “extremely easy.” He also noticed many Semitisms—linguistic features of the Greek that seemed to have been translated from a Semitic language—in the…
What is the meaning of “Boanerges”?
In Mk 3:17 Jesus gives two disciples the nickname “Boanerges”; the text explains that the meaning of “Boanerges” is “Sons of Thunder.” The problem is that “Boanerges” is not good Aramaic. As Wikipedia says, “Given the Greek translation that comes with it (‘Sons of Thunder’), it seems that the first element of the name is…
The Bethsaida section, Part III: The editing
Summary In my book, The Two Gospels of Mark: Performance and Text, I discuss the current Bethsaida section in the Gospel of Mark (Mk 6:45-8:26). I review the staging of each scene, and explain why I think some scenes are original and some are by an editor. These three blog posts build on that discussion….
The Bethsaida section, Part II: The original sequence
Summary In Part I, I argued that the role of the blind man of Bethsaida was played by Titus Flavius Clemens. Clemens was honored in the scene, and Mark wrote the scene for that purpose. Here, I build on Part I. I discuss the second feeding miracle in the Gospel of Mark. I propose that…
The Bethsaida section, Part I: The blind man of Bethsaida scene
Summary This post extrapolates from the discussion of the blind man of Bethsaida scene in my book, The Two Gospels of Mark: Performance and Text. Here, I review elements of the scene (Mk 8:22-26). I imagine how the scene was staged. I conclude that the scene made sense only in the world of the audience….
The Joseph of Arimathea scene in the Gospel of Mark, revisited
Summary When I wrote my book, The Two Gospels of Mark: Performance and Text, I assumed that the received text of the Joseph of Arimathea scene in the Gospel of Mark (Mk 15:42-46) preserved the performance of Mark’s play. I assumed that the audience heard the spoken words “Iōsēph ho apo Harimathaias.” I assumed that…
Dramatic enactment of the Gospel of Mark by actor Max McLean
A YouTube search yields several dramatic readings of the Gospel of Mark, including an excellent one by actor David Suchet. But the dramatic enactment of the Gospel of Mark by actor Max McLean is in a class by itself. McLean dramatizes the dialogue. He uses the stage and all of the actor’s craft to keep…
The fig tree episode in the Gospel of Mark is an editorial overwrite
Summary The episode of the cursing of the fig tree in the Gospel of Mark is not good theater. It follows the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, and brackets the Temple Incident (TI). The fig-tree episode should have some relationship to either the triumph or to Jesus’s actions in the Temple. But instead, Jesus explains to…
Reconstruction of the Pilate scene in the Gospel of Mark
Executive Summary In the Pilate scene in the Gospel of Mark, Mark invoked a name, “Pilate,” that had meaning to the audience of his play. We can assume that Mark expected the audience (in Rome 90-95 CE) to bring their knowledge of Pilate, that he was hard or even cruel. But the Passover Privilege presents…