Showing posts with label women. Show all posts
Showing posts with label women. Show all posts

Thursday, December 22, 2022

Matthew 1:1-17

 “This is the record of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.”

— ‭‭Matthew‬ ‭1‬:‭1‬‬

“and Jesse the father of David the king. David was the father of Solomon (by the wife of Uriah),”

— ‭‭Matthew‬ ‭1‬:‭6‬‬

“After the deportation to Babylon, Jeconiah became the father of Shealtiel, Shealtiel the father of Zerubbabel,”

— ‭‭Matthew‬ ‭1‬:‭12‬‬

“and Jacob the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary, by whom Jesus was born, who is called Christ. So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations, and from David to the deportation to Babylon, fourteen generations, and from the deportation to Babylon to Christ, fourteen generations.”

— ‭‭Matthew‬ ‭1‬:‭16‬-‭17‬‬


Definitely more than 14 + 14 + 14 people/generations born between Abraham and Jesus. This is way too precise. Plus, Luke’s genealogy has a different number. Classic genre question. Ancient gospel writing has different purpose than modern biographies.

Even genealogies are telling story. Why do they have different names? Too long of issue for here. Not Joseph in Matthew and Mary in Luke. Many names are same. Probably a Levirate marriage (or two) where names disagree towards the end of genealogy. Could be someone is giving physical line and another is giving royal line. Could reflect adoption even. Issues with Jeconiah’s curse in OT. The point is that again, we have a problem with genealogies but between genre and cultural practices, we have solutions and really no reason to resolve the issue. Authors had theological reasons for their specific lists.

Matthew’s 3 lists of 14…don’t like numerology a lot, but Jewish gematria has David represented as 1 and 4. 

Biggest surprise of Matthew’s genealogy is 4 women: Rahab, Tamar, “Uriah’s wife,” Mary. Some of these had less than stellar pasts, but find themselves in Messiah’s line. In 1st century, it would be crazy to find women listed, and especially these. Matthew is making a case for Jesus’ royalty. This would not be the way to do it.

Mark 16:9-20

 “Then he appeared to the eleven themselves, while they were eating, and he rebuked them for their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they did not believe those who had seen him resurrected. He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature.”
— ‭‭Mark‬ ‭16‬:‭14‬-‭15‬‬

“These signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new languages; they will pick up snakes with their hands, and whatever poison they drink will not harm them; they will place their hands on the sick and they will be well.””
— ‭‭Mark‬ ‭16‬:‭17‬-‭18‬‬


Mark ends at 16:8

    External evidence: B 304 sys sams armmss Eus Eusmss Hiermss.
  • Sinaiticus and Vaticanus testimony here are huge.
  • Clement of Alexandria and Origen do not know of these verses.
  • Eusebius and Jerome affirm that Mark ends at 16:8 in all manuscript that they know.
 
 Internal arguments:
Vocabulary and style not like Mark (this is a double-edged sword when it comes to determining authorship and authenticity of books/sections of books). But the data is as follows: ἀπιστέω, βλάπτω,
βεβαιόω, ἐπακολουθέω, θεάομαι, μετά ταῦτα, πορεύομαι, συνεργέω, ὕστερον are found nowhere else
in Mark. One word (θανάσιμον) and phrase referring to disciples (τοῖς μετ΄αὐτο γενομένοις) would only
occur here in the entire NT.

The connection between vv. 8 and 9 is awkward at best. Mary Magdalene is "reintroduced." Jesus is
assumed to be the new subject, when the entire chapter has been about the women.
The principles of text criticism (reasoned eclecticism, at least) would presume that it's much easier to assume the text grew over time. Scribes would see an abrupt ending and add to the text than see a nice, rounded ending to Mark and cut it out.

Either shorter or longer ending of Mark

Shorter reading: “They reported briefly to those around Peter all that they had been commanded.
After these things Jesus himself sent out through them, from the east to the west, the holy and
imperishable preaching of eternal salvation. Amen.”
 
   External evidence:
Short + Long ending: L Ψ 083 099 0112 579 al
vv 9-20 after v. 8: A C D W [which has a different shorter ending between vv. 14 and 15] Θ ƒ13 33 2427 Majority lat syc, p, h bo
  
 Internal arguments: f


So what happened to the ending of Mark?
(1) the Gospel was never finished; hmm...unlikely. I mean, Mark could have been receiving persecution
and never been able to finish. But there has to be better options.
(2) the last leaf of the gospel was lost prior to copying. Unlikely, because it would have been written on
a scroll. The last section of Mark would have been the most protected. There were no "leaves" until the
codex/book was invented centuries later.
(3) The author intentionally ended the Gospel here. Believe it or not, this fits Marks modus operandi.
Mark loves mystery in his gospel and challenging the reader. Nothing better than basically leaving the reader with sense of wonder after most amazing event and the basic question, “Will you believe, and how will you respond?”

Conclusion:
I definitely lean towards the manuscript evidence that does not include vv. 9-20 of chapter 16. There’s both internal evidence in these verses and external (stronger manuscript) support for Mark ending at v. 8, even though it leaves the gospel “open” per se.
 
Just because verses are not original does not mean events they discuss didn’t happen. E.g., I still think the woman caught in adultery (beginning of John 8) sounds like something very much like Jesus would do.

V.  14 doesn’t sound like Jesus, especially post resurrection, but it could have happened. The “accompanying signs” have inspired many church practices in various denominations but we can argue about that another time.

Some even say the “Great commission” has been fulfilled bc from Jesus and disciples’ perspective, taking gospel to “ends of earth” has happened. Was Jesus really thinking of every people group? I don’t know. It’s possible and every nation certainly needs to hear the gospel. But I don’t think anything is hindering Jesus’ return. 

What’s our responsibility now? Love others. Make disciples. Serve sacrificially. Show hope where there is none.