From: c stirling bartholomew (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Wed Jun 06 2001 - 13:24:25 EDT
Iver raised the issue of the privacy of Jesus prediction of the fall of the
temple in Mk 13:2, suggesting that the false testimony in Mk 14:57-59 could
not be linked to remarks that were not publicly made.
I looked over the synoptic accounts of Jesus prediction of the fall of the
temple (MK13:2, Matt 24:2, Lk 21:6) and it seems that these remarks were
only semi-private. Real privacy in Mark's account does not arrive until Mk
13:3 where we are told that Peter, James and John EPHRWTA AUTO KAT' IDIAN.
See also Matt 24:3.
Those who were available to hear Jesus prediction (hOI MAQTHAI) about the
temple could easily have been responsible for repeating Jesus words which
became the substance of the false testimony in Mk 14:57-59 even if they were
not the ones bearing false testimony. Assuming that hOI MAQTHAI is not being
used in the narrow sense of the twelve, it could even be possible that one
of those hearing Jesus actually participated in the false testimony directly
but this would be impossible to prove and is in a sense a question of little
In all three synoptic accounts of this prediction we have a construction
where the agent of destruction is suppressed. This left the door open so to
speak for the false witnesses to fill the agent slot with Jesus.
I am not really trying to reconstruct the path of reports and rumors about
Jesus during his trial. What I am doing is responding to a supposed
difficulty raised by Iver which I don't see as a very serious difficulty.
Clayton Stirling Bartholomew
Three Tree Point
P.O. Box 255 Seahurst WA 98062
B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [email@example.com]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-327Q@franklin.oit.unc.edu
To subscribe, send a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:36:59 EDT