04-04-2025, 12:01 AM
Do you believe that in the original rendition of Mk 4:9-12, Jesus spoke of his intentionally "concealing the true meaning" of parables?
Richard Carrier, _On the Historicity of Jesus: Why We Might Have Reason for Doubt_ (2014), 696pp., on 419
https://archive.org/details/on-the-histo...concealing
Page 419
... In the Sea Narrative Jesus starts telling parables about the gospel (even beginning with an explanation of the whole concept of parable as a way of concealing the true meaning behind fictitious stories: Mk 4.9-12)...
Mark 4 (Berean Literal)
https://biblehub.com/blb/mark/4.htm
9 And He was saying,
“He who has ears to hear,
let him hear.”
10 And when He was alone, those around Him with the Twelve began asking Him about the parable.
11 And He was saying to them,
“To you has been given the mystery of the kingdom of God,
but to those who are outside, everything is done in parables,
12 so that,
‘Seeing, they might see
and not perceive;
and hearing, they might hear
and not understand;
lest ever they should turn,
and they should be forgiven.’”
Mark 4 (Lamsa)
https://biblehub.com/lamsa/mark/4.htm
9 And he said,
He who has ears to hear,
let him hear.
10 When they were alone by themselves,
those who were with him together with the twelve asked him about that parable.
11 And Jesus said to them,
To you is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God,
but to the outsiders everything has to be explained by parables.
12 For seeing they see,
and yet do not perceive;
and hearing they hear,
and yet do not understand;
if they return,
their sins would be forgiven.
===========================
T. W. Manson (1893-1958), _The Teaching of Jesus: Studies of its Form and Content_ (1935), 351pp., on 76-80
https://www.amazon.com/Teaching-Jesus-T-...521091993/
https://archive.org/details/teachingofje...q=category
Page 76
mean those whom Jesus himself had called and a further group of people who had attached themselves to him.
With this class is contrasted the other class who are outside.
To the inner circle is given the secret of the Kingdom of God, to the others only parables.
The most obvious question to ask at this stage is how the two classes are divided :
what is it that places a man in the one class rather than the other?
In view of what has been said above on the nature of parables, there can be only one answer to this question.
It is the man himself who places himself in one category or another, and that simply by the response which he makes to the parables.
Those in whom religious insight and faith are awakened by the hearing of parables press into the inner circle for more.
Once more the saying applies:
'To him that hath shall be given'.
The parable is in practice a test :
and the response of a man to it is what determines whether he shall ever get beyond it to the secret of the Kingdom.
We are now brought face to face with the chief difficulty of the passage :
ἵνα βλέποντες ... ἀφεθῇ αὐτοῖς.
The stumblingblock here is the ἵνα.
As the text stands it can only mean that the object, or at any rate the result, of parabolic teaching is to prevent insight, understanding, repentance, and forgiveness.
On any interpretation of parable this is simply absurd.
If parables had this object or result, that in itself would be the strongest possible argument against making use of them, and would make it impossible to imagine why Jesus should have employed such a way of delivering his teaching.
The solution of the difficulty is to be sought in two directions.
The first clue is the parable of the Sower itself.
Commentators have pointed out that _vv_. 11, 12 are really an intrusion between the parable and its interpretation :
and the step from 'intrusion' to 'interpolation' is easily made.
But the intrusion of this saying is perfectly natural, if, as I believe, the 'Sower' is a parable about parabolic teaching.
'The sower sows the word' (_v_. 14) :
'and in many such parables he spake the word to them' (_v_. 33)
Now the one thing that is clear in the parable is that the result of the sowing depends, not on the seed, but on the kind of ground in which it lodges.
In other words the efficacy of parables depends, not on the parables, but on the character of the hearers.
The object of sowing is not to prevent growth and fruition but rather to see whether anything will grow and give fruit.
Granted this, it will follow that the inner circle in _v_. 11 represent the good ground which brings forth fruit ;
while those outside correspond to the ground which, for various reasons, produces nothing.
The second clue lies in the fact that the quotation from Is. vi. 9 f. ends with the words καὶ ἀφεθῇ αὐτοῖς, departing from LXX ..., and the Hebrew ..., and agreeing with the Targum ... .
This suggests that the last part of the quotation is given in what was the accepted version for synagogue purposes, a version which later was incorporated in the written Targum.
It also stamps the saying as Palestinian in origin and thus creates a strong presumption in favour of its authenticity.
If we now turn to the beginning of the quotation we find that in the Targum it runs as follows:^1 [1: Ed. P. de Lagarde, p. 230]
...
And he said :
Go and speak to this people
who hear indeed
and do not understand,
and see indeed
but do not know.
Turned into Greek this would be: ... .
Here again the quotation in Mark agrees with the Targum against both the Hebrew and the LXX in putting the verbs in the third person rather than the second.
The chief point of difference is that the Marcan form gives final clauses where the Targum has relative clauses.
Now in Aramaic the particle ... [I'm guessing it's ר resh, which looks like ד dalet], which is used in the Targum here, can be used to introduce either a relative or a final clause :
it can mean either
οἵ
or
ἵνα.
The conclusion to be drawn is, I think, that the form in which the words were spoken by Jesus approximated to what we find in the Targum, and that the Marcan version rests on a misunderstanding of the Aramaic due mainly to the ambiguity of the particle ... [I'm guessing it's ר resh, which looks like ד dalet]
We may conjecture that what Jesus said was:
To you is given the secret of the Kingdom of God;
but all things come in parables to those outside who
See indeed but do not know
And hear indeed but do not understand
Lest they should repent and receive forgiveness^1 [1: Cf. Is. xlii. 18-20]
where the last words would seem to mean :
'For if they did, they would repent and receive forgiveness'.
In support of this interpretation one other point may be mentioned.
If the object of the quotation were to show that parabolic teaching was calculated to harden the hearts of the hearers, it is curious that the words in Is. vi. 9 f. which would most strongly suggest this are precisely those which are omitted in Mark :
'Make the heart of this people fat
and make their ears heavy,
and shut their eyes,
lest they see with their eyes
and hear with their ears,
and understand with their heart'.
These would surely be more apt to the purpose than what we actually have in Mark :
and it seems to me significant that they are _not_ quoted.
With the omission of these words the conjunction ... is left in the air :
and at once two possibilities emerge.
Either it may be taken in the sense suggested above, in which case it will appear that the real cause of the blindness of those outside is that they do not wish to repent and be forgiven : a deadly self-satisfaction is the real hindrance to the efficacy of parabolic teaching.
Or, though this seems to me less probable, we may place a full stop after 'understand' and take ... in its other sense of 'perhaps'.
The last words would then express a hope that the unresponsiveness of these people will yet be overcome-- 'Perhaps they may yet repent'.
If it be objected that this interpretation of the passage makes Jesus do violence to the Old Testament text, the answer is that this passage is a piece of Haggadah and that the passage from Isaiah is not cited as a proof-text but as an illustration.
Further, it is not cited in the original but in the current Aramaic version, which, as we have already seen, departs from the Hebrew in several important particulars.
And it may be added that Jewish practice permitted and approved a much greater freedom in the use of the Scriptures when quoted in Haggadah than would be allowable when strict interpretation of the Law was in question.
Anyone who is familiar with the feats of exegesis performed in the homiletic Midrashim will find nothing startling in this case.
We may conclude then that the text as it stands in _v_. 12 rests on a misunderstanding of what Jesus really said and that the true sense of his words would be given by a text running somewhat as follows:
...^1 [1: This represents an Aramaic original which would be somewhat as follows: ...
which has been misunderstood as if it were: ...
thus producing the text which stands in Mark.]
The passage will then be in complete agreement with what we learn elsewhere in the Synoptic Gospels about the nature and object of teaching in parables.
It will be clear that the purpose of parables is not to harden the hearts of the hearers, but that it is the hardness of heart of the hearers that defeats the purpose of parables.
The quotation from Isaiah is not introduced by Jesus to explain the purpose of teaching in parables, but to illustrate what is meant by
οἵ ἔξω :
it is in fact a definition of the sort of character which prevents a man from becoming one of those to whom the secret of the Kingdom is given, a description in language borrowed from the Jewish Bible of those people who did not produce the things for which Jesus was constantly seeking-- insight, repentance, and faith.
Richard Carrier, _On the Historicity of Jesus: Why We Might Have Reason for Doubt_ (2014), 696pp., on 419
https://archive.org/details/on-the-histo...concealing
Page 419
... In the Sea Narrative Jesus starts telling parables about the gospel (even beginning with an explanation of the whole concept of parable as a way of concealing the true meaning behind fictitious stories: Mk 4.9-12)...
Mark 4 (Berean Literal)
https://biblehub.com/blb/mark/4.htm
9 And He was saying,
“He who has ears to hear,
let him hear.”
10 And when He was alone, those around Him with the Twelve began asking Him about the parable.
11 And He was saying to them,
“To you has been given the mystery of the kingdom of God,
but to those who are outside, everything is done in parables,
12 so that,
‘Seeing, they might see
and not perceive;
and hearing, they might hear
and not understand;
lest ever they should turn,
and they should be forgiven.’”
Mark 4 (Lamsa)
https://biblehub.com/lamsa/mark/4.htm
9 And he said,
He who has ears to hear,
let him hear.
10 When they were alone by themselves,
those who were with him together with the twelve asked him about that parable.
11 And Jesus said to them,
To you is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God,
but to the outsiders everything has to be explained by parables.
12 For seeing they see,
and yet do not perceive;
and hearing they hear,
and yet do not understand;
if they return,
their sins would be forgiven.
===========================
T. W. Manson (1893-1958), _The Teaching of Jesus: Studies of its Form and Content_ (1935), 351pp., on 76-80
https://www.amazon.com/Teaching-Jesus-T-...521091993/
https://archive.org/details/teachingofje...q=category
Page 76
mean those whom Jesus himself had called and a further group of people who had attached themselves to him.
With this class is contrasted the other class who are outside.
To the inner circle is given the secret of the Kingdom of God, to the others only parables.
The most obvious question to ask at this stage is how the two classes are divided :
what is it that places a man in the one class rather than the other?
In view of what has been said above on the nature of parables, there can be only one answer to this question.
It is the man himself who places himself in one category or another, and that simply by the response which he makes to the parables.
Those in whom religious insight and faith are awakened by the hearing of parables press into the inner circle for more.
Once more the saying applies:
'To him that hath shall be given'.
The parable is in practice a test :
and the response of a man to it is what determines whether he shall ever get beyond it to the secret of the Kingdom.
We are now brought face to face with the chief difficulty of the passage :
ἵνα βλέποντες ... ἀφεθῇ αὐτοῖς.
The stumblingblock here is the ἵνα.
As the text stands it can only mean that the object, or at any rate the result, of parabolic teaching is to prevent insight, understanding, repentance, and forgiveness.
On any interpretation of parable this is simply absurd.
If parables had this object or result, that in itself would be the strongest possible argument against making use of them, and would make it impossible to imagine why Jesus should have employed such a way of delivering his teaching.
The solution of the difficulty is to be sought in two directions.
The first clue is the parable of the Sower itself.
Commentators have pointed out that _vv_. 11, 12 are really an intrusion between the parable and its interpretation :
and the step from 'intrusion' to 'interpolation' is easily made.
But the intrusion of this saying is perfectly natural, if, as I believe, the 'Sower' is a parable about parabolic teaching.
'The sower sows the word' (_v_. 14) :
'and in many such parables he spake the word to them' (_v_. 33)
Now the one thing that is clear in the parable is that the result of the sowing depends, not on the seed, but on the kind of ground in which it lodges.
In other words the efficacy of parables depends, not on the parables, but on the character of the hearers.
The object of sowing is not to prevent growth and fruition but rather to see whether anything will grow and give fruit.
Granted this, it will follow that the inner circle in _v_. 11 represent the good ground which brings forth fruit ;
while those outside correspond to the ground which, for various reasons, produces nothing.
The second clue lies in the fact that the quotation from Is. vi. 9 f. ends with the words καὶ ἀφεθῇ αὐτοῖς, departing from LXX ..., and the Hebrew ..., and agreeing with the Targum ... .
This suggests that the last part of the quotation is given in what was the accepted version for synagogue purposes, a version which later was incorporated in the written Targum.
It also stamps the saying as Palestinian in origin and thus creates a strong presumption in favour of its authenticity.
If we now turn to the beginning of the quotation we find that in the Targum it runs as follows:^1 [1: Ed. P. de Lagarde, p. 230]
...
And he said :
Go and speak to this people
who hear indeed
and do not understand,
and see indeed
but do not know.
Turned into Greek this would be: ... .
Here again the quotation in Mark agrees with the Targum against both the Hebrew and the LXX in putting the verbs in the third person rather than the second.
The chief point of difference is that the Marcan form gives final clauses where the Targum has relative clauses.
Now in Aramaic the particle ... [I'm guessing it's ר resh, which looks like ד dalet], which is used in the Targum here, can be used to introduce either a relative or a final clause :
it can mean either
οἵ
or
ἵνα.
The conclusion to be drawn is, I think, that the form in which the words were spoken by Jesus approximated to what we find in the Targum, and that the Marcan version rests on a misunderstanding of the Aramaic due mainly to the ambiguity of the particle ... [I'm guessing it's ר resh, which looks like ד dalet]
We may conjecture that what Jesus said was:
To you is given the secret of the Kingdom of God;
but all things come in parables to those outside who
See indeed but do not know
And hear indeed but do not understand
Lest they should repent and receive forgiveness^1 [1: Cf. Is. xlii. 18-20]
where the last words would seem to mean :
'For if they did, they would repent and receive forgiveness'.
In support of this interpretation one other point may be mentioned.
If the object of the quotation were to show that parabolic teaching was calculated to harden the hearts of the hearers, it is curious that the words in Is. vi. 9 f. which would most strongly suggest this are precisely those which are omitted in Mark :
'Make the heart of this people fat
and make their ears heavy,
and shut their eyes,
lest they see with their eyes
and hear with their ears,
and understand with their heart'.
These would surely be more apt to the purpose than what we actually have in Mark :
and it seems to me significant that they are _not_ quoted.
With the omission of these words the conjunction ... is left in the air :
and at once two possibilities emerge.
Either it may be taken in the sense suggested above, in which case it will appear that the real cause of the blindness of those outside is that they do not wish to repent and be forgiven : a deadly self-satisfaction is the real hindrance to the efficacy of parabolic teaching.
Or, though this seems to me less probable, we may place a full stop after 'understand' and take ... in its other sense of 'perhaps'.
The last words would then express a hope that the unresponsiveness of these people will yet be overcome-- 'Perhaps they may yet repent'.
If it be objected that this interpretation of the passage makes Jesus do violence to the Old Testament text, the answer is that this passage is a piece of Haggadah and that the passage from Isaiah is not cited as a proof-text but as an illustration.
Further, it is not cited in the original but in the current Aramaic version, which, as we have already seen, departs from the Hebrew in several important particulars.
And it may be added that Jewish practice permitted and approved a much greater freedom in the use of the Scriptures when quoted in Haggadah than would be allowable when strict interpretation of the Law was in question.
Anyone who is familiar with the feats of exegesis performed in the homiletic Midrashim will find nothing startling in this case.
We may conclude then that the text as it stands in _v_. 12 rests on a misunderstanding of what Jesus really said and that the true sense of his words would be given by a text running somewhat as follows:
...^1 [1: This represents an Aramaic original which would be somewhat as follows: ...
which has been misunderstood as if it were: ...
thus producing the text which stands in Mark.]
The passage will then be in complete agreement with what we learn elsewhere in the Synoptic Gospels about the nature and object of teaching in parables.
It will be clear that the purpose of parables is not to harden the hearts of the hearers, but that it is the hardness of heart of the hearers that defeats the purpose of parables.
The quotation from Isaiah is not introduced by Jesus to explain the purpose of teaching in parables, but to illustrate what is meant by
οἵ ἔξω :
it is in fact a definition of the sort of character which prevents a man from becoming one of those to whom the secret of the Kingdom is given, a description in language borrowed from the Jewish Bible of those people who did not produce the things for which Jesus was constantly seeking-- insight, repentance, and faith.