Gospel of Mark Chapter 10

Historical Commentary on the Gospel of Mark

Chapter 10

Home

Mark 10:1-12

1:And he left there and went to the region of Judea and beyond the Jordan, and crowds gathered to him again; and again, as his custom was, he taught them. 2: And Pharisees came up and in order to test him asked, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?" 3: He answered them, "What did Moses command you?" 4: They said, "Moses allowed a man to write a certificate of divorce, and to put her away." 5: But Jesus said to them, "For your hardness of heart he wrote you this commandment. 6: But from the beginning of creation, `God made them

male and female.' 7: `For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, 8: and the two shall become one flesh.' So they are no longer two but one flesh. 9: What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder." 10: And in the house the disciples asked him again about this matter. 11: And he said to them, "Whoever divorces his wife and marries another, commits adultery against her; 12: and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery."

NOTES

1: And he left there and went to the region of Judea and beyond the Jordan, and crowds gathered to him again; and again, as his custom was, he taught them.

	v1: Markan redaction. The text is unstable here as the Greek actually says "the region of Judea beyond the Jordan." But all of Judea lies west of the Jordan. Hence the RSV's translation, which eliminates this serious geographical error by translating it away.
	v1: Theissen and Merz (1998, p178), argue that Mark 10:1 has Jesus going to Jerusalem by way of Perea, to avoid setting foot in non-Jewish territory.

2: And Pharisees came up and in order to test him asked, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?"

v2: The Pharisees appear here, and then disappear from the pericope. In many manuscripts the reference to "Pharisees" is not present, and some exegetes argue the text has been assimilated to Matthew (Donahue and Harrington 2002, p292).

3: He answered them, "What did Moses command you?"

v3: Moses never left a command on divorce. In Deut 24:1-4 the right of divorce is already recognized; the text (the only one in the Torah referring to the topic) deals with the arcane problem of a man who wants to remarry a wife he previously divorced and who married another and then was divorced:

Deut 24:1 If a man marries a woman who becomes displeasing to him because he finds something indecent about her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce, gives it to her and sends her from his house, 2 and if after she leaves his house she becomes the wife of another man, 3 and her second husband dislikes her and writes her a certificate of divorce, gives it to her and sends her from his house, or if he dies, 4 then her first husband, who divorced her, is not allowed to marry her again after she has been defiled. That would be detestable in the eyes of the LORD . Do not bring sin upon the land the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance. (NIV)

4: They said, "Moses allowed a man to write a certificate of divorce, and to put her away." 5: But Jesus said to them, "For your hardness of heart he wrote you this commandment.

v4-5: Progressive interpreters of Mark like Schussler Fiorenza and Myers have seen this as a criticism of patriarchical control of marriage, for Jewish marriage law permitted the man to put away his wife, but did not give equal power to the woman.

v4: refers to Deuteronomy 24 (v3). Such certificates of divorce are known from the Dead Sea Scrolls.

v5: Compare 10:5 with Paul's argument in Galatians 3:

10: 5: But Jesus said to them, "For your hardness of heart he wrote you this commandment.(RSV)

Gal 3:19: What, then, was the purpose of the law? It was added because of transgressions until the Seed to whom the promise referred had come. (NIV)

6: But from the beginning of creation, `God made them male and female.'

v6-8: refer to Genesis 1:27, 2:24:

1: 27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. (NIV)

2:24 For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh. (NIV)

Genesis 2:24 is cited by Paul in 1 Cor 2:24.

7: `For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife,

v7: "and be joined to be his wife" is missing from many manuscripts. The argument could go either way. See review in Gundry (1993, p530-1).

9: What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder."

	v9: perhaps "man" is meant in the sense of "all mortals;" perhaps "a man" is meant because only men could initiate divorce.
	v9: Mack (1995, p315) identifies the chreia that forms the core of this pericope, in which Jesus is challenged: What does the Law say? and responds What does God say?

10: And in the house the disciples asked him again about this matter.

v10-12: gives us Jesus instructing the disciples in a house, a common redactional feature, as well as an explanation for the disciples, another redactional feature.

12: and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery."

v12: is widely seen as an anachronism in that a Jewish woman could not divorce her husband. Instead, the husband had to do the divorcing. This usually seen as a later insertion aimed at Gentile populations which had different divorce rules (Tomson 2001, p258-9). The same issue is brought up in 1 Cor 7. Against this two scrolls from Qumran, Damascus Document and the Temple Scroll, challenge the view that this was unknown in Judaism, for they appear to support this same rule. However, they also appear to apply it only to kings.

v12: Once again, Jesus's remarks appear to re-order Jewish understandings of Jewish law, but no one challenges him on this for the remainder of the gospel.

Historical Commentary

Dean-Otting and Robbins (1993) show how this passage is a product of rhetorical construction using citations of authoritative sources, including a citation of the Bible, to dismiss Mosaic Law and substitute a new formulation of divorce. The pericope pivots around a chreia organized as a simple ABBA chiasm:

A: But from the beginning of creation, `God made them male and female.' `
B: For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.'
B': So they are no longer two but one flesh.
A:' What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder."

The structure of the pericope itself is unusually and consists of two small chiasms:

A
and he left there and went to the region of Judea and beyond the Jordan, and crowds gathered to him again;

B
and again, as his custom was, he taught them.

C
And Pharisees came up and in order to test him asked, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?"

D
He answered them, "What did Moses command you?"

D
They said, "Moses allowed a man to write a certificate of divorce, and to put her away."

C
But Jesus said to them, "For your hardness of heart he wrote you this commandment.

B
But from the beginning of creation, `God made them male and female.' `For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.' So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder."

A
And in the house the disciples asked him again about this matter.

B
And he said to them, "Whoever divorces his wife and marries another, commits adultery against her; and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery."

A
And they were bringing children to him, that he might touch them.

The pericope shows the Pharisees testing Jesus, a common formulation in Mark. The writer cites the OT in v 4,6,7 and 8, while v5 gives us an attack on Jews that is widely seen as a post-Easter construction. A typical chreia informs the climax of the sequence v2-9, while the underlying chiastic structure focuses attention on Jesus' conflict with the Pharisees. v12 is a clear anachronism. There is no support for historicity in this pericope.

Mark 10:13-16

13: And they were bringing children to him, that he might touch them; and the disciples rebuked them. 14: But when Jesus saw it he was indignant, and said to them, "Let the children come to me, do not hinder them; for to such belongs the kingdom of God.

15: Truly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child shall not enter it." 16: And he took them in his arms and blessed them, laying his hands upon them.

NOTES

13: And they were bringing children to him, that he might touch them; and the disciples rebuked them.

v13: some translations have "threatened" for "rebuked."

Historical Commentary

A pericope about children following a pericope about marriage indicates a larger structural design. The pericope is a redactional construction of Mark around the saying in v15. Crossan sees it as a parallel to 9:35-6 (1991, p268). The pericope is actually a chreia form, in which the disciples function as challengers by rebuking the children for bothering Jesus, which triggers a retort that effectively states "Bothering me? They ARE the Kingdom!"

A chiasm structures this pericope.

A
And they were bringing children to him, that he might touch them;

B
and the disciples rebuked them.

C
But when Jesus saw it he was indignant, and said to them, "Let the children come to me, do not hinder them; for to such belongs the kingdom of God.

C
Truly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child shall not enter it."

B
And he took them in his arms and blessed them, laying his hands upon them.

A
And as he was setting out on his journey, a man ran up and knelt before him, and asked him, "Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?"

In the usual fashion of the writer, the A brackets contain movement. The B brackets oppose the rebuking of the disciples with the blessings of Jesus. The C brackets contain the chreia structure.

The typical features of Markan construction indicate that there is no support for historicity from this pericope.

Mark 10:17-31

17: And as he was setting out on his journey, a man ran up and knelt before him, and asked him, "Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?" 18: And Jesus said to him, "Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone. 19: You know the commandments: `Do not kill, Do not commit adultery, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Do not defraud, Honor your father and mother.'" 20: And he said to him, "Teacher, all these I have observed from my youth." 21: And Jesus looking upon him, loved him, and said to him, "You lack one thing; go, sell what you have, and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me." 22: At that saying his countenance fell, and he went away sorrowful; for he had great possessions. 23: And Jesus looked around and said to his disciples, "How hard it will be for those who have riches to enter the kingdom of God!"

24: And the disciples were amazed at his words. But Jesus said to them again, "Children, how hard it is to enter the kingdom of God! 25: It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God." 26: And they were exceedingly astonished, and said to him, "Then who can be saved?" 27: Jesus looked at them and said, "With men it is impossible, but not with God; for all things are possible with God." 28: Peter began to say to him, "Lo, we have left everything and followed you." 29: Jesus said, "Truly, I say to you, there is no one who has left house or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or lands, for my sake and for the gospel, 30: who will not receive a hundredfold now in this time, houses and brothers and sisters and mothers and children and lands, with persecutions, and in the age to come eternal life. 31: But many that are first will be last, and the last first."

NOTES

17: And as he was setting out on his journey, a man ran up and knelt before him, and asked him, "Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?"

	v17-21: is a creation of Mark whose purpose is to reach v21. Note that the man has no name and other than being rich, the writer shows no interest in him.
	v17: This occurs as Jesus is setting out on his journey. Jesus is now turning toward Jerusalem to die.

18: And Jesus said to him, "Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone.

	v18: this text Neyrey (1998) reads sociologically as Jesus deflecting a compliment, to prevent people from envying him (note that later Pilate comes to understand that it is out of envy that the chief priests and scribes seek Jesus' death). Other exegetes see a tension here: the man has handed out a rare compliment -- 'Good Teacher' -- and may expect similar flattery in return.
	v18: this verse endured much tinkering and rewriting in the manuscript tradition, for it appears to categorically deny that Jesus is God. Luke and Matt both made adjustments.

19: You know the commandments: `Do not kill, Do not commit adultery, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Do not defraud, Honor your father and mother.'"

v19: Jesus commits a famous error: "defraud" is not a commandment. This verse cannot be historical, for everyone standing there would have laughed themselves silly at such ignorance. The textual tradition is unstable at this point as well; many manuscripts omit "Do not defraud" as do Matthew and Luke, perhaps to eliminate the error. A number of manuscripts also place adultery before murder in the list. Myers (1988, p272) points out that the Greek for "defraud" refers to the practice of keeping back the wages of an employee in the Greek Bible, whereas in Classical Greek it refers to failure to return money left with another for safekeeping. The "error" may well relate to the apechei in Mark 14:40, where the bill is paid in full, pointing to Jesus own sacrifice of himself.

20: And he said to him, "Teacher, all these I have observed from my youth."

v20: Yuri Kuchinsky (2003) points out:

"It is interesting that, if one reads only the Markan and the Lukan versions of this story, it is not at all clear that this man is really "young". In Luke, he's identified as a "ruler" (arcwn; pronounced as "arkhon"), which is not really consistent with him being so very young. Also, in both Mark and Luke, the man says that he had observed the commandments "from his youth". Again, this seems to imply that he's of an older age."

23: And Jesus looked around and said to his disciples, "How hard it will be for those who have riches to enter the kingdom of God!"

v23-7: are Markan redaction. The function, explanation, is redactional, and they feature the usual Markan portrayal of clueless disciples (v24). However, Koester (1990, p276-7) argues that because v23-24 are not paralleled in either Matthew or Luke, they are probably later additions to the text. Note that v24 repeats v23, but without the reference to riches. Further, the verb for "amazement" is found only in Mark (1990, p284).

v23-7: in the ancient lampoon of marketplace philosophers, Philosophies for Sale, the author Lucian complains of wandering philosophers who talk incessantly about the unimportance of money, but are always asking for it.

26: And they were exceedingly astonished, and said to him, "Then who can be saved?"

	v26: The disciples are portrayed as worldly and clueless again. Even though Jesus has just pointed out who will be saved (children, those who act in Jesus' name, and those who are like children) the disciples still imagine that one must be rich and powerful to enter the kingdom.
	v26: In many places in the OT wealth and material goods are considered a sign of God's favor (Job 1:10; Psalm 128:1-2; Isaiah 3:10). That is why the disciples are so astonished that the weathy cannot enter the Kingdom.

27: Jesus looked at them and said, "With men it is impossible, but not with God; for all things are possible with God."

v27: Taken from Zechariah 8:6 (LXX).

28: Peter began to say to him, "Lo, we have left everything and followed you." 29: Jesus said, "Truly, I say to you, there is no one who has left house or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or lands, for my sake and for the gospel, 30: who will not receive a hundredfold now in this time, houses and brothers and sisters and mothers and children and lands, with persecutions, and in the age to come eternal life.

	v28-30: yet another Markan creation. The reference to persecutions is a clear anachronism. Some see them as later insertions. But v30 the doublet "now..in this time" is a classic Markan construction. Wilker (2004, p267-8) argues that the additional "houses and brothers and sisters and mothers and children" in v30 is an early textual corruption.
	v30: Donahue and Harrington (2002, p40) argue that the word "houses" here refers to house churches of the kind common in primitive Christianity, with brothers, sisters, mothers, and children, but significantly, no "father," or centralized authority. They link this back to Paul's description of this structure in Romans 16:1-16 (although 16:1-7 is sometimes seen as an interpolation).

31: But many that are first will be last, and the last first."

v31: Some exegetes have seen this as an exhortation to service, or a prediction of who will be in the Kingdom (the least), or simply as an uncontextualized saying tacked onto the end of the pericope. Reading this against the writer's constant denigration on the disciples, I see this as a prediction of their future behavior. But many that are first on the list of the Twelve in Mark 3 will be last to fall away when the tribulation comes, culminating in Peter, the very first name on the list, and the last disciple to deny him, and the last, Judas, will be the first to betray me." Read that way, the final line is then in context with the previous several verses, especially as "the hundredfold" in v30 takes the reader back to the Parable of the Sower, and thence to the typology that identifies the role of the disciples in the Gospel of Mark.

Historical Commentary

The underlying literary structure is a typical sandwich structure, whose theme is the blindness of the disciples. Two episodes about receiving children, 9:36-7 and 10:13-16, open and close sequences involving marginal types who will enter the Kingdom of Heaven. The disciples still do not get the message, and discourage the children from coming to see Jesus. Jesus then closes out the sequence with the pericope of 10:17-31, when he announces that the rich are far from the Kingdom, confounding the disciple's expectations (Tolbert 1989, p210). The entire sequence is literary construction that follows the typology erected in the Parable of the Sower back in Mark 4. The unit closes with a prediction about the disciples' future behavior.

Although the various sayings are often seen as going back to Jesus, a minority of scholars points out that they can be seen as attempts to set the boundaries of the early communities and may thus have been generated in them (Fun et al 1997, p92). In fact this looks like yet another version of the insider/outsider dichotomies that are a key theme of the writer of Mark.

The sequence with the rich man is a typical chreia in which the disciples function as challengers: Will the Rich enter the Kingdom? to which Jesus wittily replies: Sure, when a camel goes through the eye of a needle! The sequence that terminates the pericope may also offer the chreia structure, with Peter complaining We've given up everything! and Jesus responding with a wink: Some of you who think you are first will be last, Petey.

This pericope is a chiasm as follows:

A
And as he was setting out on his journey, a man ran up and knelt before him, and asked him, "Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?"

B
And Jesus said to him, "Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone.You know the commandments: `Do not kill, Do not commit adultery, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Do not defraud, Honor your father and mother.'"

C
And he said to him, "Teacher, all these I have observed from my youth."

D
And Jesus looking upon him, loved him, and said to him, "You lack one thing; go, sell what you have, and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me."

E
A
And Jesus looked around and said to his disciples, "How hard it will be for those who have riches to enter the kingdom of God!"

B
And the disciples were amazed at his words.

E

A
But Jesus said to them again, "Children, how hard it is to enter the kingdom of God! It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.

B
And they were exceedingly astonished, and said to him, "Then who can be saved?"

D
Jesus looked at them and said, "With men it is impossible, but not with God; for all things are possible with God.

C
Peter began to say to him, "Lo, we have left everything and followed you."

B
Jesus said, "Truly, I say to you, there is no one who has left house or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or lands, for my sake and for the gospel, 30: who will not receive a hundredfold now in this time, houses and brothers and sisters and mothers and children and lands, with persecutions, and in the age to come eternal life. But many that are first will be last, and the last first."

A'
32: And they were on the road, going up to Jerusalem, Jesus was walking ahead of them;

The many signals of literary contrivance indicate that historicity is not supported in this pericope.

Mark 10:32-34

32: And they were on the road, going up to Jerusalem, and Jesus was walking ahead of them; and they were amazed, and those who followed were afraid. And taking the twelve again, he began to tell them what was to happen to him, 33: saying, "Behold, we are going up to

Jerusalem; and the Son of man will be delivered to the chief priests and the scribes, and they will condemn him to death, and deliver him to the Gentiles; 34: and they will mock him, and spit upon him, and scourge him, and kill him; and after three days he will rise."

NOTES

v32: Extremely enigmatic. Who are 'they?" Locals? Other disciples? Who is amazed, and why?

34: and they will mock him, and spit upon him, and scourge him, and kill him; and after three days he will rise."

v34: It is here that the forger of Secret Mark placed his gospel event.

Historical Commentary
The pericope appears to be entirely a composition from the hand of the author of Mark. Historicity is not supported in this pericope, not the least because it is so enigmatic, but also because it contains a supernatural prediction of Jesus' own death. The chiastic structure is laid out in the next pericope. Here the gospel of Mark is clearly wrongly pericoped.

Mark 10:35-45

35: And James and John, the sons of Zeb'edee, came forward to him, and said to him, "Teacher, we want you to do for us whatever we ask of you." 36: And he said to them, "What do you want me to do for you?" 37: And they said to him, "Grant us to sit, one at your right hand and one at your left, in your glory." 38: But Jesus said to them, "You do not know what you are asking. Are you able to drink the cup that I drink, or to be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized?" 39: And they said to him, "We are able." And Jesus said to them, "The cup that I drink you will drink; and with the baptism with which I am baptized, you will be baptized;

40: but to sit at my right hand or at my left is not mine to grant, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared." 41: And when the ten heard it, they began to be indignant at James and John. 42: And Jesus called them to him and said to them, "You know that those who are supposed to rule over the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great men exercise authority over them. 43: But it shall not be so among you; but whoever would be great among you must be your servant, 44: and whoever would be first among you must be slave of all.45: For the Son of man also came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many."

NOTES

35: And James and John, the sons of Zeb'edee, came forward to him, and said to him, "Teacher, we want you to do for us whatever we ask of you." 36: And he said to them, "What do you want me to do for you?" 37: And they said to him, "Grant us to sit, one at your right hand and one at your left, in your glory.

v35-37: may well reflect back to Paul's claim in 1 Cor 6:1-3 that believers shall judge the world, even judging angels.

If any of you has a dispute with another, dare he take it before the ungodly for judgment instead of before the saints? Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if you are to judge the world, are you not competent to judge trivial cases? Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more the things of this life! (NIV)

v35-37: Ched Myers (1988, p279) sees an allusion to Psalm 110 in the first two verses:

1 The LORD says to my Lord: "Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet." 2 The LORD will extend your mighty scepter from Zion; you will rule in the midst of your enemies.(NIV)

In Psalm 110:6 the Lord sits in judgment on his enemies, just as James and John ask for here. In Mk 12:35 this same passage becomes the basis for a discussion of Jesus' Davidic relationship.

v35-37: Myers (1988, p280-1) argues that against the request for power and authority of men, Mark opposes an ethic of servant and slavehood, one reserved for females.

38: But Jesus said to them, "You do not know what you are asking. Are you able to drink the cup that I drink, or to be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized?"

v38: contains a probable later insertion into the text, "and with the baptism with which I am baptized, you will be baptized" (Koester 1990, p 278).

v38: with its reference to the later martyrdom of James, is clearly unhistorical, for it is either an anachronism or supernatural prophecy.

v38: The OT offers at least one example of a cup of death, in Psalm 11:

5: The LORD tests the righteous and the wicked, and his soul hates him that loves violence.
6: On the wicked he will rain coals of fire and brimstone; a scorching wind shall be the portion of their cup. 7: For the LORD is righteous, he loves righteous deeds; the upright shall behold his face. (RSV)

42: And Jesus called them to him and said to them, "You know that those who are supposed to rule over the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great men exercise authority over them.

v42: C.F Stone (2002) notes that there is an allusion to Isaiah 11:10 (LXX) here, and argues that Isaiah 11 stands behind 10:42-45

45: For the Son of man also came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many."

v45: the title "Son of Man" appears in all three passion predictions in Mark 8, 9 and 10. Thematically it probably connects to Mark 14:62.

v45: Related to the Septaugint Isaiah, according to Adella Yarbro Collins (1997):

"According to the Septuagint version of Isa 53:11, the servant of the Lord is a just man who serves many well."

In a footnote Collins adds:

"The antithetical structure of Mark 10:45 and its meaning are strikingly similar to a saying that Dio Cassius attributed to Otho: "I shall free myself [that is, take my own life], that all may learn from the deed that you chose for your emperor one who would not give you up to save himself, but rather himself to save you."

v45: Bultman (1958) identified this verse as "a Hellenistic variation of an older saying."

v45: "to give his life as a ransom for many." The Roman armies are said to have had a practice called devotio in which a single individual offered up their life to the gods during a battle. The sacrifice was made to both friendly and enemy gods, in the hope of impressing them and gaining their favor. Decius Mus was the most famous example. Examples of life-offerings as ransom from Jewish history are also known.

v45: "ransom" Fletcher-Louis (2003, p27) points out that the Greek word here always refers to an object, never a person, given as ransom.

v45: Seeley (1993) points out that the sequence of ruler, service, and sacrifice is not known in intertestamental Judaism. He identifies this as stemming from Cynic and Hellenistic concepts of how a good king should behave. According to Seeley, the writings of the philosopher Dio Chrysostom (40-112 CE) on Kingship say that a good king receives his position from Zeus, with the condition that he work for the welfare of his people. The good loves what is good, and cares for all. Seeley notes;

"In his third Discourse on kingship, Dio concludes that the best illustration of the office is the sun, for though the latter is a god, he "does not grow weary in ministering ... to us and doing everything to promote our welfare."...(3.73). one might even say that the sun "endures a servitude... most exacting...."(3.75)"(p236)

The idea that the true ruler is the servant of his subjects is also found in Plato and Xenophon. Seeley also gives other examples from Hellenistic thought of how the true philosopher, kingly in his ways, remains unmarried and serves the people. There are also Cynic examples of those who share kingship with the deity and engage in service. In Cynicism devotion of others can result in suffering and even death. Seeley concludes:

"In Epictetus' comments on the Cynic, we thus see a figure who is both ruler and servant, and whose service can include physical suffering and even death. This is the pattern we traced in Mark 10:41-5."(p245)

The key difference between the two is that in Cynicism the death of the philosopher functions as an example for other Cynics, whereas in Mark Jesus' death is substitutionary. Seeley reads that as a Markan development from Paul.

Historical Commentary

The larger structural features indicate literary creation. "Hardly has Jesus ended his third announcement of the passion and resurrection when there is again a misunderstanding in the circle of disciples" (Ludemann 2001, p71). Goodspeed notes that "Zebedee's sons are so oblivious of his mood that they actually ask for the leading places in his coming triumph" (1937, p143).

The writer offers another chreia here, delineated by Mack (1995, p316) as a challenge offered by the disciples: We want the power! and Jesus putting them in their place by replying Those who have the power first must serve. The writer interweaves different themes from the Gospel, including the sequence in which he compares Jesus to Simon Maccabaeus, his portrayal of the disciples as ignorant, self-aggrandizing clods, predictions of Jesus' Passion and death, allusions to the future of persecution of Jesus' followers, and the chreia format. Stein (1999) identifies the underlying structure of the sequence that runs from 8:27 on:

Passion Saying	Disciples Err	Theme of Discipleship
Mark 8:31-2	Mark 8:33 (Peter errs)	Mark 8:34-9:1 Discipleship means suffering like Christ.
Mark 9:30-2	Mark 9:34 (the Twelve Err)	Mark 9:33-7 Discipleship involves serving like Christ
Mark 10:32-34	Mark 10:35 (James and John err)	Mark 10:42-5 (Discipleship involves serving like Christ)
		(adapted from Stein 1999, p46)

The structure is a chiasm that extends back to the previous pericope, and contains an ABBA structure.

A	And they were on the road, going up to Jerusalem, and Jesus was walking ahead of them; and they were amazed, and those who followed were afraid.
	B	And taking the twelve again, he began to tell them what was to happen to him, saying, "Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man will be delivered to the chief priests and the scribes, and they will condemn him to death, and deliver him to the Gentiles; and they will mock him, and spit upon him, and scourge him, and kill him; and after three days he will rise."
		C	And James and John, the sons of Zeb'edee, came forward to him, and said to him, "Teacher, we want you to do for us whatever we ask of you."
			D	And he said to them, "What do you want me to do for you?"
				E	A	And they said to him, "Grant us to sit, one at your right hand and one at your left, in your glory."
					B	But Jesus said to them, "You do not know what you are asking. Are you able to drink the cup that I drink, or to be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized?"
				E	A	And they said to him, "We are able."
					B	And Jesus said to them, "The cup that I drink you will drink; and with the baptism with which I am baptized, you will be baptized; but to sit at my right hand or at my left is not mine to grant, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared."
			D	And when the ten heard it, they began to be indignant at James and John.
		C	And Jesus called them to him and said to them, "You know that those who are supposed to rule over the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great men exercise authority over them. But it shall not be so among you; but whoever would be great among you must be your servant, and whoever would be first among you must be slave of all.
	B	For the Son of man also came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many."
A	And they came to Jericho;

The A brackets contain the usual geographic shifts. The B brackets oppose predictions of Jesus' death. The C brackets oppose the request of James and John "whatever we ask of you" to the ideal of service. The D brackets oppose Jesus' question to the disciples' indignation. The E brackets offer an ABBA chiasm whose structure should be obvious.

The vintage Markan themes, the literary structures, and the awareness of subsequent traditions of persecution signal that there is no support for historicity in this pericope.

Mark 10:46-52

46: And they came to Jericho; and as he was leaving Jericho with his disciples and a great multitude, Bartimae'us, a blind beggar, the son of Timae'us, was sitting by the roadside. 47: And when he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to cry out and say, "Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!" 48: And many rebuked him, telling him to be silent; but he cried out all the more, "Son of David, have mercy on me!"

49: And Jesus stopped and said, "Call him." And they called the blind man, saying to him, "Take heart; rise, he is calling you." 50: And throwing off his mantle he sprang up and came to Jesus. 51: And Jesus said to him, "What do you want me to do for you?" And the blind man said to him, "Master, let me receive my sight." 52: And Jesus said to him, "Go your way; your faith has made you well." And immediately he received his sight and followed him on the way.

NOTES

46: And they came to Jericho; and as he was leaving Jericho with his disciples and a great multitude, Bartimae'us, a blind beggar, the son of Timae'us, was sitting by the roadside.

v46a: Although many exegetes have seen a deletion here. D. Brown (2003, p107) argued:

"It seems no less reasonable, then, to suppose that only the bare fact of Jesus' arrival in Jericho is mentioned in 10:46a because the road from Jericho is where Mark wished to locate the healing of Bartimaeus: Jesus had to enter Jericho before Mark could describe him leaving it."

However, the chiastic structure I have reconstructed shows that indeed material has been removed here.

v46b: "Bartimaeus" the name itself means "son of Timaeus." It is typical of the author of Mark to use this type of dual construction. "The two-step progression is one of the most pervasive patterns of repetition in Mark's Gospel. It occurs in phrases, clauses, pairs of sentences, and the structure of episodes" (Rhoads et al 1999, p49). This redactive pattern suggests that the name itself is probably invention. "Bar-teymah" means "son of poverty" in Aramaic (Price 2003, p148), or "son of the unclean" (Myers 1988, p282), another name that like "Jairus," echoes the meaning of the event.

47: And when he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to cry out and say, "Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!"

	v47: the Greek says Nazarene not Nazareth.
	v47: Donahue and Harrington (2002,317) observe that the Son of David "par excellence" is Solomon, who in the NT period had a widespread reputation in Jewish tradition as a healer. Meier (1994, p737n48) points out that one of the manuscripts of the Testament of Solomon has "King Solomon, Son of David, have mercy on me!" at 20:1. However, the Testament of Solomon has been heavily Christianized.

51: And Jesus said to him, "What do you want me to do for you?" And the blind man said to him, "Master, let me receive my sight."

v51: The term rabbi probably had not yet become a technical term for "teacher" at the time Mark's gospel is ordinarily considered to have been written (Donahue and Harrington 2002, p318).

v51: Gundry notes the strong association of healing of the blind with the day of salvation in Isaiah (1993, p600).

Isaiah 29:18
In that day the deaf will hear the words of the scroll, and out of gloom and darkness the eyes of the blind will see. (NIV)

Isaiah 35:5-6
5 Then will the eyes of the blind be opened and the ears of the deaf unstopped. 6 Then will the lame leap like a deer, and the mute tongue shout for joy. Water will gush forth in the wilderness and streams in the desert. (NIV)

Isaiah 61:1 (LXX)
The Spirit of the Sovereign LORD is on me, because the LORD has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim freedom for the captives and release from darkness the blind, (NIV)

52: And Jesus said to him, "Go your way; your faith has made you well." And immediately he received his sight and followed him on the way.

v52: this pericope links back to the healing of the bleeding woman in Mk 5:21-43. First, the crowd hinders both suppliants. Second, they are commended for their faith which has healed them (the Greek of 5:34 and 10:52 is identical: hepistis sou sesoken se). Finally, in both cases there is the problem of impurity, bleeding by the woman, and the blind beggar's name, which may mean "son of the unclean."

v52: One is reminded of Paul's comment in 2 Cor 4:4

In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the likeness of God. (RSV)

v52: Stephen Smith (1996) describes the situation:

"The irony of the situation is rich indeed, for it involves a reversal of roles. Bartimaeus takes the stage as a blind outsider on the periphery of the crowd, but after his encounter with Jesus he not only sees physically, but metaphorically as well, and follows his master."(p527)

Historical Commentary

Timaeus is the name of a well-known dialog of Plato. In this dialog, Socrates -- who will be executed -- sits down with three of his friends, Critias, Timaeus, and Hermocrates. The dialog involves a discussion of why and how the universe was created:

"When the father creator saw the creature which he had made moving and living, the created image of the eternal gods, he rejoiced..."(Jowett translation)

Plato's Timaeus also contains a long discussion about the eye and vision:

"And of the organs they first contrived the eyes to give light, and the principle according to which they were inserted was as follows: So much of fire as would not burn, but gave a gentle light, they formed into a substance akin to the light of every-day life; and the pure fire which is within us and related thereto they made to flow through the eyes in a stream smooth and dense, compressing the whole eye, and especially the centre part, so that it kept out everything of a coarser nature, and allowed to pass only this pure element. When the light of day surrounds the stream of vision, then like falls upon like, and they coalesce, and one body is formed by natural affinity in the line of vision, wherever the light that falls from within meets with an external object. And the whole stream of vision, being similarly affected in virtue of similarity, diffuses the motions of what it touches or what touches it over the whole body, until they reach the soul, causing that perception which we call sight. But when night comes on and the external and kindred fire departs, then the stream of vision is cut off; for going forth to an unlike element it is changed and extinguished, being no longer of one nature with the surrounding atmosphere which is now deprived of fire: and so the eye no longer sees, and we feel disposed to sleep." (Jowett translation)

It is not difficult to see the parallel between Jesus -- about to be executed -- and Socrates, as well as Peter, James, and John, and Socrates' three friends. Socrates, like Jesus, is a tekton. Bar-Timaeus is blind, and Timaeus has a discussion of optics and the physics of the eye. Like Jesus, Socrates will enlighten his companions as to the truth. The parallel may be pushed further, but that would take us outside our task here. The name stinks of literary invention, and this would make it the only pericope in Mark with an origin in Plato or other Hellenistic literature. All in all, considering the odd structure (see below), this pericope is probably not from the hand of the original writer of Mark.

Bar-Timaeus also recalls the blind seer Tiresias, the famous Greek prophet, who sees truth though blind, just as Bar-Timaeus knows the truth that the King, the Son of David, is passing by, though he is blind. Although the text implies that Bartimaeus becomes a follower of Jesus, he disappears from the story after this incident.

Most exegetes relate this to the previous pericope, relating the blindness of Bar-Timaeus to the blindness of the disciples. Note how Jesus greets the beggar with the same words he met the disciples' request in Mk 10:36: "What do you want me to do for you?" But disciples' lack of understand is met with scorn, while the faith of the beggar, the fertile ground of Tolbert's analysis, is met with healing and a will to followership.

In Mary Tolbert's (1989) analysis of Mark, this pericope is the last of the first half.

The chiastic structure of this pericope is clear and quite beautiful, almost suspiciously so. The center of the chiasm seems somewhat unMarkan. Also unMarkan is the lack of saying that can be unplugged from its context. Note the double geographic reference to Jericho. The chiastic structure lends support to the idea that a pericope has been removed in v46.

A	And they came to Jericho; and as he was leaving Jericho with his disciples and a great multitude, Bartimae'us, a blind beggar, the son of Timae'us, was sitting by the roadside.
	B	And when he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to cry out and say, "Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!"
		C	And many rebuked him, telling him to be silent;
			D	but he cried out all the more, "Son of David, have mercy on me!"
				E	And Jesus stopped and said, "Call him."
					F	And they called the blind man, saying to him, "Take heart; rise, he is calling you."
					F	And throwing off his mantle he sprang up and came to Jesus.
				E	And Jesus said to him, "What do you want me to do for you?"
			D	And the blind man said to him, "Master, let me receive my sight."
		C	And Jesus said to him, "Go your way; your faith has made you well."
	B	And immediately he received his sight and followed him on the way.
A	And when they drew near to Jerusalem, to Beth'phage and Bethany, at the Mount of Olives, he sent two of his disciples, and said to them, "Go into the village opposite you, and immediately as you enter it you will find a colt tied, on which no one has ever sat; untie it and bring it. If any one says to you, `Why are you doing this?' say, `The Lord has need of it and will send it back here immediately.'"

The presence of Markan creation, OT construction and the supernatural indicate that there is no support for historicity in this pericope.

Excursus: Did the Gospel of Mark know the Pauline Corpus?

Echoes of Paul in Mark

A Pauline Chiasm in Mark

Paul as a Source for Mark

Conclusion

"...despite the near-total absence of synoptic Jesus tradition in Paul’s letters, his story-grounded preaching marks a point on a historical trajectory towards the composition of written narratives.” R.B. Hays.

Imagine if we went back to the OT to search for more sources of Mark's gospel, and we came across the following passage in Psalm 151:

Or don't you know that all of us who were baptized into him were baptized into his death? We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as he was raised from the dead through the glory of YHWH, we too may live a new life.

What if, a few passages later in that same Psalm, we chanced upon this text:

because those who are led by the Spirit of the Lord are sons of YHWH. For you did not receive a spirit that makes you a slave again to fear, but you received the Spirit of sonship. And by him we cry, “Abba, Father.” The Spirit himself testifies with our spirit that we are YHWH's children. Now if we are children, then we are heirs, if indeed we share in his sufferings in order that we may also share in his glory.

We might begin to suspect that we had found the source of the baptism story in Mark 1:9-11. After all, the same themes appear there. For example, Psalm 151 uses "baptism" as a metaphor for death, just as Mark 10:38-39 does:

Psalm 151: Or don't you know that all of us who were baptized into him were baptized into his death?

38: But Jesus said to them, "You do not know what you are asking. Are you able to drink the cup that I drink, or to be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized?" 39: And they said to him, "We are able." And Jesus said to them, "The cup that I drink you will drink; and with the baptism with which I am baptized, you will be baptized; (RSV)

In this passage the spirit of God descends on the baptized one, as we see in Mark 1:10:

Psalm 151: For you did not receive a spirit that makes you a slave again to fear, but you received the Spirit of sonship. (NIV)

1:10: And when he came up out of the water, immediately he saw the heavens opened and the Spirit descending upon him like a dove; (RSV)

There too, in this passage, we find the idea that those baptized are the sons of God. Recall that the Christology of Mark is Adoptionist, that is, the writer presents Jesus as a person adopted as the Son of God. In that light, compare Psalm 151 and Mark 1:11:

because those who are led by the Spirit of the Lord are sons of YHWH.

1:11: and a voice came from heaven, "Thou art my beloved Son; with thee I am well pleased." (RSV)

In Psalm 151 "The Spirit himself testifies with our spirit" that the believer is God's son.

There's another idea in Psalm 151 that we also see in Mark. One verse reminds us of the Garden of Gethsemane:

And by him we cry, “Abba, Father.” (NIV)

14:36: And he said, "Abba, Father, all things are possible to thee; remove this cup from me; yet not what I will, but what thou wilt." (RSV)

Clearly, given all the affinities between the OT and Mark that scholars have postulated, frequently on much slimmer grounds, we would be quite justified in seeing Psalm 151 as a potential source of the Baptism scene. The only problem with this thesis is that there is no Psalm 151. These passages are not from the Old Testament. They are from Paul's Letter to the Romans.

* * * * * * * *

Scholars have often been reluctant to see connections between the writer of Mark and Paul, although a tradition of Pauline influence on Mark remains among many conservatives and scholars on the conservative side of the mainstream, including most recently Donohue and Harrington's very fine commentary on Mark for the Sacra Pagina series. Against this, Aichele (2003, p14) points out:

"As a result, the scholarly arguments that Paul’s use of “gospel” have influenced the text of Mark may better suggest that Pauline thought has influenced the scholarly hermeneutic. If we read Mark as a Pauline text, perhaps it is because we are Pauline readers."

A dominant view is that concordances between the Pauline Corpus and Mark stem from commonalities in the traditions of early Christianity or perhaps were transmitted through oral routes. From time to time a scholar has put forth the thesis that Mark knew the Pauline letters somehow, most recently in Joel Marcus' in "Mark - Interpreter of Paul" (New Testament Studies 46/4 (2000): pp. 473-487). This issue refuses to die because, as Donahue and Harrington (2002, p40) put it, there are some "intriguing contacts between the Gospel of Mark and Paul or the Pauline tradition." Indeed, as I pointed out above, if we assume for a moment the direct use of Paul by the writer of Mark, we see the same patterns that characterize the writer's use of the Old Testament: direct citations, allusions, echoes, and conceptual parallels.

Let's explore this possible relationship by looking at verses in Mark that appear to echo Pauline thought.

* * * * * * * *

A Stir of Echoes

Here are just a few of the many concordances between Paul and Mark:

Mk 1:1: The phrase “the beginning of the gospel” (arch. tou euaggeliou), appears in Philippians 4:15, where it denotes the beginning of Paul's missionary activity. In both Paul and Mark arch. tou euaggeliou denotes a beginning.

Mk 1:11: As Paul noted in Romans 8:14-17 and again in Gal 3:26, believers were the adopted sons of God.

Mk 1:14,: "Gospel of God." The phrase also occurs in Romans 1:1 and 15:16, as well as 1 Thess 2:2 and 2:9.

Mk 1:29-31: 1 Cor 9:5 implies that Peter was married:

Don't we have the right to take a believing wife along with us, as do the other apostles and the Lord's brothers and Cephas?

Mk 2:16: Jesus eats with sinners and tax collectors, just as Paul in Gal 2:11 complained that Peter was violating the spirit of Jesus, who "ate with sinners and tax-collectors."

Mk 4:9-20: These verses contain vocabulary found nowhere else in the Synoptic gospels, but present in other NT writings. These include "sow" as a metaphor for preaching (1 Cor. 9:11), "root" as a metaphor for inner steadfastness (Col 2:7, Eph. 3:17) and above all, the "word" which grows and spreads, found in many places in 1 & 2 Thess, II Tim, and other early Christian writings (Ludemann 2001, p 27). Note also that the Parable refers to the casting of seed, and Paul in Galatians 3:19 refers to Jesus as "Seed" which he implies was sent.

Mk 6:3: Compare Jesus' profession of tekton with 1 Cor 1:20:

where [is] the wise? where the scribe? where a disputer of this age? did not God make foolish the wisdom of this world? (YLT).

Another affinity between Mark and 1 Cor is also found in the word "offense," from the Greek skandalon, also a key idea of 1 Cor, found in 1 Cor 1:24.

Mk 6:7: The theme of paired missionary work is also present in 1 Corinthians:

1 Cor 9:2-6
2Even though I may not be an apostle to others, surely I am to you! For you are the seal of my apostleship in the Lord. 3This is my defense to those who sit in judgment on me. 4Don't we have the right to food and drink? 5Don't we have the right to take a believing wife along with us, as do the other apostles and the Lord's brothers and Cephas? 6Or is it only I and Barnabas who must work for a living? (NIV)

Mk 7:15: The discussion of food issues echos Romans. Mark 7:15 is similar to Romans 14:14 and 14:20.

14: 14: As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for him it is unclean.(NIV)

14:20: Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All food is clean, but it is wrong for a man to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble. (NIV)

Mk 7:19 The explanatory aside here, "(Thus he declared all foods clean.)" seems to strongly indicate a situation addressing later community issues over food laws and Gentiles. Again the flavor of this whole passage on food is strongly pro-Pauline.

Mk 7:20-23: A triple hit on the three most common letters. Similar lists exist in 1 Cor 6:9-10, Rom 1:29-31, and Gal 5:19-21:

1 Cor 6: 9 Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.(NIV)

Rom 1: 29 They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless. (NIV)

Gal 5: 19 The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; 20idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions 21and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God. (NIV)

Mk 7:27:

"Let the children first be fed." Here in the episode with the Syro-Phoenician woman Jesus says the children of Israel are to fed first, perhaps an echo of Romans 1:16, where Paul argues "to the Jews first" (Donahue and Harrington 2002, p40).

Mk 8:12: Note that Paul says in 1 Corinthians 1:22-23:

22 Since also Jews ask a sign, and Greeks seek wisdom, 23 also we -- we preach Christ crucified, to Jews, indeed, a stumbling-block, and to Greeks foolishness, (NIV)

Mk 8:15: Paul warns against the leaven of evil and malice, just as Jesus warns against the leaven of the Pharisees and the Herodians.

Mk 8:17-18: perhaps a reference to 1 Cor 2:9:

1 Cor 2:9 But as it is written, "Things which an eye didn't see, and an ear didn't hear, which didn't enter into the heart of man, these God has prepared for those who love him."

Mk 9:42: "to sin." The Greek verb skandalise (literally closer to to offend rather than to sin) is used here, echoing Paul in several places in 1 Corinthians, including the famous passage in 1:23, as well as 8:13. The appendix to McCracken (1994) lists this word and its appearances in the NT, including 8 times in Mark (4:17, 6:3, 9:42, 9:43, 9:45, 9:47, 14:27, and 14:29). The verb means both "to stumble" (fall away from the right) and "to offend." In the Septaugint translation of the OT, it is used to translate the Hebrew word for "snare."

Mk 9:43-47: recalls Paul's construction in 1 Cor 12 as a community with hands, eye, and feet. This is a common metaphor in all cultures, however.

Mk 9:43-47: Cutting off may link back to Paul's crudely sarcastic remark about "cutting off' certain parts of his opponents. The verb for "cutting off" is the same in both cases. But of course the idea of "cutting off" occurs in Daniel 9:26, in the famous passage about Onias III, and in some of the Jewish literature, where demonic agents are "cut off."

Mk 10:5: Compare 10:5 with Paul's argument in Galatians 3:

10: 5: But Jesus said to them, "For your hardness of heart he wrote you this commandment.(RSV)

Gal 3:19: What, then, was the purpose of the law? It was added because of transgressions until the Seed to whom the promise referred had come. (NIV)

Jesus and Paul explain the Law in the same way.

Mk 10:12: is widely seen as an anachronism in that a Jewish woman could not divorce her husband. Instead, the husband had to do the divorcing. This usually seen as a later insertion aimed at Gentile populations which had different divorce rules (Tomson 2001, p258-9). The same issue is brought up in 1 Cor 7.

10:30: Donahue and Harrington (2002, p40) argue that the word "houses" here refers to house churches of the kind common in primitive Christianity, with brothers, sisters, mothers, and children, but significantly, no "father," or centralized authority. They link this back to Paul's description of this structure in Romans 16:1-16 (although 16:1-7 is sometimes seen as an interpolation).

Mk 10:35-37: where James and John request to sit at Jesus' right hand, may well reflect back to Paul's claim in 1 Cor 6:1-3 that believers shall judge the world, even judging angels.

If any of you has a dispute with another, dare he take it before the ungodly for judgment instead of before the saints? Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if you are to judge the world, are you not competent to judge trivial cases? Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more the things of this life! (NIV)

Mk 11:23: recalls Paul's words in 1 Cor 13:2:

If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing.

Mk 12:17: The view of the state here is read by some to echo Romans 13:1-7.

Mk 12:25: perhaps a reference to 1 Cor 15:35-50, where Paul describes the resurrection bodies.

Mk 12:33: Donahue and Harrington (2002, p40) note that just as in Romans 13:1-7 and 13:8-10, in Mark 12:13-17 and 12:28-34, a command to love follows an injunction to obey the governing authorities.

Mk 12:36: Here Jesus quotes Psalm 110 (109 LXX). The Psalm appears to have been used in a coronation ritual for the kings of Israel (Donahue and Harrington 2002, p359). It was widely used in early Christian circles in the NT period and is cited in Acts 2:34-5, 1 Cor 15:25-6, and Heb 1:13.

Mk 14:22-24: The similar passage in 1 Cor 11:23-25.

Mk 14:36: perhaps "cup" is a reference to 1 Cor 10:16, although the "cup of death" symbol was widespread in the Mediterranean.

Mk 15:21: Romans 16:13 refers to a Rufus.

Mk 15:25: 1 Cor 5:7 refers to Jesus as the Paschal Lamb.

Mk 16:2: 1 Cor 15 has Jesus raised on the third day.

Mk 16:8: The term "the disciples and Peter" may recall the passage in 1 Cor where "Cephas and the disciples" see the Risen Jesus.

No doubt many of these concordances are weak. Some may be coincidental. Some may be due to commonalities of tradition. Many of these ideas are found in other texts that the writer of Mark could have known. It's not always easy to pin down the relationships between the texts in the New Testament canon.

* * * * * * * *

What are the Scriptures?

But let's take a look at an interesting feature of Mark 12. It contains fascinating little chiasm......

Mark 12 opens with the Parable of the Tenants. Four pericopes then follow:

	Mk 12:13-17 Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's
	Mk 12:18-27 Sadduccees ask about marriage after resurrection
	Mk 12:28-34 Which is greatest commandment?
	Mk 12:35-44 A poor widow gives everything to Temple

The pericoping masks another structure. It looks like this:

	Mk 12:10-11 Jesus is the Cornerstone
	Mk 12:13-17 Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's
	Mk 12:18-23 Sadduccees deny resurrection
	Mk 12:25-27 Discussion of What Bodies will be like in Heaven
	Mk 12:28-34 Commandment to Love
	Mk 12:35-7 How can the Lord be the Son of David?

Please note: I have temporarily removed 12:24 and the related verses, and set them aside, to provide the heat for this dish. We'll plug them back in in one moment. Let's now take a look at what brackets this section from 12:13 to 12:37:

	Mk 12:10-11 Citation of Psalm 118
	Mk 12:12 They feared to arrest him
	Mk 12:35-7 Citation of Psalm 110 "why do scribes say....???"
	Mk 12:38 'Ware the scribes!

Psalms 118 and 110 both relate to Simon Maccabaeus, the great Jewish leader. Psalm 118 celebrates Simon's entry into Jerusalem, while Psalm 110 contains his name as an acrostic in Hebrew. The latter parts of these verses refer to the enemies of Jesus.

By now, the reader will have become alert: a sixfold discourse with bookends of parallel items signals that we're looking at another chiastic structure. Let's display it.

A	Mk 12:10-11 Citation of Psalm 118 and warning that they want to kill Jesus
	B	Mk 12:13-17 Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's
		C	Mk 12:18-23 Sadduccees deny resurrection
		C'	Mk 12:25-27 Discussion of What Bodies will be like in Heaven
	B'	Mk 12:28-34 Commandment to Love
A'	Mk 12:35-7 Citation of Psalm 110 and warning to beware of scribes

Now I know you're all scratching your heads, because there doesn't seem to be a chiasm there. "Render Unto Caesar" just doesn't seem to have an obvious relation to a "Commandment to Love." The relationship is there, but the chiasm is not about the Gospel of Mark. Nor is it about the Old Testament. It is about another set of writings entirely.

Let's step back a moment. Donahue and Harrington (2002, p40) note that just as in Romans 13:1-7 and 13:8-10, in Mark 12:13-17 and 12:28-34, a command to love follows an injunction to obey the governing authorities. Suppose we toss that into our chiasm.

A	Mk 12:10-11 Citation of Psalm 118 and warning that the scribes want to kill Jesus)
	B	Romans 13:1-7 Obey your government = (Mk 12:13-17 Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's)
		C	Mk 12:18-23 Sadduccees deny resurrection
		C'	Mk 12:25-27 Like Angels in Heaven
	B'	Romans 13:8-10 (Love is fulfillment of the Law) = (Mk 12:28-34 Commandment to Love)
A'	Mk 12:35-7 Citation of Psalm 110 and warning to beware of scribes

Interesting. The passages from Romans appear to bracket the C' portion of this Chiasm. We've already seen in the list above that Mark 12:25-27 has the same theme as 1 Cor 15:35-50, a discussion of what bodies will be like in heaven. Now that's interesting, because just prior to that in 1 Cor 15, there is a discussion of those who deny the Resurrection -- just like the Sadduccees, whom the writer of Mark explicitly avers deny the Resurrection (note that of Jesus' opponents only the Sadduccees get a description of their beliefs, yet they only appear once). That gives us two blocks of material here that relate Mark and Paul. What happens if we stick 1 Cor 15 in there?

A	Mk 12:10-11 Citation of Psalm 118 and warning that the scribes want to kill Jesus
	B	Romans 13:1-7 Obey your government = (Mk 12:13-17 Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's)
		C	1 Corinthians 15:12-14 (What if there is no resurrection?) = (Mk 12:18-23 Sadduccees deny resurrection)
		C'	1 Corinthians 15:35-50 (What is the resurrection body like?) = (Mk 12:25-27 Like Angels in Heaven)
	B'	Romans 13:8-10 (Love is fulfillment of the Law) = (Mk 12:28-34 Commandment to Love)
A'	Mk 12:35-7 Citation of Psalm 110 and warning to beware of scribes

The B and C sections are both related to Paul! A fascinating picture. Why? Because is we go to 1 Corinthians 15, we find that there is the same citation of Psalm 110 that the writer of Mark uses. Further, it is located right between the two blocs of material that the writer of Mark is echoing. This yields:

A	Mk 12:10-11 Citation of Psalm 118 and warning that the scribes want to kill Jesus
	B	Romans 13:1-7 Obey your government = (Mk 12:13-17 Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's)
		C	1 Corinthians 15:12-14 (What if there is no resurrection?) = (Mk 12:18-23 Sadduccees deny resurrection)
		C'	1 Corinthians 15:35-50 (What is the resurrection body like?) = (Mk 12:25-27 Like Angels in Heaven)
	B'	Romans 13:8-10 (Love is fulfillment of the Law) = (Mk 12:28-34 Commandment to Love)
A'	1 Corinthians 15:25-26 cites same passage from Psalm 110 as (Mk 12:35-7 Citation of Psalm 110 and warning to beware of scribes)

All that is needed to complete the chiasm is a citation of Psalm 118 in Romans. Sure enough, there is one in Romans 8. Thus, our complete chiasm is:

A	Romans 8:31 cites Psalm 118:6 (Mk 12:10-11 Citation of Psalm 118 and warning that the scribes want to kill Jesus)
	B	Romans 13:1-7 Obey your government = (Mk 12:13-17 Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's)
		C	1 Corinthians 15:12-14 (What if there is no resurrection?) = (Mk 12:18-23 Sadduccees deny resurrection)
		C'	1 Corinthians 15:35-50 (What is the resurrection body like?) = (Mk 12:25-27 Like Angels in Heaven)
	B'	Romans 13:8-10 (Love is fulfillment of the Law) = (Mk 12:28-34 Commandment to Love)
A'	1 Corinthians 15:25-26 cites same passage from Psalm 110 as (Mk 12:35-7 Citation of Psalm 110 and warning to beware of scribes)

To make this simpler, our chiasm in Mark is:

A	Romans 8:31
	B	Romans 13:1-7
		C	1 Corinthians 15:12-14
		C'	1 Corinthians 15:35-50
	B'	Romans 13:8-10
A'	1 Corinthians 15:25-26

Looking at the texts inside the A-A' brackets, we see that the two texts in C and C' are:

Block C
1 Cor 15:12-14	Mark 12
12: Now if Christ is preached as raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13: But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ has not been raised; 14: if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain. 15: We are even found to be misrepresenting God, because we testified of God that he raised Christ, whom he did not raise if it is true that the dead are not raised. 16: For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised.(RSV)	18: And Sad'ducees came to him, who say that there is no resurrection; and they asked him a question, saying, 19: "Teacher, Moses wrote for us that if a man's brother dies and leaves a wife, but leaves no child, the man must take the wife, and raise up children for his brother. 20: There were seven brothers; the first took a wife, and when he died left no children; 21: and the second took her, and died, leaving no children; and the third likewise; 22: and the seven left no children. Last of all the woman also died. 23: In the resurrection whose wife will she be? For the seven had her as wife." (RSV)

and C' parallels:

Block C'
1 Cor 15:35-50	Mark 12
35: But some one will ask, "How are the dead raised? With what kind of body do they come?" 36: You foolish man! What you sow does not come to life unless it dies. 37: And what you sow is not the body which is to be, but a bare kernel, perhaps of wheat or of some other grain. 38: But God gives it a body as he has chosen, and to each kind of seed its own body. 39: For not all flesh is alike, but there is one kind for men, another for animals, another for birds, and another for fish. 40: There are celestial bodies and there are terrestrial bodies; but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another. (RSV)	25: For when they rise from the dead, they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven.(RSV)

To save space I have eliminated some of the lengthy discussions in the Pauline passages. Looking at the texts from Romans and Mark in the B and B' blocs, we see:

Block B
Romans 13:1-7	Mark 12
1: Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. 2: Therefore he who resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. 3: For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of him who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, 4: for he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain; he is the servant of God to execute his wrath on the wrongdoer. 5: Therefore one must be subject, not only to avoid God's wrath but also for the sake of conscience. 6: For the same reason you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, attending to this very thing. 7: Pay all of them their dues, taxes to whom taxes are due, revenue to whom revenue is due, respect to whom respect is due, honor to whom honor is due. (RSV)	13: And they sent to him some of the Pharisees and some of the Hero'di-ans, to entrap him in his talk. 14: And they came and said to him, "Teacher, we know that you are true, and care for no man; for you do not regard the position of men, but truly teach the way of God. Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not? 15: Should we pay them, or should we not?" But knowing their hypocrisy, he said to them, "Why put me to the test? Bring me a coin, and let me look at it." 16: And they brought one. And he said to them, "Whose likeness and inscription is this?" They said to him, "Caesar's." 17: Jesus said to them, "Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's." And they were amazed at him. (RSV)

While B' parallels:

Block B'
Romans 13:8-10	Mark 12
8: Owe no one anything, except to love one another; for he who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law. 9: The commandments, "You shall not commit adultery, You shall not kill, You shall not steal, You shall not covet," and any other commandment, are summed up in this sentence, "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." 10: Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law. (RSV)	28: And one of the scribes came up and heard them disputing with one another, and seeing that he answered them well, asked him, "Which commandment is the first of all?" 29: Jesus answered, "The first is, `Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one; 30: and you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength.' 31: The second is this, `You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' There is no other commandment greater than these." 32: And the scribe said to him, "You are right, Teacher; you have truly said that he is one, and there is no other but he; 33: and to love him with all the heart, and with all the understanding, and with all the strength, and to love one's neighbor as oneself, is much more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices." 34: And when Jesus saw that he answered wisely, he said to him, "You are not far from the kingdom of God." And after that no one dared to ask him any question. (RSV)

Remember, Mark 12:24 and its related verses have been set aside and retained for later use. Let's now restore them to their rightful place in the center of the chiasm. For good measure we'll toss in the chreia that the writer shoehorned into this structure as well.

A	Romans 8:31 = Mk 12:10-11
	B	Romans 13:1-7 = Mk 12:13-17
		C	1 Corinthians 15:12-14 = Mk 12:18-23
			D-A	Chreia A: Whose wife is she, anyway? (Setting)
			D-B	Mk 12:24: Jesus says you don't know the Scriptures and God's Power
		C'	1 Corinthians 15:35-50 = Mk 12:25-27
			D'-B'	Jesus says the dead are raised, and cites Scriptures: "I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob"?
			D'-A'	Chreia A': You yammerheads! He's the God of the living, not the Dead! (response)
	B'	Romans 13:8-10 = Mk 12:28-34
A'	1 Corinthians 15:25-26 = Mk 12:35-7

Let's look at some of the features of this chiasm.

It refers to two complete blocks of material from Paul, Romans 13:1-10, and 1 Corinthians 15:12-50.
It is bracketed by two Psalms written for Simon Maccabaeus, Psalm 118 and Psalm 110. Each of these two Psalms is cited in Pauline letters referenced in the passage. One of the Psalms is cited within the passage that the writer of Mark has drawn on, 1 Cor 15, sitting between the sections of Paul that Mark is paralleling.
It contains the only mention in Mark of the Sadduccees, who were famous for denying the Resurrection. The writer calls attention to that trait by explicitly describing it. 12:18: And Sad'ducees came to him, who say that there is no resurrection; (RSV)
The chiasm centers on a remark about the Scriptures -- but save for the citation from Ex 3:6, the texts paralleled are Pauline letters.
It is -- I must add -- exceptionally beautiful.

Mark 12:24 contains a jibe from Jesus that refers to the "Scriptures." It sits in the center of a chiasm formed by passages arguably derived from the Pauline Corpus, bracketed by citations of two Psalms about Simon Maccabaeus that are cited in both the Pauline letters and the Gospel of Mark that are referenced in the chiasm. Its hard to see this as anything other than a signal from the author of Mark that when he uses the "Scriptures" in a way that does not seem to refer to the Old Testament, he is referring to the Pauline Corpus. Perhaps it is the writer of Mark laughing at his reader: you don't know the Scriptures. If you did, you'd spot that they included Paul. And since nobody has since then, it is hard to argue that he was wrong.

But let's look at this more closely, because there is still another structure here. The importance of the theme of "scripture" here cannot be overestimated. The fact is that this chiasm is draped over a ping-pong match about scripture between Jesus and various discussants. Consider the following:

	(Jesus) 12:10: Have you not read this scripture:
	(Discussant) 12:19: "Teacher, Moses wrote:
	(Jesus) 12:24: Jesus said to them, "Is not this why you are wrong, that you know neither the scriptures nor the power of God?

	(Jesus) 12:26: And as for the dead being raised, have you not read in the book of Moses
	(Discussant) 12:28: And one of the scribes came up and heard them disputing with one another, and seeing that he answered them well, asked him, "Which commandment is the first of all?"
	(Jesus) 12:35-6: And as Jesus taught in the temple, he said, "How can the scribes say that the Christ is the son of David? 36: David himself, inspired by the Holy Spirit, declared,

Look how Jesus' actions and Markan keywords structure this sequence. Jesus cites Scripture and identifies it four times. Each time when Jesus names and cites Scripture, he is sandwiching something about scripture being asked or quoted at him by someone else. The keywords that tie together the sequence are clear even in the English translation: scribe, writing, and scripture are keywords throughout the sequence. And yet, underneath this, the scripture being cited is Paul. And in case you still didn't get what the writer is trying to tell you, this is the first time in the Gospel that the word "scripture" appears. And there it is, on Jesus' lips, citing a "scripture" that occurs in both Paul and Mark, in a section which consists of discussions of what scripture says, that is filled with parallels to Pauline thought.

This structure explains why the Sadduccees appear here, and only here, in the Gospel of Mark. Their most conspicuous trait is a disbelief in the Resurrection, as the writer of Mark deliberately reminds us at the beginning of the pericope. In the Gospel of Mark, when something appears once, it is a pointer to something. Here the Sadduccees may point us toward the idea of those who deny the Resurrection back in Paul, just as similar passages elsewhere in Mark point us back to passages in the OT that the writer used to create his gospel.

To reiterate, the basic structure is:

A   Romans 8 = Mark 12:10
B   Romans 13 = Mark 12:13-7
C   1 Cor 15 = Mark 12:18
C' 1 Cor 15 = Mark 12:25
B   Romans 13 = Mark 12:28-34
A   1 Cor 15 = Mark12:35-7

The complete structure, without the parallel scripture cites, is

A
..B
....C
......D-A
......D---B
....C'
......D---B'
......D-A'
..B'
A'

How did I find this thing? I only "found" one of these connections, the discussion of the angel bodies. What actually happened was that I was reviewing Pauline influences on Mark after someone rubbished Paul-Mark connections in a web debate, and implied that I was stupid for imagining that some of the items in the list above reflected Mark's use of Paul. So in the mood of "I'll show that so-and-so" I went back through my references to pile up some more. I was reading Donahue and Harrington (Sacra Pagina Mark) and saw that they had pointed out that a solid block of Romans (13:1-10) is reproduced in Mark in two pericopes that are separated by another pericope. That set off an alarm -- why the separation? In my notes from somewhere else I saw that the middle pericope, with the discussion of the resurrection, was also connected to Paul, to 1 Cor 15. Both of those letters seem to appear routinely in Mark. I smelled something, but didn't know what. Then I saw the scribes and Psalm 118 on one side, and the scribes and Psalm 110 on the other. Both 118 and 110 are about Simon Maccabaeus -- the thematic links between 12:10 and 12:35-7 are clear in Mark, where Jesus is compared to Simon in both their roles as King, High Priest, and implicitly, Messiah. Suspicion turned to certainty when I remembered that the same citation of Psalm 110 also occurs in the 1 Cor 15. I dug through Romans, and sure enough, there was the citation of Psalm 118 I had been looking for.

I now had the brackets, the A-A' section, and the B-B' section, but what was the C? I read 1 Cor 15:12-14 and realized that it linked perfectly to the angel bodies Jesus was discussing. That gave me C-C'. Mark 12:24 proved stickier, part of a complex interior structure that took a little longer to elucidate. The writer of Mark has even snuck in a Cynic chreia, answering Well? Whose wife is she? with You yammerheads! He's the God of the living, not the dead! which only complicates things further.

At that point I had a citation of Psalm 110 at the end that also occurs in 1 Cor 15, right between the paralleled passages. I had outsiders, scholars, who had recognized all the parts of this chiasm except the "angel bodies" discussion, but had never stitched it together. The connections weren't in my imagination. The chiasm then emerges perfectly. Looking at that, it is hard to argue that the writer of Mark didn't know and use Paul.

* * * * * * * *

Historical Alternatives?

Assume for the nonce that the writer of Mark was familiar with Paul's letters, most probably Galatians, 1 Corinthians, Romans, and Philippians. What narrative items does that enable us to assign to the writer's knowledge of Paul? Here's a few:

Jesus was designated, not born, the Son of God	Philippians 2:6-11
Jesus was of Davidic Descent	Romans 1:3
Jesus was handed over (betrayed)	1 Cor 11:23
Importance of Peter, James and John	Galatians 2:9 James, Peter and John, those reputed to be pillars,.... Indeed, Peter only appears in Galatians and 1 Corinthians, the two most commonly echoed letters in Mark.
Pharisees hate Jesus	Philippians 3:5-6 ...circumcised on the eighth day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; in regard to the law, a Pharisee; as for zeal, persecuting the church; as for legalistic righteousness, faultless.
Peter = Cephas	Several places in the Paulines, including 1 Cor 9:5 in some manuscripts
Peter is married and has a mother-in-law	1 Cor 9: 5 Don't we have the right to take a believing wife along with us, as do the other apostles and the Lord's brothers and Cephas? (the Greek actually says "sister-wife")
Abba, Father	Galatians 4:6 Because you are sons, God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, the Spirit who calls out, “Abba, Father.”
Divorce in Mark 10:12	1 Cor 7 Extensive discussion on divorce
Last Supper	1 Cor 11:23-5
Jesus Raised on the Third Day	1 Cor 15:4
Interpretation It is widely argued that the Gospel of Mark is about discipleship, and that an important aspect of it is imitating Jesus.. "If any man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me."	Possible Source: 1 Cor 4:15-6 Even though you have ten thousand guardians in Christ, you do not have many fathers, for in Christ Jesus I became your father through the gospel. Therefore I urge you to imitate me.
"Food" and "eating" as a metaphor for the message of Jesus and its reception.	1 Cor 10:1-4 1: I want you to know, brethren, that our fathers were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea, 2: and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, 3: and all ate the same supernatural food 4: and all drank the same supernatural drink. For they drank from the supernatural Rock which followed them, and the Rock was Christ.

* * * * * * * *

Conclusion

Did the writer of Mark know the Pauline letters? In this Excursus we've reviewed a portion of the evidence, and suggested a new and powerful piece of evidence for the writer's use of Paul. Here's another way to think about it.. With reference to Gal 3:1-4:11, Richard B. Hays (2002) has argued that “A story about Jesus Christ is presupposed by Paul’s argument in Galatians, and his theological reflection attempts to articulate the meaning of that story.”

Galatians 3

O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified? Let me ask you only this: Did you receive the Spirit by works of the law, or by hearing with faith? Are you so foolish? Having begun with the Spirit, are you now ending with the flesh? Did you experience so many things in vain? -- if it really is in vain. Does he who supplies the Spirit to you and works miracles among you do so by works of the law, or by hearing with faith? Thus Abraham "believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness.": So you see that it is men of faith who are the sons of Abraham. And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, "In you shall all the nations be blessed." So then, those who are men of faith are blessed with Abraham who had faith. For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, "Cursed be every one who does not abide by all things written in the book of the law, and do them." Now it is evident that no man is justified before God by the law; for "He who through faith is righteous shall live"; but the law does not rest on faith, for "He who does them shall live by them." Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us -- for it is written, "Cursed be every one who hangs on a tree" -- that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come upon the Gentiles, that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith. To give a human example, brethren: no one annuls even a man's will, or adds to it, once it has been ratified. Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring. It does not say, "And to offsprings," referring to many; but, referring to one, "And to your offspring," which is Christ. This is what I mean: the law, which came four hundred and thirty years afterward, does not annul a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to make the promise void.For if the inheritance is by the law, it is no longer by promise; but God gave it to Abraham by a promise.Why then the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the offspring should come to whom the promise had been made; and it was ordained by angels through an intermediary.Now an intermediary implies more than one; but God is one. Is the law then against the promises of God? Certainly not; for if a law had been given which could make alive, then righteousness would indeed be by the law.But the scripture consigned all things to sin, that what was promised to faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe. Now before faith came, we were confined under the law, kept under restraint until faith should be revealed. So that the law was our custodian until Christ came, that we might be justified by faith. But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a custodian; for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's offspring, heirs according to promise.I mean that the heir, as long as he is a child, is no better than a slave, though he is the owner of all the estate; but he is under guardians and trustees until the date set by the father. So with us; when we were children, we were slaves to the elemental spirits of the universe. But when the time had fully come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons. And because you are sons, God has sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, "Abba! Father!" So through God you are no longer a slave but a son, and if a son then an heir.Formerly, when you did not know God, you were in bondage to beings that by nature are no gods; but now that you have come to know God, or rather to be known by God, how can you turn back again to the weak and beggarly elemental spirits, whose slaves you want to be once more? You observe days, and months, and seasons, and years! I am afraid I have labored over you in vain. (RSV)

Read this carefully. Can you see any themes and ideas from the Gospel of Mark in it?

Notes:
The citations in the fake Psalm 151 at the beginning of the essay are from the NIV version of Romans. I have modified them to fit the context. The R.B. Hays quote is from The Faith of Jesus Christ (2002, p93), cited in Just (1993). A related version of this article may be found on my blog.

Previous Chapter

Home

Topical Index

Next Chapter

Historical Commentary on the Gospel of Mark
Chapter 1	Chapter 9	Home
Chapter 2	Chapter 10	Home
Chapter 3	Chapter 11	Topical Index
Chapter 4	Chapter 12	Topical Index
Chapter 5	Chapter 13	References
Chapter 6	Chapter 14	References
Chapter 7	Chapter 15	Contact Author
Chapter 8	Chapter 16	Contact Author