Orr The Beginning of the Gospel

A Theology of Mark
1. Auflage 2022
ISBN: 978-1-4335-7534-1
Verlag: Crossway
Format: EPUB
Kopierschutz: 0 - No protection

E-Book, Englisch, 192 Seiten

Reihe: New Testament Theology

Understanding Mark in the Context of the Old and New Testaments The book of Mark-the first and shortest Gospel written-serves as both a historical and theological account, connecting Jesus to the whole storyline of the Bible. Mark writes against the backdrop of the Old Testament and draws from other New Testament writers, specifically Peter and Paul, to articulate many themes that are found in the rest of the New Testament. In this addition to the New Testament Theology series, scholar Peter Orr offers an accessible summary of the theology of Mark, examining its relationship to both the Old and New Testaments. Each chapter focuses on a key theological theme-the identity of Christ, the announcement of the kingdom, the call to follow, and more-and explains how it is relevant for the church today.  - Part of the New Testament Theology Series: Other volumes include The Joy of Hearing; The Mission of the Triune God; and United to Christ, Walking in the Spirit - Ideal for Anyone Wanting to Study the Bible More Deeply: Perfect for pastors, seminarians, college students, and laypeople - Written by Peter Orr: New Testament lecturer and author of Fight for Your Pastor

Peter Orr (PhD, University of Durham) is a New Testament lecturer at Moore Theological College in Sydney, Australia. He is the author of Exalted Above the Heavens: The Risen and Ascended Christ and a contributor to Theology Is for Preaching and Romans and the Legacy of St Paul. Orr and his wife, Emma, have four sons and are members at All Saints Petersham.

Autoren/Hrsg.

Orr, Peter

Leseproben

1

Divine Identity

Jesus Christ, the Son of God

Even though Mark writes a book to explain the origins of the gospel, his central focus is on Jesus since the gospel is about Jesus.1 Therefore, this book on Mark will really be a book about Jesus! I will more narrowly concentrate in this chapter on two aspects of Jesus’s identity: (1) the titles used of him and (2) how his miracles reveal his divine identity. There will be overlap between the sections since some of the titles indicate his divine identity. There is, however, more to say about Jesus because Mark says much about what Jesus does. So although this chapter focuses on Jesus, the remainder of the book will build on our understanding of who he is.

The Titles of Jesus

In this section, then, I will examine the titles of Jesus. Whole monographs have been written on each of these titles; thus, all I can do here is sketch the main contours that each brings to Mark’s picture of Jesus. In a book that starts by identifying its main character as the “Christ” and “the Son of God” (Mark 1:1),2 that pivots on Peter confessing Jesus as the Christ (8:29), and that climaxes (to a degree) with the confession of the Roman centurion that Jesus was the “Son of God” (15:39), the titles used of Jesus are clearly significant. Certainly, Mark’s view of Jesus cannot be reduced to a study of the titles, but to neglect them would be to overlook a rich seam of information about the person of Jesus.

Christ

Although “Christ” (Christos in Greek; Messiah in Hebrew) is not the most common title in Mark, its use in 1:1 seems to indicate that it is the fundamental way in which Mark presents Jesus, employed as it is by Peter in his pivotal confession in 8:29. In three places, Jesus uses it, albeit somewhat obliquely, to refer to himself. In 9:41 he refers to the disciples as those who “belong to Christ.” In 12:35 he poses the question whether the Christ is merely the “son” of David. In 13:21 he warns the disciples not to be deceived if people tell them that the Christ has come. The final two occurrences of the title are used by others at his trial and crucifixion. In 14:61 the high priest asks Jesus if he is “the Christ, the Son of the Blessed,” and Jesus responds that he is (14:62). In 15:32 the chief priests and scribes mock Jesus by challenging “the Christ, the King of Israel” to come down from the cross so that they might believe.

This final instance equates “Christ” and “King of Israel.” Although in the Old Testament priests (e.g., Ex. 28:41) and prophets (e.g., 1 Kings 19:16) were anointed, the term messiah in the world of first-century Judaism primarily referred to kings, who were also anointed (e.g., 1 Sam. 15:1).3 The expectation of a messiah par excellence (see 1 Sam. 2:35) was primarily an expectation of an anointed king who would crush God’s enemies and rule the nations (Ps. 2:2). In the first century, messiah language, though diverse,4 does speak to a specific problem: “determining who is and who should be in charge.”5 Although the term is uniquely Jewish and Christian, “Persians, Greeks, Romans, and others had their own ways of talking”6 about unique leaders who would come and “inaugurate a new and better order.”7

However, in presenting the Christ as dying on the cross, Mark narrates something unheard of: a messiah or Christ who suffers. This did not cohere with the anticipation of the triumphant, all-conquering king inside or outside of Judaism. Peter’s rebuke of Jesus reflects the incongruity of a suffering messiah (Mark 8:31–32). As Paul puts it, the notion of a crucified Christ was “a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles” (1 Cor. 1:23). Paul’s gospel, which centered on “Jesus Christ and him crucified” (1 Cor. 2:2), thus finds its origins in the life and teaching of Jesus himself.

Jesus’s identity as Christ is, however, one aspect where we see a difference between Paul and Mark. In Mark’s Gospel, Jesus is reluctant to take this identity upon himself, whereas in Paul’s letters it is by far the most common way for him to refer to Jesus. We will see that twice Jesus interprets the title “Christ” by using “Son of Man” (Mark 8:29–31; 14:61–62), his preferred title. Son of Man (as we will see below) was not a title to which first-century people attached considerable expectation. By employing it, therefore, Jesus could more easily speak of himself without the misunderstanding and fervor that “Christ” might have generated.

This underlines Mark’s historical agenda and reminds us that he is not merely writing theology. In writing of Jesus before the cross and resurrection, Mark shows that Jesus wanted to downplay unhelpful expectations and stress his impending suffering and death, thus favoring Son of Man language. Paul, writing from the perspective of the resurrection, appropriately refers to Jesus as Christ—a title that speaks more universally to Jesus’s exalted status. Nevertheless, Paul’s language of “Christ and him crucified” underscores the point that this is not the Christ of popular expectation.

Son of God

Many argue that “Son of God” is the key title in Mark’s Gospel.8 God himself identifies Jesus as his Son at his baptism (1:11) and transfiguration (9:7), and demons (who are presumed to have supernatural knowledge)9 twice address him as such (3:11; 5:7). Furthermore, the placement of this title at the beginning (1:1, 11), middle (9:7), and end (15:39) of the Gospel points to its significance for Mark.10

The two affirmations from God that Jesus is his Son evoke Psalm 2:7 (“You are my Son; today I have begotten you”), which, in turn, is a meditation on God’s promise to David in 2 Samuel 7:14. As with “Christ,” it seems that “Son of God” is primarily an expression of Jesus’s kingship. Thus, “Mark’s use of Messiah and ‘Son of God’ finds unity in the notion of God’s appointed eschatological ruler.”11

However, “Christ” and “Son of God,” while both evoking the notion of kingship, do subtly differ from one another. If Christ was a particularly Jewish term, Son of God was one used by both Jews and Gentiles.12 In the Old Testament the term son “not only had its usual biological meaning, but often designated the category to which someone or something belonged.”13 So in the Old Testament “son of God” could be used “for a being who belongs to the heavenly world”—that is, an angel (e.g., Job 1:6). It could be used of Israel (e.g., Ex. 4:22) and of kings (e.g., Ps. 2:7), the nation or person that particularly belonged to God. In the New Testament, it is used of Christians (e.g., Matt. 5:9; Rom. 8:14). In Jewish contexts, a human being could be designated “son of God” in an unremarkable way—meaning they belonged to God. However, in Gentile thought, the term had a more supernatural flavor, in that kings and rulers were understood to be sons of the gods in a more particular sense. This gives irony to the centurion’s confession of Jesus as Son of God (Mark 15:39), a “title that a Roman soldier would normally attribute to the Roman emperor.”14

“Son of God” as a title, then, can point to Jesus’s divine identity, but it raises the question, what type of divine identity? Roman emperors were made (i.e., declared to be) gods by the people following their achievements. As such, they were not regarded as gods in the same way that, say, Jupiter was. They were not understood as gods by nature or as preexistent gods. What kind of deity, if any, does Jesus possess by virtue of being the Son of God? Some commentators suggest that Jesus became Son of God at his baptism—that is, he was adopted as Son of God in a manner somewhat analogous to a Roman emperor. They point to similar language in Romans 1:4 where it has been argued that Paul is teaching that Jesus became Son of God following his resurrection. However, this is a misreading of Paul since in the previous verse Paul has already identified Jesus as God’s Son at his birth (Rom. 1:3).15

Indicators in Mark’s Gospel show that, like Paul, Mark has a stronger view of Jesus’s deity and considers him to be the preexistent Son of God.16 Prior to the...