Mark 1-8:26, Volume 34A

Robert A. Guelich, David Allen Hubbard, Glenn W. Barker, John D. W. Watts, Ralph P. Martin

• Verlag: Zondervan Academic
• Jahr: 2018
• ISBN:
  9780310588375
• Thema: Theology & Religion
• Thema: Biblical Commentary

The Word Biblical Commentary delivers the best in biblical scholarship, from the leading scholars of our day who share a commitment to Scripture as divine revelation. This series emphasizes a thorough analysis of textual, linguistic, structural, and theological evidence. The result is judicious and balanced insight into the meanings of the text in the framework of biblical theology. These widely acclaimed commentaries serve as exceptional resources for the professional theologian and instructor, the seminary or university student, the working minister, and everyone concerned with building theological understanding from a solid base of biblical scholarship.

Overview of Commentary Organization

• Introduction—covers issues pertaining to the whole book, including context, date, authorship, composition, interpretive issues, purpose, and theology.
• Each section of the commentary includes:
• Pericope Bibliography—a helpful resource containing the most important works that pertain to each particular pericope.
• Translation—the author's own translation of the biblical text, reflecting the end result of exegesis and attending to Hebrew and Greek idiomatic usage of words, phrases, and tenses, yet in reasonably good English.
• Notes—the author's notes to the translation that address any textual variants, grammatical forms, syntactical constructions, basic meanings of words, and problems of translation.
• Form/Structure/Setting—a discussion of redaction, genre, sources, and tradition as they concern the origin of the pericope, its canonical form, and its relation to the biblical and extra-biblical contexts in order to illuminate the structure and character of the pericope. Rhetorical or compositional features important to understanding the passage are also introduced here.
• Comment—verse-by-verse interpretation of the text and dialogue with other interpreters, engaging with current opinion and scholarly research.
• Explanation—brings together all the results of the discussion in previous sections to expose the meaning and intention of the text at several levels: (1) within the context of the book itself; (2) its meaning in the OT or NT; (3) its place in the entire canon; (4) theological relevance to broader OT or NT issues.
  • General Bibliography—occurring at the end of each volume, this extensive bibliographycontains all sources used anywhere in the commentary.

I. The Beginning of the Gospel according to Isaiah (1:1–15)

Bibliography

Bacon, B. W. “The Prologue of Mark: A Study of Sources and Structure.” JBL 26 (1907) 84–105. Dautzenberg, G. “Die Zeit des Evangeliums. Mk 1,1–15 und die Konzeption des Markusevangeliums.” BZ 21 (1977) 219–34. Feneberg, W. Der Markusprolog: Studien zur Formbestimmung des Evangeliums. SANT 36. Munich: Kösel, 1974. Gibbs, J. M. “Gospel Prologues.” SE 6 = TU 112 (1974) 154–88. Guelich, R. A. “The Beginning of the Gospel, Mark 1:1–15.” BR 27 (1982) 5–15. Iersel, B. F. W. van, and Schoonenberg, P. “Die Theologie über die exegetische Detailarbeit: Ein Exeget und ein Theolog über Markus 1, 1–15.” Concil 7 (1971) 715–24. Keck, L. E. “The Introduction to Mark’s Gospel.” NTS 12 (1965–66) 352–70. Langkammer, H. “Tradition und Redaktion im Prolog zum Markusevangelium.” RTK 20 (1973) 37–57. Lightfoot, R. H. The Gospel Message of St. Mark. Oxford: Clarendon, 1950. Lührmann, D. “Biographie des Gerechten als Evangelium: Vorstellungen zu einem Markus-Kommentar.” Wort und Dienst 14 (1977) 23–50. Pesch, R. “Anfang des Evangeliums.” In Die Zeit Jesu, FS H. Schlier, ed. G. Bornkamm and K. Rahner. Freiburg: Herder, 1970. 108–44. Robinson, J. M. The Problem of History in Mark. SBT 21. London: SCM, 1957. Schnackenburg, R. “Das Evangelium’ im Verständnis des ältesten Evangelisten.” In Orientierung an Jesus, FS J. Schmid, ed. P. Hoffmann. Freiburg: Herder, 1973. 309–24. Schweizer, E. “Anmerkungen zur Theologie des Markus.” In Neotestamentica et Patristica, FS O. Cullmann. NovTSup 6. Leiden: Brill, 1960. 1–13. Seitz, O.J. “Praeparatio Evangelica in the Marcan Prologue.” JBL 82 (1963) 201–6.

Introduction

The Gospel of Mark opens with a series of vignettes depicting the beginning of the ministry of Jesus Messiah, the Son of God. The focus on Jesus’ coming begins with the OT promise (1:2–3) of a precursor that is fulfilled by John the Baptist (1:4–6) whose own role as a prophet, indicated by his food and clothing (1:6), culminates in his heralding of Jesus’ coming (1:7–8). The Baptist’s preaching and baptism set the stage for the divine declaration that attests Jesus to be the Son of God (1:9–11) who resists Satan in the wilderness temptations (1:12–13) and who himself emerges in Galilee to herald the fulfillment of time, the good news of God’s reign (1:14–15). Thus the opening section sets forth the “beginning of the gospel of Jesus Messiah, Son of God” (1:1).

Yet this opening section has given rise to a variety of opinions regarding its proper designation, its limits and its sources. Cranfield (33) reflects the diversity in the passage’s designation by entitling the section “The Beginning” and then noting that it serves as a “prologue” to the Gospel that “introduces” Jesus of Nazareth. It has become rather common to refer to these opening verses as a “prologue” (e.g., Bacon, JBL 26 [1907] 84; Grundmann, 34; Lane, 39; Pesch, 71–72; Seitz, JBL 82 [1963] 201), while others prefer the more neutral “introduction” (e.g., Dautzenberg, BZ 21 [1977] 3; Keck, NTS 12 [1965–66] 352–70; Lightfoot, Message, 15; Taylor, 151) or “preface” (e.g., Anderson, 63). The evangelist (1:1) apparently referred to this section as the “beginning” (so Cranfield, 33; Gnilka, 1:39 [“initium”]; Lohmeyer, 9; Schweizer, 28).

Behind the choice of terminology lies the basic question of the section’s relationship to the rest of the Gospel. Whereas “prologue” and “preface” connote a more self-contained section, “introduction” and clearly “beginning” signal a more integral relationship between this material and the rest of the Gospel. The answer ultimately lies in the significance of the opening verse.

The limit of this opening section has been variously set as 1:1–8, 1:1–13, and 1:1–15 (Feneberg, Markusprolog, arbitrarily chose 1:1–11 apparently for the purposes of his survey). The division of 1:1–8 found in the Greek texts of Westcott and Hort, Nestle, and the GNT (cf. Nestle²⁶) has few followers today (e.g., Haenchen, 28–51, and Schmithals, 1:73–82, without comment). Since the appearance and preaching of the Baptist (1:4–8) hardly represent the “beginning of the gospel” for Mark and since the thrust of 1:2b–3, 7–8 points to the one who would follow John, Mark’s opening section must include at least 1:1–13 (e.g., Bacon, JBL 26 [1907] 87–88; Cranfield, 32–60; Lane, 39–62; Lightfoot, Message, 15–20; Lohmeyer, 9–28; Schniewind, 44–50; Schweizer, 28–43; Taylor, 151–64).

Yet the grounds for drawing the line at 1:13 rather than 1:15 are seldom stated. They are implied by the headings given the following sections. For most of the above commentators, 1:14–15 represent the outset of Jesus’ public or Galilean ministry. Thus by implication 1:1–13 merely set the stage for Jesus’ entry into his public ministry. Since, however, such a chronological orientation appears at best to be of secondary importance to the evangelist both in 1:1–13 as well as in the following pericopes that lead to the passion narrative, one wonders if it should be accorded such significance in the relationship of 1:1–13 to 1:14–15. The evidence suggests a third option.

The recent trend has been to include 1:14–15 within the opening section (e.g., Anderson, 63–64; Dautzenberg, BZ 21 [1977] 219–34; Gibbs, TU 112 [1974] 154–88; Gnilka, 1:39–40; Grundmann, 34; Keck, NTS 12 [1965–66] 352–70; Langkammer, RTK 20 [1973] 57; Pesch, 1:71–73; Mann, 193–94). Three arguments support this option. First, terminologically εὐαγγέλιον forms an inclusion between 1:1 and 1:14–15 and the related term κηρύσσειν links John and Jesus in 1:4, 7, 14. Second, thematically John the Baptist as the forerunner provides the foil for Jesus’ appearance in 1:9–15. In addition to the contrast explicitly stated in 1:2–8, the threefold division of the traditional units regarding John and Jesus respectively parallel each other in such a manner as to accent this contrast. For example, both units open with an identifying word from God (1:2b–3, 11), contain a reference to their person and work (1:4–6, 12–13), and climax with a reference to their preaching (1:7–8, 14–15). Third, structurally the second major section of the Gospel (1:16—8:26) can be divided into three subsections, each beginning with a reference to discipleship (1:16—3:12; 3:13—6:6; 6:7—8:26; so Keck, NTS 12 [1965–66] 362–63) that supports the break between 1:15 and the call of the four disciples in 1:16–20.

This opening section consists of several traditional units. At issue in the discussion of sources is the extent of the evangelist’s redactional contribution to and the shaping of the material. On the one side, some have argued for a preevangelist traditional unit (1:1–15) with little redactional activity by the evangelist (e.g., Langkammer, RTK 20 [1973] 57; Pesch, 1:71–108; Schnackenburg, Orientierung, 318–19). Accordingly, this material would have come to the evangelist as the product of the community’s previous combination of traditional materials. On the other side, several have assigned the combination of the traditions in 1:2–8 and at least the shaping, if not the whole, of 1:14–15 to Mark (e.g., Dautzenberg, BZ 21 [1977] 226–27; Gnilka, 1:39–40; Grundmann, 34–35; van Iersel, Concil 7 [1971] 717–18).

Based on an examination of this material, Mark appears to have formed the opening of his Gospel from a mixed quotation (1:2b–3) taken either from a setting similar to 1:4 or found as an isolated testimonium, a traditional unit on the appearance and ministry of John the Baptist (1:4–8), a tradition of Jesus’ baptism by John (1:9–11) previously combined with an account of Jesus’ temptation in the wilderness (1:12–13) and a summary statement consisting of several traditional formulas to summarize Jesus’ message (1:14–15). The evangelist has aligned these units under his heading of 1:1–3 to show how the “beginning of the gospel of Jesus Messiah, Son of God” corresponds to Isaiah’s promise. In this way, he introduces and identifies John the Baptist and the main character of his story, Jesus Messiah, Son of God.

A. The Heading (1:1–3)

Bibliography

Arnold, G. “Mk 1,1 und Eröffnungswendungen in griechischen und lateinischen Schriften.” ZNW 68 (1977) 121–27. Bowman, J. W. “The Term Gospel and its Cognates in the Palestinian Syriac.” In New Testament Essays, FS T. W. Manson, ed. A. J. B. Higgins. Manchester: Manchester UP, 1959. 54–57. Dantzenberg, G. “Die Zeit des Evangeliums: Mk 1,1–15 und die Konzeption des Markusevangeliums.” BZ 21 (1977) 219–34. Feneberg, W. Der Markusprolog: Studien zur Formbestimmung des Evangeliums. SANT 36. Munich: Kösel, 1974. Fitzmyer, J. A. “The Use of the Explicit Old Testament Quotations in Qumran and the New Testament.” NTS 7 (1960–61) 297–33 = Essays on the Semitic Background of the New Testament. London: Chapman, 1971. 3–58. Iersel, B. F. W. van, and P. Schoonenberg. “Die Theologie über die exegetische Detailarbeit: Ein Exeget und ein Theologe über Markus 1,1–15.” Concil 7 (1971) 715–24. Kazmierski, C. R. Jesus, the Son of God: A Study of the Markan Tradition and Its Redaction by the Evangelist. Forschung zur Bibel 33. Würzburg: Echter Verlag, 1979. Kingsbury, J. D. The Christology of Mark’s Gospel. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983. Lamarche, P. “Commencement de l’Evangile de Jésus, Christ, Fils de Dieu (Mc 1,1).” NRT 92 (1970) 1024–36. Martin, R. P. Mark, Evangelist and Theologian. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1972. Marxsen, W. Mark the Evangelist. 1969. Pesch, R. “Der Anfang des Evangeliums Jesu Christi: Eine Studie zum Prolog des Markusevangeliums (Mk 1:1–15).” In Die Zeit Jesu, FS H. Schlier, ed. G. Bornkamm and K Rahner. Freiburg: Herder, 1970. 108–44. Schnackenburg, R. “ ‘Das Evangelium’ im Verständnis des ältesten Evangelisten.” In Orientierung an Jesus, FS J. Schmid, ed. P. Hoffmann. Freiburg: Herder, 1973. 309–24. Schweizer, E. “Die theologische Leistung des Markus.” EvT 19 (1964) 337–55. Seitz, O. J. F. “Praeparatio Evangelica in the Marcan P...