THE MARKAN INCIPIT
It is widely recognized that Mark 1:1 functions as a title or incipit for the entire Gospel of Mark. Such titles were significant in ancient literature, as they often functioned as a programmatic statement for the reader, providing a lens through which the entire text should be read.2 Thus paying close attention to Markâs incipit should offer the reader clues as to the function and purpose of the entire Gospel.
A number of brief preliminary exegetical comments can be made about Markâs incipit: âThe beginning of the good news [gospel] of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.â The reference to âbeginningâ (ÎŹÏÏÎź) could be a reference to the beginning of Jesusâ earthly ministry, which will be described in Mark, or it could be a reference to the entirety of Jesusâ ministry as outlined in Mark, that is, what is described in this text is only the beginning of Godâs work, not the entirety of it. âGospelâ (ΔáœÎ±ÎłÎłÎ”Î»ÎŻÎżÎœ) generally refers to good news or glad tidings and is not here used in a technical sense to refer to genre, that is to say, Mark is not identifying this work as âa Gospel.â Presumably this good news is about Jesus, who is identified as the Christ or Godâs Messiah.3 Jesusâ identity as the Christ is then further qualified by the title âSon of God,â that is, Jesus is understood as Messiah in terms of divine sonship.
However, the title âSon of Godâ is textually uncertain, with the phrase being absent in one significant early manuscript (Codex Sinaiticus, Ś*). Despite this omission, the reading âSon of Godâ is found in good and reliable early manuscripts (Codex Vaticanus, B; Codex Alexandrinus, A; Codex Bezae, D). Yet many scholars find it more likely that a scribe added the title than omitted it. It is possible, however, that the omission was accidental, as a scribe would have been looking at a list of six genitive words, with the sacred names abbreviated and listed without spaces between themâÎ΄Χ΄΄΄Î΄.4 This textual issue is impossible to resolve with any certainty, but there is adequate reason to accept âSon of Godâ as original to Markâs incipit, and I will cautiously move forward accepting the longer reading.
Thus Markâs incipit establishes Jesusâ identity as Godâs Messiah (and plausibly Son of God) and clearly indicates that Mark has a strong christological interest. But such a conclusion is rather generic and gives the reader little insight into how Mark might understand these titles or to what ends these titles are used in Mark. To glean more from Markâs incipit, attention must be given to the possible backgrounds against which the language of the incipit could be read. Many interpreters have argued that the language of Markâs incipit finds meaning against the background of Isaiahâs Servant Song, in which âthe one who proclaims good newsâ (ΔáœÎ±ÎłÎłÎ”λÎčζÏÎŒÎ”ÎœÎżÏ, a participle from the same root as the noun ΔáœÎ±ÎłÎłÎ”Î»ÎŻÎżÎœ, âgood newsâ) is prominent (e.g., Is 40:9 [2x]; 41:27 [Masoretic Text]; 52:7 [2x]; 60:6; 61:1). The âone who proclaims good newsâ announces Godâs victory over the enemies of Israel (Is 41:27) and the reestablishment of Godâs righteous reign over Israel (Is 40:9-10; 52:7). That the incipit is followed by a citation from Isaiahâs Servant Song (Is 40:3) serves to strengthen the connection between Markâs incipit and âthe one who proclaims good newsâ in Isaiah. Such a conclusion is also supported by the first words spoken by the Markan Jesus, who enters Galilee saying, âThe time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God has come near; repent, and believe in the good newsâ (Mk 1:15). Thus through the incipit Mark is intentionally identifying Jesus as the one who both proclaims and establishes the Isaianic good news.
But other interpreters have noted that the language of the Markan incipit strongly echoes the language of the Roman imperial world. ÎáœÎ±ÎłÎłÎλÎčÎżÎœ was a word regularly associated with Roman emperors. It was often used to describe their birth, political ascension, and military victories. Josephus writes that on receiving the news of Vespasianâs rise to power, âevery city kept festivals for the good news [ΔáœÎ±ÎłÎłÎλÎčα] and offered sacrifices on his behalf.â5 He also writes, âOn reaching Alexandria, Vespasian was greeted by the good news [ΔáœÎ±ÎłÎłÎλÎčα] from Rome and by embassies of congratulation from every quarter of the world, now his own.â6 But perhaps most significant is the Priene Calendar Inscription, written in honor of the emperor Augustus:
Since Providence, which has ordered all things and is deeply interested in our life, has set in most perfect order by giving us Augustus, whom she filled with virtue that he might benefit humankind, sending him as a savior, both for us and for our descendants, that he might end war and arrange all things, and since he, Caesar, by his appearance (excelled even our anticipations), surpassing all previous benefactors, and not even leaving to posterity any hope of surpassing what he has done, and since the birthday of the god [ΞΔοῊ] Augustus was the beginning [ጊÏΟΔΜ] of the good tidings [ΔáœÎ±ÎłÎłÎ”λίÏÎœ] for the world that came by reason of him.7
Here we see a striking similarity with the Markan incipit, as both refer to the âbeginning of the good tidings [gospel].â And while in this inscription Augustus is identified as a god, he and his successors were often given the title âson of Godâ (see discussion above in chapter two), a title present in the Markan incipit. If one were to remove âJesus Christâ from the Markan incipit and replace it with âCaesar Augustus,â the resulting text would be quite similar to Roman imperial inscriptions found throughout the empire. Undeniably the first century Greco-Roman reader would have recognized the presence of Roman imperial language in Markâs incipit. To such a reader it would have appeared that Mark intentionally replaced Caesar with Jesus and thus attributed to Jesus the honor that was regularly reserved for the emperor alone.
The similarities that Markâs incipit shares with both the language of Isaiah and the language of the Roman imperial world have led many interpreters to argue for one background over against the other.8 While such a choice might seem the only way forward, both Craig Evans and I have argued for a third possibilityânamely, that the Evangelist has intentionally brought together the language of both the Jewish and the Roman world.9 The intentional merging of such language would be perfectly suited to address a crisis created by Flavian propaganda, propaganda in which Vespasian had already merged Jewish messianic hope with Roman imperial realities. Markâs merging of Isaianic language (clearly understood messianically) and the language of the Roman imperial world could easily and naturally have been understood as an intentionally mirroring of and response to Vespasianâs merging of these same two realities. Thus, from the outset of Markâs Gospel, he proclaims the âgood newsâ of Jesus contra Vespasian, that Jesus is the true Messiah and fulfillment of Jewish Scriptures contra Vespasian, and that Jesus is true âSon of Godâ contra Vespasian. Thus I propose that through an incipit tailor made to address the crisis facing the Markan community, the Evangelist sets the agenda for the entire Gospel and provides the reader with the proper lens for reading the entire narrative.
JOHN THE BAPTIST AND JESUS
After the Markan incipit, the reader is introduced to John the Baptist, a figure established as a powerful prophet of God and one who plays a preparatory role for Godâs salvific work. Mark styles John after the powerful prophet Elijah, as he is dressed in a similar fashion (2 Kings 1:8). Johnâs role is relatively minor in Markâs Gospel. Though he does not use Jesusâ name, he declares that Jesus will be even greater than himself and that Jesus will baptize people with the Holy Spirit. At the baptism of Jesus the wilderness prophet fades into the background (though he reappears in Mk 6) while God declares Jesus to be his beloved son, and Jesus is anointed with the Spirit of God. Jesus is then driven into the wilderness for forty days, where he is presumably victorious over the testing of Satan and the threat of wild beasts, and is subsequently attended to by angels.
In these opening verses of Markâs narrative Jesus is presented as an impressive and powerful figure. He is greater than the powerful prophet John and will have the ability to wield the very Spirit of God. Jesusâ baptism reaffirms the claim of Markâs incipit that Jesus is the âSon of God.â Markâs echo of Psalm 2:7, a royal coronation psalm, presents Jesusâ baptism as just such a coronation. The latter half of the divine saying, âthe Beloved; with you I am well pleased,â echoes Isaiah 42:1, which describes Godâs servant assigned to an eschatological task.10 Thus at his baptism Jesus begins his reign as Godâs appointed eschatological ruler. As Godâs ruler, Jesus is victorious over both spiritual and physical opposition, and he regains his strength from the aid of divine agents. It is this powerful figure who will enter Galilee and dominate the first half of Markâs Gospel.
THE GALILEAN MINISTRY
In Mark 1:15 Jesus enters Galilee proclaiming the âgood newsâ of the coming kingdom of God. With Jesusâ recent appointment as Godâs ruler, the reader might rightfully conclude that Jesus should be understood as the ruler of this kingdom, though he is ruling on behalf of God himself. The narrative that follows this proclamation of the kingdom of God is dominated by the powerful actions of Jesus, including healings, exorcisms, power over nature, and the power to multiply food. Interspersed with these powerful actions are accounts of peopleâs reactions to Jesus, both positive and negative, and Jesusâ teaching on the nature of the kingdom of God. Throughout this portion of the narrative there are persistent questions about Jesusâ identity, with some perceiving it clearly and others failing to do so.
As I noted in the introductory chapter, most narrative assessments of Mark have tended to give narrative priority to the various responses to Jesus throughout the Galilean ministry, with the powerful deeds of Jesus often treated as mere vehicles for addressing discipleship and proper responses to Jesus. As such the miracles of Jesus often play a minor role in narrative assessments of Markâs Christology. Such an approach to understanding the Jesus of Markâs Galilean ministry seems tragically misguided, as Jesusâ deeds of power seem to dominate the narrative space of the first eight chapters of Markâs Gospel. That Mark devotes such space to Jesusâ great deeds of power suggests that those deeds of power are intended to communicate important aspects of Jesusâ identity. To be sure, peopleâs responses to Jesusâ deeds of power are important for the Markan narrative, but are they truly primary over the powerful deeds of Jesus? I propose that the powerful deeds of Jesus are primary for Markâs presentation of Jesus and that the reactions to these deeds often function both to illustrate the significance of the deeds themselves and to identify the proper response to such deeds. Often the reader is pushed to make an assessment about what the deeds mean for Jesusâ identity, as questions about his identity often accompany his deeds of power.
To illustrate, I offer a narrative overview of a section of Markâs Galilean ministry, Mark 1:21â3:35. This section of Markan text begins with Jesus exorcising a demon through a verbal command. This episode illustrates for the reader an important part of Jesusâ identity as Godâs Messiah and Sonâthat he possesses extreme power, including power over the supernatural realm that opposes God. The response of those present for the exorcism, âWhat is this? A new teachingâwith authority! He co...