Study of the Gospel of Mark – Recap Session 10

The Final Disclosure

Mark 15:42-47; Mark 16

Throughout the Gospel of Mark, we have noted similarities with the Elijah-Elisha narratives.  Other similarities not yet discussed include Jesus and Elisha both performing the same number of miracles.  Jesus’ and Elisha’s ministries both begin after the end of their predecessor’s ministry.  Both ministries aim to establish God’s rule.  There are multiple references to Elijah in Mark’s gospel – the final one while Jesus is on the cross.  However, multiple similarities in themselves do not constitute literary dependence.  Adam Winn has suggested several criteria for determining literary dependence: 1) Plausibility of imitation, 2) similarities in narrative structures/orders of events, 3) similarities in specific narrative details and actions, 4) verbal agreement, and 5) weight of combined criteria.  Based on these criteria, Dr. Winn concludes that there is a literary dependence.

This does not mean that Mark just plugged in “John” for “Elijah” and “Jesus” for “Elisha” and repeated the same story.  Dr. Winn is only claiming that the Elijah-Elisha narratives were an important literary source for Mark’s gospel – but not the only source.  Nor does Mark’s use of the Elijah-Elisha narratives mean we should draw any conclusions with respect to the gospel’s meaning or theological significance.  Understanding the theology behind the Elijah-Elisha narratives doesn’t necessarily help us interpret the Gospel of Mark.

The gospel writers have frequently quoted Old Testament scripture in their text.  Mark’s gospel, for example, begins with quotations from Isaiah, Malachi, and Exodus.  Dr. Winn’s study opens up the issue of other ways the Old Testament may have been utilized by New Testament writers.  It has long been theorized that the Gospel of Matthew and the Gospel of Luke used Mark’s gospel as a primary source.  Winn’s work provides a potential answer to the question, “What were Mark’s sources?”  Thomas Nelligan, for example, has more recently explored First Corinthians as another potential source for Mark’s writing.

Mark’s account of the crucifixion and death of Jesus is the shortest account of the four gospels, and yet in the crucifixion and burial stories, Mark sums up nearly everything of importance he writes in the whole gospel.  After Jesus died on the cross, Joseph of Arimathea went to Pilate, requested Jesus body, and buried it in a tomb (Mark 15:42–47).  Mark told us that Joseph of Arimathea was a councilor, but not what type of council he sat on – there is no reason to think he was a member of the Sanhedrin.  It was quite unusual to quickly bury the body of someone who was crucified.  Most bodies were left on the cross for days or weeks to be picked over by birds as a warning.  Joseph did what John’s disciples did after his execution, and what Jesus’ disciples failed to do.  Jesus’ body was buried Friday afternoon before the start of the Sabbath.

“When the Sabbath was over” (after six pm on Saturday evening), the women purchased spices to anoint the body (Mark 16:1–8).  When they went to the tomb after sun rose on Sunday, the stone was rolled away and a young man dressed in white sat at the right – the favored place.    We learn four things from the young man:  (1) not to be alarmed; (2) the women who were looking for Jesus had not been paying attention.  They were looking for a dead Jew instead of a living Messiah; (3) Jesus, who had been crucified, had been raised up; (4) the women are to tell the disciples to go back to Galilee (back to the beginning) to see Jesus.  Jesus’ loyalty to his disciples is linked with God’s vindication of Jesus.  The women who have followed Jesus to the end, even after the Twelve have run away, also fail at the last moment.  Out of fear, they say nothing.

The Gospel of Mark has four endings.  The shortest – the one ending with verse eight – is likely the earliest.  It was the only ending familiar to Clement (150–215 c.e.) and Origen (185–254 c.e.).  The evidence points to it being the one written by Mark, or his earliest redactors.  The other possible endings appear to have been derived primarily from material in Matthew, Luke or John at a much later date.  The vocabulary and style differ significantly from the rest of Mark’s gospel.   While they present valid theological viewpoints, they are not the viewpoint expressed in the core of Mark’s gospel.

An intermediate ending following verse eight, tells us that the women reported to Peter and the disciples, and afterwards Jesus “sent out through them the sacred and imperishable proclamation of eternal salvation …” This short addition uses language common to Paul or Luke, but never appears elsewhere in the Gospel of Mark.  That, plus the fact that it directly contradicts verse eight which said the women said nothing to anyone, makes it highly unlikely that it was included in Mark’s original text.  This ending first appeared in some Greek manuscripts in the seventh, eighth and ninth centuries.

A longer ending (Mark 16:9 – 20) is divided into three sections.  The first section (from verses 9 to 14) is focused on the problem of disbelief.  Mary Magdalene told the disciples what she saw, but they did not believe her.  Jesus was seen by two disciples walking (probably on the road to Emmaus – from Luke), but when they told the others, they were not believed.  Finally, Jesus appeared to the eleven and upbraided them for their lack of faith and their unbelief.  Perhaps this section was added by followers of Jesus who had been dealing with the issue of disbelief when they preached the resurrection story.

The second section (verses 15–18) is the great commission story followed by a discussion of dramatic signs to be performed by believers, such as picking up snakes and drinking poison without ill effect.  This flies in the face of earlier stories where Jesus clearly stated that he would not provide any more signs.  The section also includes the clause, “the one who does not believe will be condemned. ” – a judgment unprecedented in Mark.  The third section (verses 19–20) describes the ascension of Jesus followed by the disciples’ complete rehabilitation as ardent proclaimers of the good news, in a way that seemed impossible for the confused, frightened deserters we have read about throughout this gospel. Again, this does not fit the narrative we have been given from the first chapter through the eighth verse of the sixteenth chapter.  Jerome included this ending in his translation into the Vulgate (Latin), but was not convinced it was part of the original.  It seems to have first appeared in the late fourth or early fifth century.

Also in the fifth century a version appeared that had verses 9 – 20 plus an expansion between verse 14 and 15.  This expansion appears as a footnote in the NRSV as well as some other current translations.   In this addition, the disciples demand that Jesus disclose his righteousness right now.  This section is loaded with apocalyptic language and even uses ideas, language and themes consistent with Mark’s gospel, But it is extremely unlikely it was written by Mark.

The longer versions are a part of the canon – i.e. a part of the New Testament used by most Christians today.  What ending we include with the story makes a difference in how we understand the whole story.  Dr. Black suggests we consider the extra endings as commentary on the Gospel of Mark.  Perhaps it could be thought of as an annex.  But if, as it appears, Mark ended his gospel with verse eight, the question becomes. “Why?”