WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK by MARIE-JOSÉE FORTIN Doctor of Chiropractic, UQTR, 1999 Master of Divinity, Sembeq, 2015 Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF THEOLOGY in FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES TRINITY WESTERN UNIVERSITY April 20, 2022 © Marie-Josée Fortin, 2022 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK ii Abstract The hermeneutic used by the writers of the New Testament in their interpretation of the Jewish Scriptures seems so far from 21st century exegetical principles that it is often considered as puzzling. One of those mysteries is the way some authors combine citations from the Jewish Scriptures and integrate them in their text as if coming from a single text—combinations of citations also known as composite citations. This study examines why and how some authors adapt texts from the Old Testament to use them as literary devices with rhetorical intent. A simplified Socio-Rhetorical-Interpretation method is used to examine selected composite citations found in Mark’s Gospel. This investigation includes an exploration of literary devices, discourse analysis, grammatical and socio-cultural considerations, as well as a reflection on the integration of those composite citations and their motifs within the Markan narrative. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK iii Contents Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... ii Acknowledgment ............................................................................................................................ v Abbreviations ................................................................................................................................. vi Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1 Research Strategy .................................................................................................................... 6 Chapter 1 Review of Literature..................................................................................................... 12 Why did Ancient Greco-Roman and Jewish Authors Use Citations? ....................................... 12 Theories to Explain Composite Citations Found in the Bible ................................................... 16 Are Composite Citations Imperfect Recollection? ................................................................ 16 Are Composite Citations Derived from Lists or Testimonies? .............................................. 18 Are Composite Citations the Result of Midrashic Interpretation? ........................................ 20 Are Composite Citations Purposefully Following the Rule of Two Testimonies? ............... 22 Are Composite Citations Rhetorical Devices? ...................................................................... 23 What Is Rhetoric? .................................................................................................................. 24 Are Composite Citations Part of the Rhetorical Tool-Kit Available to Greco-Roman or Jewish Writers/Speakers? ...................................................................................................... 25 How were Composite Citations used in Greco-Roman and Jewish Texts? .......................... 27 Could a First-Century Audience Have Recognized and Appreciated Rhetoric? ...................... 32 Were Composite Citations Part of the Rhetorical Methods Taught in School? .................... 34 Why Composite Citation? ......................................................................................................... 37 Chapter 2 Method ......................................................................................................................... 41 Socio-Rhetorical Interpretation in the Study of Composite Citations ................................... 42 Inner Texture of the NT ......................................................................................................... 43 Application of Inner Texture to Mark 11:17 ......................................................................... 44 Inner Texture of the OT ......................................................................................................... 48 Intertexture............................................................................................................................. 51 Application of Intertexture .................................................................................................... 52 Socio-Cultural Texture .......................................................................................................... 55 Application of Socio-Cultural Texture .................................................................................. 57 Conclusion and Evaluation .................................................................................................... 62 Chapter 3 Composite Citation in Mark 1:2–3 ............................................................................... 69 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK iv Inner Texture of the NT ......................................................................................................... 71 Inner Texture of the OT ......................................................................................................... 79 Intertexture............................................................................................................................. 83 Socio-Cultural Texture .......................................................................................................... 90 Conclusion and Evaluation .................................................................................................... 93 Chapter 4 Composite Citation in Mark 12:19 ............................................................................. 101 Inner Texture of the NT ....................................................................................................... 104 Inner Texture of the OT ....................................................................................................... 113 Intertexture........................................................................................................................... 116 Socio-Cultural Texture ........................................................................................................ 121 Conclusion and Evaluation .................................................................................................. 128 Chapter 5 Composite Citations in Mark 13:24-26 and 14:62 ..................................................... 134 Inner Texture of the NT ....................................................................................................... 137 Inner Texture of the OT ....................................................................................................... 146 Intertexture........................................................................................................................... 153 Socio-Cultural Texture ........................................................................................................ 165 Conclusion and Evaluation .................................................................................................. 170 Conclusion .................................................................................................................................. 176 Evaluation ............................................................................................................................ 177 Observations ........................................................................................................................ 178 Considerations ..................................................................................................................... 181 Bibliography ............................................................................................................................... 183 Curriculum Vitae ........................................................................................................................ 195 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK v Acknowledgment As one approaches the completion of an extensive project, it is always appropriate to recognize all the help received in so many forms. This thesis would not have seen the light of day without support and suggestions. I would like to thank my husband Emmanuel and my family for their never-ending patience and love, Karlena for her patient listening and encouragement, Anne-Marie for many revisions and discussions, and especially Dr. Perkins for his wisdom and guidance. To you, I would like to offer this story. A long, long time ago, as the world was only waking up for the first time, a cardinal was contemplating the sunrise. Amazed by the beauty surrounding her, the bird wondered how she could show appreciation for it. She tried to shake her feathers and flap her wings, but somehow it did not seem enough. She opened her mouth to see what would happen: a little peep came out, a trill followed, and a melodious sound escaped her beak. Emboldened in her gratefulness, she tweeted and warbled, and created the first bird song known to creation. From this day forward, birds from all around the world join to sing praise in a symphony of gratitude. It is their never-ending ritual; with their chirping or their croaks, they give thanks to the Creator of all. A thousand songs, a thousand thanks. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK Abbreviations AFAT The Hebrew Bible: Andersen-Forbes Analyzed Text A.J. Antiquitates judaica BBR Bulletin for Biblical Research BDAG A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature Bib Biblica BNTC Black’s New Testament Commentary BR Biblical Research BTB Biblical Theology Bulletin CV Communio Viatorum CurBr Currents in Biblical Research ESV English Standard Version JBL Journal of Biblical Literature JBQ Jewish Bible Quarterly JJS Journal of Jewish Studies JSJ Journal for the Study of Judaism in the Persian, Hellenistic, and Roman Periods JSNT Journal for the Study of the New Testament JTS Journal of Theological Studies HALOT The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament HTR Harvard Theological Review IDS In die Skriflig J.W. Jewish War LNTS Library of New Testament Studies LSJ A Greek-English Lexicon LXX Septuagint MT Masoretic Text NA28 Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament, 28th edition vi WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK NASB95 New American Standard Bible (1995 Update) NET The NET Bible Neot Neotestamentica NETS A New English Translation of the Septuagint NKJV New King James Version NICNT New International Commentary on New Testament NIGTC New International Creek Testament Commentary Series NICOT New International Commentary on the Old Testament NIV New International Version NLT New Living Translation NT New Testament NTS New Testament Studies Nov T Novum Testamentum OT Old Testament OTL The Old Testament Library RB Revue biblique RRef La revue réformée RRJ The Review of Rabbinic Judaism TOTC Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries TynBul Tyndale Bulletin WW Word and World ZECNT Zondervan Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament ZNW Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche vii WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 1 Introduction A biblical scholar is like someone who went for a walk on a beach and who discovered an old broken-down chest on a beach, with its treasure spread all over the sand. Full of wonder, the explorer bent down and picked up the crown, the jewels and the gold coins, went back home to pay all debts and make the hearts of friends and family rejoice. After a while and wondering if something may have been forgotten on the beach, the hero went back to verify. Lo-and-behold, there was a golden dagger half poking out the sand. A few weeks later, the treasure hunter noticed a small mound of sand and dug it to discover a pearl necklace. Over time, the hero sometimes discovered a gold coin or a beautiful shell, or simply enjoyed a nice refreshing walk on the beach, and learnt to always go back … because the best treasures are always unexpected. In much the same way, theologians come back to the same text, poking, and digging and hoping for a small treasure as a reward (Matt. 13:52). Like explorers of the Bible, they face obstacles, raise questions, and go in many wrong directions before finding the right path to follow, but the way to treasures requires patience, perseverance, careful attention to method and a lot of research, just as one finds the way of Wisdom in the Proverbs. One of those promising fields seems to be the vast world of biblical interpretation.1 Today, however, various methods of interpretation compete for acceptance. Literary theories make many readers more aware of the subjective elements in the hermeneutic process, and many biblical interpreters are gaining a new appreciation for postmodern hermeneutics.2 Along with 1 In this thesis I define hermeneutics as the theory of interpretation of a text, or any other form of communication. Interpretation is also the art of decoding, or explaining, the significance of a received message (regardless of its form). In this thesis, I refer to the “interpreter” as a general term for the one engaging in interpretation. 2 Samuel Emadi, “Intertextuality in New Testament Scholarship: Significance, Criteria, and the Art of Intertextual Reading,” CurBR 14, no. 1 (2015): 9. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 2 this comes a possible increase of subjectivity: Who creates meaning—authors3 or readers?4 And if authors are still relevant, how can we understand what they are trying to communicate? One trail to follow would be to gain a better understanding of the methods of interpretation used by authors of the NT5 as they heard, read and used previous tradition (any oral or written material referred to). A better awareness of ancient interpretation might provide clues to modern interpreters to increase their biblical literacy and their ability to provide application to contemporary life for a 21st century audience. In this thesis, I show that NT authors intentionally used previous literature, primarily Jewish Scriptures, as part of their rhetorical discourse and in accordance with the literary methods of the first-century CE found in GrecoRoman and Hellenistic Judaic texts.6 Composite Citation It is well established that authors from the NT had access to pre-existing literature and used it in a variety of ways in their own texts.7 These influential texts were various,8 but their 3 As the focus of my thesis is on the analysis of the rhetorical effect produced by a specific text, I will use general terms like audience to refer to those receiving a text, and author to refer to the one creating the text. I recognize the recent discussion distinguishing author from an implied author or narrator, especially in narrative interpretation. I discuss my choice in relation to the Markan author below. 4 There is a “triad of author-, text-, or reader-oriented approaches to biblical interpretation” where each brings their own methods of interpretation. While I will use what could be considered a literary approach (rhetorical interpretation) in this thesis, I believe that the authority in the meaning of a text comes from the author. See: Stanley E. Porter Jr. and Beth M. Stovell, eds., Biblical Hermeneutics: Five Views (Downers Grove, IL:IVP Academic, 2012), 48. 5 I refer to the canon of the NT used by the Protestant Church containing 27 books and accepted as early as 382 CE. 6 As will be discussed later, composite citations were found in Greco-Roman texts citing previous authors, like Homer, and also Jewish texts like the Epistle of Barnabas. See Sean A. Adams and Seth M. Ehorn, “What is a Composite Citation? An Introduction,” in Composite Citations in Antiquity: Jewish, Graeco-Roman, and Early Christian Uses, ed. Sean A. Adams, Seth M. Ehorn, and C. Keith (New York: T&T Clark, 2016), 5–6 and 17. 7 For an introduction to the subject of the use of the OT in the NT, see G. K. Beale and D. A. Carson, eds., Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2007). 8 The list is long and the composition date is uncertain for many, but the most common were the OT Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha, the Dead Sea Scrolls, the LXX, the Targumim and Rabbinic tradition (most Rabbinic tradition is dated much later, but some traditions may have existed as oral tradition). For more details, see Craig A. Evans, Ancient Texts for New Testament Studies: A Guide to the Background Literature (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2009), 1. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 3 primary source was the Jewish Scriptures.9 The authors of the NT evoked Scriptures in different ways, and some scholars use the terms quotations/citations, allusions and echoes to refer to those literary borrowings which are usually considered on a spectrum moving from the most explicit to the least. A citation—or quotation—is produced by the act of quoting from a text,10 an allusion refers to an event from the past with little verbal parallelism, and an echo alludes to traditional teaching or an ancient concept.11 Hoping to contribute to the understanding of hermeneutics in the first century, I focus intentionally on one more specific and puzzling use of previous texts: composite citations. Composite citations are citations drawn from two or more texts taken from the same or different authors.12 These borrowed texts are combined and presented by their originator as if 9 I understand that the Jewish Scriptures, also called OT, or Hebrew Text, was not a closed canon at the time of the NT. For the sake of simplicity, I use Jewish Scriptures in this thesis to refer to the texts sometimes called “The Law and the Prophets” in the NT as they are usually considered as part of the OT (as accepted by the Protestant Church). For more details on the Scriptures used in the first century: R. Timothy McLay, “Biblical Texts and the Scriptures for the New Testament Church,” in Hearing the Old Testament in the New Testament, ed. Stanley E. Porter (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2006), Kindle. 10 A citation “is easily recognizable by its clear and unique verbal parallelism,” G. K. Beale, Handbook on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament: Exegesis and Interpretation (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2012), Kindle, ch. 2. 11 While some scholars use these terms, their precise definitions for each one varies. One example of citation is found in Mark 12:10-11, “Have you not read this Scripture: The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone; this was the Lord’s doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes,” where the originator of the citation quotes Ps 118:22-23. An example of an allusion can be seen in Matthew 12:3-4 when Jesus refers to an episode of David’s life (1 Sam 21:1-6); the event is recognizable but there is little verbal parallelism. An example for an echo can be found in Mark 3:14 where the calling of the 12 apostles echoes back to the 12 tribes of Israel (one could also refer to typology to explain this literary borrowing). Echoes rarely refer to a specific text or event. For a general presentation: Richard B. Hays, Echoes of Scripture in the Gospels (Baylor University Press, 2016), Kindle, 10. There are no ways to divide them in clear-cut categories, but one could summarize this way: citations usually refer to text, allusions to event and echoes to concepts. 12 Composite citations include two distinct modes of citation according to Stanley: Combined citations occur when two excerpts are joined. Conflated citations occur when a group of words is incorporated in another citation. As both are composite citations, I use the term composite citations in a general sense including both modes since my aim is to understand their rhetorical intention, but not to label them. Stanley, “Composite Citations: Retrospect and Prospect,” 204. Some scholars also refer to condensed citations to refer to citations where a section has been removed, or to conflated citations as a synonym for composite citations sharing key words. Seth M. Ehorn, “Composite Citations in Plutarch,” in Composite Citations in Antiquity: Jewish, Graeco-Roman, and Early Christian Uses, 43–45. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 4 they came from a single text.13 The term originator refers to the creator of the composite citation, who may, or may not be the same as the author of the NT text.14 Additionally, composite citations are often undetected by an uninformed audience who are not very knowledgeable in previous tradition.15 Composite citations are recognized by three main characteristics: they are the reproduction of some of the exacts words of previously written material,16 they are introduced in some manner as coming from tradition,17 and they combine written material from more than one source to make it appear as if it came from a unique origin.18 They can be distinguished from the key text by a noticeable break in syntax,19 and they must also have an 13 In a narrative text, it is not always possible to know if the speaker (most often Jesus in the Gospels) or the author is creating the composite citations; for the sake of simplicity, I use the term originator for composite citations. In each chapter, I usually discuss who the originator could be, and how authors of the Gospel incorporated the composite citation (whether they are also the originator or not). 14 The different uses of the OT in the NT vary and are categorized in different ways beyond the definition of a citation, as will be discussed later. As my main goal is to explain their use, I will concentrate my efforts on the most clearly identified uses of the OT within one Gospel which are usually recognized as direct citations. It is important to note that if the citing author indicates a plurality of sources, the citation should not be considered composite. For more details on the definition, see: Adams and Ehorn, “What Is a Composite Citation? An Introduction,” 4. 15 Most 21st century readers are not familiar enough with the OT text to recognize their origin, or even that the composite citations are a recombination of more than one tradition (in the NT, tradition usually comes in the form of previous texts). A Jewish first-century audience would have usually been able to recognize some well-known expressions, whereas a Gentile audience would have more difficulty. However, it must be recognized that a public reader could easily have explained more obscure references. I discuss this in more detail below. 16 It goes without saying that a specific and minimum number of words is difficult to establish. Some citations are recognizable because of their association, for example “den of robbers” from Mark 11:17 discussed in chapter 3. In this case, a very few words suffice because their combination is only found in Jer 7:11, but more than two or three words are usually necessary for recognition. The citation can be verbatim and constructed in a sentence, or appear in a different order, for example as a summary (Mark 12:19). 17 Ideally, a citation is introduced by an introduction formula such as “it is written.” However, the context may indicate that Scripture is alluded to, for example in Mark 13:24-26 where the citation is incorporated in Jesus’ dialogue directly. In this case, the introduction is subtle or absent and the verbal parallel is the best tool at recognizing the citation. Context is often necessary to establish if a reference is made to previous written tradition or not. 18 Some interpreters, like Moyise for example, may not recognize a composite citation when the two traditions are joined by a conjunction, like the one found in Mark 11:17 (δέ is used between the citation from Isa 56:7 and the one from Jer 7:11). However, as they still appear as a single quotation, I consider them as composite citation for the purpose of this thesis. Steve Moyise, “Composite Citations in the Gospel of Mark,” in Composite Citations in Antiquity: New Testament Uses, ed. Sean A. Adams and Seth M. Ehorn, LNTS 593 (London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2018), 16–33. 19 An example of a simple citation introduced by a syntax break is found in Mark 12:29 where Jesus cites Deut 6:45. When he is asked about the most important commandment, Jesus simply introduces it with, “The most important is, Hear, O Israel…” Only a small break in syntax indicates that Jesus is quoting Jewish Scriptures. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 5 obvious parallel to a previous text.20 Because of their recombination of tradition, at first glance composite citations appear to misrepresent the text or to be caused by a faulty memory. This textual phenomenon in the NT remains largely unexplored so I intend to remove some of the ambiguity that surrounds their origin and rhetorical intention. The mystery behind composite citations mostly rests in their motivation. Why would the authors of composite citations ‘break the rules’ (from a contemporary perspective) by making their literary borrowing appear as if they were from one documentary text? Are they the product of human error or created for a special effect?21 Overall, citations—composite or not—are part of the general act of literary borrowing sometimes called intertextuality. Some authors use the term to refer to the influence of a previous text, while admitting that the term is “fuzzy.” The notion of intertextuality was introduced in poststructuralism’s theories to explain the association between two texts and their influence on the reader, creating “a new context in which to understand a text (often an earlier text).”22 In Biblical studies, intertextuality is often understood as the procedure by which a later text uses a previous one; from its creation, the term was linked to readers’ 20 Commentators generally agree (more or less) on the list of quotations from the OT found in the NT. However, they usually do not agree on the number of allusions or echoes, see: Beale, Handbook on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament, Kindle, ch. 2. For the criteria, see also: Adams and Ehorn, “What is a Composite Citation? An Introduction,” 3. 21 The error—or special effect—could have been created by the originator of the composite citation, or the author could have modified material and combined citations. 22 Beale, Handbook on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament, 39 (Emphasis mine); Graham Allen, Intertextuality (The New Critical Idiom), 2nd ed. (New York: Routledge, 2011), 3; Anthony C. Thiselton, New Horizons in Hermeneutics: The Theory and Practice of Transforming Biblical Reading, Rev. ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Academic, 1997), 495–508. The notion of intertextuality is often used to justify a new reading imposed on an earlier text in light of a later text. In this thesis, I study how NT authors would have quoted Jewish Scriptures, not how an OT author may have written more than he expected. This notion of the future influencing the past within the literary theory of intertextuality is not useful for my demonstration. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 6 viewpoints instead of authorial intent.23 In this thesis, I avoid the term and refer instead to innerbiblical exegesis or the use of Jewish Scriptures in the NT.24 Hypothesis Why were authors incorporating previous tradition to make them appear as a single citation? I propose that authors working with narrative genre used composite citations, formed from previous texts, as literary devices with rhetorical intent to persuade their audience to accept their message. I understand a literary device with rhetorical intent as a way to use words to evoke emotions or awake memories in an audience, in order to convey meaning or to persuade the audience to accept an interpretation of an event or to respond in a certain way. In this thesis I limit myself to Mark’s use of composite citations and examine the way he incorporates and combines texts from the Jewish Scriptures as a part of his narrative.25 I seek to show that composite citations are particularly effective in evoking images and language from the audience’s memory—they give the writer the opportunity to convince his audience to accept his message and his presentation of the gospel. Research Strategy When one examines the influence of a previous text on a subsequent one, it is always difficult to determine if—and how much—an audience could identify and understand a reference to a specific written or oral tradition. In the story of a treasure found on a beach used in the introductory paragraphs, a reader familiar with the teaching of Jesus could note a reference to the 23 Beale, Handbook on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament, 40-41. Bourin demonstrates how the expression intertextuality in biblical research can lead to confusion. Guillaume Bourin, “Évaluer les connexions intertextuelles au sein du Canon Biblique: Une méthodologie,” RRef 289 (2019). 25 I follow the traditional hypothesis according Markan authorship of the Gospel according to Mark. There is good evidence for “John” Mark (Acts 12:26) to be the author, and little evidence for the contrary. I accept that revisions may have been part of the redactional process, but, as it is impossible to identify exactly what these adjustments might be, I take the text as it came to us. Mark L. Strauss, Mark, ZECNT, ed. Clinton E. Arnold (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2014), 28. 24 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 7 parable of the Treasure in the field or the parable of the Pearl of Great Value,26 an echo to the concept of the forgiveness of sins as being a debt paid,27 or even to an allusion to the crown of life from Revelation.28 I am aware of those references because I created them, but different readers will respond to them variously. It is difficult to know an audience’s level of awareness; this is one of the greatest challenges of any literary interpretation and a proposed reconstruction of the audience is an important part of the evaluation of each of the selected composite citations. In this dissertation, I begin with a literature review to evaluate previous studies on composite citations in the NT and examine the different explanations for composite citations. I also include a brief survey of different authors from the Roman Empire who used composite citations between the years 350 BCE and 150 CE (and some theories to explain their use). Furthermore, I take the time to examine what general understanding the average residents of the Roman Empire in the first century would normally have developed in their use and reception of speech and argumentation. I then discuss the use of rhetoric in narrative texts and Mark’s own rhetoric. Since my main goal is to understand the intention of the author,29 I propose to use a simplified version of the socio-rhetorical interpretation (SRI) method developed by Robbins.30 I believe that looking at the different aspects of a text—including the potential response from firstcentury audiences—improves not only one’s understanding of the author’s intention in 26 Matt 13:44-46 Luke 7:36-50 28 Rev 2:10 29 This would imply an author-based method of interpretation that regards authors as meaning-making through their own texts. In this, I follow Porter when he observes that audience-oriented approaches are not useful to examine the use of the OT by the NT. See: Stanley E. Porter, “Further Comments on the Use of the Old Testament in the New Testament,” in Intertextuality of the Epistles: Explorations in Theory and Practice, ed. T. L. Brodie, D. R. MacDonald, and Stanley E. Porter (Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix, 2007), 100. 30 Robbins’ approach is more reader-based, but since he has combined different approaches into one, I find his sequence of interpretation useful. Vernon K. Robbins, The Tapestry of Early Christian Discourse: Rhetoric, Society and Ideology, Taylor & Francis eLibrary (New York: Routledge, 2003). 27 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 8 composing a text, but also how the social context would have influenced the composition of a text. This method also provides a better understanding of the way that an author communicates a message effectively through rhetoric and narrative to the intended audience. The SRI usually combines a five-arena approach to socio-rhetorical criticism that addresses inner texture, intertexture, social and cultural texture, ideological texture and sacred texture in exegetical interpretation.31 I propose to focus on the first three arenas (inner texture, intertexture and social and cultural texture) and incorporate Robbins’ sacred texture in the conclusion.32 This method is discussed in more details in chapter 2. Following my initial observations, I investigate in detail five composite citations in Mark’s Gospel and seek to interpret their rhetorical purpose and impact. Moyise proposes a list of five composite citations and they are the focus of my thesis (1:2-3; 11:17; 12:19; 13:24-26; 14:62).33 My interpretational method considers the context of the composite citation as explained in chapter 2.34 I conclude the analysis of each composite citation with an examination of the rhetorical intention of the originator of the composite citation, and how Mark integrated the resulting combination in his larger narrative and theological message.35 At the completion of the thesis, I end my demonstration and interpretations with a re-examination of my hypothesis in the light of those analysis. 31 Robbins, The Tapestry of Early Christian Discourse. Robbin’s “sacred texture” usually refers to the theological teaching found in a text. While I often discuss the theological development of a composite citation as it is being studied, I reserve the main discussion for each conclusion. 33 Moyise observes nine possible composite citations (1:2-3; 1:11; 7:10; 10:19; 11:17; 12:19; 12:32; 13:24-26; 14:62) before narrowing the list to the five most likely. He explains the other ones in various ways. Moyise, “Composite Citations in the Gospel of Mark.” 34 The narrative context where the composite citation is incorporated and the literary context of the tradition (inner texture), a comparison between documents in their original language (often the NA28 and the LXX in the intertexture) and the socio-cultural context of the first century (socio-cultural texture). 35 As is discussed in the chapter on interpretation, by doing so, I loosely follow the method offered in Beale and Carson, Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament, xxiv-xxvi. 32 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 9 Some Considerations A few details are worth mentioning at this point. For the sake of simplicity, I consider the narrator’s voice, or the implied author, as Mark’s own voice.36 I understand that narrative interpretation now prefers to discuss the minute differences between an author, an implied author and a narrator as defined by Booth.37 The main issue with those categories is that they have been constructed for fiction, not historiographies or biographies. Since my main aim is to discover how an author is using a composite citation incorporated in a narrative, to distinguish between the so-called distinctive categories of participants in the narration serves no purpose. Since the narrator is not a sentient being but a literary device, it would be illogical to try to understand its purpose in using a composite citation.38 I need to understand how authors used tradition; therefore, only flesh-and-blood authors will do.39 As the narrator of Mark’s Gospel appears as an omniscient narrator,40 I consider that he has the same general goals as the author.41 I understand that there is a difference between an author and that author’s chosen narrator who tells the story to create a certain effect on the audience, but as Mark’s narrator is quite absent from the text and mostly lets the events speak for themselves, I chose to prioritize the term “author,” or simply Mark—especially since my aim is to study the methods used by the writer to present his discourse. 37 Wayne C. Booth, The Rhetoric of Fiction, 2nd ed. (University of Chicago Press, 2010), 431. 38 The narrator of the story is a “rhetorical device the author uses to get the story told.” Rhoads, Dewey, and Michie, Mark as Story, Kindle, ch. 2. 39 According to Booth, the flesh-and-blood author is the one who remains unknown, who postulates that listeners are also flesh-and-blood and complex, and that part of them are ignorant of some aspects or credulous. The implied author is the one who has chosen every detail, who knows the story to be untrue, but pretends it is true. The narrator is the one who believes the story is true, who accepts everything as permanent (contrary to the implied author) and who may be impersonal or participant, and who may be reliable or not. Booth, The Rhetoric of Fiction, 431. Some authors now use Booth’s concepts in biblical narrative interpretation—despite the fact that they were developed for fiction—for example, David Rhoads, Joanna Dewey, and Donald Michie, Mark as Story: An Introduction to the Narrative of a Gospel, 3rd ed. (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2012). 40 According to Rhoads, Dewey and Michie, Mark chose a narrator with “unlimited omniscience” for his Gospel, one who is “able to tell anything about the story world, including what is in the mind of any character at any time and place.” Rhoads, Dewey, and Michie, Mark as Story, 40. I agree that the narrator is presented as knowing details that a simple observant would not have known, like awareness of the ending from the beginning of the story. However, I disagree that Mark is an unlimited omniscient narrator. He obviously knows some events or intention as they have been told to him, but he could not read the mind of every participant like the unlimited omniscient narrator of a fictive story could. This is one of the main problems with the use of labels created for fiction: they do not quite fit the authors of the NT and using them compromises interpretation. However, I agree with Rhoads, Dewey and Michie that an narrator appearing omniscient has the advantage of easily creating confidence in audiences. 41 According to Rhoads, Dewey and Michie, the Markan narrator was “thinking in God’s terms” when it came to moral concepts. Rhoads, Dewey, and Michie, Mark as Story, ch. 2. Since the narrator of Mark’s Gospel was 36 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 10 Since Gospels are presented as historical account, I accept the original speaker in the narrative segment, even if speeches could have been translated and adapted.42 I take a synchronistic approach to the text and its discourse43 and only consider the text as it came to us.44 I accept a date for the text of Mark’s Gospel as we have it, following closely the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem in 70 CE.45 My discussion surrounding the use of composite citations assumes a general Markan audience from the first century: average subjects of the Roman empire being able to understand, respond to and use a basic rhetorical argument. They would have been able to understand Greek,46 being Jewish and non-Jewish believers, and would have experienced, or been witness to, some form of rejection because of their faith. 47 I take a “both-and” approach to the different theories behind the so-called Markan Community theory: I consider that Mark wrote to a Christian community, but also expected his composition to be distributed more widely for reading in other communities.48 His community was probably forwarding some Christians ideals, and since that ideology was shared by his community of the first Christians, it follows that the author—like his narrator—wanted to convince the audience to believe in his message. 42 By “adapted” I mean that the narrator could have rephrased the speech—it does not need to be verbatim to be original. 43 Referring here to a study of the language as it existed in a specific time, as opposed to a diachronic linguistic approach studying the evolution of the language (the diachronicity may be examined when relevant), but the focus of this methodology is the study within a specific period. 44 For a discussion on the coherence of Mark’s narrative as opposed to a series of further editions, see: Rhoads, Dewey, and Michie, Mark as Story, 3–4. 45 Strauss believes that a very early date, preceding the temple destruction, explains the lack of details concerning the destruction in Mark’s Gospel. Strauss, Mark, 2014, 39. Kimondo has studied the contrasts and similitudes between Josephus’ destruction of Jerusalem and archeological findings. He concludes that Mark’s description is closer to recent archeological findings than Josephus, therefore answering Strauss’ argument about Mark’s inclusion of little detail. Stephen Simon Kimondo, The Gospel of Mark and the Roman-Jewish War of 66–70 CE: Jesus’ Story as a Contrast to the Events of the War (Eugene, OR: Pickwick Publications, 2019). 46 While I discuss mostly Mark’s audience, I understand that the rhetoric used by Jesus may have been first presented in Aramaic. See below the discussion related to the rhetoric of the originator of the composite citation, and the rhetoric of the Markan author. 47 The rhetoric used by Mark points to an audience mostly composed of believers or people interested in the faith offered by believers, but it does not deny that Mark could have had an eventual evangelistic goal as well. 48 Following Blomberg, I believe that there is a possible compromise between a very large and “for all Christian” audience, and the theory for a very limited community. For this thesis, I consider that Mark was using his own style to try to influence an audience of believers living in a large geographic area. Craig L. Blomberg, “The Gospels for Specific Communities and All Christians,” in The Audience of the Gospels: The Origin and Function of the Gospels in Early Christianity, ed. Edward W. Klink III (London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2010), 111–33. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 11 in or around the city of Rome,49 although a precise location within the Roman Empire does not affect my hypothesis. There are two levels of rhetoric within any narrative text using direct speech: the rhetorical intention of the speaker and the rhetorical intent of the author incorporating those words in his narrative.50 Therefore, two different communicators need to be considered: the originator of the composite citation and the Gospel’s author who is using the originator’s words within his own rhetoric—his language of persuasion. Each composite citation is analyzed in relation to those two levels of rhetoric. I also consider the first audience (most often Jesus’ audience) and Mark’s audience as two separate entities.51 Before taking my shovel to dig the beach, I first consider other people’s research, and their own finding in the next chapter by examining the different theories behind composite citations and the rhetoric of citations. 49 Strauss, Mark, 33–34; William L. Lane, The Gospel of Mark, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1974), 24. In this regard, an investigation of non-fictive narration differs from the investigation of a fictive one. 51 Jesus’ audience was mostly Jewish and non-Christian while Mark’s audience was mostly Christian, Jewish and non-Jewish. Since their reaction to the same message would vary, I consider various receptions in my investigation. 50 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 12 Chapter 1 Review of Literature To what shall a composite citation be compared? It is like a new cake recipe combining the taste of one’s favourite chocolate cookie from their youth, with the spices of a warm apple cider drunk during a rainy day. Together, they create something new and beautiful from what is old and loved. The nature of composite citations in the NT often intrigues readers—once they realize that they exist. Only a few studies examine in detail composite citations in the Bible, and some authors have offered various hypotheses to explain the use of this literary phenomenon. In this brief survey, I examine the various questions surrounding citations and composite citations found in the NT. Following this review, I explore the possibility that composite citations used by ancient Greco-Roman and Jewish writers—including NT writers—could be part of a rhetorical strategy. Before beginning exploring theories behind composite citation, I first consider how citations (composite or not) were used in texts. Why did Ancient Greco-Roman and Jewish Authors Use Citations? Diverse hypotheses explain why ancient authors used citations in their writing, and many of the reasons are similar to what a reader of the 21st century may expect. Although the use of citations is often the product of a complex rationale and a combination of reasons, this brief overview offers a few possibilities to explain why authors, both ancient and modern, use citations. Validation Western writers have used citations from reputable authorities in order to validate their message, and citations have historically been perceived this way.52 Using citations allows authors 52 Nathalie Piégay-Gros, Introduction à l’intertextualité (Paris: Dunod, 1996), 46. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 13 to prove that their ideas come from sources known to their audience.53 In order for citations to be proof of authority, both authors and audiences need to share the same conviction in the authority of the cited source, the same worldview. If NT authors cited the Jewish Scriptures as proofs of authority, they believed their implied audience considered those texts as authoritative and as a divine message. Lane-Mercier considers that quoting a text from an authoritative source is “equal with the performing of an act of authority,”54 based on the assumption that words have a stable meaning and express an accepted truth. By using quotes from a source imbued with authority, the author gains respect. Lane-Mercier’s conclusions are a reminder that citations may act as proof texts, but also to increase an audience’s confidence in their originators and in their shared worldview. 55 Expansion Authors can also use citations to point to a larger narrative text. Nathalie Piégay-Gros considers that inserted in a narrative text, citations have a deeper meaning by joining two texts (poems or narrative) to remind the reader of a deeper connection or a metaphorical meaning.56 For example, a modern writer could allude to a larger background of conflicts between families affecting two lovers by a simple citation from Romeo and Juliet. Dodd also offered a similar theory to explain the use of citations in the Bible.57 Citations could therefore be considered as “The syntax does indeed derive from a literary source known to the author … not merely some confluence of ‘heterogeneous materials’,” (emphasis original). J. D. H. Norton, “Composite Quotations in the Damascus Document,” in Composite Citations in Antiquity: Jewish, Graeco-Roman, and Early Christian Use, 114. 54 Gillian Lane-Mercier, “Quotation as a Discursive Strategy,” Kodikas 14, no. 3/4 (1991): 201. 55 However, Lane-Mercier considers citations to have a parodic role, making them a duplicitous process to be avoided as they are used for manipulating the masses: “a discursive strategy designed to manipulate the listener and to program the listener’s response.” Lane-Mercier, “Quotation as a Discursive Strategy,” 207. This conclusion may be merciless, but it still points to the perceived authority of citations. 56 Piégay-Gros, Introduction à l’intertextualité, 46–48. 57 Dodd proposes that an author could refer to a larger narrative context by the use of a citation. C. H. Dodd, According to the Scriptures: The Sub-Structure of New Testament Theology (Great Britain: Fontana, 1965), 59–61. 53 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 14 “merely signposts to the overall Old Testament context from which they were cited.” 58 The theory of citations referring to larger background does not explain all use of citations, but it can apply to citations linked with a larger narrative, or a prophecy or psalm. Nonetheless, one should be prudent in extending the context to other psalms, prophecies, or even an entire book.59 Dramatization Using citations is also explained by the speech-act theory developed by Austin who claims that every sentence corresponds to performing an act. 60 Although he does not discuss written citations, he introduced the notion of a rhetorical act linked to every utterance. Wierzbicka’s dramaturgical theory considers citations to be a way to dramatize someone else’s words. She believes that authors may quote to “avoid the responsibility for a correct representation of the meaning as such”61 and transfer to the audience the responsibility of interpretation; audiences hear for themselves the cited words. This would allow NT authors to let the Scriptures speak for themselves, inviting the audience to listen to God speak the words in some manner. This would also give the members of the audience the possibility to interpret the Word of God for themselves, and to increase their confidence in the NT author. In Roman culture, citations have also been used to show literary skills, especially in some circles.62 Some preferred verbatim citations, but “incorporating interpretive elements into the wording of a quotation was a common and apparently well-accepted practice throughout the Albert C. Sundberg, “On Testimonies,” Nov T 3, no. 4 (1959): 275. In a similar manner, authors could summarize a passage, or paraphrase it. 58 G. K. Beale, “Did Jesus and His Followers Preach the Right Doctrine from the Wrong Texts? An Examination of the Presuppositions of Jesus’ and the Apostles’ Exegetical Method,” in The Right Doctrine from the Wrong Texts? Essays on the Use of the Old Testament in the New, ed. G. K. Beale (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1994), chap. 59 For a citation to point to a larger narrative, poem or prophecy, one must demonstrate that such texts were already assembled and available. 60 “Once we realize that what we have to study is not the sentence but the issuing of an utterance in a speech situation, there can hardly be any longer a possibility of not seeing that stating is performing an act” (emphasis original). J. L. Austin, How To Do Things With Words (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1962), 139. 61 Anna Wierzbicka, “The Semantics of Direct and Indirect Discourse,” Papers in Linguistic 7 (1974): 279. 62 Ehorn, “Composite Citations in Plutarch,” 41. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 15 ancient Mediterranean world.”63 Those interpretive elements could be contextualized adjustments like a change of pronoun or the use of a replacement word, or even incorporation of material from other sources like a combination of quotations.64 Demonstration Citations are also used to prove fulfilment,65 and to demonstrate the existence of a link between previous sacred texts and what was being witnessed in the first century.66 Citations functioning in this way could also attest the author’s mission, clarify the enigmatic, demonstrate corporate solidarity,67 show typology and validate a Christian way to interpret Jewish history.68 Education Citations could also have a didactic or missional role: by quoting a text, one can improve the audience’s confidence in the authoritative text. Non-Jews could increase their understanding and confidence in the Jewish Scriptures by discovering how Jesus used them as proof texts. This implies that an audience would trust the originator of the citation and the originator’s judgment; the transfer of authority would then move from originator to text instead of from authoritative text to originator.69 This point is important when one studies the NT texts addressed to a nonJewish audience. A Jewish audience would have accepted Jewish Scriptures much more easily 63 Christopher D. Stanley, Paul and the Language of Scripture: Citation Technique in the Pauline Epistles and Contemporary Literature, rev. ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), 343. 64 As discuss later, the modifier of a citation could use a replacement word, or what could be considered as a synonym by the modifier, to make the modified text correspond to the new literary context. This modification could change the first sense given by the original author, or not, depending on one’s interpretation. 65 Jean-Marie Van Cangh, “La Bible de Matthieu : Les Citations d’accomplissement,” Revue Théologique de Louvain 6, no. 2 (1975) : 205–11. However, Longenecker warns against considering all citations as proof of accomplishments in Richard N. Longenecker, “Negative Answer to the Question ‘Who Is the Prophet Talking About?’ Some Reflections on the New Testament’s Use of the Old,” in The Right Doctrine from the Wrong Texts? Essays on the Use of the Old Testament in the New. 66 Sébastien Doane, “Les Citations de Matthieu 1-2 : Charnières Théologiques Entre l’ancien et Le Nouveau,” Theoforum 47, no. 1 (2016–2017): 133–48. 67 Corporate solidarity is the act of considering interchangeability between the nation of Israel and its representative. For example, Matt 2:15 quotes Hos 1:1 where Israel is called out of Egypt and applies it to Jesus. 68 For a longer discussion on the subject: Richard N. Longenecker, “Negative Answer to the Question.” 69 In the same way, some believers in the 21st century learn to trust the OT despite its very different culture because Jesus and the NT authors use and trust the OT. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 16 than a non-Jewish audience would. By gaining confidence in an originator—for example Jesus— a non-Jewish audience would progressively accept his interpretation and believe the Jewish Scriptures because of the originator’s own authority, and not because of a positive preconception of the OT. In this case, a good foreknowledge of a cited text would not be required in order to gain understanding.70 It would be an oversimplification to claim that authors use citations for only one reason; they probably did—and still do—cite texts with more than a single goal in mind. However, this does not explain why authors modified citations and recombined them. To do so, it is useful to examine different theories offered to explain this literary phenomenon. Theories to Explain Composite Citations Found in the Bible Are Composite Citations Imperfect Recollection? Some 20th and 21st century authors have postulated that composite citations could result from imperfect recollection, or even from faulty memory.71 Franklin Johnson assumes that authors from the NT naturally quoted the OT from memory as they did not have easy access to scrolls, especially during their journeys.72 He believes that reformulation was “the uniform rule Paul also used citations in an educative manner, “in these cases, the biblical quotation carries weight regardless of whether the recipients fully understand the reference, since the quotation shows the God of Israel standing firmly on the side of the speaker. The ability to quote and interpret Scripture is a potent weapon within a religious community, especially when the skill is limited to a few practitioners, and Paul did not hesitate to wield this weapon in his letters. Neither literacy nor familiarity with the original context is required for people to be moved by a quotation from a text deemed authoritative by a religious group.” Christopher D. Stanley, Arguing with Scripture: The Rhetoric of Quotations in the Letters of Paul (New York: Bloomsbury; T&T Clark, 2004), 52. Of course, the foreknowledge that non-Jews had or not is very difficult to establish. Many who already followed Judaism could already trust the OT implicitly. 71 Ellis admits that composite citations (“when one book is named and another cited”) can be caused by faulty memory, but more likely results from interpretation or elaboration. See E. Earl Ellis, Prophecy and Hermeneutic in Early Christianity: New Testament Essays (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2003), 148. 72 Franklin Johnson, The Quotations of the New Testament from the Old, Considered in the Light of General Literature (Philadelphia: American Baptist Publication Society, 1896), 29. 70 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 17 of quotation in the Old Testament,”73 and that the NT authors reproduced a similar method of reformulating texts.74 Considering that verbatim quotation have only been considered the norm in the last two centuries, Johnson does not claim that composite citations were caused by faulty memory, but that it should not be a problem if they were since the sense of the previous was always preserved.75 Contra Johnson, Edwin Hatch denies that quotations resulted from inaccurate recall and demonstrated that when early Church Fathers used them, they were very accurate.76 One should also consider the ability developed in the first century for memorization of texts. Oral transmission may have been very accurate in a community where key texts were repeated and “where people were keen to correct each other.”77 This would go against faulty memory as a general explanation for all composite citations.78 It is as impossible to prove that composite citations were caused by faulty memory as it is to prove they were not; nonetheless, many other plausible explanations exist to justify their existence as seen below. 73 Johnson believes that OT authors did not quote other passages from the OT with precision and he cites 2 Sam 23:17 and 1 Chron 11:19 as examples amongst others. Johnson, The Quotations of the New Testament from the Old, 31. 74 To prove his point, Johnson demonstrates how Plato or Aristotle quoted Homer by modifying the original sentence structure and by sometimes using different vocabulary to adapt the citation to a new literary context. Johnson, The Quotations of the New Testament from the Old, 38. 75 Johnson responds to the accusation that NT writers altered the OT texts by design in such a way as to make them different from the OT author’s intent, manipulating those citations to make them proofs. He demonstrates that the alteration can be explained without such a grave accusation. Johnson, The Quotations of the New Testament from the Old, 30, 44-61. Johnson also believes that composite citations were usually intentional: “it is always composed of fragments which originally related to the subject of the argument; and all of them except one or two are brought forward as proofs.” Johnson, The Quotations of the New Testament from the Old, 92. 76 Hatch examines mostly Barnabas II and Justin Martyr and Clement of Rome. Edwin Hatch, “On Composite Quotations from the Septuagint,” in Essays in Biblical Greek, vol. 1 (Oxford: Clarendon, 1889), 204. 77 For example, a written summary of a dispute about the ruling of the Sabbath Year has been found in a mid-second century AD document. The details of that dispute were transmitted orally before it was later put into writing. As the Shammaites were normally stricter than the Hillelites for making laws, it is remarkable that the Shammaites kept in records the Hillelites ruling instead of their own. Even disagreements were preserved, pointing to the real possibility that oral transmission was taken seriously. D. Instone-Brewer, “Rabbinic Traditions and Writings,” in Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, ed. Joel B. Green (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2020), 759. 78 I do not mean that it is an impossible explanation for a few composite citations; it may be impossible to find an explanation for all of them. However, it seems unreasonable to claim that faulty memory explains all composite citations. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 18 Are Composite Citations Derived from Lists or Testimonies? Another theory offered to explain composite citation is the existence of a list of such quotations—or testimonies: a compilation of extracts from the OT used by the primitive church as proof texts for the fulfillment of prophecies.79 According to that theory, composite citations are derived from lists; they would result from human errors if texts were fused together accidentally when they were part of a list of extracts.80 The tenants of the theory of testimonies feel justified by the discovery of similar lists made from different originators. As has been discovered in antiquity, making lists of extracts was a known practice.81 Martin Albl showed that later authors such as Clement and Irenaeus probably used testimonies—which, in his opinion, points to the possibility that such shorter lists existed in the first century.82 Hatch agrees and mentions a Jewish habit of making excerpts of important texts, but showed no proof for this allegation.83 Hatch also demonstrated that early fathers copied texts with great care—which goes against the theory of testimonies.84 Rejecting those views, Albert Sundberg shows that the earliest mention of such a Christian list is found in a document from 170 CE and that no prior list or testimonies have been Sundberg, “On Testimonies,” 268. In those documents, anyone desiring to copy extracts of the OT could have incorporated texts by copying them side by side in the testimonies (intentionally making them appear as one, or unintentionally), or subsequent writers could have consulted those testimonies and combined extracts by including them together in their own writings (once again, intentionally or unintentionally making them appear as one). 81 Ehorn mentions Seneca, Xenophon, Aristotle and a few others. However, no such list of biblical extracts attributed to Christian authors has been found dating from the first century. The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls included documents such as 4QTestimonia that may point to written scriptural excerpt collections circulating in the first century. Nevertheless, these documents are only excerpts and it is impossible to know if Christian writers would have know about them or used them. Ehorn, “Composite Citations in Plutarch,” 37; Martin C. Albl, “The Testimonia Hypothesis and Composite Citations,” in Composite Citations in Antiquity: Jewish, Graeco-Roman, and Early Christian Use, 185. 82 Albl believes that those later authors also recombined composite citations from different texts than the ones combined in the NT, proving that adapting citations was also part of their usual method. Albl, “The Testimonia Hypothesis and Composite Citations,” 182. 83 Despite this affirmation, Hatch only examines texts from early Fathers. Hatch, “On Composite Quotations from the Septuagint,” 203. 84 However, it must be noted that Hatch examined only a few testimonies (Barnabas II and Justin M. and Clement of Rome). See Hatch, “On Composite Quotations from the Septuagint,” 204. 79 80 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 19 found in relation with Christianity. 85 He critiques authors for using collections dated 248 CE and 400 CE to demonstrate the theory of testimonies.86 He also points out that the same passage from the OT can be used with various interpretations by different authors of the NT, which would confirm that there is no common source for all quotations.87 Sundberg concludes that it is unlikely for a collection of citations from the OT to be in circulation during the first century. He adds that a theory of testimonies does not explain why originators would have purposefully created composite citations in a list. Dodd determined that the list of the composite citations made from different originators is remarkably short and appear as exceptions,88 which implies that some transmission of composite citations in the form of lists or extracts (written or oral) could explain a tiny portion, but not all of them.89 He believes in the existence of testimonies, but as oral tradition, not as a single circulating book during the first century. One must also include the possibility that an author could have borrowed composite citations from another originator or author, but that does not explain the first practice.90 That author may have kept some extracts of the documents regarded as sacred on personal scrolls is In Sundberg, “On Testimonies,” 268‑81, Sundberg discusses Harris’s theory popularized by his book Testimonies I and II, Cambridge, 1916–1920, and Dodd’s response to it in Dodd, According to the Scriptures. 86 Albl, “The Testimonia Hypothesis and Composite Citations,” 183. 87 Sundberg offers a few examples, one being the use of Isa 52:7 in Acts 10:36 as fulfilled by Jesus, but fulfilled by Christians in Rom. 10.15. Sundberg, “On Testimonies,” 278. 88 “There is no convincing evidence that any such book was compiled in the earliest period.” See C. H. Dodd, “The Old Testament in the New,” in The Right Doctrine from the Wrong Texts? Essays on the Use of the Old Testament in the New. 89 Oral transmission is notoriously difficult to prove but could explain some similarities between the uses of similarly modified OT citations in the absence of a written document. However, transmission and use of texts from the NT could also explain those similitudes if—for example—an evangelist had access to some epistles when he wrote his Gospel. In this case, we could say that authors used the composite citations from other written documents, but not necessarily from lists. Stanley, Paul and the Language of Scripture, 16. 90 If Mark has priority and was consulted by Matthew and Luke, it is possible that they used the composite citations found in Mark’s Gospel, similarly if Matthew and Luke are referencing Q, or if Matthew has priority. For example, there is a possible influence of Mark 1:2-3 on Matt 11:10 and Luke 7:27; also Mark 12:19 on Matt 22:24 and Luke 20:28. Sean A. Adams and Seth Ehorn, “Composite Citations in Antiquity: A Conclusion,” in Composite Citations in Antiquity: New Testament Uses, 212. 85 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 20 also possible,91 but a general and universal use of testimonies to explain all composite citations is difficult to accept at this point. Are Composite Citations the Result of Midrashic Interpretation? Amongst other possibilities, Ellis and Ruzer propose that composite citations were created by a method of interpretation known to us as midrash92 used in first century Judaism.93 Midrash is a general and imprecise term used to refer to the broad rabbinic literature of the first few centuries or to refer to the general interpretative procedures that Jewish scholars used in the first century CE. Those who claim that composite citations are the result of midrashic interpretation consider this model of interpretation as a non-contextual method—an interpretation that does not consider the original literary context of a given text. Midrashic interpretation presupposes the Jewish Scriptures as a closed and authoritative revelation from God,94 a text at times cryptic and requiring interpretation of the whole to understand a particular context.95 In order to apply the text considered mysterious to contemporary life, Jews looked for similar individual words in the larger text, but with little regard to the literary context.96 This method of interpretation would accept divergences of interpretation and allows for creativity; hence the 1 Tim 4:13 mentions Paul’s personal collection of scrolls which would presumably contain extracts he used for his own study. We do not know what was written on those scrolls, but it certainly implies written material useful for Paul. It would seem logical for Paul to keep copies of useful passages for his ministry when he could access biblical scrolls. See also Stanley, Paul and the Language of Scripture, 73–78. 92 From the Hebrew ‫( ִמ ְד ָרׁש‬exposition, interpretation), itself from the root ‫( דרׁש‬to inquire, to study, to investigate). W. VanGemeren, ed., in NIDOTTE, vol. 1, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1997), 993. 93 Ellis, Prophecy and Hermeneutic in Early Christianity, 151. and Serge Ruzer, “The Technique of Composite Citation in the Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5:21-22, 33–37),” RB 103, no. 1 (1996): 65–75. 94 “The reuse of scripture in pseudepigraphic works highlights the consistency of scriptural legal judgments. These authors sought to understand the basic harmony of scriptural laws in the face of apparent discord, and this reality is borne out in their exegesis.” Garrick V. Allen, “Composite Citations in Jewish Pseudepigraphic Works: RePresenting Legal Traditions in the Second Temple Period,” in Composite Citations in Antiquity: Jewish, GraecoRoman, and Early Christian Use, 141. 95 “Ancient biblical interpreters scrutinized every detail of the biblical text in search of hidden meaning.” Karin Hedner Zetterholm, Jewish Interpretation of the Bible: Ancient and Contemporary (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2012), 71. 96 “Without regard to the authorial intention of a larger literary context in which they appear.” C. A. Evans and L. Novakovic, “Midrash,” in Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, 589. 91 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 21 unannounced combination of citations.97 Kee also considers composite citations as the juxtaposition of citations with little in common and giving rise to a new theological perception like midrash pesher98 used at Qumran.99 The issue with that view is that midrashic interpretation was usually used to explain difficult texts, and was often introduced by the expression: “another interpretation”—which does not reflect the citation procedure found in the NT.100 Furthermore, it has not been demonstrated that non-contextual midrashic interpretation was central for Pharisees and Sadducees in their methods of interpretation in the first century, and not all midrashic interpretation is noncontextual.101 G.K. Beale even states that “it may not be appropriate to speak of a non-contextual rabbinic method in the 70 BCE setting, since most examples come from after 70 CE.”102 As there is no way to know if, and how widespread, midrashic interpretation was in pre-Christian Judaism, this model of interpretation may not be the best explanation to justify non-contextual NT exegesis. Some authors refer to “pesher” (in the general sense of a “contemporizing interpretation”) or “targumic” interpretation — which may fall in a broad midrashic category of rabbinic interpretation. Dating for the midrashic text varies between pre-Christian in origin to the Middle Ages. Targumim are commented Aramaic translations of OT texts often included in the broad category of midrash. In the Targums the commentary was usually presented in a way to distinguish it from the translation of the Bible (either in a separate section, or in a different language). They usually demonstrate concern for the theological relevance of the biblical text, but are considered commentary, not methods of citations. See M. B. Shepherd, “Targums,” in Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, 932. 98 ‫ ֵּ֫פׁשֶׁ ר‬meaning solution or interpretation. Francis Brown, Samuel Rolles Driver, and Charles Augustus Briggs, Enhanced Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon (BDB) (Oxford: Clarendon, 1977), 833. 99 “Thus the most significant parallel between Markan exegesis and the exegetical method employed at Qumran is the juxtaposition of scriptures that in their origins had little or nothing to do with each other.” Howard Clark Kee, “The Function of Scriptural Quotations and Allusions in Mark 11-16,” in Jesus Und Paulus: Festschrift Für Werner Georg Kümmel Zum 70sten Geburtstag, (Göttingen, Germany: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1975), 181. 100 “Paul is not offering commentary to explain a difficult text but rather using a text to validate his teaching on the theological origins of Christian unity and the patterns of charismata that empower the sort of ministries that secure it.” John K. Stafford, “Paul’s Use of the Psalms. Beyond Midrash,” Perichoresis 11, no. 2 (2013): 215. 101 The general rules of midrashic interpretation can be demonstrated in the NT, which seems to point to their use in the first century even if most of those rules are quite general and could be found in many different interpretative procedures. C. A. Evans and L. Novakovic, “Midrash,” in Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, 589. 102 He continues by saying: “and those which can be dated with probability before that do not appear to reflect such an atomistic approach.” Beale also believes that some Qumran texts demonstrate a certain respect for contextual exegesis, see Beale “Positive Answer to the Question Did Jesus and His Followers Preach the Right Doctrine from the Wrong Texts?.” 97 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 22 Some scholars also refute this theory because it is often possible to show how the NT author respected the larger narrative context or the theological context of the OT texts.103 Only a few NT citations and allusions to the OT may potentially be considered non-contextual.104 John Stafford shows how Paul uses quotations in a very disciplined manner, quite distinct from the usual midrash interpretation.105 Christopher Stanley believes that the explanation based on midrash interpretation was popular at the turn of the century, but is losing popularity.106 Effectively, midrashic interpretation includes re-application of the law to a contemporary setting (Halakah) or explanations for difficult passages (Haggadah), but not recombined citations. While it may be possible to show some influence of midrashic exegesis in the Gospels,107 nothing in the midrashic interpretations permits an explanation for composite citations. Are Composite Citations Purposefully Following the Rule of Two Testimonies? In 1970, Jindřich Mánek surveyed composite citations in the NT and concluded that they were used to testify to important events.108 He postulates that the authors of the NT followed the rule of Deut 19:15 stating that two or more witnesses are necessary to create testimony.109 The Stafford, “Paul’s Use of the Psalms. Beyond Midrash,” 215. Beale offers a tentative lists, some of them are “the role of the angels revealing the law in Galatians 3:19 … the understanding of baptism and the ‘following rock’ in 1 Corinthians 10:1-4 … atomistic interpretation: Isaiah 40:6-8 in 1 Peter 1:24ff,” Beale, “Positive Answer to the Question Did Jesus and His Followers Preach the Right Doctrine from the Wrong Texts?” 105 Stafford, “Paul’s Use of the Psalms. Beyond Midrash.” 106 “More recent scholars, on the other hand, have adopted a more reticent attitude toward the relevance of the rabbinic literature at this point.” Stanley, Paul and the Language of Scripture, 22. 107 For example, it is possible to consider the Sermon on the Mount as a midrashic re-interpretation of the law in Matt 5–7 in the way Jesus reapplies the law to a more contemporary context. Ruzer, “The Technique of Composite Citation in the Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5:21-22, 33-37).” 108 He made a list: Jesus’ birth; John the Baptist’s ministry; Jesus’ baptism; the transfiguration; the triumphal entry in Jerusalem; the cleansing of the temple; Judas’s betrayal; the signs of the end and the second coming; the hardening of Israel; Jesus’ death; and the victory of the believers over death. Jindřich Mánek, “Composite Quotations in the New Testament and Their Purpose,” CV 13, no. 3–4 (1970): 184. 109 Despite the fact that the context of Deuteronomy applies to criminal charges, which seems to be reflected in Matt 18:16, John 8:17 implies that two witnesses were also necessary for more neutral or positive declarations, as seen in Rev 11:3. 103 104 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 23 authors from the NT would have used composite citations—created by them or copied from another source—as ‘double witness’ for important events. As interesting as this theory appears, it is negated by the practice because the combination makes the double witness into single one—therefore cancelling the double-witness effect. Nevertheless, the originator of a composite citation could have combined citations to show the consistency of God’s revelation regarding a certain matter. In this case, composite citations could be viewed as a sort of ‘double witness.’110 Are Composite Citations Rhetorical Devices? Mánek believes that composite citations were created intentionally since they were placed in strategic places to act as proof.111 Stanley goes further by considering composite citations as the result of “the conscious effort of a thoughtful editor who has produced this sophisticated piece of literary and rhetorical artistry.”112 In order to establish if composite citations were used as literary devices with rhetorical intent, one needs first to define rhetoric and how it was used in the first-century Roman Empire to advance an author’s rhetorical purposes. One must also demonstrate that composite citations were common Greco-Roman literary phenomena; their presence in Jewish texts could also help establish possible Hellenistic influence on Jewish rhetoric. This question of composite citations as rhetorical devices needs to be examined in detail because there does not appear to be one simple explanation for their development. Finally, it is 110 In this case, one could not view composite citations as legal witnesses in the same way Mánek proposed them to be, but still as witnesses in a general sense. 111 Of course, composite citation may have been created by an originator, and later used as proof by a different author. Mánek, “Composite Quotations in the New Testament and Their Purpose,” 186. 112 Stanley discusses the various uses made by Paul as he combined citations. Stanley, Paul and the Language of Scripture, 116. Stanley uses the term editor instead of author, probably because authors can become editors of their own work, but more likely to include the possibility that later editors from the community could be responsible for those changes. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 24 necessary to establish if such literary devices would be understood by an implied audience since it is usually accepted that there is no meaning of a message without comprehension of its content. What Is Rhetoric? Rhetoric is usually understood as the art of convincing someone to believe what is contrary to his thoughts (you absolutely need this new car), to implant a new conviction (this man is innocent!), to persuade an audience to accept the cleverness of the one communicating (I am the best candidate for this post), or to adopt a new behaviour (working out is the best way to lose weight).113 The art of persuasion includes everything that influences emotions, beliefs or actions of the receptors—as it relates to one’s culture, including tone, vocabulary, illustrations, humour, and many other factors.114 George Kennedy has been one of the first authors to provoke a renewal of interest in Biblical studies in rhetoric as a method of communication.115 He shows that the Greeks were the first to elevate rhetoric to an art form, especially in the development of democracy starting in 500-400 BCE.116 Even if it was first used in oral forms of communication, the art of persuasion quickly took a literary form often used in political and legal contexts.117 Ben Witherington III 113 In this thesis, rhetoric involves all that included persuasion from the time of Aristotle through and beyond the first century in the Greek-speaking world. Ben Witherington III, New Testament Rhetoric: An Introductory Guide to the Art of Persuasion in and of the New Testament (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2009), ix. 114 In order to convince, rhetoric uses the rules of a language considered acceptable for a society. Burton L. Mack, Rhetoric and the New Testament (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1989), 15–16. 115 For close to two millennia, rhetoric was usually defined as a form of argumentation influenced by its cultural milieu, usually studied mostly for its stylistic arrangements. In the 1970s, there was a renewal of interest for rhetorical analysis. With this new interest came a desire to look at rhetoric not only as a stylistic form, but as a communication device that could be adapted to various human discourses. Critics of rhetoric became interested in the interconnections between communicators, discourses and audience; the study of rhetoric is now a historicalcultural study. George A. Kennedy, Classical Rhetoric and Its Christian and Secular Tradition from Ancient to Modern Times, 2nd ed. (Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North Carolina Press, 2003), 137. 116 The rhetoric, now considered “Classical Rhetoric,” continued to be developed in the Middle Ages, in the Renaissance, and in the Modern and Postmodern eras, always adapting to the changing time and cultures. Romans pursued the efforts started by the Greeks to develop rhetoric by creating schools and professional rhetoricians. Kennedy, Classical Rhetoric and Its Christian and Secular Tradition, 1. 117 Kennedy, Classical Rhetoric and Its Christian and Secular Tradition, 3–4. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 25 states that as the NT came to us in Greek—the lingua franca of the Roman Empire118—it is therefore reasonable to deduce that the Greek influence extended to composition and argumentation in those texts.119 As he mentions: “no documents in antiquity were intended for ‘silent’ reading,”120 and rhetoric of the first century includes oral performance which would include intonation and non-verbal cues.121 From the first centuries, the Church Fathers expected to find rhetorical arguments as they were reading the Bible.122 To prove that composite citations were literary devices with rhetorical intent, one must demonstrate that they played an intentional role in improving their originator’s strategy of persuasion and achieved their rhetorical purpose. It is also necessary to confirm that they were present in first-century literature. Are Composite Citations Part of the Rhetorical Tool-Kit Available to GrecoRoman or Jewish Writers/Speakers? Some biblical scholars believe that NT authors, like Paul, did something completely new when he cited the OT,123 and others believe that composite citations were not found in Judaism, even if all other types of citations were.124 This, however, seems to be the point of view of the minority. “The Judaism of the time of Jesus and Paul had long since been Hellenized; this affected it not only linguistically, but culturally as well.” Witherington III, New Testament Rhetoric, 23. 119 Witherington III, New Testament Rhetoric, 23. 120 As demonstrated by the famous anecdote reported by Augustine who was impressed that Ambrose could read without making a sound or moving his lips. Witherington III, New Testament Rhetoric, 1–2. 121 Kennedy includes intonation in his proposal to analyze rhetoric. As composite citations are part of written documents, it is difficult to include non-verbal cues to their interpretation, but, one must note that oral presentation would have influenced an audience’s understanding of the speech. Kennedy, Classical Rhetoric and Its Christian and Secular Tradition. 122 Augustine himself could see no other way to interpret a written text. Mack, Rhetoric and the New Testament, 10. 123 Stanley discusses a German scholar, Alex Koch, who wrote a study on the composition of the NT and who believed that Paul was citing Jewish sacred texts in a very unique and new way. Stanley, Paul and the Language of Scripture, 268. 124 However, Ellis does not cite his source for such an affirmation. He simply mentions that composite citations are infrequent in rabbinic usage and that they are a NT phenomenon. Ellis, Prophecy and Hermeneutic in Early Christianity, 150. 118 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 26 In 1889, Hatch catalogued composite citations from Clement of Rome, Barnabas and Justin Martyr in their use of the OT to prove that this method of quoting text was used in the first few centuries. As all his case studies came from mid-to late-first century, Hatch did not prove influence on the composition of the NT, but he demonstrated that they were not unique to the NT.125 In 1896, Johnson used a wider range of texts from authors who lived a few centuries before, during and after the first century to show that composite citation existed in Greco-Roman literature.126 He concludes that citation techniques used in the NT conformed to the literary custom of the first century.127 Mánek believed that Christians shared Jewish conceptions in their use of composite citations, but did not expand on his sources.128 In 2016, seeing the necessity for an extensive evaluation of Jewish and Greco-Roman use of composite citations, Ehorn and Adams created an impressive collective work studying various texts. Following this first volume, they created a second one for the use of composite citations in the NT.129 As discussed below, they show that composite citations were used both in Jewish and Greco-Roman literature accessible to a firstcentury audience.130 125 Hatch mostly wanted to demonstrate that some sacred texts existed for the Jewish community of the first century and he proves it by the fact that some authors cited prior sources. However, his examples for composite citations postdate the NT text. He examines a composite of Jer 2:12 and Isa 16:1-2 found in Barnabas II, and Justin Martyr Tryph 114; from Psalms and Isaiah found in Rom 3:10-18 and Justin M. Tryph. 27; from different psalms in Clement of Rome, to name a few—all composite citations of OT texts. Edwin Hatch, “On Composite Quotations from the Septuagint,” 203–4. 126 He cites Cicero, Lucian, Maximus Tyrius, Philo, Plato, Plutarch and Xenophon. Johnson also considers that the early Fathers of the Church also quoted “with little reference to verbal exactness.” Johnson, The Quotations of the New Testament from the Old. 127 Johnson, The Quotations of the New Testament from the Old, 43. 128 Mánek, “Composite Quotations in the New Testament and Their Purpose,” 186. 129 Adams and Ehorn, Composite Citations in Antiquity: Jewish, Graeco-Roman, and Early Christian Use; Adams and Ehorn, Composite Citations in Antiquity: New Testament Uses. 130 Adams and Ehorn, “Composite Citations in Antiquity: A Conclusion,” 215. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 27 How were Composite Citations used in Greco-Roman and Jewish Texts? Adams and Ehorn et al. examined various authors and presented a few theories to explain why and how authors from 350 BCE to 150 CE used composite citations.131 They discovered that authors used composite citations—as demonstrated below—in the following ways: to summarize, to adapt citations to a new literary context, to create a stylistic effect, to customize for argumentation and to create new proof texts. Providing Summaries Composite citations would have provided a simpler reading by summarizing and omitting irrelevant material to avoid distracting the audience “from the flow of narrative.”132 This was a technique learnt in school.133 Such citations were observed in Plutarch;134 Philo would also quote very well, but skipped irrelevant sections.135 The result would also be a more fluid and beautiful reading. An example from Philo (20 BCE to 50 CE) can be seen at Sacrifices 87: “And even if we are slow, nevertheless he does not delay to take to himself those who are fit to worship him. For ‘I will take’, says he, ‘you to be a people for myself, and I will be your God [Exod 6:7], and you shall be my people: I am the Lord [Lev 26:12–13].’”136 131 Their study extends to documents written between 350 BCE to 150 CE. They examined Homer, Plutarch, some elite Romans, Philo, the Damascus document, the Septuagint apocrypha, the Jewish pseudepigraphical works and Justin Martyr. Adams and Ehorn, Composite Citations in Antiquity: Jewish, Graeco-Roman, and Early Christian Uses. 132 Sean A. Adams, “Greek Education and Composite Citations of Homer,” in Composite Citations in Antiquity: Jewish, Graeco-Roman, and Early Christian Use, 19. 133 Ehorn, “Composite Citations in Plutarch,” 2016, 43. Its Greek version: “κἂν ἡμεῖς μέντοι βραδύνωμεν, αὐτὸς οὐ βραδύνει τοὺς ἐπιτηδείους πρὸς θεραπείαν λαβεῖν ἑαυτῷ· ‘λήψομαιʼ γάρ φησιν ‘ὑμᾶς ἐμαυτῷ λαὸν ἐμοὶ καὶ ἔσομαι ὑμῶν θεὸςʼ ‘καὶ ὑμεῖς ἔσεσθέ μοι λαός· ἐγώ εἰμι κύριοςʼ.” 134 Ehorn, “Composite Citations in Plutarch,” 43–45. Its Greek version: “ᾠδὴν μὲν γάρ, ἣν ἐδίδαξεν Μωυσῆς, οὐκ ἐπελάθετο διδάσκων τὴν λέγουσαν· Ἐγὼ ἀποκτενῶ καὶ ζῆν ποιήσω. αὕτη ἡ ζωὴ ὑμῶν καὶ ἡ μακρότης τῶν ἡμερῶν.” 135 J. R. Royse, “Composite Quotations in Philo of Alexandria,” in Composite Citations in Antiquity: Jewish, Graeco-Roman, and Early Christian Use, 78. 136 C. D. Yonge, The Works of Philo: Complete and Unabridged (Peabody, MASS: Hendrickson, 1995), Sacrifice 87. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 28 Philo creates an emphasis on the reciprocity between God and his people by reducing the citations and avoiding the mentions of slavery in Egypt from Exod 6:7 and from Lev 26:13.137 The result is a compact composite citation.138 Philo usually cites the LXX accurately, but sometimes modified his citations to create a smoother construction.139 Adapting to New Literary Contexts The author of 4 Macc. (63 BCE – 70 CE140) also regularly shapes citations in order to fit their new literary context as seen in 4 Macc. 18:18-19: “For he did not forget to teach the song that Moses taught which says, ‘I will kill, and I will make alive [Deut 32:39]; this is your life and the length of days’ [Deut 30:20].”141 In this example, the author uses only one extract of the song of Moses (32:39) combined with a fragment of a commandment to explain God’s act of revivification (30:20). 142 The resulting composite citation provides support for the soul’s immortality, where life follows death, by the inclusion of the excerpt from Deut 30:20 in a new literary context.143 Creating Stylistic Effects Plato could sometimes combine citations to underline another author’s lack of precision and critique the original user’s imprecision.144 Authors could also combine different citations to 137 Philo quotes from the first part of Exod 6:7 and combines it with the end of Lev 26:12 and the beginning of 26:13. 138 Royse adds that it is impossible to conclude without any doubt that this composite citation is not the result of faulty memory; it may not even be a citation because it does not have a formula of introduction, but the result is still a seamless composite citation. Royse, “Composite Quotations in Philo of Alexandria,” 82. 139 Royse, “Composite Quotations in Philo of Alexandria,” 76. 140 Dating for 4 Macc. is disputed, but most agree for a date preceding or within the first century. James H. Charlesworth, The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha: Expansions of the “Old Testament” and Legends, Wisdom, and Philosophical Literature, Prayers, Psalms and Odes, Fragments of Lost Judeo-Hellenistic Works, vol. 2 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1985), 533. 141 Sean A. Adams and Seth M. Ehorn, “Composite Citations in the Septuagint Apocrypha,” in Composite Citations in Antiquity: Jewish, Graeco-Roman, and Early Christian Use, 124. 142 This merging transforms the meaning of Deut 30:20 where God is described as the “life and length of days” for those who obey. 143 This composite citation can also modify the meaning of the quoted text, or apply it to a new situation. 144 For example, Plato inverts the order of clauses in citations by citing the later line first, demonstrating Socrates’s lack of knowledge. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 29 show their own literary prowess by creating a new and sublime citation.145 Plutarch sometimes combined citations with similar keywords or similar themes; 146 his “impressive command of literature would bolster his credibility to any lesser (or un-) educated readers/listeners.”147 It is true that only educated listeners would have recognized the extent of his composite citations, but a less aware audience could still recognize and appreciate his mastery of literature. Customizing the Argumentation Plato also sometimes combined citations from the same author in order to create a new quotation that fit more adequately the argument of his new context. By removing the middle sections of a citation, Plato could condense the discourse by omitting lines without indicating it and create new pithy lines.148 He did not defy conventions, but he acted in accordance with the practices of his time.149 Citations were sometimes modified to help in the justification of arguments; Plutarch did not hesitate to add words to a citation to correct understanding or add explanation.150 Seneca “Of Pramneian wine it was, and therein she grated cheese of goat’s milk with a grater of bronze (Il. 11.638–39a) and thereby an onion as a relish for drink (Il. 11.630) (Lamb).” Adams, “Greek Education and Composite Citations of Homer,” 25–28. 145 For example, Lucian of Samosata combines four different lines from Homer to create a new literary feature and seems to do this for no better reason than to show off the character (Heracles) and his knowledge of Homer: “Death makes mortals alike, be they buried or lying unburied. Equal is Irus the beggar in honour to King Agamemnon (Il. 9.319–20); Fair-haired Thetis’ son is no better a man than Thersites (Od. 10.521), They are all of them nothing but skeleton relics of dead men (Od. 11.539), Bare, dry bones that are scattered about in the Asphodel meadow (Od. 11.573).” Adams, “Greek Education and Composite Citations of Homer,” 26. 146 Of course, some of those combinations could have been caused by mistakes because of their similarities. Some examples are difficult to classify as they could also be explained by a desire to remove irrelevant material. Ehorn, “Composite Citations in Plutarch,” 47–51. 147 Ehorn, “Composite Citations in Plutarch,” 2016, 41. 148 Plato effectively created a new saying for Achilles: “You thwarted me, far shooter, most deadly of all the gods (Il. 22.15) Indeed I would repay you, if I had the strength (Il. 22.20).” Adams, “Greek Education and Composite Citations of Homer,” 18. 149 “This practice of customized citations is also found in many Greek authors in the first centuries CE.” However, it is also possible that Plutarch used different versions of Homer texts, which could explain the reformulations. The result is still a nice narrative flow. Adams, “Greek Education and Composite Citations of Homer,” 21. 150 For example, in Mor. 15c, Plutarch added a sentence to his quotation from Homer: “Drugs of which many are healing, intermixed, and others baneful to those who cultivate. In it is love-making; in it is desire; in it is sweet talk, persuasion that steals away the mind of the very wisest” (emphasis original), Ehorn, “Composite Citations in Plutarch,” 2016, 54–55. His addition directs attention to those cultivating instead of those mixing the drinks. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 30 could use composite citations if they strengthened the point he was trying to make.151 In a similar manner, authors from the Septuagint Apocrypha152 changed citations to transform the meaning of the cited text within their later interpretation and new rhetorical context.153 Even if they are relatively rare, composite citations found in Jewish pseudepigraphic works also had a didactic or apologetic function by supporting a legal or theological statement.154 For example, Ep Arist. 155: “Therefore, he prescribes also through the scriptures saying thusly: ‘You shall remember a remembrance of the Lord [Deut 7:18], the one who did for you great and wonderful things’[Deut 10:21], for [they] are considered manifestly ‘great and glorious things.’”155 The author of Aristeas modified and recombined a line from Deut 7:18 with a line from Deut 10:21. The author appeals to authority and illustrates that God is more concerned about the symbol of sacrifice than the nature of the animal.156 The result illustrates how an author could combine texts to show confidence in the Jewish Scriptures he is citing, implying that his audience should share the same belief.157 He used his new recombined citation to prove his point and avoided the lines which were useless for his argument. The author of the Damascus Document also believed that answers Seneca could manufacture a line by combining words from an unknown author to create ‘evidence’ as he does in his letter Ep. 4. This is not an example of a true composite citation, but it demonstrates the liberty that some authors took. Williams seems to see this adaptation as a “manipulation” of text. She believes that the first Christians were not above manipulating evidence themselves to further their agenda. Margaret Williams, “Citation in the Elite Roman Epistolary Writing: Cicero, Seneca, and Pliny,” in Composite Citations in Antiquity: Jewish, Graeco-Roman, and Early Christian Use, 73. 152 Usually refers to various texts like 4 Macc., 1 Esd., 2 Macc., Baruch. 153 See the example from 4 Macc 18:19 above where the author combined Deut 32:39 with 30:20 to fit the new literary context, but also to transform the meaning of Deut 30:20. Adams and Ehorn, “Composite Citations in the Septuagint Apocrypha,” 124-134. 154 Allen, “Composite Citations in Jewish Pseudepigraphic Works: Re-Presenting Legal Traditions in the Second Temple Period,” 145. 155 Allen, “Composite Citations in Jewish Pseudepigraphic Works: Re-Presenting Legal Traditions in the Second Temple Period,” 142. The Greek version: “διὸ παρακελεύεται καὶ διὰ τῆς γραφῆς ὁ λέγων οὕτως μνείᾳ μνησθήσῃ κυρίου τοῦ ποιήσαντος ἒν σοι τὰ μεγάλα καὶ θαυμαστά κατανοούμενα γὰρ καὶ μεγάλα καὶ ἒνδοξα φαίνεται.” 156 He argues that Jewish law is “symbolic of more concrete religious realities” in a philosophical discourse attributed to the high priest Eleazar. Allen, “Composite Citations in Jewish Pseudepigraphic Works: Re-Presenting Legal Traditions in the Second Temple Period,” 142-144. 157 There is no introduction formula, and the combination could also be considered a simple reformulation, or a combination of allusions. 151 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 31 to questions were found in the biblical text and sometimes used an amalgam of multiple lines from different literary contexts with thematic commonalities.158 Composite citations and different forms of text manipulations are found more frequently in Greco-Roman works than in Jewish texts where they are relatively rare. It is plausible that Hellenism was a growing influence and that Jewish writers borrowed the practice since composite citations seem to be much more frequent in the NT.159 Adams and Ehorn theorize from this that Jesus may have been a strong influence and used composite citations himself as he taught his disciples (Luke 24:27)—who continued his ministry (Acts 1:1-2) as he engaged “in combining texts for exegetical purposes.”160 If Jesus is the originator of all the composite citation attributed to him, he could be considered the role model for NT authors.161 It is difficult to demonstrate a direct Jewish influence on Jesus for his composite citations as he uses them with more imagination and more constancy than most Jewish authors who precede him and whose works survive. The next concern is the reception of composite citations, especially from a Jewish firstcentury audience since their knowledge of Greco-Roman literature or rhetoric was presumably not as developed as an educated Gentile audience (or maybe an educated Jewish audience in the Diaspora). It remains to be seen if the average inhabitant—the one who had a basic education 158 In the Damascus Document 3.20-4.2, the author uses many extracts from Ezek 44:15 and 44:7. By rephrasing the text from Ezekiel, the document says that: “Those who remained steadfast in it will acquire eternal life, and all the glory of Adam is for them. As God swore to them by means of Ezekiel the prophet, saying: ‘The priests and the levites and the sons of Zadok who maintained the service of my temple when the children of Israel strayed far away from me (Ez 44:15); they shall offer me the fat and the blood’ [Ezek 44:7]” (my emphasis). Florentino García Martínez and Eibert J. C. Tigchelaar, eds., The Dead Sea Scrolls Study Edition (Translations) (Leiden: Brill, 1997). 159 Texts like the Letter of Aristeas were written in Greek, probably in a Diaspora context, which points to a Hellenistic influence, but it is difficult to distinguish completely Jewish from Hellenistic influence in Greek Jewish text. 160 Adams and Ehorn, “Composite Citations in Antiquity: A Conclusion,” 215–16. 161 This, of course, implies that Jesus is the originator of most composite citation, if not all. I understand that NT authors may have created the composite citations. However, as the great majority of composite citations in the gospels are part of Jesus’ speech, it is not unreasonable to assume that he created most of them. If this is the case, Paul may have been influenced by Jesus, and he “quoted Scripture according to the ordinary literary conventions of his day.” Stanley, “Composite Citations: Retrospect and Prospect,” 203. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 32 and made up most of the population—could also comprehend their message or be taught to recognize and appreciate them.162 Could a First-Century Audience Have Recognized and Appreciated Rhetoric? Would authors create something intentional without expecting at least part of their audience to understand? How much does an audience need to comprehend something to consider that meaning has been transmitted? Those questions are philosophical, and their answers go beyond this thesis, but they still need to be briefly considered. In this thesis, I consider meaning as a cultural construct, and as a group of concepts transmitted163 in order to be received by a receptor.164 One must wonder how much an original audience must understand a text in order to comprehend the meaning of its message. At the beginning of this chapter, I used an image to describe a composite citation as a mixed recipe. Referring to it, I might wonder if readers could appreciate my description if they have never heard of apple cider, or ever tasted chocolate. Is it necessary to recognize all components of the comparison to understand it? Are not metaphors used to communicate by approximations to the truth? Stanley argues that Paul, for example, used 162 This implies, of course, that if an average inhabitant of the first century could understand something about literature, it follows that most educated first-century inhabitant could also gain, at least, the same understanding. 163 “If there is to be a meaning at all it must have a personal point of reference. Many philosophers and linguists have shown that language is a social phenomenon and must be understood in terms of its use.” Philip Barton Payne, “The Fallacy of Equating Meaning with the Human Author’s Intention,” in The Right Doctrine from the Wrong Texts? Essays on the Use of the Old Testament in the New. 164 Authorial meaning is created by the author: “This authorial meaning can be understood by all readers who will allow the writer to first say what he wants to say without introducing conservative or liberal prejudices as a preunderstanding.” Walter C. Kaiser Jr., “The Single Intent of Scripture,” in The Right Doctrine from the Wrong Texts?: Essays on the Use of the Old Testament in the New. Three aspects are important in the concept of authorial meaning: the total context of a text which should includes literary contexts, socio-historical factors and theological message; the original audience which should always be prioritized as the text was created for them (although I recognize that considering the later audience should be factored in by interpreters as their role is usually to discover meaning in order to communicate it to their own original audience); and the authorial meaning, or authorial intent, which includes the notion that “ultimately God is the author of Scripture, and it is his intention alone that exhaustively determines its meaning. Therefore, the exegete should not necessarily restrict the meaning of the text to what he feels can be demonstrated to be the intention of the human author.” See Payne, “The Fallacy of Equating Meaning with the Human Author’s Intention.” WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 33 quotations from the Bible even if he knew that the most illiterate part of the church would not understand it.165 Stanley implies that by being unable to read, or by being non-Jews, believers could not understand Paul’s citations, leading to the inevitable conclusion that an incomplete understanding is no understanding at all. This brings me back to the example of a mixed recipe; one could understand that I am trying to make a comparison between citations and taste, even with no referent to the taste in question. In a similar way, an audience could have understood the words of the citation without recognizing its source and allusion, and could also recognize an author’s rhetorical discourse without acknowledging all the rhetorical methods used. 166 Stanley fails to acknowledge that explanations could also be provided to less discerning members of the audience as the text was publicly read. The recognition of the citation—even without realizing its composite nature—still grants the audience a partial comprehension. Contrary to a joke, a citation preserves its value even if it is explained later on. In fact, as letters and gospels were read in public, it would be logical for the authors to expect members of the audience to help each other understand what seemed to be cryptic. Readers could act as leaders and teachers who explained the text as Jesus did in Luke 4. I intend to show that authors could have used composite citations as part of a rhetorical discourse because they could create them—and their audience could perceive their part in the 165 Stanley considers that Paul was using quotations as part of his rhetoric, but that he expected his audience to accept his words at face value because of his ability to read and quote Scriptures (and maybe even because of his title as the apostle?). He rightly argues that a first-century audience would be in the majority illiterate, and those who could read could hardly be expected to take up a scroll and find the appropriate reference as chapters and verses were not marked. However, his insistence that Gentiles would not know the Jewish Scriptures puzzles me: did he not expect teachers in churches to educate believers about such things? His main argument is weakened by his assumption that no leaders would teach from the Old Testament, especially in light of the believers of Berea including both Jews and non-Jews (Acts 17.10-15). Stanley, Arguing With Scripture. 166 This could bring forward the discussion to the responsibility of the audience to participate in the reception of transmitted knowledge. Because of the scope of this thesis, I dare not bring the discussion in this direction as it would be as complicated as it is fascinating. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 34 argumentation—because they belonged in their culture. In order to do this, I turn to the general education of a first-century inhabitant of the Roman Empire. Were Composite Citations Part of the Rhetorical Methods Taught in School? We now realize that the average citizen of the first-century Roman Empire was probably exposed very young to the basic methods of rhetoric, the same ways children in the Western world of the 21st century are introduced to the ‘scientific method’ very early on. In his important contribution to the history of education, H. Marrou explains that most children—girls and boys—had access to public primary school.167 Teachers taught from November to June in openair buildings accessible to any passer-by.168 Everything more complex was reserved for secondary school for girls and boys of 11–16 years old from well-to-do families.169 Teaching was usually public, even for the secondary and tertiary levels.170 Burton Mack argued that culture and public education were closely linked.171 In secondary and tertiary schools (fewer) children were exposed to the progymnasmata exercises; students learnt rhetoric as they learnt to read and 167 The children of the very rich Romans often had private tutors, and the children of slaves on grand domains had particular schools. H. I. Marrou, A History of Education in Antiquity, Repr. ed. (Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press, 1982), 266–67. Witherington also believes that “there were not only schools of rhetoric throughout the Mediterranean crescent, rhetoric itself was part of elementary, secondary, and tertiary basic education as well.” Witherington III, New Testament Rhetoric, 5. 168 I do not imply that primary school created a strong literacy rate as only between 5 and 20% of the population could read and write. However, it seems that most had access to an introduction to words and mathematics, even if lessons were probably often forgotten when they were not put into practice. School may have been at times mostly a glorified daycare centre, but pupils were still introduced to stories that used various strategies of persuasion. Jerome H. Neyrey, “‘How Does This Man Have Learning, Since He Is without Education’ (John 7:15),” BTB 48, no. 2 (2018): 88. However, Martin and Pearsons believe that most children could not read, but could copy text to improve their handwriting. Michael W. Martin and Mikeal C. Parsons, Ancient Rhetoric and the New Testament: The Influence of Elementary Greek Composition (Waco, TX: Baylor University Press, 2018), 1. 169 Of course, this does not imply that everything was done in a uniform manner in all the Roman Empire. One must allow for variations in the applications of those principles depending on the regions and the periods. Marrou, A History of Education in Antiquity, 268–73. 170 Tertiary school started at 16–17 years old and was considered the “professional” level. It varied greatly from one profession to another one. Future rhetoricians learnt to perfect their power of persuasion. For more details, see Marrou, A History of Education in Antiquity, ch. 6. 171 Mack, Rhetoric and the New Testament, 30. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 35 write.172 It is safe to say that all who could write Greek could also debate at a basic level, using contemporary rhetorical methods. Mack also explained that one of the first rhetorical techniques taught in school was the chreia (from the Greek χρεία),173 which was usually a proverb or a saying whose importance was linked to its origin. Chreiai were used in a particular situation to teach about wisdom, illustrate a fact or convince audiences. Children learnt to change those pithy lines and integrate them into a narrative text in order to create rhetorical effects; they learnt to tell the truth through fiction.174 As chreiai were the basic part of rhetorical discourse, first-century inhabitants of the GrecoRoman society were presumably introduced from an early age to the rhetorical method.175 Despite the Maccabean revolt, Hellenist education still existed in Jerusalem.176 In Alexandria, the Greek school gymnasium was accepted by the Jewish upper class. The Jewish ruling classes had to master not only Greek, but also Greco-Roman rhetoric.177 There are good reasons to believe that authors such as Mark or Paul could have been educated in the gymnasium in Jerusalem, or any Greek school found in cities or larger villages. 172 Progymnasmata were preliminary rhetorical exercises taught in school. For a very thorough explication, see Martin and Parsons, Ancient Rhetoric and the New Testament. 173 The Greek term means “that which should happen or be supplied because it is needed” or “what is lacking.” BDAG, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2001, 1088. 174 Mack, Rhetoric and the New Testament, 13. See also Burton L. Mack, Patterns of Persuasion in the Gospels, rev. ed., Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2008, ch. 1, and Martin and Parsons, Ancient Rhetoric and the New Testament, ch. 2-3. 175 Witherington III, New Testament Rhetoric, 26. One humorous example of a chreia can be found in Socrates: As a woman came to announce to Socrates that he had been condemned to death by the Athenians, she complained tearfully: “You were unjustly condemned.” He answered: “Would you have preferred that they had done it with justice?” This reply informs us of the character of Socrates, and his short and direct answer is a good example of a response to which one can hardly find a good retort. (Found and adapted from the Dictionnaire des portraits historiques, anecdotes, et traits remarquables des hommes illustres, Paris : Chez Lacombe, 1768, p. 474.) 176 Some evidence in the two books of Maccabees point to the foundation of a gymnasium in Jerusalem in 175 BCE, and cross-connections with Jews from Alexandria (Hengel offers the example of a marriage proposal) points to the Jewish aristocracy knowing Greek language and custom in the first century BCE. Martin Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism: Studies in Their Encounter in Palestine during the Early Hellenistic Period, Repr. ed. (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981), 70, 76. 177 This was demonstrated by both the letters of Aristeas (approx. 140 BCE) and Josephus’ comment that well-to-do Jews could enroll in the gymnasium. This did not prevent the Jewish leaders from getting implicated in education to prevent a submission to Hellenic culture. “Thus ‘Greek education’ was put in to serve the Jewish cause.” Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism, 68-77. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 36 As they were literate and able to create complicated narrative texts, the authors of the gospels were men who had, in all probability, finished at least their secondary school; Luke also certainly finished the tertiary school as he is considered a physician (Col 4:14). Most of the population did not finish secondary school, but rhetoric was popular and many debates were done on the public scene; they were appreciated and sought in a world where entertainment was scarce.178 Mack therefore concludes that arguments that showed rhetorical sophistication would have been largely understood and appreciated by the population.179 J. Norton agrees: “Any audience could appreciate the rhetorical effect of the overt announcement of citation from another source, even if few could appreciate the exegetical process inherent in the textual amalgam.”180 Would a rhetorical discourse be understood in Palestinian Judaism as well? Those being raised in environments where their first language is spoken by the minority, and where bilingualism is viewed as a considerable advantage, can attest that culture can be influenced by the dominating one even when the language of the minority is fiercely defended. Stanley Porter shows that Jesus could have been bilingual,181 but whether or not Jesus spoke Greek, it did not prevent him from learning how to argue from public debate in his first language. 182 The use of rhetorical methods was not viewed negatively by the Jews; Josephus was himself well versed in Many of Jesus’ debates with the Pharisees were rhetorical debates and Jesus employs many contemporary rhetorical techniques. 179 Mack and Robbins, Patterns of Persuasion, 31. 180 Norton, “Composite Quotations in the Damascus Document,” 93. 181 Stanley E. Porter, “Did Jesus Ever Teach in Greek?” TynBul, 1993, 37. Those raised in a very bilingual environment will often have little difficulty accepting Porter’s proposition. It stands to reason that when bilingualism is deemed an asset, the desire to learn becomes natural. 182 Lieberman demonstrates that Greek was very probably used in Palestine Synagogues as part of the teaching. Some Greek inscriptions of prayers from less-educated Greeks demonstrate that the language was not only spoken by the very well educated, but also by poorer people. Saul Lieberman, Greek in Jewish Palestine/Hellenism in Jewish Palestine (New York: Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1994), 29–67. 178 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 37 rhetoric and mentions Moses’s ability to convince.183 Jesus was described by Mark as teaching with ‘authority’ very early in his Gospel.184 Even if only 10% of the population was literate, the majority could hear public debates and learn to respond to rhetorical discourse, Jews and nonJews alike.185 NT authors could therefore have used methods of rhetoric in their writing and expected their audience to respond to their message of persuasion. Young and Strickland show that rhetoric would have been used and understood by a first-century audience;186 along with Mack and Robbins,187 and Witherington.188 The rhetoric of the NT is quite similar to what people learned in school in order “to teach lessons to audiences and inform not merely their views but their behaviour.”189 Why Composite Citation? If citations were used to create various effects, why combine citations and not use simple citations? Part of the answer comes from ancient writers. It has been demonstrated that authors 183 William Whiston and Flavius Josephus, The Works of Josephus: Complete and Unabridged (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1987), 28. 184 As seen in Mark 1:21-28. Plausibly, as an author, Mark considered the qualifier ‘authority’ to be culturally accepted as ‘skilful rhetorician’ which seems to imply the ability to interpret the Jewish Scriptures in a compelling manner. 185 “It is important to tease out the implications of this fact for understanding the impact of early Christian writings upon their authorial audience, who presumably also knew how to respond appropriately (if unconsciously) to the effects of persuasive rhetoric.” Martin and Parsons, Ancient Rhetoric and the New Testament, 3. Also: “So influential had rhetoric become in Greece, the Hellenistic world, and in both the Roman Republic and the Empire, that it is not too much to assert that the art and practice of rhetoric permeated virtually every level of Greco-Roman society and influenced virtually all discourse.” Michael Strickland and David M. Young, The Rhetoric of Jesus in the Gospel of Mark (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2017), 44. 186 Strickland and Young, The Rhetoric of Jesus in the Gospel of Mark. 187 Vernon K. Robbins, Jesus the Teacher: A Socio-Rhetorical Interpretation of Mark, (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992). 188 Witherington III, New Testament Rhetoric, and Ben Witherington III, The Gospel of Mark: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI.: Eerdmans, 2001). 189 Witherington III, New Testament Rhetoric, 23. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 38 changed citations for literary effect190 and to remove extraneous material;191 they learned in school to create pithy lines to create new beautiful statements of wisdom.192 Manipulation of lines and the use of extracts were not frowned upon: it showed literary prowess. A demonstration of literary skills and depth of knowledge was, and still is, an efficient way to increase audiences’ confidence in one’s authority, and consequently one’s message.193 As some Jewish writers also already used composite citations, is it surprising that in this context NT authors would use composite citation in their desire to underline the importance of their message? It is also quite likely that Jesus created himself composite citations, as they are often attributed to him. In this case, it is plausible that those who followed him chose, not only to use the composite citations he created, but also to follow his example and create new ones as they “searched the scriptures.” Additionally, Jesus may have used his skills to convince the Jewish leaders that he knew what he was talking about since he demonstrated superior prowess in his understanding and use of Jewish Scriptures. Stanley has shown that Paul used citations—composite or not—mostly when he needed to establish his authority or the validity of his argument.194 Jesus also used citations to show his authority, the continuity between the God of Israel and himself and how the Jewish Scriptures pointed to him. I propose that authors of the Gospels also used those citations to demonstrate the authority of the Jewish Scriptures. “More ‘bonded’ citation technique appears to have been dictated by the special literary and rhetorical concerns of the later author.” Stanley, Paul and the Language of Scripture, 342; see also Royse, “Composite Quotations in Philo of Alexandria,” 76. 191 Adams, “Greek Education and Composite Citations of Homer,” 19; Royse, “Composite Quotations in Philo of Alexandria,” 78. 192 Ehorn, “Composite Citations in Plutarch,” 2016, 43. 193 “In general it seems that the more argumentative and/or apologetic the writing, the more likely the author will trade on the authority of outside sources. But quotations with a more illustrative or rhetorical purpose appear throughout the literature.” Stanley, Paul and the Language of Scripture, 339. 194 Stanley, Arguing With Scripture, 179. 190 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 39 Composite citation established the authority of the originator—or the authority of the text—and created a new pithy saying: a convincing text composed of the more persuasive lines from the OT and used in different ways to refute, convince, challenge or prove. This combination would not create a ‘double witness’ in the legal sense; nonetheless, it would call upon a multiplied source of authority, recognized especially by those who could remember specific scriptural lines. This would not be a manipulation of the Jewish Scriptures in a negative sense, but would demonstrate the literary prowess of those who respected and underlined the authority of the Word of God in its entirety—and show spiritual insight into the meaning of these texts. Any discussion on the reception of a text is directly linked to the audience. If Mark (or any other Gospel writer) wrote to a mixed audience of Jews and non-Jews, he could not have expected all of them to accept automatically the Jewish Scriptures as a source of authority— although they may have accepted the Jewish Scriptures as an ancient source.195 If Mark wrote in majority to a Christian audience, his principal argument would have been to reinforce faith in Jesus and his words (and authority). The non-Christian part of the audience received mostly an invitation to believe. Since Mark’s audience was presumably mixed, it is best to examine each composite citation in situ and accept a certain variety of reception depending on the audience when examining the text. It is also important to consider the audience as a community where each could have contributed to the other’s understanding. As it has been noted, reading was not a private affair in the first century; this implies that discussions would have followed. What may seem cryptic for some was presumably explained by the community—more discerning members 195 Stanley discusses audiences of the first century, Jews vs non-Jews mostly, and the problems related to a possible recognition of citations from the OT, or not. However, his discussion is related to Paul’s use of citations. Stanley, Arguing with Scripture. A Jewish audience would have a high regard of Scriptures, as demonstrated in Acts 15:1621. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 40 of the audience could have explained to less educated ones. Authors would have been aware of this phenomenon that we still observe to this day. My conclusion is that composite citations could be literary devices with rhetorical intent used by the authors of the Gospels—and by Jesus—and understood by the average inhabitant of the first-century CE Roman Empire.196 How much audiences may have understood the composite citations, and what the resulting message may have been, needs to be examined for each individual case.197 To show that composite citations were literary devices with a rhetorical intent, I first suggest a method to examine composite citations in the next chapter. Composite citations are socio-rhetorical constructs, employed in a Jewish world that is set within a larger Greco-Roman context. They are generated by attempts to interpret Jewish sacred texts available at the time—creating something new and beautiful from what is old and loved. 196 Composite citations may not have all been composed for a rhetorical purpose, each should be examined individually. 197 “Some composite citations appear to presuppose prior knowledge of the source text while others do not.” Stanley, “Composite Citations: Retrospect and Prospect,” 207. As discussed earlier, the two levels of rhetoric also need to be considered since the originator’s audience could have been very different from the Markan audience. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 41 Chapter 2 Method A man walked over to his neighbor’s house and knocked on his door. A grey-haired man opened and waved his friend to come inside. “Hello, Georges, I am sorry to bother you, but I have a puzzle for you. I was clearing my father’s shed when I found this bottle of powder. It is not labeled. Do you think you could identify it?” Pleased with the challenge, the chemist took the bottle and examined it carefully. He moved into his garage, followed by his neighbor. Taking out some instruments, he carefully transferred some powder in a glass container before putting it on a scale. Taking notes, he then took some water to mix with the powder to observe its reaction. Puzzled, his friend asked “Why are you doing all those tests? I thought you could simply look at it, or smell it and tell me what it is.” “Ah, answered the scientist, I could do that and venture a guess, but in order to get the best answers, I must examine as many characteristics as I can. Patience my friend.” In many aspects, a good interpreter comes to a text with various tools at his disposal and approaches it as a chemist looks at an unknown substance. Foreknowledge and experience will always be of great use, but a methodical looking at the various aspects of a text will enhance the process. It also makes a more complete understanding more accessible.198 Since the aim of this thesis is to determine if composite citations have rhetorical intent, I propose using a simplified version of socio-rhetorical interpretation (SRI) popularized by Robbins.199 This method, elaborated below, should allow for the examination of composite citations used within rhetorical discourse. I chose to use Mark 11:17 as a test case for the SRI method. This verse contains a citation from two different texts: the first from Isa 56:7 and the second from Jer 7:11. As the two 198 I understand one will never achieve a perfect understanding of any text, but I believe we can progressively get closer to discovering the intent of the author (human and divine). 199 As fascinating as is each texture, or step, for his interpretation, the constraints of this thesis make it difficult to apply each one in detail for every passage studied. For a detailed presentation of SRI, see Vernon K. Robbins, The Tapestry of Early Christian Discourse: Rhetoric, Society and Ideology. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 42 are separated by a conjunction (δέ), they are not clearly presented as a single citation.200 Regardless, despite the fact that it is not introduced by the name of a prophet and it can be neatly separated by a conjunction, Mark 11:17 can be categorized as a composite citation by its combination of two prophetic texts, its suggestion of a single source, and its clever literary amalgamation. Socio-Rhetorical Interpretation in the Study of Composite Citations SRI is composed of different steps—or textures—interconnecting different worlds (the world of the text within the Mediterranean world and within the world of the interpreter).201 Robbins uses the word texture to evoke the various surfaces felt on a tapestry; it refers to the observation of patterns and repetitions found in a text.202 The textures are (1) inner texture, (2) intertexture, (3) social and cultural texture, and (4) ideological texture;203 each containing their own set of steps. As this proposed method is simplified in this thesis, the last two steps are streamlined. As a method of interpretation, SRI is complex and extensive. It tries to combine many forms of interpretation, making limits hard to establish for each aspect since it is difficult to 200 Moyise considers this quotation a weak case of composite quotation in his discussion and does not consider it to be a composite citation in his conclusion. Moyise, “Composite Citations in the Gospel of Mark,” 26–32. While it may not conform with his own definition, I believe it still functions as a composite citation within the Markan narrative. A simple juxtaposition would not have created a contrast between the two citations, something the originator is clearly trying to do. 201 “Socio-rhetorical criticism focuses on the relation of things to one another.” Because of this interrelation, each method of interpretation should not be done in isolation to all others. Robbins, The Tapestry of Early Christian Discourse, 38. 202 Vernon K. Robbins, Exploring the Texture of Texts: A Guide to Socio-Rhetorical Interpretations, (Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 1996), 2. 203 Robbins does not include his Sacred Texture from his earlier 1996 work on socio-rhetorical interpretation in his later book on the subject. It seems that he includes Sacred Texture in his larger Ideology Texture. Sacred Texture included theological concepts such as divine persons, divine history, human redemption, human commitment, religious community and ethics. Ideology Texture examines the theological ideology in texts, but also in tradition, discourse and communities. Robbins, Exploring the Texture of Texts. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 43 know when one has considered enough angles.204 There is also the danger of putting too much weight on one aspect or another. The interpreter may also focus solely on the technique and forget to assess the success of the rhetoric.205 Despite those weaknesses, it is a rewarding method for analyzing the text from different perspectives and a fascinating way to include so many methods of interpretation. Since this thesis analyzes the working of a composite citation, each texture will consider the NT text, but also the OT co-text for the original setting of the cited text. This additional step to the SRI method improves the observation of the use of OT in the NT. Inner Texture of the NT The first step of this method of interpretation is the analysis of the inner texture of a text. It consists in a combination of various literary methods of interpretation with an emphasis on the analysis of the text as discourse.206 This includes observing within the text: the repetitive and progressive patterns, the structure of the pericope (opening-middle-closing), the narration, the argumentation and the aesthetic of the text.207 Analysis of patterns, repetitions, and structure aims to establish the limits of the pericope, and to understand the nature of the discourse and the 204 By being very inclusive, there seems to be no limit to the extent of the conversation. How many anthropological studies should be included? How far does scribal-oral influence go in the past? These questions are difficult to answer. In some aspects, SRI seems to be always an invitation to add more, with all the advantages and inconveniences that such an invitation can include. 205 One could, for example, put too much emphasis on enthymemes and chreiai, which may distract from a text’s main points. One must not forget that enthymemes and chreiai are rhetorical devices, but a rhetorical device does not guarantee that the audience will be persuaded. There is always the possibility that an author’s argument failed. Offering his own socio-rhetorical evaluation of Mark 9:42-50, Henderson critiques SRI for focusing too much on certain rhetorical devices. Ian H. Henderson, “‘Salted with Fire’ (Mark 9:42-50): Style, Oracles and (Socio) Rhetorical Gospel Criticism,” JSNT 80 (2000): 44–65. 206 Robbins, The Tapestry of Early Christian Discourse, 45. 207 Robbins suggests including all observations found within the text, but to keep in mind a larger discussion by not limiting oneself to the text itself. Robbins believes that a socio-rhetorical interpretation should always consider the influence of culture at any point of the interpretation. Contrary to authors like Rhoads, Dewey and Michie (Rhoads, Dewey, and Michie, Mark as Story), Robbins does not believe that the interpreter should only consider the text as if it stands alone, but to include all possible influences in one’s study. Robbins, The Tapestry of Early Christian Discourse, 55; 44 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK construction of the argument. The narration, argumentation and aesthetic inform the interpreter about the different devices used to create effects and argumentation as they relate to the audience’s culture, and the desired effect upon the implied audience.208 The inner texture of the original literary setting of each part of the citation should also be noted after observation in their own original literary context.209 Application of Inner Texture to Mark 11:17 “And he was teaching them and saying to them, ‘Is it not written, “My house shall be called a house of prayer for all the nations”? But you have made it a den of robbers.’” Mark 11:17210 Mark 11:17 is part of a small pericope ranging from verses 15 to 19, itself part of a larger section found in 11:12-26.211 The larger section is constructed as a sandwich, or an A-B-A’ structure—also know as a chiasm.212 It presents the so-called cleansing213 of the temple (vv. 15– 19) placed between two episodes recounting the cursing of a fig tree (vv. 12–14) and its subsequent withering (vv. 20–26). 208 Robbins mentions that texts in antiquity originated from a rhetorical culture where words were employed to give language power. Robbins, The Tapestry of Early Christian Discourse, 56. 209 At this point of my research, I have not found a socio-rhetorical analysis of a text which includes a composite citation where the citation is examined from its OT perspective. Composite citations are mentioned, but the rhetorical effect of the combination is usually not discussed in details. 210 Unless stated otherwise, all NT English translations come from the ESV. 211 The introduction clearly starts a new pericope with the Greek “καὶ τῇ ἐπαύριον” (12), later followed by action within Jerusalem: they entered “Καὶ ἔρχονται” (15) and exited the city “ἐξεπορεύοντο ἔξω τῆς πόλεως” (19) before continuing the action the next morning as they passed again the cursed tree in the morning “πρωΐ ” (20). This effectively ties the narratives of the fig tree with that of the incident of the temple. R. T. France, The Gospel of Mark, (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2002), 443. 212 A sandwich narrative structure often frames the important section, necessary for the understanding of the preceding and following sections. Often, the middle (or the ‘B’ component) acts as the theological key to understand both surrounding halves. It is a clever and more subtle rhetorical tool which uses the narration to underline a message. Mark uses this rhetorical technique more often than most evangelists. James R. Edwards, The Gospel According to Mark, (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2001), 11; Lane, The Gospel of Mark, 400. 213 The term cleansing is often used to describe Jesus’ actions in the temple in this pericope. However, I will favour the expression incident as it is a less connoted term. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 45 The larger section of Mark 11:12-26 follows the triumphal entry in Jerusalem (vv. 1–11) and precedes a discussion on the authority of Jesus (beginning at 11:27). The small pericope (vv. 15–19) is a short narration, starting as Jesus and his disciples come to Jerusalem the day after his triumphal entry, and ending by their coming out, with Jesus’ words placed right in the middle and framed by action, creating another small chiasm.214 Repetitions include different terms to refer to the temple, monetary transaction words, and vocabulary related to teaching/words; they underline how the discourse is centred on the teaching of Jesus about the purpose of the temple and how the monetary transactions are put in opposition to the temple’s real purpose.215 As is common in Mark’s Gospel, the Greek conjunction καί is used to join small propositions and this pericope is no exception; it gives to the narration an impression of speed and movement. The various usages of καί also present some similarity to narrative discourse patterns found in OT narratives; for Jewish ears, this ‘sounds like’ sacred text. The author, by representing Jesus as the subject of the key verbs, centers the plot on him. The expression “my house” stands counterposed to “den of robbers.”216 The larger pericope is centred around the fig tree and presents an echo of the expression “house of prayer” by ending the discussion with a theme of prayer and faith (22–25).217 The action following Jesus’ words is that of the Jewish religious leaders. In the larger pericope, Mark chose to narrate the action by marking with clear temporal borders. Whether the events were chronological or not; they are combined to create a link between them. 215 Temple (2) = Ὁ οἶκός μου (‘my house’) and οἶκος προσευχῆς (house of prayer). Money transaction = τοὺς πωλοῦντας (those who sold *2), τοὺς ἀγοράζοντας (those who bought), κολλυβιστῶν money changers. Words = ἐδίδασκεν (teaching *2), ἔλεγεν (saying), γέγραπται (written), ἤκουσαν (heard). 216 The pronoun is particularly important as it refers back to God as the owner of the house. It is also possible that the chief priests and scribes believed that Jesus was referring to his own house when he used those words. Whether Jesus used it specifically to point to himself or not, it is reasonable to assume that Mark’s audience would have received Jesus’ words as pointing both to God’s ownership to the temple, and his own personal claim. 217 Some Greek manuscripts include, “But if you do not forgive, neither will your Father who is in heaven forgive your trespasses” (Εἰ δὲ ὑμεῖς οὖκ ἀφίετε, οὐδὲ ὁ πατὴρ ὑμῶν ὁ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς ἀφήσει τὰ παραπτώματα ὑμῶν). However, the NA28 does not include it in its main text. 214 46 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK The narration includes a lot of action verbs, making the narration move along quickly, only pausing to let the audience hear Jesus’ teaching before the result of the action: a mixture of opposition by those who wanted to destroy him, and astonishment (11:18).218 καὶ ἐδίδασκεν καὶ ἔλεγεν αὐτοῖς· οὐ γέγραπται ὅτι ὁ οἶκός μου οἶκος προσευχῆς κληθήσεται πᾶσιν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν; ὑμεῖς δὲ πεποιήκατε αὐτὸν σπήλαιον λῃστῶν. Mark 11:17219 The citation from Jesus is strategically placed in the middle of the small pericope. The pithy line “My house shall be called a house of prayer for all the nations, but you have made it a den of robbers” (11:17) acts as the centre of the narration.220 This is not passive instruction: the action is part of the teaching to what would probably have been a large audience. Presumably, Jesus’ words are presented as the explanation/justification for his behaviour—making his reaction appear as a type of live illustration against leaders. Mark lets his own audience know that the chief priests and the scribes listened (11:18), but after such a public demonstration, one Verbs like ἤρξατο ἐκβάλλειν (began to drive) or κατέστρεψεν (overturned) are culminative or constative aorists (or historical aorist). They describe an action which took place in a moment of time. The imperfect verbs, οὐκ ἤφιεν (not allowing), ἐδίδασκεν (teaching), ἔλεγεν (saying) act as descriptive imperfects of action going over a certain period of time, creating a contrast between some punctual actions (driving and overturning) and Jesus’ teaching. Furthermore, by using the perfect tense to describe what was written (γέγραπται), as well as the “you have made it a den of robbers” (πεποιήκατε) within the citation, the author indicates past actions with results still affecting the present. With the perfect tense, the originator is saying that the actions of the leaders have put the temple into a state of being a den of robbers. David Alan Black and Benjamin L. Merkle, eds., Linguistics and New Testament Greek: Key Issues in the Current Debate (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2020), 109–10. By preserving the future for the verb καλέω, the originator of the composite citation implies that this prophecy is still to come. 219 Unless stated otherwise, all NT Greek quotes come from Kurt Aland et al., eds., Novum Testamentum Graece, 28th ed. (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2012). 220 The NA28 only includes “my house shall be called a house of prayer for all the nations” as part of the question (is it not written...). The rest appears as the following comment: “but you have made it a den of robbers,” but, the NA28 still marks it as part of the citation. Some English translations (ESV, NASB95, NKJV, NET, NIV) indicate the origin of the second half of the composite citation as Jer 7:11, but others (NLT, Lexham) make it appear simply as part of Jesus’ speech, as a comment following the question, but not part of what is written. While the question mark after the first citation (from Isa 56:7) is very useful to underline the contrast between what the temple should have been (a house of prayer), and its current state (a den of robbers), both citations should be considered as part of what has been written and therefore part of the question. Since it is a rhetorical question, Jesus’ words could be translated as “Is it not written: ‘My house my house shall be called a house of prayer for all the nations, and yet you have made it a den of robbers.’?” 218 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 47 can easily presuppose a larger public. The chief priests and the scribes’ reaction in verse 18 demonstrated that they took Jesus’ words personally—and that it was probably Jesus’ aim.221 By placing the temple incident between the two pericopes of the cursing of the fig tree, the Markan author creates a teaching within the narrative (15-19) surrounded by a ‘real-life parable’222 in the form of the cursing of the fig tree (12-14, 20-26). Here, Jesus is visually demonstrating his lesson, and shows his power over nature. All this creates a memorable image and a prophetic message. The destruction of the fruitless fig tree echoes the parable of the Sower in Mark 4 where only the seeds in the good soil produce fruits.223 By centering the narration of the episode of the temple in the two parts of the cursing of the fig tree, the sterility of the tree is linked with the lack of respect for the sanctity of the temple in Jerusalem denounced by the composite citation.224 221 If Jesus entered the temple precinct at the time of morning sacrifices, it was probably very crowded. Jesus would probably stand close to the entrance of the temple to prevent people from carrying vessels through the temple precinct. Wherever he was, he was most likely in the center of the action. 222 Whether the narration of the fig tree is a parable presented by Mark as narrated event, or whether the events were related as a parable in Luke 13:6-9, the story is used to convey a message. Its nature (fictious or not) does not change its meaning. 223 Mark 4:19 uses the word unfruitful (ἄκαρπος) for seeds which fell in the thorns, and the rest of the explanation implies that the seeds which fell on the road and the rocky ground are also unfruitful as they did not bear fruits either. Mark 12:2 also implies that a vineyard is precious because (and when) it bears fruits; it stands in contrast with the fruitless fig tree. 224 A lot of discussion surrounds the cursing of the fig tree. Two difficulties rest with the mention that Jesus found only leaves (no fruit), and the mention that it was not the season for figs (ὁ γὰρ καιρὸς οὐκ ἦν σύκων). As figs usually start growing before the leaves, there should have been fruit present even if the season for harvest had not started. That fruit would not have been ripe, but would have been eatable. While this is a reasonable explanation, why did Mark mention that it was not the harvest season? It seems to make Jesus capricious. I propose that Mark mentioned this to explain why the tree had not already been harvested. A tree full of leaves should have been full of fruit … until all fruit was removed (likely by other hungry passersby on the road). Because Mark mentions that it was not yet the season of harvest, the audience cannot expect the tree to already be emptied of fruit. Jesus was therefore not unreasonable. His reasoning was simply logical: a fig-tree full of leaves should bear fruit (and that fruit should still be there before harvest time). Jesus therefore cursed a tree which was already barren, which is no more unreasonable than a gardener pulling weeds, or a farmer removing fruitless plants (4:1-9). 48 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK Inner Texture of the OT Isa 56:7 “For my house shall be called a house of prayer for all peoples.”225 Isa 56:7b226 Isa 56:1-8 is a beautiful prophecy written in the first person, making God the one proclaiming an invitation for outsiders to come into his house. It is followed by another prophecy (or a continuity of the first prophecy) about the irresponsible leaders of Israel who are compared to devouring dogs. The first section uses imperatives directed to Israelites, including the command to let the foreigner come to God (56:3). The text uses the words foreigner (‫ )נכָר‬and eunuch (‫ )סָ ִריס‬almost synonymously. The OT usually uses the term eunuch for castrated men, but also for household manager. As Deut 23:2 excluded castrated men from assembly, the practice of castration was not usual in Israel; therefore, most eunuchs would have been outsiders.227 Isa 56:4 mentions men who were eunuchs—and quite probably foreign—making them twice as likely to be excluded from Israel’s assembly. God promises a house where the very excluded are invited. Mark 11:17 uses the last part of Isa 56:7 where God explains the blessings to come to the one “who keeps the Sabbath and does not profane it and holds fast my covenant” (56:6). Isa 56:7 mentions that sacrifices and offerings will be accepted from all people. Hebrew: ‫ית־תפִ לָה יִקָ רא לְ כָל־הָ ע ִַמים‬ ְ ‫יתי ב‬ ִ ‫ ;כִ י ב‬LXX: ὁ γὰρ οἶκός μου οἶκος προσευχῆς κληθήσεται πᾶσι τοῖς ἔθνεσιν. 226 Unless stated otherwise, all Hebrew citations come from Francis I. Andersen and A. Dean Forbes, eds., The Hebrew Bible: Andersen-Forbes Analyzed Text (AFAT) (Bellingham, WA: Lexham, 2008). 227 The practice of castration was not usual in Israel, but was at some point quite popular in surrounding countries to assure loyalty of attendants and to protect a leader’s harem. The promise of an everlasting name is quite powerful for men who could not have descendants, whether the choice of being eunuch was voluntary or imposed. W. VanGemeren, ed., NIDOTTE (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1997), vol. 3, 289. 225 49 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK Jer 7:11 “Has this house, which is called by my name, become a den of robbers in your eyes? Behold, I myself have seen it, declares the LORD.”228 Jer 7:11 Jer 7:1-15 is part of a prophecy of judgment written in the first person in God’s words in the form of a question—giving the accusation added emphasis. Jeremiah proclaims his oracle at the gate of the temple where he accuses people of considering themselves secure in Jerusalem and Judea because of the temple that bears God’s sacred name.229 Despite their apparent security (or because of it), people acted without restrictions from the law and are therefore accused of making the house—called by God’s name—a “den of robbers.”230 A theme of house, name, and calling/rejecting is woven through the text. God claims that people will be rejected despite their use of the house of God as protection against enemies, which was quite relevant in Jeremiah’s context of invasion. The repetition of “the house that is called by my name” (‫א־ׁש ִמי‬ ְ ‫ )הַ בַ יִ ת אֲׁשֶׁ ר נִקְ ָר‬reminds the reader of the sanctity of the temple—it is holy because it is God’s house and because it bears his name.231 The prophecy announces that God will do to the temple what he did to Shiloh. This used to be the location of the ark of the covenant before its removal in 1 Sam 4:1-11 during the war against the Philistines. Incidentally, Shiloh was not destroyed right away in the biblical narrative. It is possible that the city lost its Hebrew: ‫יתי נְ אֻם־יהוה׃‬ ִ ‫א־ׁש ִמי ָעלָיו בְ עיניכֶׁם גַם אָ נֹ כִ י הִ נה ָר ִא‬ ְ ‫ ;הַ ְמע ַָרת פ ִָרצִ ים הָ יָה הַ בַ יִת הַ זֶׁה אֲׁשֶׁ ר־נִקְ ָר‬LXX: μὴ σπήλαιον λῃστῶν ὁ οἶκός μου, οὗ ἐπικέκληται τὸ ὄνομά μου ἐπʼ αὐτῷ ἐκεῖ, ἐνώπιον ὑμῶν; καὶ ἐγὼ ἰδοὺ ἑώρακα, λέγει κύριος. 229 Jer 7:4 even has an interesting repetition three times of: “the temple of the Lord,” creating an impression of a sort of incantation repeated for protection. It is as if people felt protected by the words themselves. 230 By the first century, the Greek word λῃστής had a political sense and was used to describe an insurrectionist or revolutionary. The expression from Jer 7:11 was already known and it is therefore reasonable to understand as the OT sense of robber or marauder. However, it is important to note that Mark’s audience may have recognized the expression, especially in light of the 66-70 CE war. France, The Gospel of Mark, 446. 231 The verb ‫ קרא‬has the sense of being named, but also of ownership. The saying ‘the house that is called by my name’ is used in the same sense of ‘my house’ found in Isaiah 56. 228 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 50 importance after the removal of the ark and was destroyed later,232 but there are reasons to believe that Philistines marched to Shiloh to destroy it after their victory in 1 Sam.233 Jer 7:14-15 could therefore describe the destruction of the temple, or more generally God’s withdrawal of blessing or protection. If tradition is to be believed, contemporaries of Jeremiah would have recognized his reference to Shiloh even if the biblical text stays silent on the subject. Mark 11:17 uses only the expression “house of robbers” from Jer 7:11 in his composite citation. While this is a very short expression to acknowledge it as a citation, it is quite a unique and recognizable expression. Summary of the Inner Texture Isa 56:7 and Jer 7:11 have in common the general theme of the temple as God’s house. One is part of future blessings for those who will be faithful to God, the second appears in a set of warnings about rejection and destruction. Linked together in Mark 11:17, they create a juxtaposition of blessings and warnings set in the frame of a question intended to challenge the audience and explain Jesus’ actions. The originator of the composite citation uses the allusions to the Jewish Scriptures as caution against those who prevent some from coming to God in prayers, and probably as a warning for a lack of respect regarding the temple. With its chiasm structure, Shiloh’s destruction is mentioned in Ps 78:60-61 and Jer 7:12. However it is difficult to say if both describe the same event or two different ones. 1 Sam uses words like ‫מֹועד‬ ֵֽ ‫“ אֹֹ֥ הֶׁ ל‬tent of meeting” (2:22) and ‫“ היכַ ַ֣ל‬the temple” (3:2) to describe the place where the ark stood. Details are insufficient to determine if the ark was still in the tent of the tabernacle, or in a temple building at that point. 233 The discussion of the destruction of Shiloh has two main camps: either Shiloh was destroyed prior to Jer 7 and God’s words refer back to its ruins, “Jeremiah referred to the destruction of the tent of meeting by the Philistines (1 Sam. 4:10-11), which was God’s response to the sinful, priestly conduct of Eli’s sons,” Larry Perkins, “The Markan Narrative’s Use of the Old Greek Text of Jeremiah to Explain Israel’s Obduracy,” TynBul 60, no. 2 (2009): 227; also Leslie C. Allen, Jeremiah: A Commentary, William P. Brown, Carol A. Newsom, and David L. Petersen, eds., (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, 2008), 97. Or it was still possibly standing during Jeremiah's life (John Peter Lange et al., A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures: Jeremiah (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2008), 93. Males believes that it was destroyed prior to Jer 7 while admitting that the Bible does not refer to the destruction. According to him, “Jewish tradition maintains that after serving as the spiritual center of Israel for 369 years, the Tabernacle of Shiloh was destroyed.” As mentioned by several statements in the Talmud and other sources (Males mentions TB Yoma 9a, Megillah 16b and Zavehim 118b), the tabernacle would have later been built in Nob and Gibeon and stayed there for 57 years. For a more detailed discussion, see: Akiva Rabbi Males, “Reconstructing the Destruction of the Tabernacle of Shiloh,” JBQ 44, no. 1 (January 2016): 8–12. 232 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 51 the larger section of Mark 11:12-26 illustrates vividly Jesus’ admonition with the cursing and withering of the fig tree by placing the incident in the center of the larger event. Intertexture The second step—a very important one in interpreting composite citation—is the analysis of the influence upon a text by previous tradition, oral or written.234 The influence includes oralscribal, cultural, social, and historical intertextures. In theory, the search for any influence on the composition of a text could be unlimited, it is therefore usually necessary to establish boundaries in one’s analysis. The main aspect of the intertexture is a comparison between the NT Greek text and its possible influence—usually the Greek LXX. The intertexture of the OT discourse within OT materials needs to be considered as well since one text may easily be influenced by a previously written OT text.235 Furthermore, previous uses of the texts from the Jewish Scriptures in Jewish writings should also be evaluated, especially where the same citations from the OT were combined.236 The intertexture includes recitation, recontextualization and reconfiguration of tradition— oral or written. Robbins’s category of recitation includes citations and allusions (and everything in between on the spectrum, but not between allusions and echoes). The analysis of recitations in oral-scribal intertexture includes mostly an observation of the way a citation is preserved, is reformulated to fit the new context, excluded or preserved certain words in summaries, and 234 This step, like the first one, still considers the text as a production of an author. It is the interpretation of internal aspects of the text and does not consider the relationship between text and reader at this point. Robbins, The Tapestry of Early Christian Discourse, 96. 235 For example, Jeremiah may be influenced by Isaiah’s language when he wrote his prophecies. In the case of Jer 7:11 and its expression ‘cave of robbers’, there does not seem to be any allusion to a previous text as it is an expression unique to Jeremiah. 236 Texts following the NT should be examined as well. While they would not demonstrate influence, they can show that such combinations were considered normal. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 52 alluded to tradition in the author’s own words.237 Composite citations fit in Robbin’s category of recitation as changed citations, but they could fit in any other sub-category (recontextualization or reconfiguration) depending on the modifications.238 This intertexture includes a cultural intertexture, which is a consideration of the influence of both Jewish and Greco-Roman cultures in the NT texts.239 The analysis of cultural expressions in the text is preserved in this section, but discussion on larger socio-cultural or historical concept is reserved to the socio-cultural texture. Application of Intertexture The citation in Mark 11:17 from Isa 56:7b is almost verbatim with the LXX version. The citation from Jer 7:11 only consists of two words, but they occur only in Jer 7:11. Comparison Between Mark 11:17 and the LXX Versions of Isa 56:7 and Jer 7:11240 Mark 11:17 καὶ ἐδίδασκεν καὶ ἔλεγεν αὐτοῖς· Οὐ γέγραπται ὅτι Ὁ οἶκός μου οἶκος προσευχῆς κληθήσεται πᾶσιν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν; ὑμεῖς δὲ πεποιήκατε αὐτὸν σπήλαιον λῃστῶν. And he was teaching them and saying to them, “Is it not written, My house shall be called a house of prayer for all the nations? But you have made it a den of robbers.” Isa 56:7b LXX 237 The way the text is modified and used is more important than discovering a precise label for each use of the previous text. Robbins, The Tapestry of Early Christian Discourse, 102–6. 238 Recontextualization is mostly considered as an integration of a text within a new context and reconfiguration as a type of allusion. An example of recontextualization is an inclusion of Ps 34:8 found in 1 Pet 2:3 “… for you have tasted the kindness of the Lord.” An example of reconfiguration is offered in Luke 4:1-2 where the author refers to the 40 years in the desert by his presentation of Jesus spending 40 days in the wilderness. The categories offered by Robbins are not very precise, but his goal is mostly to observe the type of modification made, not to catalogue use of antecedent tradition. Robbins, The Tapestry of Early Christian Discourse, 106. 239 It could be as a reference or an echo, where a reference is a group of words referring to a person recognized by a culture and an echo is the evocation of tradition. Hays defines an echo as a word evoking an earlier text, but Robbins distinguishes references from echoes. For example, a reference to Zeus and Hermes (known figures) in Acts 14:12 implies a knowledge of the prevalent culture. An echo is found in 1 Cor 9:19 where Paul mentions a prize received after a race (known tradition). Hays, Echoes of Scripture in the Gospels, 10; Robbins, The Tapestry of Early Christian Discourse, 110. 240 The Greek NT texts come from: NA28; the Greek LXX from Joseph Ziegler, ed., Isaias, vol. 14, Vetus Testamentum Graecum, XIV (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1983); Joseph Ziegler, ed., Jeremias, Baruch, Threni, Epistula Jeremiae, vol. 15, Vetus Testamentum Graecum (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2006). The English NT text comes from ESV, the English LXX text comes from Albert Pietersma and Benjamin G. Wright, eds., A New English Translation of the Septuagint (Primary Texts) (New York: Oxford University Press, 2007). WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 53 ὁ γὰρ οἶκός μου οἶκος προσευχῆς κληθήσεται πᾶσιν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν, for my house shall be called a house of prayer for all peoples. Jer 7:11 LXX μὴ σπήλαιον λῃστῶν ὁ οἶκός μου, οὗ ἐπικέκληται τὸ ὄνομά μου ἐπʼ αὐτῷ ἐκεῖ, ἐνώπιον ὑμῶν; καὶ ἐγὼ ἰδοὺ ἑόρακα, λέγει κύριος. surely my house,241 there where my name has been called on it, has not become a den of robbers before you? And I, behold, I have seen it, says the Lord, In Mark 11:17 Jesus uses a rhetorical question to introduce his double citation “Is it not written…” implying that his audience should be able to recognize it. The composite citation is not a double citation242 of messianic fulfillment, but it prophesies fulfillment of God’s warnings.243 Jesus (or Mark) also uses it as a justification or an explanation for his actions.244 The verb “written” (γράφω) appears in the perfect tense (γέγραπται), presumably to indicate prophetic texts.245 By preserving the future tense for the passive form of the verb καλέω in this context, the originator of the composite citation formulates it as something still to come—or something that should already be there. Maybe he is indicating that the time for the fulfillment of When Jeremiah calls the temple the house “which is called by my name,” he uses the verb ‫ קרא‬which has been translated by ἐπικαλέω in the LXX with a possible sense of invoking God. Whereas in Mark, Isaiah’s ‫ קרא‬has been translated to καλέω, which has a more general sense of calling or naming. This distinction is not visible in Jesus’ citation, but allows for a more nuanced understanding of Jeremiah’s use of the equivalent of my house (although the choice could also reflect flexibility in translation). God expresses his anger toward the people who disrespected his house; this is significant because it bears God’s name, but also implies an evocation of God’s blessing on his people, which is now being rejected. 242 As mentioned previously, citations can be used in different ways, but in this specific context, it is possible to notice a challenge to the leaders who should know the Scriptures, and therefore apply all of its commands. 243 Or at least not in the way authors use citations to prove continuity in God’s promises in the Messiah. It could however be considered as a fulfilment of God’s promise to destroy the temple even if that prophecy has already been accomplished in the OT. The use of the perfect (πεποιήκατε – made) expresses an event which has ended, but with continuing results; however, this citation points to a repetition of events and curses or to a state or condition that persists, i.e., the temple functions as “a den of thieves,” despite its religious pretensions. 244 He could also use Isaiah’s citation as a prophecy of inclusion, but the context seems to point more toward God’s rejection and the eventual destruction of the temple. However, a double-meaning is certainly possible. 245 This could emphasize the result of the past action and the fact that the words still stand written—a perfect way to refer to a prophetic text still to be fulfilled. Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1996), 576. 241 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 54 that prophecy has finally come. The verb’s implied agent is God, the owner of the house, which in context points to Jesus. Both citations are combined to flow like a single citation by the conjunction δέ, making it difficult to confirm if this is a composite citation or a double citation.246 While the word house does not appear in the citation from Jer 7:11, it is very present in the co-text of the prophecy. As a metaphor for the temple of God, it is the common theme linking both OT passages—as such it also appears as central in Jesus’ message.247 The temple is God’s house which makes the lack of respect all the worse: a lack of concern for the holiness of God, for the inclusion and protection of a house. The Greek citation of Isa 56:7 follows closely the LXX,248 only “γὰρ” has been removed from Isa 56:7 to fit the context. While he is indirectly attributing the possession of the house to himself, Jesus is clearly pointing to the leaders as the guilty party. This inclusion of “you have made it” adapts the citation from Jer 7:11 to fit the literary context of Mark 11:17; the change of pronoun from “my house” to “you have made” underlines the accusation in Jesus’ message and its Christological implications. As it is possible to find allusion to Jeremiah in Josephus’ writings, it seems likely that this prophet was not only well-known, but also read during the first century from the perspective of 246 As stated previously, I have chosen to look at Mark 11:17 as a composite citation, but I must admit that Jesus (or the Markan author) could have referred to two citations from the Scriptures, one after the other, without intending to make them appear as one. If it is the case, it would not be a composite citation proper. However, in its written form, the connection appears seamless, especially with the change of subject (from the 1st singular to the 2nd plural) and their common theme of house and called, which is why I chose to treat it as a composite citation. 247 Perkins discusses the other uses of house made by Jeremiah and the warning to Israel: God will forsake his house following Israel’s actions. Perkins, “The Markan Narrative’s Use of the Old Greek Text of Jeremiah to Explain Israel’s Obduracy.” 248 Hooker notes that although the LXX follows the MT very closely, it is impossible to exclude the possibility that Mark made his own Greek translation from the MT. Morna D. Hooker, “Isaiah in Mark’s Gospel,” in Isaiah in the New Testament, ed. Steve Moyise and Maarten J. J. Menkel (London: T&T Clark, 2005), 43. There is little indication for a personal translation from the MT by the Markan author; LXX as a source seems more likely. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 55 current events in Jerusalem.249 It is therefore plausible that the use of Jeremiah to prophesy the destruction of Jerusalem was current in Jewish circles, but there does not seem to be another author who linked Isa 56:7 and Jer 7:11. Summary of Intertexture Jeremiah was a known prophet of destruction who had a strong Deuteronomic theology of destruction following rejection. As the citation from Jeremiah is very short, it would be difficult to consider it as a prophecy of doom by itself, but its co-text speaks of repudiation and devastation (especially Jer 7:30-34). Since the expression was probably well known for Jesus’ audience, the relation between the expression and the prophecy of judgment would be natural. The combination with Isaiah’s words, with the cursing of the tree, and with the larger literary context also points toward a message of rejection and destruction. The composite citation cannot be disconnected from its narrative and as the only spoken words of Jesus in the small pericope of 11:15-19, its message is central to the rhetorical effect of the narration. Socio-Cultural Texture This section reflects knowledge that people ‘on the inside’ of a culture would recognize. Social intertexture refers to the practices and conventions existing in a society.250 The cultural texture includes any cultural realities like religious, agricultural, political or social elements. The study of common topics allows for recognition of institutions and social structures alluded to, 249 For example, Josephus refers to Jeremiah 52:12 when he prophecies the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem. Although he does not directly quote the Scriptures, Josephus uses many allusions and echoes. In J.W. 5.381-414, Josephus describes destructions and uses many expressions similar to Jer 7:5-11. Tucker S. Ferda, “Jeremiah 7 and Flavius Josephus on the First Jewish War,” JSJ 44, no. 2 (2013): 169. 250 For example, the way people came to eat with their own portions, as alluded to in 1 Cor 11. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 56 like the system of patron-client relations.251 Historical intertexture is the allusion to specific historical events or periods of time.252 SRI usually includes a section discussing social texture where worldviews are considered.253 As these textures usually analyze larger texts—ideally entire books—their use is limited for the interpretation of a small pericope. Because of the constraints of this thesis, this section is removed from my method, but considered when relevant. I still include in this section everything social or cultural relevant to the comprehension of the composite citation.254 The SRI method also includes a discussion on ideological texture after the social and cultural textures. It is mostly a useful texture for studying the history of interpretation of a text, or in an analysis of presuppositions. It allows the interpreter to examine how a text will try to influence the audience to adopt a particular worldview, or to accept a particular social construct based on the understanding of the world by the author. Because of the constraints of this thesis, 251 The dominant culture (indigenous or conquering culture), the subculture (which exists in parallel with the dominant culture, but preserves different rules) and the counterculture (which rejects one or more central values of its culture of origin). “A counterculture is ‘interested in creating a better society, but not by legislative reform or by violent opposition to the dominant culture’, which are common characteristics of sub-cultures.” Robbins, The Tapestry of Early Christian Discourse, 168. 252 Robbins refers to the episode of the blind man in John 9 and the risk of rejection from the synagogue for his parents if they should confess Jesus (9:22). The example is given as a historical reference to the post-70 split between Christians and Jews, a specific historical event experienced by the so-called Johannine community. Although I am not convinced that the ’70 split’ refers to one single historical event (and rejection from synagogue in a specific locale during Jesus’ ministry is not that far-fetched—it should not be considered anachronistic for being ‘pre-70 split’), it is an example of what could be a historical texture in the text. Robbins, The Tapestry of Early Christian Discourse, 117–20. 253 The SRI method usually considers 7 main worldviews: The conversionist argumentation considers the world to be corrupt, but believes that if humans can be changed (gradually), then the world will change. The revolutionist argumentation wants God to rid the world of the present social order; people are asked to choose to believe and become God’s instrument. The introversionist argumentation encourages people to retire from the world for personal holiness. The gnostic manipulationist argumentation asserts that certain knowledge is essential. It does not reject global society and its culture; it simply claims a more spiritual stance. The thaumaturgic argumentation proclaims the possibility to experience the supernatural and encourages seeking of personal messages or miracles. The reformist argumentation pushes people to be involved in the world with good deeds and an active association. The utopian argumentation claims that people should try to attain a new social system on a communitarian basis and free of corruption; it sees the system as corrupt, not people. 254 Since the different worldviews represented in a text are by themselves philosophical constructs, I consider that their imprecise nature is not particularly useful in the study of a smaller pericope. Their demonstration would be too complicated to prove useful in a study regarding the nature of composite citations, but could certainly help an interpreter understand his or her own worldview in comparison with an author’s entire work. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 57 only the relevant elements of the history of interpretation or presuppositions are included in the conclusion and evaluation. Application of Socio-Cultural Texture Destruction of Jerusalem If one accepts a later date for the composition of Mark’s Gospel, the pattern of judgment and destruction becomes interlinked with the events of the 66-70 CE Roman-Jewish war. In 66 CE, a revolt began after Florus’ demand for temple money, which angered Jews. In response, Florus arrested and killed Jews, which provoked riots.255 It escalated into a division in the Jewish upper-class priests and the lower-class priests who supported the revolutionaries. This war between Jewish leaders provoked a massive revolt, the eventual Roman siege of 70 CE, the eventual cruel death and deportation of hundreds of thousands of Jews, and the destruction of the temple and much of Jerusalem.256 It is reasonable to conclude from those events that audiences of any Gospel written after 70 CE—especially shortly after—would perceive any critique against the temple as precursor to its destruction.257 Prayer and forgiveness Using hyperbole as a rhetorical device, Jesus uses an expression about having enough faith to move a mountain (11:23). It is possibly a known Hebraic expression for faith.258 255 Of course, this is only a summary of the major events, frustration was already high in 66 CE for a multitude of reasons that are outside of the scope of this thesis. 256 Kimondo, The Gospel of Mark and the Roman-Jewish War of 66–70 CE, 88–106. 257 Although the Herodians (Mark 12:13) are not mentioned in the larger pericope of 11:12-26, even if they did not witness the incident in the temple, they were probably present, and Mark mentions their presence along with the Pharisees in their desire to trap Jesus (12:13). Little is known about them; presumably the Herodians were in agreement with the Sadducees theologically, but were more pro-Herodian politically. As the temple has been built as part of a political strategy, they may be displeased by any public denunciation of its use, or its destruction. Harold W. Hoehner, “Herodians,” in Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1988), 972-973. 258 Edwards believes it was a Hebraic expression. France adds that “in later rabbinic writings there are several references to those who accomplish ‘feats of an exceptional, extraordinary or impossible nature’ as those who move mountains.” Edwards, The Gospel According to Mark, 346–47; France, The Gospel of Mark, 449. However, the use WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 58 Mark 11:20-26 includes a discussion on personal forgiveness and its relation to divine forgiveness. Judaism in the first century involved the primary notion of divine forgiveness which stressed the responsibility of the sinner to recognize his fault and offer atonement. God was perceived as the chief wronged party, but also as the one who always forgives following repentance.259 Regarding personal conflicts, the Mishnah expresses the necessity for the sinner to ask forgiveness followed by assurance that it will be received. The ultimate response of forgiveness is God’s; therefore, the victim becomes the mediator between God and the sinner. As God always forgives, so must the victim.260 Everything comes back to God’s never-ending forgiveness.261 Even if Jews believed they could pray everywhere, the temple was the place for the expiation that made a relationship with God possible—Jesus’ words in Mark 11:22-25 imply a direct access eventually made possible through him. Temple Mark 11:17 is placed in the narration of the incident in the temple. It hints at the cultural concept of the temple itself as a place of the daily sacrifice offered for all Israel, and individual sacrifices that every faithful Jew might have occasion to offer, as well as the economy developed around it for sellers and money changers.262 The mention of the pigeons being sold might refer to a form of exploitation of the poor since they were the ones who would usually buy pigeons.263 of a similar rabbinic expression is only found is later texts. There is no evidence that the expression was popular in the first century. 259 Even in personal conflicts, God is the one who is first wronged by the sinner. Michael L. Morgan, “Mercy, Repentance, and Forgiveness in Ancient Judaism,” in Ancient Forgiveness, ed. Charles L. Griswold and David Konstan (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012), 138. 260 Morgan, “Mercy, Repentance, and Forgiveness in Ancient Judaism,” 146. 261 In the Talmud, the Day of Atonement, or Yom Kippur, includes a ritual practice for the forgiveness from God and included forgiveness against any offence, as long as the transgressor asked for forgiveness, although it is uncertain if it was practiced in the first century. Morgan, “Mercy, Repentance, and Forgiveness in Ancient Judaism,” 148. 262 The money changers allowed people to exchange Roman currency for the biblical shekel as commanded in the law (Ex 30:13-16). There was a small surcharge, but not intended as profit. Victor Eppstein, “Historicity of the Gospel Account of the Cleansing of the Temple,” ZNW 55, no. 1–2 (1964): 43. 263 It is difficult to determine why pigeon vendors were specifically mentioned. It is possible that they were the only ones who could realistically bring their animals to sell within the temple court since space was limited. Open WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 59 Chief priests and scribes were considered spiritual leaders in charge of all affairs at the temple, including the market in the outside court—the Gentiles’ court. Religious leaders taught people and influenced the masses, but their authority was not universal as they also feared the crowds (11:18). Religious leaders had the authority of influence even if the Romans were the ones who had proper authority as the conquering people. Jesus’ action is described as being against those who sold and bought (11:15); however, vendors needed authorization from the authorities of the temple to operate in the court. 264 It is not certain that leaders received financial gain for this tolerance, but any attack on the vendors implies critique against their authority.265 By authorizing vendors to commit commerce—unfair or not—leaders become complicit in their action, whether they gained money or only the power of influence. Their reaction in verse 18 clearly shows that they take Jesus’ criticism seriously and personally.266 In the Jewish culture, Gentiles and women did not have the same status as Jewish males and had separate courts for worship. The court which was furthest from the temple’s inner sanctum was the court of the Gentiles; it was very large and included warning notices for all nonJews to avoid the Jewish court on pain of death.267 The Gentiles’ court would have been a very markets could offer larger animals for sale in a larger location. It is also possible that Mark referred specifically to the exploitation of the poor since Lev 5:7 allowed the less fortunate who could not afford a lamb to buy a dove instead. In any case, there is nothing else to indicate that Jesus’ indignation related to a form of social justice here. 264 It seems that the establishment of vendors in the temple court was quite recent; there is reason to believe that it was only established in 30 CE by authorization from Caiaphas. Eppstein, “Historicity of the Gospel Account of the Cleansing of the Temple,” 55. 265 Looking at the discussion of the Mishnah Shekalim and its explication on the half-shekel requirement for all male Jews, it is interesting to note that although Ex. 30:11-16 requires a one-time half shekel, the rabbis understood it to be an annual requirement. This could be considered as an exploitation of people. See “English Explanation of Mishnah Shekalim, Introduction,” sefaria.org (https://www.sefaria.org/English_Explanation_of_Mishnah_Shekalim.3.1?lang=bi), accessed Oct. 15, 2021. 266 This could explain both 11:18 and 27–33 when the chief priests, the scribes and the elders banded together to challenge Jesus’ authority. It seems that they were trying to re-enforce (or re-establish) their own authority. 267 The doors of the temple building opened to the court of the priests, which was followed by the court of Israel for Jewish males, then came the court of Jewish women. The court of the Gentiles was intended for non-Jews of all WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 60 busy place, especially around Passover, and probably not always very practical for private prayers. Although Mark does not mention that the court where the vendors were installed was the court of the Gentiles, an alert audience could have recognized the link between that court and Isa 56, a very inclusive text for non-Jews which could have easily been very popular for Gentiles. It could be argued that the smaller pericope presents a demonstration for social justice as Jesus overturns tables and drives out sellers and buyers, seemingly to protest the social order. Nonetheless, the main reproach is directed at the misuse of the temple; Jesus does not condemn the commerce as much as he condemns the selling and buying associated with the house of God, and the implication of the religious leaders in this commerce, along with their failure to show consideration for the worship of God by the non-Jews.268 His words condemn the procedures preventing the nations from approaching Yahweh in prayer. Both citations are taken from literary contexts where one of the major themes is the house of God—a synonym for the temple. The temple was a place for sacrifice; even a non-Jewish audience of the first century could understand that a temple was the house of deities and a sacred place.269 Jews took the sanctity of the temple very seriously (Acts 21:28-29), and there are nations; pillars with inscriptions in Greek warned strangers that strangers could not enter the court of the Jews. The dividing wall (maybe alluded to by Paul in Eph. 2:14-16) was a symbol based on separation instead of inclusion. Walter A. Elwell and Barry Beitzel, “Tabernacle, Temple,” in Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1988); M. G. Easton, “Herod’s Temple,” in Easton’s Bible Dictionary (New York: Harper & Brother, 1893). 268 Christianity appears as a counterculture which does not regard the temple wholly in a positive light. As Witherington demonstrates, “a variety of people differed with either the Pharisees or the temple hierarchy or both within early Judaism. Jesus was one such person.” By including such an episode, the author suggests that the audience following Jesus should share the same view. However, this does not negate the sanctity of the temple, only its management. Witherington III, The Gospel of Mark, XI B, Kindle. 269 As Romans took the sanctity of temples seriously, it would be surprising if Jesus’s intervention in the temple was fictitious since some could consider Jesus’ actions as blasphemous. Witherington III, The Gospel of Mark, XI B, Kindle. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 61 reasons to believe that some Jews were expecting a reformation of the temple, the ‘old House’ for a new one.270 Fig Tree as a Symbol In the OT, to own a fig tree was considered a sign of prosperity. 271 In the prophecies of judgment, the destruction of the fig tree is sometimes associated with loss of property and prosperity (along with the destruction of many other things).272 There is no direct comparison in the OT of a fig tree and Jerusalem or the temple, and no first-century text attests to such an association.273 Israel is compared to a fruitless fig tree in two prophecies of judgment; once Israel is compared to the first fruits of a fig tree in a positive light.274 Healthy trees were considered a gift from God275 and the prophecy of the destruction of a fig tree would have symbolized a withdrawal of blessings and protection from God.276 While it is impossible to demonstrate that the first audiences277 would have associated the fig tree as a symbol for the temple, Jerusalem or 1 Enoch 90:28-30. James H. Charlesworth, The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha: Expansions of the “Old Testament” and Legends, Wisdom, and Philosophical Literature, Prayers, Psalms and Odes, Fragments of Lost Judeo-Hellenistic Works, vol. 1 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1983), vol. 1, p. 71. 271 “Obversely, the state where the individual dwelt securely under his own fig tree was one of safety and prosperity (1 K. 4:25; cf. 2 K. 18:31; Isa. 36:16; Mic. 4:4; Zec. 3:10; 1 Macc. 14:12).” R. K. Harrison, “Fig; Fir Tree,” in The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Revised, vol. 2, ed. G. W. Bromiley, 1988-1979, 302. 272 Jer 29:17 says people will become like vile figs. Here, the destruction of the fig tree is associated with judgment (Joel 1:7; Hos 2:12; Isa 34:4). 273 Edwards asserts that Mark did not condemn Jews by his miracle of destruction of the fig tree, but he condemned the temple. He uses 11:27-33 as proof. He seems to equate leaders with the temple. Edwards, The Gospel According to Mark, 343. Of course, people could have associated the fig tree of Israel with the temple, but there is no evidence in the OT for an association between the fig tree and the temple of Jerusalem. 274 Hos 9:10 compares Israel to the first fruits on the fig tree; Jer 8:13 and Mic 7:1-6 compare Israel to fruitless fig trees. Jer 24 uses good and bad figs to prophesy the destruction of Zedekiah because he is like bad figs. 275 For example, the Psalms of Solomon 11:5 “ The woods shaded them as they passed by; God caused every tree of fragrance to spring up for them” (NETS). 276 Joel 1:7 explains how a nation came to the land of God and “has laid waste my vine and splintered my fig tree” (which could be interpreted as the destruction of Jerusalem, or a destruction of everything that makes Jerusalem prosperous). Hos. 2:12 says “And I will lay waste her vines and her fig trees, of which she said, ‘These are my wages, which my lovers have given me” (which points mostly to a loss of prosperity), and in 9:16, Ephraim is compared to a plant (or a tree) with rotten roots and without fruits. Isa 34:4 mentions that “their host shall fall, as leaves fall from the vine, like leaves falling from the fig tree” (which implies general destruction as the prophecy refers to “all the nations” in 34:2). 277 Jesus’ audience and the Markan audience in this case. 270 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 62 Israel, it does not diminish the direct relation between the prophecies and Jesus’ powerful illustration of destruction.278 Summary of Socio-Cultural Texture This texture gives the interpreter an overview of the cultural understanding of the time and how the composite citation should have been received. Since temples were known in Jewish and Gentile communities, a lack of respect for such a sacred place would have been understood by all. The association between forgiveness, prayer and the temple explains Jesus’ words in Mark 11:20-25; if the temple is to be rejected and destroyed, a replacement is necessary. The larger pericope (11:12-26) including the cursing and the so-called ‘cleansing’ has often been interpreted as a prophecy of destruction of the temple or of Jerusalem.279 Along with the illustration of the cursing of the fig tree, one can conclude that Mark’s narrative has been built for his first-century audience in a Greco-Roman empire of the Mediterranean world. Conclusion and Evaluation This section concludes the analysis by linking together the conclusion from each texture and by looking at the sacred texture of each text—the theological message from the Jewish Scriptures integrated by the originator of the composite citation, and the theological message woven by the writer in his work. I chose to include an evaluation of the rhetorical effect created by the author in this last step. If one is to claim that an author created an argument, the rhetorical If I am right, and Mark’s Gospel has been written after the destruction of the temple, the association between a warning of destruction and a critique against the temple would have been natural. There is no need for a symbol for Israel for such association. 279 Lane refers to ‘Victor of Antioch’ who presumably wrote the oldest commentary on Mark, and who mentions the fig tree as prophesying the destruction of Jerusalem. Lane, The Gospel of Mark, 400. 278 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 63 effect should be examined to determine if the composite citation could have been received as such by the first audience.280 Application of Conclusion and Evaluation The contexts of both Isa 56 and Jer 7 bring nuances to Jesus’ teaching during his visit to the temple. The temple of God was built to allow people to approach the Lord; the notion of house reminds those who listen of security and inclusion, while the term prayer brings to memory requests, praise and confession to God. By combining a reminder of God’s desire to see his house as a place of worship, communion and inclusion, with the expression den of robbers— echoing a lack of respect for the house that bears his name—this double citation informs the audience of the depth of Jesus’ indignation. He is rejecting the misuse of the temple and is making it very personal with the use of the personal pronoun, i.e., my house. This implicates those who lack respect for the temple as the guilty parties, and the leaders who allow it.281 The close literary proximity of the Parable of the Tenants in Mark 12:1-11 pursues the accusation and Mark 13 seals it with its prophecy of the destruction of the temple.282 The originator of the composite citation uses the words “is it not written” as its introduction. The perfect tense of the verb implies that some lessons from the past must be considered, and that the prophetic words still applied in the new literary setting of the composite citation. Here, a repetition of past mistakes seems to be in view with their association to curses and punishment. With all their rules and minutiae, religious leaders were still leading the people 280 Henderson proposes such an evaluation. In his article, he believes that Mark failed in his argument in Mark 9:4250, but I feel that his demonstration is not strong enough. It is based too much on the assumption that the audience had to understand everything in the first reading (or oral presentation). Henderson, “‘Salted with Fire’ (Mark 9:4250): Style, Oracles and (Socio)Rhetorical Gospel Criticism.” 281 The ‘not so subtle’ accusation against the leaders will come later in the form of a parable (12:1-9; 38–40). The prediction of the destruction of the temple in the form of prophecy also occurs later in ch. 13. 282 The literary and chronological proximity links the events together since they are only separated by one day in the narrative. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 64 in the wrong direction—like their fathers did—despite their access to the Scriptures because they misunderstood them. Jesus’ words point to a prophecy where God is announcing that Israel’s failure will result in the destruction of the temple. The larger pericope explains that this will result in a replacement where Jesus will invite nations to pray—Jews and Gentiles alike— therefore fulfilling the temple’s role. As shown above, it is not unreasonable to conclude that most inhabitants of the Mediterranean world of the first century should have been able to recognize that a fig tree should bear fruit in its season, even if the text has been problematic for many Western readers. The story of the fig tree being fruitless and cursed stands in contrasts with the fruitful vine of 12:1-12, and echoes Isa 5 with its useless grapes. The parable of the Sower in 4:1-9 is especially relevant since only the good seeds produce fruit; all the others are ‘unfruitful’ (4:19). I propose to consider the destruction of the sterile tree as a sign for the destruction of the unfruitful, eventually pointing to the destruction of the temple and Jerusalem.283 Just as Jesus reproaches the people for their misuse of the temple, he considers the ones who do not bear fruit—the ones who refuse to listen (4:12) and to receive the word (4:15-19)—to be cursed. Disrespect of the temple is associated with unfruitfulness, and this deserves destruction. Jesus’ action against the misuses of the temple, the cursing of the fruitless fig tree, and announcement of a direct access to God (11:24) all point to the eventual destruction of the temple—which is clearly announced in 13:1-2. The use of a fig tree in Jesus’ acted prophecy points to great judgment despite the fact that the image of a fig tree by itself is not enough to 283 In Mark 13, Jesus not only describes the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, but he also mentions again a fig tree without any link between that tree and the temple, Jerusalem, or Israel (13:28). WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 65 point to Israel or its temple; it is better understood in its larger literary context.284 Jesus’ use of Jer 7:11 alludes vividly to rejection, but it seems to imply mostly the abusive activities associated with the temple, and the lack of respect for the temple’s sanctity.285 Even the larger section of Mark 11:12-26 is part of a larger narrative which must be considered. By itself, the pericope of Mark 11:10-11 does not announce explicit destruction of the temple.286 Regardless, the Markan author uses it as sort of crescendo where the faults of the temple management and their rejection of Jesus’ authority (Mark 12) are first established as a justification for the eventual clearer prophecy of the destruction of the temple in Mark 13. The double citation also implies a Jesus who acts against the expectations of a Messiah in including Gentiles. Jesus was not guided by contemporary interpretations of Israel’s writings; he was guided by his Father’s will and his own interpretation. Contrary to the Jews’ failing leaders, Jesus would eventually cause the Gentiles to be welcomed by God. Mark 11:20-26 describes the one who is fruitful, in contrast to the one who is fruitless and who deserves destruction.287 There is a pastoral concern woven into the narrative, it includes warnings against a barren life and encouragement for a faithful lifestyle. Personal and divine forgiveness, faith and prayers are part of the disciple’s life. In 11:22, Jesus’ answer moves from “Yet the prevalence of fig trees in Palestine and the variety of figurative uses of the fig tree and figs in the OT caution against drawing the significance from the fig tree itself or its fruit.” Craig A. Evans, Mark 8:27-16:20, Volume 34B, ed. Bruce M. Metzger, David Allen Hubbard, and Glenn W. Barker, Revised ed. (Zondervan Academic, 2018), ch. VII, C., Kindle. Despite this, many commentators use the fig tree as a representation of Israel as their main ‘proof’ for a prophetic destruction of the temple, for example Edwards, The Gospel According to Mark, 346; R. Alan Cole, Mark, TNTC 2 (Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity, 1989), 256. 285 The citation from Jer 7 express how (unless they repent) the inhabitants of Judah will be rejected and abandoned; it is a vivid description of death and loss of any blessing. Jer 8:13 refers to the inhabitants of Judah as similar to vines without grapes or fig trees without figs in the mist of a long description of death and desolation and Jer 9:11 talks of Jerusalem as a “heap of ruins.” If Jesus had a much larger text in mind, the destruction of Jerusalem could very well be announced by his words, but it is difficult to confirm if a larger context was in view or not. 286 John is the only Gospel author who clearly equates the incident in the temple with its coming destruction (John 2:13-22). The authors of the Synoptic Gospels imply the destruction and judgment in a larger narrative setting. 287 France goes in a similar direction: “… the explicit lesson which is drawn from the event by the addition of this saying is, as in Matthew, on what may appear to be a different subject altogether. What Jesus has just done is a model for how true believers may also draw on the power of God.” France, The Gospel of Mark, 447–48. 284 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 66 the miraculous withering of the fig tree to a call for faith. Part of this relationship is to receive and practice forgiveness; lack of forgiveness is seen as an obstacle to a life of prayer. Jesus’ answer also teaches us that God is the one who acts, not faith. The answer “it will be done for him” (11:23) reminds the audience that the power does not rest in the one believing, but in the one doing. Faith is the response expected of the one who trusts in God for “both faith and prayer stand in continuity with God’s character.”288 Amid this action and teaching depicted in 11:12-26 stands an account of Jesus’ character. One purpose of the Gospels’ stories is to teach about Jesus as an agent of change “in a mode characteristic of anecdotal biography in Mediterranean society during the first century.”289 Jesus is presented as the one for whom the sanctity of the Father is crucial as is his also. He is described as the one who has enough power and authority to kill a fig tree by the power of his words. He is also portrayed as the one who curses those who are fruitless and invites to faith and blessings those who will listen. He is the one who will ultimately be the replacement of the temple and offer the possibility for forgiveness, security in God’s house, and inclusion. Because of Jesus, the fruitful are now called and invited into God’s house, and the fruitless and encouraged to become fruitful. The Rhetorical Role of the Composite Citation The combination of Isa 56:7 and Jer 7:11 does not cause great difficulties from a rhetorical perspective.290 It can be understood without their OT context—the “house of prayer” is recognizable by Jews and Gentiles as a place of worship, and “den of robbers” is self- 288 Edwards, The Gospel According to Mark, 347. Robbins, The Tapestry of Early Christian Discourse, 94. 290 Of course, this implies that the very short citation from Jeremiah is considered a citation. It could also be understood as an allusion because of its succinct nature. Despite this, the recognizable verbal parallelism makes it closer to a citation. Since they are joined by a conjunction, the OT texts in Mark 11:10-11 can be read as two separate citations or a single one, but the context alerts the audience that they are meant to be read/heard together. 289 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 67 explanatory.291 Any first-century audience would have recognized the sanctity of a temple. Regardless, only those who knew of Isa 56 would have recognized the implied message of inclusion for Gentiles and judgment against Jewish leaders who did not facilitate the Gentiles’ inclusion. Jer 7 stands as a reminder of judgment against a false sense of security, misuse and destruction; this would be harder to realize without a knowledge of Jeremiah’s prophecy.292 There are good reasons to believe that Isa 56 would have been known to Gentiles who converted to Judaism. In any event, both passages could easily have been taught in the early church. The onlookers in the temple could have completely missed Jesus’ allusion to impending doom, but Mark’s first audience—especially in light of the post-war events—would certainly not have failed to notice the link between Jeremiah’s words and his prophecies against the temple and Jerusalem.293 Mark’s audience can be reassured: the temple is no longer necessary to reach God. This could have been a subtle lesson for the disciples walking along with Jesus, but not for Mark’s audience.294 In conclusion, the composite citation combining two prophecies related to the theme of the “house of God” allude to an array of motifs from the OT. By using very recognizable vocabulary, the originator of the composite citation created a powerful pithy line. The Markan 291 It goes without saying that the effectiveness of a rhetorical device can hardly be judged scientifically or measured without access to the first audience. However, it is reasonable to conclude that the first audience could possess the necessary knowledge to understand Jesus’ meaning. It must be noted that a 21 st century Western person would certainly often recognize Jesus’ indignation even without any recollection from the OT, but it would be fair to say that the first century audience would easily have been better equipped to understand the citation since temples were part of the culture. 292 This may explain why some interpreters consider this a warning, by implication, for the destruction of the temple as a source of security. 293 It is not too farfetched to imagine Jews poring over prophecies of destruction and examining Jeremiah’s words after the destruction of Jerusalem. Those texts could very well have been present in the minds of the Jewish part of Mark’s audience. 294 Beside the events of the destruction themselves, the Jews could also associate this with the prophecy of Jesus, the son of Ananias (of Jesus ben Ananias) who predicted the temple’s destruction in 63-64 according to Josephus. It is quite possible that Jesus son of Ananias quoted (or alluded to) Jeremiah 7 (J.W. 6.3.5 §§ 301). Whiston and Josephus, The Works of Josephus: Complete and Unabridged, 742–43. See also Ferda, “Jeremiah 7 and Flavius Josephus on the First Jewish War,” 107. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 68 author later used it as a central point to justify Jesus’ actions in the temple court, but also to explain the larger episode of the fig tree. Looking at the various aspects of this composite citation—and especially the OT co-text of the citation—allows the interpreter to notice the depth of Jesus’ message, as well as the ability of the Markan author to weave everything together to make it a moving and convincing narrative. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 69 Chapter 3 Composite Citation in Mark 1:2–3 Once upon a time, an enormous mountain was struck by lightning and a boulder broke off. It bounced and split many times before a small rock finished the course by falling in a tiny stream. Over the centuries, carried by the turbulent water, the rock slowly became a pebble as it progressively eroded and softened on neighbouring rocks, until one dry summer, the pebble rested in the mud on the side of the stream. This is where a horse, walking by, stepped on it and it got stuck on his hoof. When the horse’s owner noticed the horse’s limping, he looked down, dislodged the pebble and threw it on a field to lie in the sun. For many years, the little rock waited there until one day a young man finally noticed it, picked it up and put it in his sling. With a swift gesture, the young man threw the pebble at a giant… and brought victory to all his people. The little rock-now-pebble had a very short impact on history, but oh! What a glorious one it was! At times, the Bible presents a mysterious character who seems to be part of God’s story for only a moment. The backstory is sometimes only briefly alluded to and the storyteller does not always inform the audience of the preparation necessary for the character’s actions, or all that follows. John the Baptist is such a character. He is introduced in Mark’s Gospel with only a few words by an intriguing composite citation attributed to Isaiah in Mark 1:1-3, and yet combining textual references from Mal 3:1, Ex 23:20 and Isa 40:3. The resulting citation is used to introduce John the Baptist and his role, but also to link him to the gospel of Jesus Christ in the WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 70 following narrative.295 As demonstrated below, Mark’s first composite citation artfully sets the scene for John the Baptist, but also for his entire narrative. The next three chapters in this thesis consider Mark’s composite citations using the same method developed in chapter 2. This chapter examines how Mark used this initial composite citation to convince his audience of a particular message; it also considers how it would have been received by this audience. This analysis demonstrates how Mark has remarkably and efficiently combined theology and motifs of Deity/Messiah, wilderness, preparation of the way from Exodus, and prophecy/proclamations; all this packaged in one composite citation introducing John the Baptist. Mark’s first composite citation appears at the very beginning of his book and it is his only explicit composite citation in the narrative framework; all his other composite citations occur in dialogues. Many commentators understand the prologue to be composed of verses 1–13,296 but others believe that verses 14 and 15 should be included.297 Because of the interesting inclusio concerning the good news (mentioned in 1:1 and 1:14) and the fulfilment of a time for preparation as announced by Isaiah298 (evoked in 1:2 and 1:15), it makes sense to see the pericope ending at v. 15.299 Mark 1:14-15 concludes the initial section and transitions to a new And backwards into the Jewish Scriptures and God’s purposes for Israel. Lane, The Gospel of Mark, 39; Edwards, The Gospel According to Mark, 23; Cole, Mark, 103; Morna Hooker, Gospel According to Saint Mark, BNTC (London: Continuum, 1991), 32; Strauss, Mark, 2014, 57. 297 Guelich also mentions the repetition of κηρύσσω linking John and Jesus (1:4, 7, 14), John and Jesus are introduced by a word from God (1:2-3 and 11), receive reference to their work (1:4-6 and 12–13) in the wilderness, and to their preaching (1:7-8 and 14–15). Each larger section of 1:16-8:26 begins by a call to discipleship (1:163:12; 3:13-6:7a; 6.7b-8:26). Robert A. Guelich, Mark 1-8:26, Vol. 34A, ed. David Allen Hubbard and Glenn W. Barker (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Academic, 2018), 3; Witherington III, The Gospel of Mark, Kindle, II. 298 “πεπλήρωται ὁ καιρὸς” (Mark 1:15) is used by Mark as the fulfillment of Isaiah’s prophecy. It is the first line that Mark attributes to Jesus in his narrative. It summarizes Mark 1:1-13, but also announces what is to come, by linking Jesus’ words with Isaiah’s prophecy. 299 Robert A. Guelich, “‘The Beginning of the Gospel’: Mark 1:1-15,” BR 27 (1982): 7–8. 295 296 71 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK subject by repeating the key points of the prologue—it creates a move from the prelude of Jesus’ ministry to its more public beginning.300 Mark uses his first composite citation in this larger section (1:1-15), as well as its motifs, to introduce the themes of the larger pericope, and eventually for his Gospel. As a composite citation, it is an appropriate literary device used by the writer for specific rhetorical effect, combining themes as well as texts. Because of the constraints of this thesis, the focus in this discussion is upon the smaller pericope of Mark 1:1-3, but elements in the rest of the larger section of 1:1-15 are observed as they may provide insight for understanding the rhetorical purpose of vv. 1–3. “The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God. As it is written in Isaiah the prophet, ‘Behold, I send my messenger before your face, who will prepare your way, the voice of one crying in the wilderness: “Prepare the way of the Lord, make his paths straight”,’” Mark 1:1-3 Inner Texture of the NT301 The overall structure of the prelude of 1:1-3 opens with: “The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.” It is followed by an introductory formula for the composite citation “as it is written in Isaiah the prophet,” that is part of a subordinate clause of comparison marked by καθώς. The Gospel’s introduction and the introductory formula are succeeded by the composite citation itself (verses 2b and 3). The following narrative in v. 4 states that John The transition is marked by δέ, the time marker, and by making Jesus the subject of the present and subsequent actions. 301 This includes observing within the text: the repetitive and progressive patterns, the structure of the pericope (opening-middle-closing), the narration, the argumentation, and the aesthetic of the text. Analysis of patterns, repetitions, and structure aims to establish the limits of the pericope, and to understand the nature of the discourse and the construction of the argument. The narration, argumentation and aesthetic inform the interpreter about the different devices used to create effects and argumentation as they relate to writer’s presumed culture. 300 72 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK appears (from the verb γίνομαι) and continues with a description of his activities and his appearance. Placed immediately after the composite citation, the writer’s mention of John the Baptist expresses a consequence of this prophetic word. Mark 1:1-2a Ἀρχὴ τοῦ εὐαγγελίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ [υἱοῦ θεοῦ]. Καθὼς γέγραπται ἐν τῷ Ἠσαΐᾳ τῷ προφήτῃ· Mark 1:1-2a Mark’s first sentence leads off with an anarthrous noun, the subject of a verbless clause302: “The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.” This clause can be understood as a title, a verbless independent clause, and a main clause followed by a subordinate clause (1:2a). Beginning with the conjunction καθὼς—marking a comparison—Mark 1:2 indicates the following should be understood as the continuity of Mark 1:1. Therefore, it should not be considered as an independent clause beginning a separate pericope.303 The same phrase καθὼς γέγραπται (1:2a) appears a few times in the NT304 to introduce an OT quotation, but never as the beginning of a new sentence.305 Mark also uses καθὼς γέγραπται in 9:13 and 14:21 to refer to the preceding (9:13 concludes the sentence). Consequently, the clause “as it is written in Isaiah the prophet” acts a transition; it comments on the preceding and introduces the following.306 This means that the first clause is not an independent clause, but is a main (or Unless Mark intends to communicate an implied verb “to be,” which would render the translation: “It is the beginning…” 303 I reject the clausal relationship proposed by NA28. For the reasons stated, v.1 does not function as a separate independent sentence 304 It appears in Luke 2:23, Acts 7:42; 15:15; Rom 1:17; 2:24; 3:4, 10, 4:17, and many more contexts. The expression also appears in Mark 9:13 and 14:21, but does not introduce an OT citation. 305 “When καθὼς occurs in a formula with γέγραπται, it always refers to the preceding rather than to the succeeding material),” Guelich, Mark 1-8, 7. Καθὼς never begins a new sentence in Mark (or the rest of the NT). 306 Mark also uses a similar expression, καθὼς εἶπεν in 11.6 and 16.7. In the same manner, the expression refers to the preceding. 302 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 73 nominal) clause followed by a subordinate clause. Therefore, Mark 1:2 continues the first sentence and Mark 1:1-2. It could be translated as: “The origin/beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, son of God, according to the writings of Isaiah: ‘Behold, I send…’.” Mark used the word ἀρχη to refer to a new beginning that started with Jesus, to express the origin of the gospel, or to evoke a new creation or renewal: the origin or the beginning of Jesus’ ministry. Mark may also have had all those senses in mind when he used the word beginning.307 The more likely explanation is that Mark was declaring the gospel’s origin and marking its debut. The term gospel or good news (or its cognate form) was an expression used in the LXX in the sense of good tidings, usually with God as its subject and humans as objects of blessings; it became a religious, cultic, and messianic verb.308 The OT sense precedes the Greco-Romans’ sense of the word, but it was also used by the Greco-Romans as good news of significance or news of victory in a military, political or national sense.309 Paul also used the term extensively in The Greek word ἀρχή can have different meanings. It is often used as ‘beginning’ in the NT (Matt 24:8; Mark 13:8; Acts 11:15; Heb 3:14), but also with the sense of causing something (Rev 3:14). It also has the sense of authority or rulers (Luke 12:11; Rom 8:38; 1 Cor 15:24). BDAG, 138–39. In context, ‘beginning’ is the more likely translation. 308 εὐαγγέλιον could take the sense of good news from God to humans, to the details of Jesus’ life (mostly based on the Didache, Mark 1:1 would be the only biblical exception) or a book concerning Jesus (based on later texts). BDAG, 402. ‫ׂשרה‬ ָ ְ‫ )בְ ׂש ָֹורה( ב‬meaning tiding (2 Sam 18:20), good tidings (1 Sam 18:25-27; 2 Kings 7:9) or reward for tidings (2 Sam 4:10; 18:22). Ludwig Koehler et al., The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament (HALOT), 2 Volume Set, E. J. Brill (Leiden: Brill, 1994), 164. In the LXX, the word εὐαγγέλιον (or one of its cognate forms) is found in 2 Kgdms 4:10, and in 2 Kgdms 18:22,25 and 4 Kgdms 7:9. The verb εὐαγγελίζω (or εὐαγγελίζομαι) is more common in the OT to refer to good news in a religious sense, as good news from God (Psalms 40:9; 96:2, Is 40:9; 52:7; 61:1. Ceslas Spicq, Theological Lexicon of the New Testament, trans. James D. Ernest, Hendrickson Publishers, vol. 2 (Peabody, MASS: Hendrickson Pub, 1994), 83–84. In the NT, the verb announces good news concerning the Messiah. 309 Along with the notion of news of victory, there is the notion of reward: “It does not merely declare salvation; it effects it.” It is also often associated with sacrifices as good news was considered a gift from the gods and had to be celebrated with sacrifices (εὐαγγέλια θύειν). In the imperial cult, emperors were considered to be like gods (or sons of gods) and their action would be considered εὐαγγέλια. Gerhard Kittel and Gerhard Friedrich, eds., Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (TDNT), vol 2 (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdman, 1996), 722-725. 307 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 74 his letters to refer to divine actions; all of which pre-date the composition of this Gospel.310 It is reasonable to assume that Mark intended the word gospel to be understood both in the GrecoRoman sense of good news of victory associated with a powerful benefactor, or Deity, and the Jewish sense of good news sent by God to his people.311 Mark may also have been using the expression partially as a response to the Greco-Roman belief that emperors were deities.312 Jesus was a common name in first century Judaism, being a Greek form of the Hebrew name Joshua (ַ‫)יֵׁשּוע‬. The writer links the term Χριστός with the proper name as a title indicating the role and function of Jesus that he will explain in his narrative. Jews and the early Church would have recognized the meaning of the title Christ as anointed, Χριστός, and its Hebrew equivalent Messiah, ַ‫;מָ ִׁשיח‬313 the title references Second Temple Jewish beliefs related to a messianic figure.314 The expression the Son of God is omitted in some manuscripts.315 Nevertheless, there is good external and internal evidence for it; the expression is used at key moments in Mark’s The early Church would already have pre-understanding of the notion of the gospel. For examples of Paul’s use, see Rom 1:1, 9, 16; 2:16; 10:16, 1 Cor 4:15; 9:12; Gal 1:6, 7, 11; 2:2. 5, 7; Eph 1:13; 3:6, and many more. The noun εὐαγγέλιον incorporates a verbal action. When governed by a genitive noun, the genitive will more probably function as either objective or subjective, or, as Hooker proposes, both at the same time: the gospel is about Jesus, and from him. Hooker, Gospel According to Saint Mark, 34. 311 It is also possible that Mark had in mind Isaiah’s use of the expression in 52:7 where the verb εὐαγγελίζω is used. 312 Witherington mentions the announcement of Octavian’s birthday which was considered good news because it celebrated the birth of a god. Witherington III, The Gospel of Mark, Kindle, II. Mark could have been trying to re-set the table on the real meaning of ‘Son of God.’ While Mark does not declare Jesus’ divinity as clearly as other evangelists, he suggests it from the beginning by attributing to Jesus what the OT attributed to God. 313 The word meant “the anointed one” which could refer to a king, Cyrus, a priest, the patriarchs or the Messiah. Koehler et al., HALOT, 645. 314 Ps 2, 89 and 110; Isa 9:1-7; 11:1-6, Jer 23:1–6, Ezek 34:23-24; 37:24-25. Josephus refers to Jesus as the Christ (A.J. 18.3.3 §§ 18.63), but nothing indicates that he believed it to be more than a title used to distinguish him; Pss. Sol.17:32 uses the word in messianic expectation. However, there were various messianic expectations in the Second Temple period and there was not uniformity regarding the figure to whom it might be applied. 315 Strauss believes that the evidence for its omission is strong. It is missing from a few MSS, including the original hand of ‫ א‬and from Θ. Origen never quotes “son of God” when he cites this passage, and it is difficult to explain the omission based on lack of attention in the first line of the book. Strauss, Mark, 2014, 60. However, Lane believes that since Origen’s citation probably comes from papyri similar to those that copyists used for the Codex Sinaiticus, this evidence may not be as strong as some scholars indicate. Lane, The Gospel of Mark, 41. Furthermore, MSS A, 310 75 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK narration and its presence in the first sentence is likely. It is an important narratological expression because it establishes one of Mark’s themes from the first few words of the Gospel. Mark’s introduction is heavily laden in sense as it introduces the coming of one bringing the good news and implies his Deity.316 The following composite citation picks up these motifs, expands on them, and shows that this event is aligned with Yahweh’s program as revealed in the Jewish Scriptures. Mark 1:2-3 Καθὼς γέγραπται ἐν τῷ Ἠσαΐᾳ τῷ προφήτῃ· ἰδοὺ ἀποστέλλω τὸν ἄγγελόν μου πρὸ προσώπου σου, ὃς κατασκευάσει τὴν ὁδόν σου· φωνὴ βοῶντος ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ· ἑτοιμάσατε τὴν ὁδὸν κυρίου, εὐθείας ποιεῖτε τὰς τρίβους αὐτοῦ Mark 2 :2-3 The writer marks the citation as the writing of Isaiah: “as it is written in Isaiah the prophet” (1:2a).317 As discussed above, since the comparative clause includes the composite citation, the whole modifies the first clause found in 1:1, creating an association between the gospel and the preparation announced in the composite citation. B and D read the expression “son of God.” Furthermore, MSS A, B and D read the expression “son of God,” giving the expression strong internal evidence. Mark uses the notion of Jesus as “the son of God” a few times in his narrative. The expression “the son” appears eight times (1:11; 3:11; 5:7; 9:7; 12:6; 13:32, 61; 15:39) in the narration, either in God’s words, in the mouth of demons, in a priest’s question or in the direct speech of some Gentiles. Maybe Mark was intentionally underlining Gentiles’ reception of the Messiah and how they succeeded where the Jews failed. This would be very ironic as some of those occurrences in the narrative come from demons (3:11 and 5:7) who, in the narrator’s mind, obviously have no problem recognizing the Son of God even if they did not use the title as part of any adoration. 316 As discussed below, since the title “Son of God” was used in different ways, one cannot declare this to be a title of deity. 317 Some manuscripts do not include the name of Isaiah and instead include τοῖς προφήταις “the prophets”, probably the result of scribes desiring to correct the fact that the citation is composite and has references to other OT writings (A K P W Γ ƒ13 28. 579. 1424. 2542 𝔐 vgms syh (bomss); Irlat), from NA28 Apparatus). 76 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK The composite citation begins with an emphatic ἰδου (not unlike the Hebrew ‫)הִ נה‬, as a prompter of attention. The context leads the audience to consider God as the first speaker in 1:2b because he is introduced by a prophet, but the close association between Jesus and the composite citation makes the audience naturally infer that Jesus’ way is being prepared. The originator of the composite citation in Mark purposefully linked Jesus’ arrival with a prophecy for God’s arrival. Effectively, the composite citation announces that God’s way is being prepared and Jesus is coming on that way—they must be one and the same. By pairing this first half (the combination of Mal 3:1 and Ex 23:20) with Isa 40:3, the originator of the composite citation applies the title κυρίου to Jesus; Jesus becomes the Lord, the one coming in the way.318 The Greek ἀποστέλλω means to “dispatch someone for the achievement of some objective,”319 but its relationship to the title apostle, ἀπόστολος, a cognate noun, was probably not lost on some.320 Incidentally, apostles ended up taking a similar role to John the Baptist to prepare people for repentance and make them ready for Jesus. The preparation of the way implies making the path “straight” from the Greek εὐθύς, and the two words for path or way (ὁδός or τρίβος) are used in synonymous parallelism (κατασκευάσει τὴν ὁδόν and εὐθείας ποιεῖτε τὰς τρίβους).321 They appear three times in the composite citation (ὁδός twice) and are presented as one of its main points even if the narrative of the co-text does not repeat the term. Mark uses the term ὁδός elsewhere in his Gospel to Attentive members of the audience could recognize Mark’s implication, especially as they moved along Mark’s narrative, even if it is not clearly stated. 319 BDAG, 120–21. 320 As the term ἀπόστολος has been used to refer to Jesus’ twelve disciples specifically selected by him to be his authorized representatives, and later to leaders in authority like Paul, an astute audience may have linked the expression back to the apostles’ role of preaching the gospel. See especially 3:14 with the use of both the verb and noun from the same root, but also the verbal use in 6:7 and in a parable in 12:1-6. 321 With the sense of “a straight or direct line”, also implying an even road. BDAG, 406–7. The two Greek terms used for road effectively translate the Hebrew ‫דֶׁ ֶׁרְך‬, but ὁδός is used more frequently literary and metaphorically (as a “course of behavior”) in the NT, BDAG, 691. 318 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 77 describe Jesus’ actions, moving through the lands with those who would follow him.322 Already in Mark 1:9, 12, 14 Jesus is described as moving from one place to another, he is on his way. The concept of ὁδός can be linked back to the Deuteronomic motif of eschatological entrance in the land;323 the entrance to the Kingdom is possible through the way.324 It is significant that Jesus’ first recorded words in Mark’s Gospel are: “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel.” Mark’s narrative makes it clear that the preparation for the way is not only literal, but also serves as a metaphor for repentance and salvation. Mark indicates that repentance is the preparation of the way by revealing in the composite citation that a prophet is coming to announce preparation. Immediately after this citation, he writes that “John appeared, baptizing in the wilderness and proclaiming a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins” (1:4). The composite citation in isolation does not emphasize repentance, but its immediate co-text links it to the preparation of the way. It is a subtle introduction to the concept of the way which is exploited by Mark in his narrative, but it is a significant one. Mark 1:4-15 In the larger section (1:1-15), the author incorporates a theme of wilderness by creating a link between the citation’s substantival participle “crying in the wilderness” and the description 322 Mark uses the concept of the way in his narrative (especially 8:27; 9:33-34; 10:17, 32, 46, 52) with some revelation made at key moments: for example, Jesus is revealed to be the Christ (8:27-30) and reveals his future suffering (8:31; 9:31; 10:32-33). The transfiguration occurs on the way (9:2-13), and Bartimaeus follows Jesus ‘on the way’ (10:52). The concept of the ‘Way’ is also used metaphorically as a reference to τηε Messianic movement by Luke in Acts (9:2; 19:9, 23; 22:4; 24:14, 22) and Peter (2:2, 21). 323 For a longer discussion on the concept of the way as understood in the OT, see Joel Marcus, The Way of the Lord: Christological Exegesis of the Old Testament in the Gospel of Mark (London: T&T Clark, 2004), 31–33. 324 “ … the old Exodus-Conquest route, the way through the wilderness, becomes at the same time the pilgrimage way to Zion.” Frank Moοre Cross, Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic: Essays in the History of the Religion of Israel (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1973), 108. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 78 of John (1:4-8) as someone located in the wilderness.325 This theme was already introduced in the composite citation because of the word ἔρημος326 with its general sense of an uninhabited region, desert or wilderness. Mark describes John’s apparel as being made of camel’s hair with a leather belt (1:6), and John’s diet as locusts and wild honey (1:7). Both descriptions fit the wilderness theme of the passage because they correspond to some descriptions made of prophets in the OT who could be considered ‘desert prophets’ like Elijah.327 Locusts and wild honey would have been consistent “with someone living off the land.”328 The theme of wilderness continues with Jesus’ temptation in 1:12.329 Mark also repeats the theme of baptism in the larger pericope (1:4, 8–11). Even though baptism is not mentioned in the composite citation, it is a rite of purification following repentance; in the narrative, it is linked to the preparation of the way for YHWH in the wilderness.330 It is noteworthy that the narrative in v. 4 first introduces John’s ministry of baptizing and proclaiming; John’s description only comes in second, putting emphasis on his actions. This Mark 1:3-6 “Wilderness … clothed with camel’s hair and wore a leather belt around his waists … locusts and wild honey.” 326 “In contrast to cultivated and inhabited country,” BDAG, 391–92. 327 Zech 13:4 refers to the hairy cloak of a prophet, and 2 King 1:8 describes Elijah’s garment as made of hair with a leather belt. Some prophets, especially Elijah, preached in the wilderness. It does not imply that prophets were all dressed this way, or that Elijah always wore such garments, but it is likely that a Jewish audience would have recognized the description. 328 Strauss, Mark, 2014, 65. 329 It must be noted that Jesus goes through a form of preparation by baptism (1:9-11) and temptation (1:12-13), but the narrative never implies the necessity of repentance for him. Mark mentions again the wilderness in his later narrative as an isolated place (1:35; 45; 6:31-35), but he does not re-examine the link between wilderness and preparation/repentance apart from Mark 1:1-15. However, the initial theme of wilderness relating to Israel in the wilderness could have been intended implicitly by Mark later in his Gospel. For example, Mark’s reference to the wilderness in Mark 6 during the feeding of the crowd can be linked back to Israel’s need of a guide (Ex 23:20) or a shepherd (Num 27:17), as well as Yahweh’s provision of food in the wilderness (Ex 16). 330 Βαπτίζω meaning to “wash for purification … the renewing or establishing a relationship with God … or to cause someone to have an extraordinary experience akin to an initiatory water-rite.” BDAG, 164. Josephus discusses John the Baptist and mentions that baptism was “not in order to the putting away [or the remission] of some sins [only], but for the purification of the body; supposing still that the soul was thoroughly purified beforehand by righteousness” (Ant. 18.5.2 §§ 117). Josephus does not mention if baptism was practiced elsewhere, but his familiarity with the practice implies it. 325 79 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK underlines John’s action in preparation of God’s way, making the baptism and the proclamation of repentance the preparation itself. Baptizing and repentance become necessary for the announcement of the gospel, but it is John’s presence that acts as the catalyst. Using prophecies from Jewish Scriptures, Mark presents John the Baptist as the one who first calls people to repentance. John’s role may have been preliminary, but it was vital. Inner Texture of the OT The following section examines the original setting of the presumed OT Hebrew texts cited, each in its literary context. The co-texts from the Jewish Scriptures are important as they demonstrate how the originator of this composite citation was aware of the thematic connections with various co-texts. As the author incorporates this composite citation in his narrative, he weaves in his text co-textual and intertextual resonances, along with their theological implications. Ex 23:20 I am going to send an angel in front of you, to guard you on the way and to bring you to the place that I have prepared. (NRSV)331 Ex 23 :20 Ex 23:20 introduces a section (23:20-33) that brings the Covenant Code to a conclusion.332 The immediately preceding segment presents instructions regarding the sabbath and festivals (23:9-19). The writer reiterates the covenant promise from God (Ex 3:15-20) using Hebrew: ‫ ;הִ נה אָ נֹ כִ י ׁשֹ לחַ מַ לְ אָ ְך לְ ָפנֶׁיָך לִ ְׁשמָ ְרָך בַ דָ ֶׁרְך וְ ַלהֲבִ יאֲָך אֶׁ ל־הַ מָ קֹום אֲׁשֶׁ ר הֲכִ נֹ ִתי׃‬LXX: Καὶ ἰδοὺ ἐγὼ ἀποστέλλω τὸν ἄγγελόν μου πρὸ προσώπου σου, ἵνα φυλάξῃ σε ἐν τῇ ὁδῷ. 332 The Covenant Code is also called the Book of the Covenant, “This name of the Hebrew code occurs in Ex 24:7, where it is said that Moses read from ‘the Book of the covenant.’” It is usually accepted that it runs from Ex 20:2223:33. Geoffrey Williams Bromiley, The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Rev. (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1988), 793. This is the concluding portion as YHWH links this covenant with promises made in his covenant with Abraham previously. 331 80 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK the first-person pronoun in 23:20 to indicate that YHWH himself would send a messenger (or angel, see below) before his people. In context, the way is being prepared to go “into the land” (εἰς τὴν γῆν), referring to the promised land, Canaan.333 The people of Israel are required to obey the angel and to “listen to his voice” (23:21 NSRV).334 The command is followed by a promise to conquer the various peoples of the land. God then makes additional promises related to their situation in the land, mixed with warnings: his people will be prosperous if they serve God. The text is filled with covenant theology and with a mixture of intolerance for sin (particularly idolatry) and of promises of blessings. The word angel, ‫ מַ לְ אָ ְך‬also has the sense of messenger,335 but in context, the reference is to an angel, or perhaps to God’s presence; it could also refer to the column of fire leading Israel—standing for a divine being, or God himself (Ex 13:21).336 In this small section, God is clearly the initiator and provider of the blessing; he guides his people in the exodus to the promised land, fulfilling his covenant promises. Mal 3:1 “See, I am sending my messenger to prepare the way before me.” (NRSV)337 Mal 3 :1a In Malachi, the prophet addresses the subject of the people’s disillusionment following the return of Israel from exile and the rebuilding of the temple. From the perspective of the “The word place is probably to be taken in a general sense, not in its frequent sense of ‘holy place’, as though God were leading Israel to his sanctuary at Shiloh or elsewhere. Christ may be alluding to this verse in John 14:2, 3.” R. Alan Cole, Exodus: An Introduction and Commentary, TOTC 2 (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1973), 189. 334 The second person singular seems to address the people as individuals. Ex 21:1 “Now these are the rules that you shall set before them” begins a set of rules given by God to Moses. Either Moses is repeating what YHWH has told him, or he is repeating commands in a way that is personal for each listener. 335 The LXX adds the possessive pronoun, making the messenger “God’s messenger.” 336 “The angel of God (of Yahweh)” (Gen 21:17; 31:11, Ex 3:2) sometimes appears as a messenger from God, or as God himself speaking, Consider the narrative in Ex 3:1-6. Koehler et al., HALOT, 585. 337 Hebrew: ‫ ;הִ נְ נִ י ׁשֹ לחַ מַ לְ אָ כִ י ּופִ נָה־דֶׁ ֶׁרְך לְ ָפנָי׃‬LXX: ἰδοὺ ἐγὼ ἐξαποστέλλω τὸν ἄγγελόν μου. 333 81 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK people of Israel, God had not returned to “dwell in the midst of Jerusalem” as promised in Zech 8:3.338 The people are described as sinful and the leaders and priests especially are considered responsible for the people’s sin (1:6-2:6). Mal 2:17-3:5 explains that the sins of Israel are responsible for the delay of God’s return; this is followed by a call to repentance. In Mal 2:17, the people ask how they wearied God and receive the answer: “By saying ‘Everyone who does evil is good in the sight of the Lord, and he delights in them’ or by asking ‘Where is the God of justice?’” To this last question, the speaker—God, who is not named but implied—responds: “See, I am sending my messenger to prepare the way before me” (Mal 3:1 NRSV, emphasis mine); this answer is used in the composite citation. Elijah is announced as the herald preceding the Day of the Lord339 (Mal 4:5, or 3:23 in the MT), unless the plan is thwarted by sins and the land is destroyed (4:6). The identity of the messenger is not mentioned in 3:1, but the repetition of the verb sending, ‫ׁשלח‬, makes the connection between the messenger and Elijah in 4:5 reasonable. The messenger of 3:1 is therefore preparing the way for the Lord who will suddenly come into his temple. The prophecy continues by announcing the “messenger of the covenant” who is also coming like a refiner’s fire (3:2), but it is unclear if he is coming before the Lord or not, or if he is coming on the same way, The words of Malachi demonstrate a discouragement from the people: “… But you say: ‘How have we despised your names?’” (1:6); “… You cover the Lord’s altar with tears, with weeping and groaning because he no longer regards the offering or accepts it with favor from your hand. But you say ‘Why does he not?’” (2:13-14a); “… Or by asking: ‘Where is the God of justice?” (2:17). The promises of 3:1 “suggest that there was continuing disappointment with the second temple, despite the encouragement of Haggai and Zechariah.” Joyce Baldwin, Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi: An Introduction and Commentary, TOTC 28 (Downers Grove, IL.: InterVarsity, 1972), 264. 339 The same expression is used in Joel 2:31 to refer to a coming judgment that could be understood both as Israel’s destruction, but also an ‘already-not yet’ prophecy of the coming judgment of the end of time when “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved” (Joel 2:32). Malachi announces a day of judgment which follows the exile, a day where “all evildoers will be stubble” (4:1), but also for “… you who fear my name, the sun of righteousness shall rise with healing in its wings” (4:2). If John the Baptist is the new Elijah coming to announce judgment, the direct implication is that judgment is now coming for Israel with the beginning of Jesus’ ministry. 338 82 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK or if he is the Lord.340 While Malachi does not refer to the wilderness, the notion of judgment in the absence of repentance is well underlined. The text announces that after sending a messenger to prepare the way, God will come as a judge and purifier.341 Isa 40:3 “A voice cries out: ‘In the wilderness prepare the way of the LORD, make straight in the desert a highway for our God.’”342 Isa 40:3 Isa 40:3 occurs in the so-called book of the Servant (Isa 38–55) and it announces a new beginning.343 After a historical prologue retelling the sickness and recovery of Hezekiah (38:139:4), Isaiah prophesies destruction to the king (39:5-8). Those words are immediately followed by words of consolation for God’s people. Three “voices” are ordered to console and cry for three different messages: that a way for God needs to be prepared (40:3-5), that God stands forever (40:6-8), and that God comes with might (40:9-10).344 Those promises are followed by more declarations of God’s glory and promises of restoration and care. In Isaiah, God is portrayed as the one choosing and leading the way (35:8, 42:16, 48:17-21, 55:12). In 40:3—the It is possibly the same ‘blending’ of YHWH and his messenger found in Ex 3:1-10. The pronouns change; 3:1 is God’s speech that then changes to the third person: “and the Lord whom you seek will suddenly come to his temple,” before another direct speech from God: “The messenger of the covenant in whom you delight—indeed, he is coming, says the LORD of hosts.” 341 Rikki E. Watts, Isaiah’s New Exodus in Mark, (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2001), 71. 342 Hebrew: ‫ ;קֹול קֹורא בַ ִמדְ בָ ר פַנּו דֶׁ ֶׁרְך יהוה י ְַשרּו בָ ע ֲָרבָ ה ְמ ִסלָה לאֹלהינּו׃‬LXX: φωνὴ βοῶντος ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ Ἑτοιμάσατε τὴν ὁδὸν κυρίου, εὐθείας ποιεῖτε τὰς τρίβους τοῦ θεοῦ ἡμῶν· 343 J. Alec Motyer, Isaiah: An Introduction and Commentary, TOTC (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1999), 260. Mark may have had this new beginning in mind as well when he announced the beginning of the Gospel. It is certainly implied by his choice of prophecy. 344 The voices seem to refer to different respondents (but they might refer to the same individual). While they are not named, there is a progression. The first one (40:3) announces a voice that is to come. 40:6 refers to a voice speaking to a respondent (maybe Isaiah) who asks what he should cry about. 40:9 is either part of the respondent’s discourse from 40:6 who says “what shall I cry? All people are … herald of good tidings, lift up your voice”, or the first voice of 40:6 is telling the respondent to lift up his voice. The only precision is that one of the voices is “a herald of good tidings” (40:9). John N. Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah, Chapters 40-66, NICOT (Grand Rapids, MI.: Wm. B. Werdmans Publishing Co., 1998), 53. 340 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 83 tradition used in the composite citation—the people are commanded to create a way as people would prepare the road for their conquering king.345 Summary of the Inner Texture All those texts from the Jewish Scriptures have something in common: they reveal that God is coming and they promise blessings, or judgment in case of disobedience. In Malachi and Isaiah, a messenger/voice is introduced as an important character who is prophesied in Jewish Scriptures. This messenger’s role is to proclaim the need for a preparation. In the composite citation, the theme of wilderness of Exodus and Isaiah is associated with the motif of that preparation as the necessary condition for the coming of the way of the Lord. Additionally, Malachi claims that God will come to his temple and expresses the necessity for preparation. The common theme of those traditions allows the author to combine texts from the Jewish Scriptures. Intertexture346 The following section observes how the author used and customized tradition from the Jewish Scriptures and incorporated it in his narrative. It explores the modifications made to the Greek LXX to adapt it to the resulting composite citation. The following chart compares the citation in Mark’s narrative with the LXX and the MT from each citation: 345 Whether the voice cries in the wilderness, or it is the location of the preparation, both point to the wilderness as the place of preparation (unless one argues that the wilderness is the proper place to tell people to prepare a way elsewhere). The wilderness would imply a road rarely (or never) used and needing preparation. The wilderness could also imply a location for spiritual preparation, away from the temptation offered by civilization. It could also refer to Israel’s first exodus in the wilderness. More likely, it refers to all three. 346 It is the analysis of the influence by previous tradition, oral or written. The influence includes oral-scribal, cultural, social, and historical intertextures. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 84 Comparison Between Mark 1:2b and the LXX Versions of Exod 23:20 and Mal 3:1347 Mark 1:2b ἰδοὺ ἀποστέλλω τὸν ἄγγελόν μου πρὸ προσώπου σου ὃς κατασκευάσει τὴν ὁδόν σου Behold I send my messenger before your face who will prepare your way Exodus 23:20 LXX Καὶ ἰδοὺ ἐγὼ ἀποστέλλω τὸν ἄγγελόν μου πρὸ προσώπου σου, ἵνα φυλάξῃ σε ἐν τῇ ὁδῷ, ὅπως εἰσαγάγῃ σε εἰς τὴν γῆν, ἣν ἡτοίμασά σοι. And look, I am sending my angel in front of you in order to guard you on the way in order to bring you into the land that I prepared for you. Malachi 3 :1 LXX/MT348 ἰδοὺ ἐγὼ ἐξαποστέλλω τὸν ἄγγελόν μου, καὶ ἐπιβλέψεται ὁδὸν πρὸ προσώπου μου… Behold, I am sending my messenger, and he will oversee the way before me… ‫הִ נְ נִי ׁשֹ לחַ מַ לְ אָ כִ י ּופִ נָה־דֶׁ ֶׁרְך לְ ָפנָי‬ See, I am sending my messenger to prepare the way before me… With the very first few words “Behold, I am sending my messenger,” Mark’s text follows LXX Ex 23:20 closely.349 The presence of “πρὸ προσώπου σου” coming after “τὸν ἄγγελόν μου” instead of being placed at the end of the citation follows the LXX Exodus text more closely than Malachi. While the associations of the messenger with Elijah, and of the way with YHWH, come from Malachi, the motifs of exodus and wilderness are from Exodus.350 347 The NT Greek text is from the NA28 and its English translation from the ESV. The LXX Greek texts are from John William Wevers and Quast Udo, eds., Exodus, vol. 2 of Vestus Testamentum Graecum, (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1991); Ziegler, Duodecim Prophetae; Ziegler, Isaias, and their English translation from Pietersma and Wright, NETS. The Hebrew text is from Andersen and Forbes, The Hebrew Bible: Andersen-Forbes Analyzed Text (AFAT) and its English translation come from the NRSV. 348 Since the MT of Mal 3:1 differs slightly from its LXX version, I have included both. 349 Watts believes that it is more probable that Mark used Mal 3:1 and adapted it with Ex 23:20 than the other way around. Mark’s preference for Exodus’ use of ἀποστέλλω, instead of Malachi’s ἐξαποστέλλω, could be explained by stylistic preference because ἐξαποστέλλω is used almost exclusively by Luke, and never by Mark. Watts, Isaiah’s New Exodus in Mark, 62. 350 The distinction between the two texts may not be quite as distinct if Malachi used Ex 23:20. In this case, the motif of exodus could belong to both, even if it appears clearer in Exodus. The association of John the Baptist with Elijah most likely comes from Malachi (Mal 4:5). Mal 3:1 refers to a way for YHWH while Exodus has Israel’s way in view. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK Incidentally, the originator appears to reflect the piel of 85 ‫ פנה‬in the MT of Malachi with its use of κατασκευάζω (to prepare or build a structure), instead of ἐπιβλέπω (to look intently, pay attention or look attentively) which is found in the LXX.351 Mark’s reading certainly suits his composite citation better than the LXX version available today. The shift to the second person (τὴν ὁδόν σου) is another modification, suggesting a desire to underline the Christology of the passage by making it appear as the way of Jesus, the Lord;352 it also parallels the previous πρὸ προσώπου σου. The originator also chose to put πρὸ προσώπου σου before τὴν ὁδόν σου, inverting Malachi’s order, probably to create a better parallel with the citation from Isa 40:3, or following Ex 23.20. This first half of the composite citation found in Mark 1:2-3 is a good example of stylistic, grammatical and syntactical rearrangements which conserve the main points of the previous tradition but combine texts to suit a specific goal. The second half of the composite citation from Isa 40:3 is almost verbatim with the LXX. Comparison Between Mark 1:3 and the LXX and MT Versions of Isa 40:3353 Mark 1:3 φωνὴ βοῶντος ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ· ἑτοιμάσατε τὴν ὁδὸν κυρίου, εὐθείας ποιεῖτε τὰς τρίβους αὐτοῦ, the voice of one crying in the wilderness: ‘Prepare the way of the Lord, make his paths straight,’” Isa 40:3 LXX Φωνὴ βοῶντος ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ Ἑτοιμάσατε τὴν ὁδὸν Κυρίου, εὐθείας ποιεῖτε τὰς τρίβους τοῦ θεοῦ ἡμῶν BDAG 526-527 and 368. ‫ פנה‬has the sense of turning aside in a particular direction, to turn to someone, but in its Piel form, it takes the sense of clearing away or tidying up. Koehler et al., HALOT, 938. Mark’s choice certainly suits his composite citation better than the LXX version available today. While some scholars like Watts (Exodus in Mark, 61) believe that Mark used the MT, it is also possible that Mark used a different Greek translation (written or oral); this latter explanation is more likely since Mark follows the LXX at other times and does not demonstrate a knowledge of Hebrew elsewhere. 352 Watts, Isaiah’s New Exodus in Mark, 61–62. While the text itself does not declare Jesus as the Lord, it implies it. 353 The NT Greek text is from the NA28 and its English translation from the ESV. The LXX Greek text is from Ziegler, Isaias and its English translation from the Pietersma and Wright, NETS. The Hebrew text comes from Andersen and Forbes, The Hebrew Bible: Andersen-Forbes Analyzed Text (AFAT), and its translation from the NRSV. 351 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 86 A voice of one crying out in the wilderness: “Prepare the way of the Lord; make straight the paths of our God. Isa 40:3 MT ‫קֹול קֹורא בַ ִמ ְדבָ ר פַנּו דֶׁ ֶׁרְך יהוה י ְַשרּו בָ ע ֲָרבָ ה ְמ ִסלָה לאֹלהינּו׃‬ A voice cries out: “In the wilderness prepare the way of the LORD, make straight in the desert a highway for our God. The only notable difference between the LXX and Mark’s version is the substitution of τοῦ θεοῦ for αὐτοῦ, probably for Christological reasons—to make the citation more applicable to Jesus. In Hebrew, ‫ בַ ִמ ְדבָ ר‬located at the end of the discourse clause marks the wilderness as the location for the way. By following the LXX instead of the MT, Mark is saying that the wilderness is the location of the one crying; in the rest of his narrative, he does not make the wilderness Jesus’ location for his ministry (beside his temptation in 1:12-13). Nonetheless, changes in punctuation could explain the difference between those readings. The LXX and Mark also avoid the second repetition regarding the wilderness (“make straight in the desert a highway”) found in the MT. Matthew and Luke both use the composite citation from Exodus and Malachi elsewhere (Matt 11:10, Luke 7:27) and the citation from Isaiah—attributed to him—on its own (Matt 3:3, Luke 3:4).354 This could suggest that Mark, Matthew and Luke had access to a common tradition already combining Ex 23:20 and Mal 3:1 and used it in different ways, Luke and Matthew agreeing. It is also possible that Matthew and Luke used Mark’s complicated composite citation and simplified it by putting Isa 40:3 elsewhere. In the latter case, Mark was the originator of the 354 Matthew and Luke use the combination of Ex 23:20 and Mal 3:1 to refer to John when messengers came from John to Jesus asking if he was the Messiah. Both evangelists attribute the composite citation of Exodus and Malachi to Jesus. In Luke 1:17, Mal 3:1 is also used in the angel’s announcement about John the Baptist, and in 1:76 in Zechariah’s prophecy. Matthew uses Isa 40:3 to introduce John the Baptist in the beginning of his Gospel in narrative text; Luke does the same, but extends his citation to Isa 40:3-5. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 87 composite citation, and the other two evangelists used his Gospel. Mark could also have combined a previous composite citation (Mal 3:1 and Ex 20:23) made by Jesus or John355 and paired it with Isa 40:3 for his own purpose.356 Oral-Scribal Texture Combination of Ex 23:20 and Mal 3:1 It is likely that Malachi alluded to Ex 23:20 when he wrote his prophecies. In both cases, a messenger/angel is sent before God, and both are followed by warnings of judgment and announcements of blessings. Using similar language from Exodus, Malachi refers to Israel’s actions that profane its covenant relationship with God (2:10-16) and announces a judgment to come when God will appear in his temple to judge the people itself. The rabbinic tradition combined the texts of Ex 23:20 and Mal 3:1 as seen in Exodus Rabbah 32 (or Sh’mot Rabbah 32), probably recognizing Malachi’s connection.357 Exodus Rabbah also intertwines the notion of the protection of the angel with a recognition that the angel was sent because of Israel’s lack of faith.358 There is reason to believe that when Ex 23:20 was later read, “the haftarah359 included Malachi 3:1-8 and 12.”360 These do not prove rabbinic In John 1:23, John also uses Isa 40.3 and incorporates it in John’s speech to introduce his role. The author of the citation is not universally recognized. For example, Guelich believes that Mark could not have produced the combination as it pre-existed in Q (implying that Matthew and Luke did not use Mark as a source), and because it existed in Rabbinic circles. Guelich, Mark 1-8, 8. I reject Exodus Rabbah as a proof because of its very late date; it only proves that the association made in Mark’s Gospel was possible. I see no reason to reject the possibility that Mark, if the writer of this Gospel narrative, had the ability to produce such a composite citation. 357 The author of Exodus Rabbah 32 explains the identity of the “angel”: it is the same angel who guarded Isaac (Gen 24:7) and Jacob (48:16), who answered Israel’s cry for help (Ex 3:9) and who will visit Israel in the days of restoration (Mal 3:1). Jocelyn McWhirter, “Messianic Exegesis in Mark 1:2-3,” in “What Does the Scripture Say?”: Studies in the Function of Scripture in Early Judaism and Christianity: The Synoptic Gospels, ed. Craig A. Evans and H. Daniel Zacharias, vol. 1 (London: Bloomsbury, 2013), 158–78. 358 The author of Exodus Rabbah comments on the coming redemption for Israel caused by the messenger's coming, and how Israel's rebellion caused the sending of that messenger. Watts, Isaiah’s New Exodus in Mark, 66-67. 359 Reading from a section of the prophet sung, usually the haftarah was related to the portion of the Torah read. 360 It is late evidence, but may indicate earlier tradition. Watts, Isaiah’s New Exodus in Mark, 74. While it does not indicate a previous usage, it points to a natural connexion between the two texts that led to the later connection. 355 356 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 88 influence on the creation of the composite citation, but they demonstrate that such a connection was natural, or that Malachi’s association with Ex 23:20 was recognized. Similarities Between Isa 40:23 and Mal 3:1 It is possible that Isa 40:3 was interpreted in Second Temple Judaism as announcing God’s eschatological deliverance.361 The late date of the documents makes it difficult to prove that an association between Ex 23:20 and Mal 3:1 existed in the first century.362 Nevertheless, it shows that such an association was plausible; it is possible that the piel of ‫ פנה‬appearing only in Mal 3:1 and Isa (40:3, 57:14; 62:10; cf. Ps 80:10) already connected those texts and that Mal 3:1 was influenced by Isa 40:3.363 Within the OT, preparing a way (‫ֶׁ ַ֣ד ֶׁרְך‬ ‫ )פַנּ֖ ּו‬appears in Isa 40:3, 57:14 and 62:10, but the last two verses mention the preparation of a way for the people and not for God.364 Isaiah 56–66 warns of God’s imminent coming, the following judgment, and the level of threat against false leaders (56:9; 65:1-25); it also shares some similarities with Malachi. The LXX changes the meaning of Isa 40:2 by the addition of ἱερεύς365 in the vocative, probably as the owner of the following voice of verse 3. This could be explained by the Klyne Snodgrass, “Streams of Tradition Emerging from Isaiah 40:1-5 and Their Adaptation in the New Testament,” JSNT 2, no. 8 (1980): 35. 362 Exodus Rabbah was probably written in late antiquity or early Middle Ages. Michael Graves, “Scholar and Advocate: The Stories of Moses in Midrash Exodus Rabbah,” BBR 21, no. 1 (2011): 8. 363 Snodgrass, “Streams of Tradition Emerging from Isaiah 40,” 25. Of course, if Exodus Rabba follows Mark 1 by almost a thousand years, one could argue that Jewish thinking could have been influenced by Christian teaching. 364 The same could be said for the notion of a highway (‫ ) ְמסִ לָה‬which is “God’s way” in the wilderness. A “New Exodus” appears in Isa 40:3-4, but also 11:16, 35:8, 43:19 and 49:11. Snodgrass, “Streams of Tradition Emerging from Isaiah 40,” 26. 365 Snodgrass believes that the translators may have seen a link between Mal 2:7 ( ‫ְהוֵֽה‬ ָ ‫ )מַ לְ ַ ֹ֥אְך י‬and its mention of a priest as messenger. This may prove a certain association between Mal 3:1 and Isa 40:3. Snodgrass, “Streams of Tradition Emerging from Isaiah 40,” 26. 361 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 89 association between Isa 40:3 and Mal 3:1; Mal 2:7 refers to priests 366 as the messengers of God, ‫מַ לְ אַ ְך יהוה‬, so the translator could have added the identity of the speaker as the priests.367 The addition of the word ‘priest’ in relation to Isa 40 is also found in 4Q176.368 By applying the passage to John the Baptist instead of priests, the originator of the composite citation may simply be using a different version (Greek or Hebrew), he could have access to a citation of Isa 40:3 without its co-text, or he was purposefully ‘correcting’ the Greek version.369 In the Dead Sea Scrolls (IQS VIII.12b-16a and IX.12–20a), the voice is not identified precisely,370 but the theme of the wilderness is underlined—it was believed that it was time for preparing the “way to the wilderness” in association with the new Exodus. The Psalms of Solomon 8:17 seems to allude to Isa 40:30 when it says: “They leveled rugged ways for his entrance.”371 Its author seems to have understood Isa 40:3 as a prophecy for the coming of God for judgment which is welcomed by the rulers of the earth (8:16) who levelled his way for his coming, despite the impending destruction of the (same?) rulers. “For the lips of a priest should guard knowledge, and people should seek instruction from his mouth, for he is the messenger of the LORD of hosts” Mal 2:7 NSRV. 367 The Targum presents a similar inclusion of the word priest in the Hebrew text of Isa 40.1, but in the Targum, the way is not prepared for God, but for the people itself to return to Jerusalem. Snodgrass, “Streams of Tradition Emerging from Isaiah 40,” 27. 368 4Q176 uses lines from Ps 79 describing God’s anger on Jerusalem, but changes the words “your servants” to “priests” in 4Q176 line 3: “See the corpses of your priests… there is no-one to bury them. And from the book of Isaiah: Words of consolation… Be consoled, consoled, my people!” (4Q176 line 3–4). The text continues with the forgiveness of Jerusalem (line 6) and a declaration of a voice shouting (line 6) to clear the path in the wilderness (line 7). According to Snodgrass, it can be understood as a demonstration of the community’s desire for consolation. Snodgrass, “Streams of Tradition Emerging from Isaiah 40,” 30–31. 369 The author of the book of Hebrews presents Jesus as the “great high priest” (4:14-5:10). However, no hints in Mark’s Gospel exist to prove that such an association between Jesus and priesthood was in the mind of the author in its introduction. Perhaps the originator of the composite citation applied the LXX version to John since he was of a priestly family. 370 IQS VIII.12b-16a mentions “the interpreter” who teaches the way of wilderness (VIII.14) and the law of Moses (VIII.15), and IX.12–20a “the instructor” who will teach in the desert (IX:20). 371 ὡμάλισαν ὁδοὺς τραχείας ἀπὸ εἰσόδου αὐτοῦ (PssSol 8:19), Alfred Rahlfs, ed., Septuaginta with Logos Morphology, Electronic ed. Stuttgart (Göttingen: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1979). This is part of a psalm where the author describes God entering Jerusalem as a father with peace (8:18), but also capturing the city (8:19) and destroying the rulers (8:20) in justified judgment (8:23-26). 366 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 90 Summary of Intertexture The author of the composite citation has used a combination of texts from Exodus, Isaiah, and Malachi that reference the same concepts of messenger (or voice) and preparation of Yahweh’s way to announce that John’s presence marks the beginning/origin of the gospel of Jesus Christ. While associations between these texts cannot be easily proven prior to the first century (apart from Malachi using Exodus), later usage points to the natural association between those texts. Parallels were not observed only for the verbal similitudes, but for the themes of the co-texts. Socio-Cultural Texture372 In the social, cultural, and ideological texture, certain expressions are considered in light of their use in the first century, not as simple words, but as expressing theological concepts. This texture considers how a first-century audience was using tradition and understood it. The Son of God The title “Son of God” was not original to the NT. It was used in classical Greek to refer to heroes, kings, or miracle workers.373 Some Jewish texts show that religious Jews could understand themselves as the children of God (παιδόυ κύριου), or call God “Father.”374 In the OT, the expression and its equivalent375 gets applied in various documents to angels,376 Israel,377 372 This texture addresses ideology in traditional interpretation, in the text, in intellectual discourse, and in individuals and groups. It focusses on certain key aspects in their understanding for a first-century audience. 373 Kittel and Friedrich, Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (TDNT), vol 8, 335–36. 374 For example, Philo uses the expression but restricts it to “those who are good, outstanding, and wise.” (Sobr. 56), and 4Q372 frag. 1:16 mentions “And he said: ‘My father and my God, do not abandon me in the hands of gentiles.’” Martínez and Tigchelaar, The Dead Sea Scrolls Study Edition (Translations). 375 For example: ‫ בְ ני־הָ אֱֹלהִ ים‬found in Gen 6. 2; 4, Deut 32:8, Job 1:6. 2:1, 38:7. 376 Job 1:6; 2:1; 33:7; Ps 29:1; 89:6, maybe Deut 32:8; Ps 82:6, Dan 3:25. Wayne Bridle, “A Definition of the Title ‘Son of God’ in The Synoptic Gospels” (PhD diss., Dallas Theological Seminary, 1988), 71-72. 377 Hos. 11:1, Ex 4:22. God is the father of Israel (Ex 4:22, Isa 63:16, Deut. 32:6, 2 Sam. 7:14, Ps 68:5; 103:13), Israel is like a rebellious son (Isa 30:1) or unwise (Hos 13:13). Israel is a firstborn son in Ex 4:22 and Jer 31:9. The plural form refers to Israelites (Deut 32:19, Isa 1:2), godly Israelites (Hos 1:10), or unjust judges (Ps 82:6). Bridle, “A Definition of the Title ‘Son of God’ in The Synoptic Gospels,” 76. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 91 Davidic kings,378 or some divine being.379 In the intertestamental period, the expression was used regarding Israel,380 and Hellenistic literature used it to describe heroes or emperors.381 These different usages demonstrate how a varied audience in the first century C.E. could have understood the expression in distinct ways. Mark uses the expression to give it a specific sense and link it with his first composite citation and with Jesus.382 The Way as Comfort/Hope and Redemption The book of Isaiah, especially 40:1-5, has been used constantly by Jewish interpreters as a promise of eschatological comfort. Some Dead Sea Scrolls refer to the biblical text as consolation.383 Being oppressed by conquerors, Israel presumably found words of comfort important. Isa 40.1- 5 was considered a classic declaration of the consolation to come from God.384 In his composite citation, Mark implies that the gospel is the expected message of hope. 378 2 Sam 7:12-16, 1 Chr 17:13; 22:10; 28:6; Ps 2:7; 89:26-27. It is possible that in the ANE, the expression would have been accepted as God’s firstborn Son. “It is certainly noteworthy that when Jesus was asked by the High Priest whether He was the Son of God, He responded by paraphrasing a combination of Daniel 7:13 and Psalm 110:1.” Bridle, “A Definition of the Title ‘Son of God’ in The Synoptic Gospels,” 95–96. 380 Wis 2:16-18 describes a man who claims to be God’s son, demonstrating that he is no better than the ones who tested him. The larger context refers to the Jews who remained faithful to the law as God’s children. Jan Joosten, “Son of God in Wisdom 2:16-18: Between the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament,” in Son of God: Divine Sonship in Jewish and Christian Antiquity, ed. Garrick V. Allen et al. (University Park, PA: Eisenbrauns, 2019), 41– 52. 381 No individual angel was called son of God according to Heb 1:5. The significance of the reference to ‘sons of God’ in Gen 6:2 is debated. Bridle, “A Definition of the Title ‘Son of God’ in The Synoptic Gospels,” 3. 4Q246 uses the expression to refer to the leader of an eternal kingdom: “He will be called son of God, and they will call him son of the Most High. Like the sparks … His kingdom will be an eternal kingdom” 4Q26 Col II, lines 1-5. Martínez and Tigchelaar, The Dead Sea Scrolls Study Edition (Translations). 382 Mark uses the expression to refer to Jesus in his introduction and his narrative, and the context of the composite citation equates it to God by applying to Jesus what is applied to God in Jewish Scriptures. The expression is used extensively in the Gospels (Matt 4:3-6; 5:9; 8:29; Mark 15:39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:3, amongst others) and sometimes indirectly (for example, Mark 1:11 and Luke 3:21-22 “You are my beloved Son;” or John 1:14 “the only Son from the Father”). Sometimes, the expression refers to Adam or believers; in Luke 3:38, Adam is “the son of God,” and in the Epistles, the title is sometimes applied to believers in God (Rom 8:14;19). 383 1 Q176.4-7 “there is no one to bury them. And from the book of Isaiah: Words of consolation. Be consoled, consoled, my people! … in the wilderness clear the path…” 384 Snodgrass offers some examples of later Jewish understanding of Isa 40, like the reading in the Pesikta Rabbati (a collection of Midrash from the 9th century). Snodgrass, “Streams of Tradition Emerging from Isaiah 40,” 32. 379 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 92 In Bar. 5.7, a chapter on repentance and redemption, its author385 adapts Isa 40:4 to describe God’s reception of his people as they express their sorrow.386 It understands the way as the place for the exiles to walk.387 In a similar manner, Mark presents the gospel as the way of the Lord. The Wilderness388 Philo saw the wilderness as the proper place for God to give Israel his commandments.389 Josephus alludes to the Judean desert as a place of preparation (J. W. 2.13.6 §§ 264-265; 7.11.1 §§ 438; 6.6.3 §§ 351) and rabbis believed the Messiah would replicate the life of Moses.390 In the mind of some Jews from the first century, the wilderness was a location for the preparation of God’s way and/or repentance. The punctuation of the MT of Isa. 40:3 reads as “the voice of one crying: ‘in the wilderness prepare the way of the Lord,’” and it may have influenced some groups to move to desert areas to prepare for YHWH’s second coming. The wilderness is also the place of the establishment of the covenant with Israel, the presentation of Israel’s election, and the place of rebellion. One could say that “the premises of Israel’s cult are established in the desert,”391 as well as her identity. 385 Baruch is a pseudonymous text preserved in the LXX Greek text and supposedly written for post-exilic Jews. It was written somewhere between 300 BCE and 135 CE. Saldarini, Anthony J. “Baruch, Book of,” David Noel Freedman, Allen C. Myers, and Astrid B. Beck, eds., Eerdman Dictionary of the Bible (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2000). 386 “For God has ordered that every high mountain and the everlasting hills be made low and the valleys filled up, to make level ground, so that Israel may walk safely in the glory of God.” NRS Bible. 387 Snodgrass, “Streams of Tradition Emerging from Isaiah 40,” 31. 388 It is noteworthy that the term wilderness, ἔρημος, should be understood in the sense of ‘a state of isolation’, and not as the stereotypical desert of the far-west or the modern images of the Sahara. The presence of the Jordan, or the implied food and clothing of the wilderness, does not negate the sense of wilderness. 389 In his writing, he explains that God chose to prepare his people for the reception of the law because of the “unspeakable evils” found in cities (Decal. I.2). 390 Mauser discusses Josephus’s accusation against some groups who were preparing for the eschatological Messiah in the wilderness, but who also disturbed social order, as seen in De bello Judaico II, 258-60; 261-3. Ulrich W. Mauser, Christ in the Wilderness: The Wilderness Theme in the Second Gospel and Its Basis in the Biblical Tradition, Repr. ed. (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2009), 55–57. 391 Mauser, Christ in the Wilderness, 25. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 93 Summary of Social, Cultural and Ideological Texture An overview of the traditional use of some of the composite motifs and texts shows that Mark’s use of “Son of God” requires further explanation.392 Effectively, the wilderness as a location for Israel’s eschatological preparation and repentance would be identified by a Jewish audience. Isa 40 could also be recognized as announcing hope and comfort393, making a natural association between good news and Isa 40, and possibly messianic expectation.394 Conclusion and Evaluation One of the chief difficulties of Mark 1:1-3 is the prelude of the citation “as it is written in Isaiah the prophet” (1:2a),” but the solution to the so-called problem of a wrong attribution is quite simple and elegant: Isaiah announced the gospel that Jesus was now bringing and what follows elaborates this declaration. 395 The composite citation therefore acts as the transition from the ‘title’—that is “the origin of the gospel of Jesus”—to the gospel’s introduction in Galilee and Judea that is facilitated by a messenger/herald announcing the coming of a King/God. Understood this way, Mark’s introduction formula should not be understood as a mistake introduced by Mark or an unknown editor, but as a comment on the message of good news introduced by Jesus and prophesied by Isaiah. We should therefore understand Mark’s 392 In his Gospel, Mark often uses the expression in a cryptic manner, which probably led to the so-called messianic secret. Reading Mark’s Gospel, a 21st century reader gets the impression that Mark wants his audience to deduce Jesus’ divinity and messianic role instead of informing the listeners directly. Nevertheless, a public reader could have added explanations, and a reading of the rest of Mark’s Gospel furthers one’s understanding. 393 For a longer discussion on the good news according to Isaiah found in the New Testament, see “The New Testament’s Usage of Isaiah” in Brevard S. Childs, The Struggle to Understand Isaiah as Christian Scripture (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2004). 394 Josephus mentions some impostors who led others to the wilderness to witness some wonders and signs from God (A.J. 20.8.6 §§ 167). He also mentions men who would lead others to the wilderness to see the signals of liberty from God (J. W. 2.13.4 §§ 259), and an Egyptian who pretended to be a prophet and who let many through the wilderness (J.W. 2.13.5 §§ 261). These texts hint at a popular expectation that God would reveal himself in the wilderness and that the Messiah would lead people there. See also the reference to “the Egyptian who led 4,000 into the wilderness” in Acts 21:38. 395 It is likely that the introduction formula creates a “bridge between what has preceded and the quotation that follows. Guelich, “‘The Beginning of the Gospel,’” 6. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 94 introduction as: “(It is) the beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, as it is written in Isaiah the prophet: ‘Behold, I send my messenger…’” In the book of Isaiah, the notion of good news is addressed in various ways 396 and the author could easily be considered as a prophet of gospel—YHWH’s good news—in Jewish Scriptures.397 Even if one does not consider the introduction formula as a transition, it is still possible to understand the composite citation as an announcement of John the Baptist’s role, with Malachi and Exodus used as support for Isaiah’s message. Mark is using Isaiah to read and interpret Malachi and Exodus and shows that God’s intent is interlaced in different parts of the OT. Mark’s composite citation in 1:2-3 is intentionally woven into the fabric of his introductory discourse. The Gospel’s introduction stands as the interpretative frame for the section—and the whole book—since it presents the Markan author’s principal subject. Although Mark’s first audience is sometimes described as Greco-Roman,398 the author seems very interested in Jewish texts and themes from the very beginning.399 Mark uses themes of gospel, Deity/Messiah, wilderness, repentance, prophecy/proclamation, and the Holy Spirit in the larger Gaiser presents a good overview of Isaiah’s different uses of ‫( בׂשר‬bring good news) and other texts presenting the hope to come. Most texts come from Isa 40–66. Six important verses are 40:9; 41:27; 52:5; 60:6; 61:1. Frederick J. Gaiser, “The Gospel According to Isaiah,” WW 38, no. 3 (2018): 239–51. 397 “The fact that Mark claimed that the beginning of the gospel was ‘as it is written in the prophet Isaiah’ suggests that he was well aware that the prophet had proclaimed ‘good news’.” Hooker, “Isaiah in Mark’s Gospel,” 37. 398 For a more detailed discussion on the various possibilities, see Strauss, Mark, 2014, 32–37. In light of Mark’s use of the OT text, it is more likely that the audience was mixed. 399 They are not mutually exclusive; a Christian Greco-Roman would receive the authority of the Jewish Scriptures. However, Mark’s interest in Jewish Scriptures makes it unlikely that the Gospel was written primarily as an evangelistic message for non-believing Greco-Roman audiences (unless a preacher was always expected to explain the relevancy of the citation). 396 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 95 pericope of 1:1-15.400 The composite citation’s key themes are Deity/Messiah, wilderness, preparation of the way/proclamations. Deity/Messiah Mark’s first composite citation acts as the preface for the gospel in the world; one could say that it presents the gospel’s first steps in the first century. The citation underlines the divine and kingly origin of the one who made the good news possible: prophets have announced his coming, and a herald announces his arrival in this proclamation. Mark first declares Jesus to be the “Christ,” and announces that he is also the Son of God—and he uses the composite citation to demonstrate this. Doing so, Mark is in essence declaring his Christology in this order: Jesus is the Messiah, he is the Son of God, and he is God’s equal. The composite citation becomes Mark’s proof for Jesus’ Deity and his proof of fulfillment. While some part of the audience, especially unbelievers, may not have received this demonstration easily, most believers would have accepted it without much hesitation. Jesus’ Deity and his role as a Messiah are further underlined in Mark’s narrative. Jesus’ Deity is more subtle in the composite citation—unless one recognized the divine name κύριος, which a Jewish audience would have noticed easily. The audience would need to recognize the original literary context of the composite citation to realize that Mark is applying to Jesus what was prophesied about God, which should not be a problem for the early Church. By itself, the composite citation acts like an encouragement to reflect and notice the invitation to 400 McWhirter uses Ps 110:1, 2 Sam 7:14 and Ps 2:7, Gal 3 and many more passages to demonstrate a messianic understanding of the early Church. McWhirter, “Messianic Exegesis in Mark 1:2-3.” I propose that Mark introduced the theme of the Messiah later in the book, but that it was not the main point of 1:2-3. Mark sees no difficulties in transferring the content applying to God in the OT (“your way”) to Jesus. Mark 1:2-3 presents an implied messianic message—which could have been recognized by an audience familiar with the relation between the Messiah and divinity—but at this point, the author is more concerned with Jesus’ divinity and the Gospel. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 96 believe in Jesus’ Deity. In context, it acts as a commentary and proof that Jewish Scriptures affirm Jesus’ Deity, and teach about him. Wilderness The theme of wilderness also implies a meeting with God where judgment and promises of blessing intertwine. All those concepts would have been recognized by a Jewish audience as the wilderness (literally, metaphorically or both) was considered a place of repentance and preparation preceding a future blessing of the land and its people. It is likely that the early Church would also have recognized this understanding based on Jewish Scriptures.401 Therefore, the preparation of Mark 1:2-3 points to the necessity of repentance—the only way to turn away from rebellion.402 The proclamation is part of this preparation and is illustrated by the terms “voice…crying” and “messenger” who, by nature, has something official to communicate. While Mark does not literally say that the messenger is John, he implies it by introducing him without further elaboration, and by putting emphasis on his role as the one to proclaim and baptize following repentance.403 Preparation of the way/Proclamation Malachi’s messenger announces judgment in contrast with Isaiah’s eschatological hope, and Mark amalgamates both ideas. His citation is followed by a call to repentance. In Jewish Scriptures, calls to repentance were often incorporating elements of blessings with warning of judgment if the prophet’s message was not received. This implies that John the Baptist was a 401 Paul used the theme of the wilderness when he wrote to the Corinthians in 1 Cor 10:1-13 in his warning against idolatry, Stephen used similar vocabulary when he exposed Israel’s disobedience in Acts 7, and the writer of Heb 3:7- 11 alludes to a “voice,” the Holy Spirit, and the wilderness in his warning against rebellion. 402 Μετάνοια should be understood as a “change of mind” or “repentance, turning about, conversion,” BDAG, 640. 403 Mark’s application of the title “messenger” points to John the Baptist who was, in the wilderness, proclaiming repentance. However, Mark uses the theme of wilderness also as the location of the preparation for Jesus. It is the location for the voice of the messenger, the location of Jesus’ baptism (1:9-11) and his temptation (1:12-13). It is safe to say the wilderness was the proper location for both the voice and the preparation in Mark’s understanding. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 97 prophet whose life ended as tragically as some of his predecessors. It also implies that John had a crucial and prophetic role to play, and this was announced in Jewish Scriptures. Mark uses this composite citation to present his Christology, and the various themes to introduce many different allusions and motifs, but he also—and mostly—introduces John’s task and responsibility in preparing those who would listen to him to follow Jesus. John appears as the final messenger to come before the return of YHWH. This is important for the audience to discern because John’s presence announces the inevitable coming of blessings and judgment, but it also points to Jesus coming as God.404 John the Baptist’s ministry may have been presented by Mark as very short, but just as a little pebble played such an important role in David’s victory over Goliath, John played a role that was as glorious as it was succinctly narrated. The composite citation underlines his role as the role of a prophet: the one who proclaims the message that came from God to invite people to turn back and follow his way. The composite citation acts as prophecy of fulfilment and effectively proves that John’s involvement was prophesied. Mark nicely wraps up his prologue with a temporary conclusion and transition for the narrative in 1:14-15. Only after John was handed over does Jesus begin his own proclamation in Mark’s narrative.405 The end of John’s ministry begins Jesus’ official role: it is the end of Mark’s beginning. The Rhetorical Role of the Composite Citation In the larger pericope of Mark 1:1-15, the composite citation functions as an anchor for the text by introducing many elements of the narrative. The question is: How would the audience 404 By referring to John as the prophet Elijah who was to come before the Lord, Mark underlines the fact that the one who is to come after the ‘prophet’ is God himself. Hooker, “Isaiah in Mark’s Gospel,” 37. 405 Matt 4:12 agrees with Mark; Luke implies that Jesus’ ministry began after John’s arrest (Luke 3:20), but does not state it; John presents Jesus as teaching and doing miracles during John the Baptist’s ministry (John 3:24). How each evangelist understood the beginning of Jesus’ public ministry remains unclear. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 98 have received the message of these three citations, and was it more effective rhetorically to express it as a composite citation than as three separate and independent citations quoted distinctly? A Jewish audience would have been more prepared to understand all the nuances of the composite citation of Mark 1:2-3. Jesus as God and Messiah would have been recognized by the early Church and Mark’s narrative points to both. The origin of the citations should have been recognized with their notion of exodus and of the return of YHWH by those who were familiar with the Jewish Scriptures. They would also have been better prepared for the implication of John as the last messenger to come before God’s second coming. It also supports Jesus’ status as YHWH’s prophet when many thought prophecy had ceased until the time of the Messiah. A Gentile audience not previously exposed to the message of the Gospel would probably have been interested by the pairing of the expression “Son of God” with a herald announcing a powerful leader, a king, or an emperor. Non-believing Gentiles would probably not have recognized the implication of the wilderness but would have understood the importance of a divine king announced by prophecy. More than the Jews, they would have accepted more easily Jesus as “Son of God” in his humanity. Paul and the author of the book of Hebrews use Jesus’ titles of Messiah and Son of God, as well as themes of wilderness in association with repentance, therefore the early Church should have noticed the connections. Especially if guided by a teacher, an audience from the early Church should not have had difficulties recognizing all the implications of Mark’s composite citation, although the promises of blessings may have been more difficult to recognize as the following narrative focusses on repentance. All the distinct groups should have recognized the notion of the gospel, either as godly action or as good news of WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 99 victory. 406 Jews and Christians should have appreciated that the gospel was initiated by God for covenant purposes—and how this signaled the next phase of human salvation. Woven in the narrative, the composite citation announces something that is to come, and which is accomplished with John’s appearance in v. 4. By combining texts, the author of the composite citations combines two steps through the prophecy: the coming last messenger, and the coming Lord—and two messages: one of coming judgment and one of coming blessing. It is more efficient as a rhetorical message for the ones who recognize the original texts and their literary context, but still stands well without such foreknowledge because of the common themes continuing in the narrative. It is probably the combination of themes and theology that is the most remarkable in Mark’s first composite citation. In a very few lines, the originator of the composite citation was able to introduce motifs of Deity/Messiah, wilderness/preparation of the way (the exodus), and prophecy/proclamations announcing John’s role. Doing so, he demonstrated literary skills by using prophecies of accomplishment to interpret their co-texts407 and dramatize the citations.408 Removing superfluous material409 gave the author the possibility to emphasize more efficiently Mark may very well have used the term ‘Gospel’ also in its military sense since God’s coming represents victory over Israel’s enemies, especially considering Isa 40 and its implication of a military victory associated with a new exodus. Mark does not use the motif of military victory in his introduction. However, a first-century audience might have linked the notion of victory with the good news, even if this would not be as natural for a twenty-first century audience. 407 As discussed in ch. 1, Piégay-Gros and Dodd’s theories claim that authors use citation to refer to more than words, they also use the co-text of citation to allow for a deeper or metaphorical meaning. 408 As discussed earlier, Wierzbicka believes that citations transfer to the audience the power of interpretation. This allows audiences to discover by themselves what the author has discovered. Wierzbicka, “The Semantics of Direct and Indirect Discourse.” It is also the proper interpretation of what YHWH intended to communicate to Israel, but the truth of which the contemporary Jewish leaders did not discern. 409 For example, if the originator of the composite citation had cited Mal 3:1, he would have added “And the Lord whom you seek will suddenly come to his temple; and the messenger of the covenant in whom you delight, behold, he is coming, says the Lord of hosts.” However, that more complete citation would have complicated the discussion with its location to the temple. The same principle applies to Ex 23:20 “… and to bring you to the place that I have prepared.” Exodus refers to a new land, while Mark’s first composite citation discusses the coming of the one 406 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 100 the desired message, making the composite citation a compelling rhetorical tool, more efficient than three separate citations. Mark’s first composite citation is a good example of the rhetorical power of a composite citation. It creates a meaningfully efficient text. It offers a pithy line speaking of expectations, and about the one bringing the gospel. The audience is encouraged to ponder Isaiah’s prophecy and agree with the author. It is Mark’s invitation to repent and follow Jesus on the way. bringing the gospel. Composite citation allows authors to remove material distracting from the key point, and focus attention on specific elements. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 101 Chapter 4 Composite Citation in Mark 12:19 Why are fire trucks red? Because they have eight wheels and four people on them, and four plus eight makes twelve, and there are twelve inches in a foot, and one foot is a ruler, and Queen Elizabeth was a ruler, and Queen Elizabeth was also a ship, and the ship sailed the seas, and there were fish in the seas, and fish have fins, and the Finns fought the Russians, and the Russians are red, and fire trucks are always “Russian” around, so that’s why fire trucks are red! —Anonymous Someone reading Mark 12:18-27 may at first wonder at the logic behind the text. Sadducees come into the scene and present an exaggerated ‘real’-life situation about marriage status after death. Jesus offers the example of Moses with the burning bush to retort that they are wrong. The entire episode seems like the summary of implied debates which can only be read between the lines, making the logic of the story difficult to follow without some background information shared by the speaker/writer and the intended audience. Within this synopsis, Mark uses a small summary: a rewording of the law of levirate marriage briefly retold in a composite citation found in Mark 12:19. This chapter considers mainly the composite citation in Mark 12:19, but also explores its function in the larger narrative of Mark 12:18-27. This chapter examines how and why a collective character (the Sadducees) in Mark 12:18-27 uses a composite citation in a debate with Jesus and what rhetorical purpose this collective character, as well as the Markan author, intended to achieve by this strategy. The composite citation found in Mark 12:19 is not a formal quotation like the example found in Mark 1:2-3. It is nevertheless a citation because it introduces WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 102 written material from previous tradition—in this case the Jewish Scriptures. As mentioned in the introduction, composite citations are recognized by three main characteristics: they are the reproduction of some of the exacts words of previously written material, they are introduced in some manner as coming from tradition, and they combine written material from more than one source and make them appear as coming from a unique origin. The material in 12:19 reflects all three of these elements. The composite citation found in Mark 12:19 acts as a synopsis. Abbreviating sections of literature was a technique learnt in ancient education.410 Summarizing allowed an author to provide an easier reading by removing irrelevant material and by providing a better flow for the narrative without unnecessary details.411 Summaries acted as recapitulation by alluding to texts previously known to an audience, or by providing the key points to an uninformed audience.412 Examples of summaries are also found in the Dead Sea Scrolls where the Jewish Scriptures are discussed.413 As explained in the Institutio Oratoria of Quintilian, book 9.2, as well as Theon’s Prog. 107. Sean A. Adams, “Greek Education and Composite Citations of Homer,” in Composite Citations in Antiquity: Jewish, Graeco-Roman, and Early Christian Uses, 30. 411 For example, in his defence of Homer (Homeric Questions) Porphyry creates summative composite citations by combining sections of Homer to fit his discussion. (Hom. 12.127-32 §5). Adams, “Greek Education and Composite Citations of Homer,” 19–20. 412 An example of such recapitulation is found in Justin, Dial. 76.7 “For He exclaimed before His crucifixion: The Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected by the Scribes and Pharisees, and be crucified, and on the third day rise again. And David predicted that He would be born from the womb before sun and moon, according to the Father’s will, and made Him known, being Christ, as God strong and to be worshipped.” Justin uses key words to tell the story of the crucifixion in an abridged manner. P. Bobichon, “Composite Features and Citations in Justin Martyr’s Textual Composition,” in Composite Citations in Antiquity: Jewish, Graeco-Roman, and Early Christian Uses, 179. 413 For example, in the Damascus Document col. III (or 4Q269 2), the author speaks of Israel’s faults in the wilderness and the following consequences by presenting a few facts adapted to his discussion. “1 [… Deut 9:23 «Go and possess [the land»….]; 2 [… and they did not listen to the voice of their creator] and did not pay attention [to the precepts]; 3 [he had taught them and murmured in their tents. And the wrath] of God [flared up] against their congregation. And their son[s]; 4 [died] through [it,] and through it their kings were cut off, and their warriors perished] through it, and through it their land was laid waste. 5 [… Through it] the very first to enter the covenant [made themselves guilty]; 6 [and were delivered up to the sword, for having deserted God’s covenant and having chosen] their whims and having followed” (4Q269 Frag. 2). Martínez and Tigchelaar, The Dead Sea Scrolls Study Edition (Translations). 410 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 103 The difference between an allusion and a summary is subtle, and at times impossible to discern. Within this thesis, the line is drawn between citations where verbal parallels are sufficient for the recognition of preceding tradition, and allusions where verbal parallels are vague which refer to events more than to a specific text. A good example of a text qualifying as a summary, but not as a composite citation, is Mark 2:25-26 where Jesus gives a synopsis of David’s history when he ate the “bread of the Presence” in the temple. It is a very effective summary, but it is not introduced by the author as coming from previous tradition and verbal parallelism is scarce. It could therefore be considered as an allusion referring to a specific event.414 This arbitrary distinction is only useful when labels are necessary to distinguish forms. As Mark 12:19 includes an introduction formula (“Moses wrote for us”), a combination of a text from Deut 25:5-7 with a clear verbal parallel with Gen 38:8, it is a composite citation.415 Nonetheless, it is different from the other composite citations examined in this thesis because it is mostly a rewording of tradition with a concluding citation, instead of two verbatim combined citations.416 As a combined citation, it acts as part of the rhetorical message conveyed by its originator.417 In this chapter, the different issues surrounding this composite citation are briefly addressed in their use as part of the Sadducees’ questioning, the effect produced by such a summary and its probable reception by the Sadducees’ audience, and Mark’s implied audience. 414 Since most faithful Jews knew about the Israelite Law and narratives from Jewish Scriptures, it is likely that such summaries were common in teaching. When the point is to allude to previous knowledge, verbatim citations are not always necessary, especially when they came from extensive texts. 415 “Summarizing or condensing a longer speech, saying, or text into a shorter citation, while still presenting the citation as a complete text, has the appearance of being a composite citation.” Ehorn, “Composite Citations in Plutarch,” 2016, 42. 416 I will not expand further on the difference between citation and allusion (an evocation of an event, usually recognized by limited verbal parallelism) as the main point of this analysis is to understand how this combination is more effective than simple quotes. To differentiate between allusion and citation is important when it comes to categorization and rhetorical usage, but not essential for comprehension or interpretation since the label does not affect their function in the text. 417 As discussed later, the originator could be the Sadducees themselves, or Mark himself as he was trying to summarize the law of levirate marriage. 104 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK In this case, the composite citation of Mark 12:19 functions on two levels: it acts as a response for the Sadducees, and it is used in the Markan narrative. Both levels are connected one within the other—like Russian dolls—but still independent in their function. The composite citation itself is not very complicated, but since it operates on two levels within the narrative text, both rhetorical effects are discussed below. This chapter shows how the Markan author was able to use this introduction to the idea of resurrection—despite its detour into the levirate marriage—to consolidate Jesus’ authority. “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 widow and raise up offspring for his brother.” Mark 12:19 Inner Texture of the NT418 This section first looks at the larger co-text surrounding the composite citation, and it considers how Mark presents his message in the smaller pericope, namely the presentation by the Sadducees (12:18-22). Διδάσκαλε, Μωϋσῆς ἔγραψεν ἡμῖν ὅτι ἐάν τινος ἀδελφὸς ἀποθάνῃ καὶ καταλίπῃ γυναῖκα καὶ μὴ ἀφῇ τέκνον, ἵνα λάβῃ ὁ ἀδελφὸς αὐτοῦ τὴν γυναῖκα καὶ ἐξαναστήσῃ σπέρμα τῷ ἀδελφῷ αὐτοῦ Mark 12:19 This composite citation occurs in a dialogue between Jesus and the Sadducees, related in 12:18-22 and placed within the larger narrative of the end of chapter 11 and chapter 12. Following the cursing of the fig tree (11:12-25), the authority of Jesus is challenged when he 418 This includes observing within the text: the repetitive and progressive patterns, the structure of the pericope (opening-middle-closing), the narration, the argumentation, and the aesthetic of the text. Analysis of patterns, repetitions, and structure aims to establish the limits of the pericope, and to understand the nature of the discourse and the construction of the argument. The narration, argumentation and aesthetic inform the interpreter about the different devices used to create effects and argumentation as they relate to the writer’s presumed culture. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 105 returns to Jerusalem (11:27). Chief priests, scribes and elders meet Jesus as he is walking in the temple and ask him on whose authority he does “these things” (11:27-28).419 Jesus answers with a question, and the narrative continues with a parable from Jesus (12:1-9) and a quote from Ps 118:22 addressing the question of Jesus’ authority (12:10-11).420 The Greek conjunction καὶ preceding the parable associates it with the Pharisees’ question. Jesus told the Pharisees that he would not answer by what authority he does “these things” (11:33), but he continues by illustrating the source of his authority by means of a parable.421 Mark uses this parable and the following quote (12:10-11) to underline the main theme of Mark 12—the question of Jesus’ authority—by addressing themes of authority, rejection and approbation from God. Despite the previous mention of their departure (12:12), “they” send some Pharisees and Herodians to trap Jesus (12:13). The location of the discussion appears to be in the temple as Jesus is mentioned walking there (11:27).422 419 As this episode follows the pericope of the incident in the temple described in 11:15-19, the audience is led to believe that “these things” refer to the events of the preceding day, which could include the teaching, and possibly the episode of the so-called ‘cleansing’ of the temple. Both suggest authority. 420 Interesting to note that the parable and the following quote end up answering the question from the chief priests and the scribes and the elders from 11:27. In Mark 11:27-33, Jesus is asked about the source of his authority, and he answers by asking his opponents the source of John the Baptist’s authority. The opponents refuse to answer because they realize the possible implication of their answer. Jesus then refuses to answer as well. This episode is a good example of what Daube describes as a ‘Socratic Interrogation’ where a hostile question is asked, a counter-question is offered and the enemy is forced to concede by answering. Jesus’ ambiguous answer corresponds to the conventions of his time regarding public debates in a Greco-Roman world. David Daube, The New Testament and Rabbinic Judaism, Repr. (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1998), 151–53. 421 Unless, of course, the parable was told elsewhere and Mark introduced it in this location. Since Matthew (21:3346) and Luke (20:9-19) record their version of the parable in similar situations concerning the authority of Jesus, they have similar sources or follow Mark. Therefore, they agree with Mark’s grouping (even if Matthew adds more parables). The Parable of the Tenants is a good way to answer indirectly the Pharisees’ question and focus on the important aspect of the rejection of this authority. 422 It is possible that the various events and discussions found in these passages happened at various points during the day (or days) and were summarized in this passage. Matthew and Luke respect the same sequence (except for the discussion of the great commandment in Luke) and they may have used a similar tradition (Q, Mark, or other). It is impossible to confirm if the grouping was in the same time and space, or thematic, despite the fact that nothing suggests that a chronological order would be unlikely. Matthew incorporates his version of the Parable of the Tenants (21:33-44) between two other parables: the Parable of the Two Sons (21:28-32) and the Parable of the Wedding Feast (22:1-14). He also underlines how Jesus’ authority is challenged (21:23-27) and continues the parables with some debates about paying taxes (22:15-22) and the resurrection (22:23-33). Luke follows Mark in presenting a challenge to Jesus’ authority (20:1-8), presents his version of the Parable of the Tenants (20:9-18), and continues with a discussion about paying taxes and about the resurrection. After the narration of the parable of the WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 106 Mark integrated the composite citation in a series of dialogues regarding specific questions;423 the first was designed to trap Jesus (12:13); the context shows that the second— which includes the composite citation—was designed as a ambush as well.424 The third and fourth dialogues—Jesus’ question about the son of David and the discussion about the greatest commandment—do not appear to be controversy stories, but still pursue the pattern of dialogues concerning Jesus’ authority. In chapter 12, Mark underlines the motif of conflict with his choice of words.425 The traps begin with a monetary issue about the necessity to pay taxes (12:13-17); it is a question filled with political undertones.426 The motif of awe is also present: Jesus answers with wisdom and Tenants (12:1-11), Mark notes that “they were seeking to arrest him” (12:12), implying that “they” refers back to the leaders of 11:27—the “chief priests and the scribes and the elders.” Mark’s narrative simply indicates that Jesus told a parable to “them,” but it is safe to assume that the chief priests, the scribes and the elders from v. 27 are still present at this point. As Jesus is accompanied by his disciples and is teaching in a public place, the audience is probably quite large. 423 Daube (and later Hooker who reflects on his ideas) discuss the possibility that the questions were combined as part of a Passover Haggadah in a Jewish-Christian community, in a manner that would be familiar to first-century Rabbis (and found in the Haggadah of the Seder). Daube suggests that the same order of questions in Mark 12 is found in Passover: a legal question, a provoking question, a simple question, and a question difficult to ask so the authority figure uses it to teach. Daube claims that the same grouping is found in the earlier Babylonian Talmud (B. Nid. 69 b-71a) dated 500–600 CE. However, some literary gymnastics are necessary to make the case, and it is impossible to prove precedent, especially since the example from the Babylonian Talmud is unrelated to Passover. Hooker proposes that even if Daube is wrong, the four different types of question may have been grouped to prove Jesus’ authority. Nevertheless, nothing in the text prevents us from deducing that the questions were grouped because of their chronicity and their relation to Jesus’ authority (except maybe the question of the great commandment that Luke places elsewhere). Daube, The New Testament and Rabbinic Judaism, 158–66; Hooker, Gospel According to Saint Mark, 278–79. 424 The third question seems genuine and Jesus’ reaction is positive (12:34a). The fourth question is asked by Jesus (12:35-37) and seems to create a transition to subsequent teaching about scribes (12:38-40). Matthew follows Mark’s sequence of questions, but includes positive reaction from the crowd after Jesus’ answer to the Sadducees (Matt 22:15-46). Luke preserves three of the questions (20:19-44), but placed the discussion about the great commandment elsewhere (10:25–28). 425 Such as “by what authority … seeking to arrest him … to trap him” (11:28-12:13). 426 Josephus mentions that most Jews accepted to pay the tax imposed by Rome, but some revolted against it, considering it as idolatrous (Josephus, A.J. 18.1.1 §§ 1-3; J. W. 2.8.1 §§ 117-118). The identity of the “Herodians” is questionable, but Mark alludes to them once before in 3:6. Luke avoids the title completely in his rendering of the same episode. Josephus mentions those that “were for Herod” (J. W. 1.16.6 §§ 319). It is likely that the Herodians were followers of Herod in some manner, and if they were, they would have been in favour of the tax. Pharisees were more likely divided on the subject if one follows Josephus’ words. For a longer discussion, see Guelich, Mark 1-8, 137–38. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 107 “they marvelled at him” (12:17), and “… after that no one dared to ask him any more questions” (12:34). In the pericope of 12:18-23, the narration moves on to the Sadducees who now come to interrogate Jesus.427 Mark includes a brief description to qualify the group: “who say that there is no resurrection” (12:18) and it is used to introduce the question, beginning with the vocative of διδάσκαλος.428 It is followed by the introduction formula for the composite citation: “Moses wrote429 for us that…” (11:19), locating the origin of the citation in the Pentateuch. By mentioning the name of Moses, the Sadducees present their case from a very authoritative source. They set the scene to make Jesus appear as Moses’ opponent if he rejects their position. The question asked in v. 23 is based on a summary of the law of levirate marriage 430 that appears in v. 19. Some vocabulary is repetitive in the phrasing of the Sadducees’ question (12:19-23). The word γυνή is repeated six times (twice in the composite citation), and translated Evans wonders why Sadducees would “take any interest in an itinerant teacher from Galilee?” and assumes that the story happened elsewhere, if it happened at all. He also finds the discussion out of place as the discussion centers on “the temple establishment and policies on which Jesus is critical.” However, Jesus’ popularity can explain the Sadducees’ interest more easily than his origins, and the larger discussions of Mark 12 seem to center more on Jesus’ authority than his provenance. There is no valid reason to consider the episode as unauthentic. Craig A. Evans, Mark 8:27-16:20, Volume 34B, 151-152. 428 The title διδάσκαλος was given to people who were recognized as teachers the same way a scribe or a Pharisee would (instead of a simple διδάσκων). According to John 1:38, it is a title comparable to “rabbi.” At times, the titles are used as synonymous: Jesus uses the title διδάσκαλος when he talks about Nicodemus (John 3:10) and Nicodemus addresses him as ῥαββί, describing him as διδάσκαλος (John 3:2). However, whereas ῥαββί could be used as an honorary title (for example Mark 9:5), διδάσκαλος was usually used for those who studied and taught the law in a Jewish setting. This is a title often used in the NT with the sense of ‘teacher’, but should not be considered as a concession of authority. In context, Jesus’ authority is questioned, not recognized. For a more complete discussion, see Gerhard Kittel and Gerhard Friedrich, eds., Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (TDNT), vol. 2, 153. 429 The verb ἔγραψεν is an aorist and it contrasts with the use of a perfect in Mark 1:2-3 (γέγραπται), used to introduce the composite citation (the same prefect tense is also used in 11:17). In Mark 12:36, an aorist is used again with a formal citation, “David himself, in the Holy Spirit, declared…” The use of the aorist in 12:19 may therefore simply be Mark’s way of mentioning a completed action from the past, without any emphasis in its internal workings. Perhaps the aorist is used to refer to the presumed author Moses and his perceived personal involvement in the writing; the same could be said for David in 12:36. In both cases, their intervention is significant since they are both figures of authority. 430 France, The Gospel of Mark, 473, states that, “The existence of a large body of rabbinic law on the subject (Mishnah, tractate Yebamot) indicates that it was still in force in the time of Jesus.” However, since this textual proof is late, it is difficult to confirm how much it would have been put into practice in the first century. 427 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 108 in English versions by woman, wife or widow.431 Brother (ἀδελφός) appears four times, three in the citation. Aside from the use of synonyms for child, the vocabulary is very repetitive.432 Matthew and Luke reformulate Mark’s composite citation slightly but preserve the main sense and the vocabulary.433 The origin of the short story about a woman and her seven brother husbands is uncertain. Matthew’s use of “seven brothers among us” implies a real story,434 but many see it as a fictive scenario.435 The hypothetical case may have been inspired by previous literature. 436 If such a story had previous success in debates between Sadducees and Pharisees, it would be natural to The word γυνή is usually not translated by “widow” but English translations seem to adapt the term to the situation. As the woman (γυνή) is described as a wife who lost her husband, the term “widow” is an appropriate adaptation. 432 The verb to die (ἀποθνῄσκω) appears four times as well, but only once in the citation. The composite citation uses two words as synonymous for child or offspring: τέκνον and σπέρμα, but only σπέρμα is used in the following example about a wife with seven husbands; it is repeated 3 times (12:20-22). Concerning the synonyms for child, I offer possible explanation for this below. It plausibly may simply be Mark’s own narrative style. 433 The vocabulary is very close for the composite citations from the Synoptics: ἐάν τινος ἀδελφὸς ἀποθάνῃ καὶ καταλίπῃ γυναῖκα καὶ μὴ ἀφῇ τέκνον, ἵνα λάβῃ ὁ ἀδελφὸς αὐτοῦ τὴν γυναῖκα καὶ ἐξαναστήσῃ σπέρμα τῷ ἀδελφῷ αὐτοῦ (if a man’s brother dies and leaves a wife, but leaves no child, the man must take the widow and raise up offspring for his brother. Mark 12:19); ἐάν τις ἀποθάνῃ μὴ ἔχων τέκνα, ἐπιγαμβρεύσει ὁ ἀδελφὸς αὐτοῦ τὴν γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ καὶ ἀναστήσει σπέρμα τῷ ἀδελφῷ αὐτοῦ (if a man dies having no children, his brother must marry the widow and raise up offspring for his brother. Matt 22:24); ἐάν τινος ἀδελφὸς ἀποθάνῃ ἔχων γυναῖκα, καὶ οὗτος ἄτεκνος ᾖ, ἵνα λάβῃ ὁ ἀδελφὸς αὐτοῦ τὴν γυναῖκα καὶ ἐξαναστήσῃ σπέρμα τῷ ἀδελφῷ αὐτοῦ (if a man’s brother dies, having a wife but no children, the man must take the widow and raise up offspring for his brother. Luke 20:28.) 434 However, “among us” can be understood as “as part of our tradition/history.” Peter Bolt, “What Were the Sadducees Reading? An Enquiry into the Literary Background of Mark 12:18-23,” TynBul 45, no. 2 (1994): 370 (footnote 5). 435 Mark L. Strauss, Mark, 533; Adela Yarbro Collins, Mark: A Commentary on the Gospel of Mark, Hermeneia—a Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2007), 560; France, The Gospel of Mark, 473. 436 There are some reasons to believe that the Sadducees were referring to the seven Maccabean martyr brothers from 2 Mac 7. However, the story mentions a sad mother instead of a wife (2 Mac. 7:29). If it was the case, the scenario brought by the Sadducees would have been particularly painful for the Pharisees as those martyrs were heroes of faith. It is also possible that the Sadducees referred to the story of Sarah, a woman who had seven husbands (no brothers mentioned) who were each killed by a demon the night of the wedding as told in the book of Tobit (Tob 3:7-9). In the story there is no question of brothers, but Tobias is the closer kinsman who can wed her. Bolt believes that the second possibility is the best explanation for the scenario as Tobit (and 2 Maccabees) would have been known by the general public. He also uses this story to evoke the possibility that there are further themes in common between Mark and Tobit like Israel’s blindness, idolatry, demons, exile, and more. Bolt, “What Were the Sadducees Reading? An Enquiry into the Literary Background of Mark 12:18-23.” His arguments centers on this tenuous allusion to seven brothers as a link between Mark and Tobit. If Mark had desired to further common themes between the books, there would have been much more efficient ways to do it than a passing indirect allusion by Jesus’ opponent. The second problematic is Bolt’s belief that Tobit speaks of the resurrection. His demonstration rests on metaphorical resurrection (like the resurrection of Israel or deliverance from a demon), but not on spiritual or bodily resurrection. To read Tobit’s themes in Mark, one needs to make many accommodations. 431 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 109 present it to Jesus as a particular challenge. Whether the story was a hypothetical scenario or a real-life situation, it is used to ridicule the belief in resurrection by creating a reductio ad absurdum. The Sadducees’ question also assumes that Jesus believes in the resurrection. Since Jesus spoke about his own resurrection in Mark 9:31 and 10:34 using ἀνίστημι, and very likely at various other moments, word of his belief in resurrection may have reached the Sadducees’ ears if they did not hear him themselves.437 If Jesus cannot respond to the Sadducees’ question, his own reputation is at risk since he would appear as a false prophet. Jesus’ answer in 12:24-26 contains two rhetorical questions (12:24, 26) followed by explanations, linking the Sadducees’ question to the larger issue of resurrection. In context, the Sadducees are trying to ridicule Jesus’ belief in resurrection, a belief he shared with the Pharisees. Jesus’ previous answer regarding taxes was brilliant and noncommittal, but now his retort comes in the form of a rebuke and a demonstration. He accuses the Sadducees of neglecting the Scriptures and the power of God.438 Jesus also uses the authority of Moses to answer back to the Sadducees. He cites another text from the Pentateuch—the book/scroll of Moses (Ex 3)—to demonstrate how one can believe in resurrection by realizing how God’s words show he is the God of the living. Luke 20:39 adds that some scribes approved the answer. By including both references to Moses, the narrator ensures that the audience recognizes how Jesus also spoke of eternal life (ζωὴν αἰώνιον) in 10:30. Luke follows Mark closely, but rephrases the first part of the citation slightly. He says ἔχων γυναῖκα, καὶ οὗτος ἄτεκνος ᾖ instead of καὶ καταλίπῃ γυναῖκα καὶ μὴ ἀφῇ τέκνον, possibly for stylistic reasons. Matthew reduces the composite citation by summarizing it even more, but preserves the ending. 438 By their rejection of resurrection, the Sadducees imply that God does not have the power over life and death. Presumably, Sadducees believed they were rejecting non traditional discussions about resurrection and thought that the Bible (especially the Pentateuch) did not teach about it. Ironically, they rejected resurrection because it was implied instead of directly stated, but they questioned Jesus about a law (the law of levirate marriage) where a disbelief in resurrection is not addressed. The only possible link between this law and resurrection is made by assumptions. 437 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 110 Jesus responded with the same source of authority the Sadducees used and did not fall into the trap of being caught as Moses’ opponent. Jesus’ answer is often considered puzzling. Trick offers the useful suggestion that Jesus was telling the Sadducees that they did not understand the Scriptures because they inferred that marriage continues after death—which was illogical since only the dissolution of marriage allowed the widow to remarry on earth.439 If death dissolves marriage covenants, the woman with seven husbands would have none after her death.440 It is likely that Jesus’ reproach was more general and the Sadducees’ lack of understanding went beyond simple lack of comprehension as they failed to realize God’s power revealed in Scriptures. Jesus goes on to clarify that when people rise from the dead, they are like angels. 441 This infers that procreation will not be necessary—which was the main point of marriage from an ancient point of view. After resurrection, people become immortal beings, like angels.442 Jesus pursues his answer by explaining that resurrection is proven by the “passage about the bush” where Moses meets God who declares “I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob” (12:26). This is where the accusations against the Sadducees concerning their misunderstanding of the Scriptures meets their misconception of the power of Bradley R. Trick, “Death, Covenants, and the Proof of Resurrection in Mark 12:18-27,” Nov T 49, no. 3 (2007): 250. 440 “For a married woman is bound by law to her husband while he lives, but if her husband dies, she is released from the law of marriage.” (Rom 7:2) 441 As Wright underlines, it is important to note that the text does not say that people become angels, but that they are like (ὡς) angels. N. T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God: Christian Origins and the Question of God (London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 2003), 421–22. 442 In his article, Thiessen discusses the possibility that first-century inhabitants (Jewish and non-Jewish) believed that angels were considered celestial bodies. From this, he concludes that since angels were stars—and that God’s covenant with Moses implied that his descendants would be “like stars” (he believes that it refers to the state of Abraham’s descendants, and not their number)—it suggests that Jesus is referring to God’s covenant with Abraham when he says that God’s elect will be angels. Matthew Thiessen, “A Buried Pentateuchal Allusion to the Resurrection in Mark 12:25,” CBQ 76, no. 2 (2014): 273–90. It is doubtful that Jesus’ first audience would have made such connections as easily as Thiessen implies. Thiessen’s views also deform slightly the Greek text which does not state that people will become angels, but that they will be like angels (Luke uses another term “ἰσάγγελοι” meaning equal to angels). 439 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 111 God. God’s title in Ex 3:6 is not the result of the actions of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob as worshipers, but it relates to God’s actions: he made a covenant with them and protected them. God’s covenant is alluded to in Ex 3:6 and by Jesus: if Abraham died, where is the aid and protection that God guaranteed? The only way for the covenant to be still valid in Moses’ days is for Abraham to be alive: “God’s faithfulness to his covenant implies the patriarchs’ continuing existence since the patriarchs’ death would have released God from his covenantal obligations.”443 Of course, the author of Exodus may easily have believed that God’s covenant implied a promised land, a long life, many descendants, and nothing more. Regardless, as Dreyfus proposes, Jesus’ understanding goes beyond a temporary alliance; he announces that God is the God of the living, implying a continuity of the covenant.444 Jesus proposes a progressive understanding of Jewish Scriptures that is quite unique. Mark has demonstrated elsewhere that Jesus interprets the Scriptures in a new and authoritative way (Mark 7:14-23). In Mark 12, Jesus is once more demonstrating his superiority in understanding the Jewish Scriptures by applying God’s covenant with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob to life after death. Seen in this light, the discussion with the Sadducees is very adequate in a larger narrative concerning Jesus’ authority; no one is more suited to understand the power of God. Jesus concludes his response as he started it: by stating that the Sadducees are wrong, but Trick, “Death, Covenants, and the Proof of Resurrection in Mark 12:18-27,” 236 (emphasis original). François Dreyfus, “L’argument scripturaire de Jésus en faveur de la résurrection des morts (Marc XII, 26-27),” RB 66, no. 2 (1959): 213–24. Trick believes that Dreyfus is on a good path, however he believes that his argument is insufficient because it implies that there would have been a progression in the biblical revelation. Contra Trick, I believe such progression proves the point as it demonstrates Jesus’ authoritative reading of the Scriptures. Trick also believes that Jesus mentions the “God of the living” because of his promise to give the land to the patriarchs and their descendants, but he nuances it: “a promise whose fulfillment will ultimately require resurrection.” Trick, “Death, Covenants, and the Proof of Resurrection in Mark 12:18-27,” 237. Regardless, this view would limit the covenant to a promise of land only. 443 444 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 112 he rejects their position, not their question.445 In doing so, he demonstrates again his superiority over the so-called experts of the law; this would have been impressive for those in his audience who viewed Sadducees as authorities.446 This episode is followed by another discussion concerning the most important commandment (12:28-34). While it is not presented clearly like another trap, it may have been a controversial question in the Pharisaic community. It is another short segment of narrative demonstrating Jesus’ authority, as are the following short pericopes (12:35-37) about the son of David, and Jesus’ warning against the Scribes (12:38-40). The only small pause in a long list of discussions concerning Jesus’ authority appears in the episode of the widow’s offering (12:4144). It concludes this series of debates and seems placed there to prove the exception to the rule: some still merit Jesus’ approbation despite the temple’s corruption mentioned in chapter 11 and the leaders’ opposition in chapter 12. It contrasts true piety against the background of rejection of the Messiah. It is worth noting that in each dialogue relating to Jesus’ authority, the Markan author takes the time to establish the point of the opponent; there is as much text reserved for the ‘setting of the trap/subject’ as there is for Jesus’ response. From a narrative standpoint, it allows the audience to perceive that Jesus took the time to listen and that the opponents had the opportunity to express their idea properly. Mark also takes time to add a brief conclusion for each confrontation.447 All this underlines how the crowd received Jesus’ answers, and how his 445 The narrative is very succinct and little explanation is offered; however, the context lets the audience deduce that it is the position against the resurrection that Jesus is attacking. It is implied by the description of the Sadducees: “… who say that there is no resurrection…” (12:18). 446 As discussed below, it is likely that the audience had mixed feeling about Sadducees. If they were mixed with the priesthood, their authority may have been difficult to deny. However, if they were often in conflict with Pharisees, it is likely that the general population would not always have been sympathetic to their teaching. 447 “And they marveled at him” (12:17), “You are quite wrong” (12:27), “And after that no one dared to ask him any more questions” (12:34), “And the great throng heard him gladly” (12:34). 113 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK authority was witnessed—and shows to Mark’s audience the correct response to Jesus’ words and actions. Summary of NT Inner Texture The composite citation of Mark 12:19 appears as the summary of the law of levirate marriage incorporated in a debate and designed to trap Jesus. The summary is followed by an exaggerated scenario created to underline the ridiculousness of the opponent’s position: belief in the resurrection. The Sadducees’ question (vv. 19-23) and Jesus’ answer (vv. 24-27) appear in a series of debates concerning Jesus’ authority—presumably as part of a conspiracy to discredit or to eliminate Jesus—narrated as a public discussion between various parties.448 Briefly stated, the summary of the law directs the attention of the Sadducees’ audience to the following debate. The vocabulary reflects themes of opposition and awe, and Jesus’ response underlines a motif of misinterpretation of God’s intent. Each discussion underlines Jesus’ superiority and authority. Inner Texture of the OT The following section examines the original setting of the OT texts cited, each in its literary context. Since the originator of the composite citation alludes to previous tradition, it is useful to consider the cited text in its original literary context. Gen 38:8 “Then Judah said to Onan, ‘Go in to your brother’s wife and perform the duty of a brother-in-law to her, and raise up offspring for your brother.’”449 Gen 38:8 448 As stated earlier, the discussion started in the temple and nothing in the narrative hints to a different location as the discussion progressed. 449 Hebrew: ‫ ; ַוי ֹאמֶׁ ר יְהּודָ ה לְ אֹונָן ב ֹא אֶׁ ל־אׁשֶׁ ת אָ חִ יָך וְ יַבם אֹ תָ ּה וְ הָ קם ז ֶַׁרע לְ אָ חִ יָך׃‬LXX: εἶπεν δὲ Ἰούδας τῷ Αὐνάν Εἴσελθε πρὸς τὴν γυναῖκα τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ σου καὶ γάμβρευσαι αὐτήν, καὶ ἀνάστησον σπέρμα τῷ ἀδελφῷ σου. 114 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK Gen 38 tells the story of one of Israel’s sons, Judah, who had moved away from his brothers and who took a wife who gave him three sons. After an implied number of years, Judah found a wife, Tamar, for his firstborn Er. Because he “was wicked in the sight of the Lord” (38:7), Er died. Judah talked to his second son, Onan, to ask him to provide a descendant for his brother, creating a description of a custom very similar to the law of the levirate marriage (38:8)—and the quote used in the Sadducees’ description of the law of the levirate “… raise up offspring for your brother.”450 The narrative continues to explain how Onan failed to listen to his father because he did not want to provide a descendant for his brother, and later died as well because his actions were displeasing to God. Eventually, Tamar tricked Judah, became pregnant and got justice—in an ANE fashion (Gen 38:12-30). Deut 25:5-7 If brothers dwell together, and one of them dies and has no son, the wife of the dead man shall not be married outside the family to a stranger. Her husband’s brother shall go in to her and take her as his wife and perform the duty of a husband’s brother to her. And the first son whom she bears shall succeed to the name of his dead brother, that his name may not be blotted out of Israel… My husband’s brother refuses to perpetuate his brother’s name in Israel; he will not perform the duty of a husband’s brother to me.451 Deut 25:5-7 The only direct citation from this verse is the expression “raise up offspring,” it is small, but—as discussed below—very close to Gen 38:8 in wording and in sense. 451 Hebrew: ‫ֹא־תהְ יֶׁה אׁשֶׁ ת־הַ מת הַ חּוצָ ה לְ ִאיׁש זָר ְיבָ מָ ּה ָיב ֹא ָעלֶׁיהָ ּולְ קָ חָ ּה‬ ִ ‫כִ י־י ְׁש בּו אַ חִ ים יַחְ דָ ו ּומת אַ חַ ד מהֶׁ ם ּובן אין־לֹו ל‬ 450 ‫וְ הָ יָה הַ בְ כֹור אֲׁשֶׁ ר תלד יָקּום עַל־ׁשם אָ חִ יו הַ מת וְ ל ֹא־ ִימָ חֶׁ ה ְׁשמֹו ִמי ְִׂש ָראל׃ … לֹו לְ ִאשָ ה וְ יִ בְ מָ ּה׃‬ ‫ ;מאין ְיבָ ִמי לְ הָ קִ ים לְ אָ חִ יו ׁשם בְ י ְִׂש ָראל ל ֹא אָ בָ ה יַבְ ִמי׃‬LXX: Ἐὰν δὲ κατοικῶσιν ἀδελφοὶ ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτό καὶ ἀποθάνῃ εἷς αὐτῶν, σπέρμα δὲ μὴ ᾖ αὐτῷ, οὐκ ἔσται ἡ γυνὴ τοῦ τεθνηκότος ἔξω ἀνδρὶ μὴ ἐγγίζοντι· ὁ ἀδελφὸς τοῦ ἀνδρὸς αὐτῆς εἰσελεύσεται πρὸς αὐτὴν καὶ λήμψεται αὐτὴν ἑαυτῷ γυναῖκα καὶ συνοικήσει αὐτῇ. καὶ ἔσται τὸ παιδίον, ὃ ἂν τέκῃ, κατασταθήσεται ἐκ τοῦ ὀνόματος τοῦ τετελευτηκότος, καὶ οὐκ ἐξαλειφθήσεται τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ ἐξ Ἰσραήλ. … Οὐ θέλει ὁ ἀδελφὸς τοῦ ἀνδρός μου ἀναστῆσαι τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ αὐτοῦ ἐν Ἰσραήλ· οὐκ ἠθέλησεν ὁ ἀδελφὸς τοῦ ἀνδρός μου· WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 115 This citation occurs in a series of miscellaneous civic and ethical Deuteronomic laws given to Israel.452 The commandment following the law of levirate marriage mentions the punishment demanded for a woman who would defend her husband by a gesture of extreme immodesty (25:11-12).453 The LXX translation of Deut 25:5-7 provides the vocabulary for the summary of the composite citation found in Mark 12:19. The relevant law—the law of levirate marriage—explains the consequence for a man who refuses to give his sister-in-law a son.454 The purpose was to provide an heir for a man who had died so his name would survive and not be “blotted out of Israel” (25:6) and presumably to provide for the widow. It was considered a great dishonour to refuse to obey the law of levirate marriage (25:5-10), especially since it was the way to perpetuate a brother’s name in Israel (25:7). Provisions for escaping responsibility were offered but discouraged (25:7-9).455 The refusal to honour a dead brother was publicly denounced by the widow in front of the elders of the city who would spit in the face of the brother-in-law and call him “the one whose sandal was pulled off” (25:10). Summary of OT Inner Texture The two texts brought together share only some similarities in vocabulary, but describe the same recommended behaviour in case of a brother’s death without descendants. The importance of the survival of the name of the deceased expressed in Deut 25:6 may explain why the Sadducees reference this legal tradition in Mark 12:18-23. This would imply the Sadducees’ assumption that Moses did not believe in resurrection if he wrote such a law—because it could 452 The two previous laws concern disputes brought before a judge and the settling of a limit of 40 stripes for the guilty party (25:1-3), and the avoiding of muzzling an ox treading the grain (25:4). 453 Some try to explain the reason why the punishment—having the hand cut off—is so harsh. It is possible that it relates in some sense to the importance for a man to have an heir, as implied in the law of the levirate marriage. To prevent him from doing so (by an injury) may deserve harsher punishment. While this interpretation presents a weak link to the previous law (also discussing descendants), there is no discernable theme for the grouping of commandments in this section. 454 It appears that the prohibition against taking a brother’s wife (Lev 18:16; 20:21) only applied during the brother’s life, but not in case of death. 455 This stands in contrast with Gen 38 where the refusal to honor a brother’s descendance is met with death. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 116 mean that the only way to ‘survive’ after death was to have an heir.456 Gen 38:8 also plays a significant role in the discussion introduced by the Sadducees since it uses a Greek translation— ἀναστῆσαι from the verb ἀνίστημι, allowing the Sadducees to create a wordplay with the notion of resurrection.457 Mark’s summary only includes the basic facts of the law itself: how a brother needs to provide an heir for a deceased childless brother by taking his widow to ‘raise up’ an offspring. Intertexture458 This section compares the Greek text found in Mark with two traditions from the Jewish Scriptures (Deut 25:5-7 and Gen 38:8). Mark 12:19 shares some vocabulary with Deut 25:5-7 and the general sense of the commandment, and with an extract of Gen 38:8. Comparison Between Mark and the LXX Versions of Deut 25:5-7 and Gen 38:8459 Mark 12:19 διδάσκαλε, Μωϋσῆς ἔγραψεν ἡμῖν ὅτι ἐάν τινος ἀδελφὸς ἀποθάνῃ καὶ καταλίπῃ γυναῖκα καὶ μὴ ἀφῇ τέκνον, ἵνα λάβῃ ὁ ἀδελφὸς αὐτοῦ τὴν γυναῖκα καὶ ἐξαναστήσῃ σπέρμα τῷ ἀδελφῷ αὐτοῦ 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 widow and raise up offspring for his brother. Deut 25:5-7 LXX Ἐὰν δὲ κατοικῶσιν ἀδελφοὶ ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτό καὶ ἀποθάνῃ εἷς αὐτῶν, σπέρμα δὲ μὴ ᾖ αὐτῷ, οὐκ ἔσται ἡ γυνὴ τοῦ τεθνηκότος ἔξω ἀνδρὶ μὴ ἐγγίζοντι· ὁ ἀδελφὸς τοῦ ἀνδρὸς αὐτῆς εἰσελεύσεται πρὸς αὐτὴν καὶ λήμψεται αὐτὴν ἑαυτῷ γυναῖκα καὶ συνοικήσει αὐτῇ. 6 καὶ ἔσται τὸ παιδίον, […] μου ἀναστῆσαι Deut 25:5-10 refers to the name and its importance: “… that his name may not be blotted out of Israel … to perpetuate his brother’s name in Israel … not build up his brother’s house. And the name of his house…” (Deut 25:5-10, emphasis mine). With their agenda to disprove resurrection, it is not surprising that Sadducees would read the text with this bias and believe that survival of one’s name was essential because there is no resurrection. 457 As discussed below, Mark chose a compound verb of the same family (ἐξαναστήσῃ) to render this wordplay on the notion of resurrection. The Hebrew term (‫ )קום‬does not have a meaning associated with resurrection, but its Greek translation does. 458 It is the analysis of the influence by previous tradition, oral or written. The influence includes oral-scribal, cultural, social, and historical intertextures. 459 The NT Greek text is from the NA28 and its English translation from the ESV. The LXX Greek texts are from John William Wevers, ed., Deuteronomium, vol. 3, Vetus Testamentum Graecum (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1976); John William Wevers, ed. Genesis, vol. 1, Vetus Testamentum Graecum (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1974) and their translation from Pietersma and Wright, NETS. 456 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 117 τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ αὐτοῦ ἐν Ἰσραήλ· … Now if brothers reside together and one of them dies and there is no offspring to him, the wife of the deceased shall not be outside, for a man not close. Her husband’s brother shall go in to her and shall take her for himself as wife and shall live with her, and it shall be that the child […] to perpetuate his brother’s name in Israel; … Gen 38:8 LXX εἶπεν δὲ Ἰούδας τῷ Αὐνάν Εἴσελθε πρὸς τὴν γυναῖκα τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ σου καὶ γάμβρευσαι αὐτήν, καὶ ἀνάστησον σπέρμα τῷ ἀδελφῷ σου Then Ioudas said to Aunan, “Go in to your brother’s wife, and act the part of a brother-in-law, and raise up offspring for your brother.” The author of the composite citation does not follow the Greek of the LXX version of Deut 25:5-6 closely; instead, he summarizes the Deuteronomic law by using a few key nouns and the general content. Mark 12:19 includes the conditional aspect of the law (ἐάν), but does not include the requirement for brothers to dwell together (‫יַחְ דָ ו‬ ‫)כִ י־י ְׁשבּו אַ חִ ים‬. It does not mention that the wife “shall not be married outside the family” or that her first son needs to “succeed to the name of his dead brother” with the help of a brother who will “perpetuate his brother’s name” (Deut 25:5-7). In Mark 12.19 the conjunction ἵνα marks the substantival content of the law460—indicating an indirect command often translated as an auxiliary verb to indicate obligation: must/shall; “the man must take the widow.” In the composite citation, the author reuses vocabulary from Deuteronomy (ἀδελφὸς, ἀποθάνῃ, γυναῖκα and σπέρμα) in his summary. In the first half, instead of using σπέρμα or παιδίον found in Deuteronomy, the author uses τέκνον (and later σπέρμα in the quote from It is the only occasion where Mark uses ἵνα to mark a command within a conditional sentence. Since the ἵνα clause completes the verb ἔγραψεν and marks the apodosis of the conditional sentence, it appears as an ad sensum construction. As it is a unique usage in Mark, it may indicate an external source that Mark incorporated. Luke, who may be presumed to have a more sophisticated Greek, follows Mark, but Matthew does not. 460 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 118 Genesis).461 The Hebrew version of Deut 25:5-7 contains a combination of “son”, ‫בן‬, and “firstborn,” ‫בְ כֹור‬, whereas Gen 38:8 uses ‫ ֵֶּׁ֫ז ַרע‬to refer to “offspring” instead of “son” (translated as σπέρμα in the LXX).462 When the Sadducees described their hypothetical scenario, they also used σπέρμα instead of “child” or “son.”463 Additionally, the composite citation uses the word “brother,” ἀδελφὸς, found in the LXX to refer to the Hebrew form ‫ יָבָ ם‬for “brother-in-law.”464 Those small changes imply that a verbatim citation was not judged necessary; the originator of the composite did not follow the letter of the Jewish Scriptures, only its general meaning. The last fragmentary citation of Mark 12:18 “καὶ ἐξαναστήσῃ σπέρμα τῷ ἀδελφῷ αὐτοῦ,” is very close to the LXX version of Gen 38:8 “καὶ ἀνάστησον σπέρμα τῷ ἀδελφῷ σου.” Beside the change of pronoun from σου to αὐτοῦ to fit the literary context, the only notable difference is the choice of the relatively rare verb compounded with two prepositional prefixes, ἐξανίστημι,465 instead of the cognate verb formed with one prepositional prefix, ἀνίστημι ‫ בן‬can be used in the sense of offspring. However, the MT text does not use ‫ ֵֶּׁ֫ז ַרע‬, which is usually used for “offspring” or “seed,” Brown, Driver, and Briggs, Enhanced Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon (BDB), 282–83. Matthew also chose τέκνον, but Luke uses the contrasting cognate ἄτεκνος (childless) to refer to the sterility of the marriage. Assuming Markan priority, why did the author of the composite citation use τέκνον instead of the σπέρμα found in the LXX? One might argue that Mark chose τέκνον because he had access to a variant Greek translation or direct access to a Hebrew tradition, or to render more precisely the meaning of the following σπέρμα. Perhaps in Mark’s perspective, τέκνον is more general as a legitimate descendant. Mark uses τέκνον in 2 :5 and 10:24, both as a vocative, and παιδίον in 5:39-40, 7:30; 9:36; 10:15 in the sense of little one. Everywhere else in Mark 12, Mark uses σπέρμα (12:19, 20, 21, 22). Despite this, the vocabulary may also have been the Sadducees’ choice. 462 The Greek υἱός would have been a perfectly acceptable word for the Sadducees’ example, but for some reason, it was not chosen by the originator of the composite citation. In the NT, the word offspring σπέρμα is sometimes used to refer specifically to David’s offspring (John 7:42; Rom 1:3; 2 Tim 2:8), but also for posterity—which may explain why the term is favoured over a more general τέκνον or παιδίον as found in the LXX. 463 If the Sadducees created the composite citation, it may explain why they continued using offspring instead of son, since σπέρμα is used in the LXX Deut 25:5 and Gen 38:8, but the opposite could also be true: if the Sadducees used offspring in their fictional scenario, a later author (maybe Mark) could have added an expression from Gen 38:8 to fit their description more closely. 464 It is a term unique to Deut 25:5-7 and Gen 38:8. To my knowledge, there is no Greek equivalent for brother-inlaw in biblical Greek. 465 “To beget progeny, raise up offspring” BDAG, 345. Also “the male role in begetting children—‘to beget, to procreate, to become the father of.’” Johannes P. Louw and Albert Nida, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Based on Semantic Domains (New York: United Bible Societies, 1996). The LSJ has no such definition, 461 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 119 (ἀνάστησον).466 If he had used ἀνίστημι, the originator of the composite citation could have created a link between the composite citation and resurrection. Since Deut 25:7 also uses ἀνίστημι,467 its choice would appear more natural.468 The preference of ἀνίστημι would also connect more naturally with Jesus’ answer.469 This choice of word for ἐξανίστημι could have been made by the originator of the composite citation (intentionally or not),470 he could have used a variant Greek translation, or Mark could have later edited it for reasons of his own.471 As it stands, the composite citation underlines the importance of begetting progeny, and lessens what could be a natural association between raising up children and resurrection. While it is difficult to explain why the originator of the composite citation chose ἐξανίστημι instead of ἀνίστημι, a wordplay is still observable between raise up and resurrection to introduce the subject via a law where resurrection was not directly addressed. Oral-Scribal Texture This section considers the influence of previous tradition on the source of the composite citation: did the author of Deut 25:5-7 use Gen 38:8 (or vice versa)? The practice of levirate marriage was not unique to Israel and was also practised among other nations like the Hittites instead: “stand up from one’s seat … arise and depart from,” Henry George Liddell et al., A Greek-English Lexicon (Oxford: Clarendon, 1996). The verb ἐξανίστημι only occurs in Mark 12:19; Luke 20:28 and Acts 15:5. Perhaps the originator is reflecting formulaic language used in the Greek OT to describe the generation of offspring through unusual means, or maybe the LXX usage has introduced some Semitic influence into the usage of this verb. 466 “To raise up by bringing back to life, raise, raise up … to cause to be born, raise up.” BDAG, 83. 467 “Οὐ θέλει ὁ ἀδελφὸς τοῦ ἀνδρός μου ἀναστῆσαι τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ αὐτοῦ ἐν Ἰσραήλ” (Deut 25:7). 468 Matthew chose that verb: “καὶ ἀναστήσει σπέρμα τῷ ἀδελφῷ αὐτοῦ,” creating a citation closer to the LXX version of Gen 38:8, and a possibly better wordplay for the Sadducees. 469 “ὅταν γὰρ ἐκ νεκρῶν ἀναστῶσιν οὔτε γαμοῦσιν οὔτε γαμίζονται…” (12:25). However, as Moyise notes, maybe “such things were of little importance to him” as Mark also uses ἐγείρω (12:26) in Jesus’ response, therefore demonstrating no efforts in creating literary parallels. Moyise, “Composite Citations in the Gospel of Mark,” 27–28. 470 It is possible that the verb ἐξανίστημι was preferred to ἀνίστημι since ἐξανίστημι accepts an object, but ἀνίστημι is sometimes intransitive, especially when it refers to resurrection, BDAG, 83. In Gen 4.25; 19.32, 34, ἐξανίστημι is used with σπέρμα. Therefore, ἐξανίστημι might have been a better choice for the originator of the composite citation. 471 Luke follows Mark whereas Matthew uses ἀναστήσει in the composite citation, but also in the hypothetical scenario and Jesus’ response. The choice of word does not seem to make any significant difference in meaning. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 120 and Assyrians.472 It is therefore possible that the events reported in Gen 38 were influenced by the general culture. If Deuteronomic Law functions as a revision of some degree for the law given to Israel in Leviticus, the inclusion of consequences for failure to observe the law of levirate marriage seems to be in place as a protection for the neglected woman.473 Therefore, the influence between the OT texts is indirect and more cultural than literal. 474 There is very little verbal parallelism between Gen 38:8 and Deut 25:5-7; the link between them seems more thematic than literary.475 Summary of Intertexture Since the verbal parallels with Deut 25:5-7 are sufficient to explain the concept of levirate marriage, one could argue that the verbal parallel between Mark 12:19 and Gen 38:8 is accidental.476 Since Sadducees were portrayed as experts on the Jewish Scriptures, a mistake is unlikely. Both texts relate a similar commandment or tradition so the inclusion or exclusion of Gen 38:8 has no tangible bearing on the interpretation, besides explaining the use of σπέρμα.477 472 Thompson also mentions countries or continents such as India, Africa and South America. However, he does not note his sources. John A. Thompson, Deuteronomy: An Introduction and Commentary, TOTC 5 (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1974), 274. 473 In this case, the law of levirate marriage would not be a new institution, but a sort of prescription that formalized a pre-existing cultural expectation—creating a thematic association between both references in Scriptures. By its elaboration, the law of levirate marriage was now offering the possibility for the woman to gain a certain freedom if her brother-in-law refused to obey the law. It also made it difficult (but not impossible) for a man to avoid this responsibility. Kruger offers a very plausible explanation for the ceremony of the removal of the sandal. He proposes that by removing the sandal from the uncooperating brother, the woman officially regained her freedom to marry again who she wanted since it was done in public. Paul A. Kruger, “The Removal of the Sandal in Deuteronomy XXV 9: ‘A Rite of Passage’?” Vetus Testamentum 46, no. 4 (October 1996): 534–39. 474 A related text in Num 27:1-11 mentions exceptions made when a father had only daughters, but Deut 25:5-6 mentions “the first son,” implying that the brother-in-law had to provide a son as his brother’s descendant. It is impossible to know if a daughter could have been the heir for her father in such a case. 475 Although there is more verbal parallelism in the Greek version which may have influenced their interconnection. There is another notable difference between the two texts: the law of Deut 25 allowed the brother of the deceased to reject his responsibility. This brought dishonour, but nothing as severe as God causing Onan to die because of his refusal in Genesis 38. 476 Or, as Janzen states it “are the Sadducees portrayed as intending to quote Moses the Torah-giver of Deuteronomy, but inadvertently falling into the language of Gen. 38.8?” J. Gerald Janzen, “Resurrection and Hermeneutics: On Exodus 3.6 in Mark 12.26,” JSNT 23 (1985): 47. 477 The main point of the Sadducees relates to resurrection; therefore, the fact that the law of levirate marriage already existed as a custom that Judah tried to respect does not nuance the Sadducees’ question in any manner. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 121 As expected in a summary, a close examination of vocabulary use does not nuance the composite citation in any significant ways; the only possible exception is the wordplay introducing the concept of resurrection. When summaries are used to convey general meaning rather than precision, it would make sense for the author to have a sense of freedom in his vocabulary choice. Socio-Cultural Texture478 This section contains a consideration of certain social, cultural and ideological assumptions from the first century related to the composite citation of Mark 12:19. The identity of the Sadducees is considered, as well as the cultural phenomena of public debates and the belief concerning resurrection. The Sadducees The Markan author uses the term “Sadducees”479 and adds the explanation “who say that there is no resurrection” (12:18) to define the group, and to improve the meaning of the following discussion for his audience.480 Nevertheless, available information about this group is very limited.481 The NT only mentions that Sadducees482 were usually pro-Roman and linked to 478 This texture addresses ideology in traditional interpretation, in the text, in intellectual discourse, and in individuals and groups. It focusses on certain key aspects in their understanding for a first-century audience. 479 Botha describes them as an “organized … separate group that asserts an exclusive claim on understanding God’s will” (emphases original), in contrast with Essenes that he considers as a sect. Pieter J. J. Botha, “History and Point of View: Understanding the Sadducees,” Neot 30, no. 2 (1996): 252. 480 Either he believes that his audience is not familiar with the term, or underlines this known characteristic since it is central to the discussion. 481 Anthony J. Saldarini, Pharisees, Scribes and Sadducees in Palestinian Society (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2001), ch. 13, Kindle. 482 The expression Sadducees may originate from the proper name Zakod ( ‫)צָ דֹוק‬, a ruling priest under David (2 Sam 15:24). “The sons of Zadok” are mentioned in Ez 44:15 and their dominion reached its height with Simon II, who was assassinated in Antioch in 170 BCE. They are later mentioned again in relation to the priests in the Damascus Document (Damasc Col IV, or 6Q15 1) 3–4: “ … and the sons of Zadok are the chosen of Israel, the men of renown, who stand (to serve) at the end of days.” Kittel and Friedrich, Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (TDNT), vol. 7, 36–41. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 122 the priesthood,483 and were usually recognized as rejecting resurrection.484 Josephus describes the Sadducees as one of the three sects among the Jews, along with Pharisees and Essenes (Life 2 §§ 10). He describes them as taking away fate entirely and believing that God is not concerned with humans’ doings, but his point of view may be subjective.485 It seems that their notions were contrary to those of the Pharisees, who added observances not written in the law of Moses (Ant. 13.293-298);486 the Sadducees were considered as traditional and stricter regarding the law.487 Nonetheless, this does not imply that Pharisees were always hostile to the Sadducees.488 The Sadducees’ doctrine states that the soul dies with the body, a doctrine “received but by a few” according to Josephus (A.J. 18.1.4 §§ 16-17). The Sadducees’ teaching was popular with the rich, but not with the masses who followed the Pharisees instead (A.J. 13.10.6 §§ 298). Sadducees would have been considered aristocrats, wealthy and “persons of rank.” Emil Schürer, The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ (175 B.C. - A.D. 135), ed. Géza Vermès et al., vol. 2 (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1979), 404. Acts 5:17 mentions the high priest with the party of the Sadducees, but it does not imply that all Sadducees were priests, or vice versa. Saldarini, Pharisees, Scribes and Sadducees in Palestinian Society, ch. 13, Kindle. 484 During his appearance before the Sanhedrin, Paul even uses the conflict about resurrection to refocus the attention of the Pharisees and Sadducees away from him (Acts 23:6-8). 485 If one considers that Josephus wrote to counter the effects of some historians who took a negative view of Judaism, and since Sadducees as a group were more or less absent after the Temple’s destruction, it would make sense for Josephus to portray Pharisees in a positive light (and diminish the importance of Sadducees), especially if he was a Pharisee (Life 2 §§ 10-12 implies it). William den Hollander, Josephus, the Emperors and the City of Rome: From Hostage to Historian, ed. Cilliers Breytenbach and Martin Goodman, Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity 86 (Leiden: Brill, 2014), 6. 486 Schürer, The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ (175 B.C. - A.D. 135), 2:408. 487 Regev used later rabbinic texts to summarize Sadducees’ views by sifting through the writings. He believes that rabbis were consistent in “portraying the Sadducees as holding stricter views than the rabbis themselves concerning Sabbath, ritual purity, the penal code, and as putting a much greater emphasis on the priests and their prominence in relation to the laity.” As rabbis would not gain consideration from this information, Regev considers it accurate. Eyal Regev, “The Sadducees, the Pharisees, and the Sacred: Meaning and Ideology in the Halakhic Controversies Between the Sadducees and the Pharisees,” RRJ 9 (2006): 126–40. 488 Schürer describes their relationship as “not one of a priestly party versus a party of the religiously observant, but of a clerical and lay aristocracy vis-à-vis an essentially lay group which derived its authority from learning.” Schürer, The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ (175 B.C. - A.D. 135), 2:404. 483 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 123 It may be an exaggeration to claim that they did not believe in Scriptures outside of the Pentateuch, but they appear to view the Torah as having higher canonical authority.489 It is usually assumed that Sadducees did not accept resurrection and angels because of Acts 23:8.490 Regardless, there are reasons to believe that Sadducees did not deny the existence of angels and spirits but rejected a kind of resurrection in which humans became angels or spirits.491 When the temple was destroyed in 70 CE, Sadducees disappeared from history presumably because their power base, related to the priesthood, was gone.492 It is possible that their influence was already weakening at the time of the temple’s destruction.493 If that is the case, Sadducees may have progressively diminished in number because their popularity was subsiding, but their influence could have still been strong at the time of Jesus’ visit.494 This might explain why Sadducees appear to have so much authority in the Gospels, but are described so 489 There is nothing in Josephus to prove that Sadducees rejected the rest of the Jewish Scriptures. France, The Gospel of Mark, 470; Hooker, Gospel According to Saint Mark, 282; Strauss, Mark, 2014, 532. “For them, none of the subsequent development was binding.” Schürer, The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ (175 B.C. - A.D. 135), 2:411. This could explain why they were not expecting a Messiah, since the prophecies concerning the Messiah occur nearly exclusively in the Prophets. 490 “For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, nor angel, nor spirit, but the Pharisees acknowledge them all” Acts 23:8. 491 This seems contrary to their recognized belief in the Pentateuch since angels are often portrayed there. Daube has demonstrated that Acts 23:8 refers to a Pharisaic belief that God’s elect became angels and spirits while they await the resurrection. David Daube, “On Acts 23: Sadducees and Angels,” JBL 109, no. 3 (1990): 493–97; Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God, 133. 492 Strauss, Mark, 2014, 532. 493 Following up on the story of the Zadokites, likely related to the Sadducees, who “never made peace with the temple government in Jerusalem.” Kittel and Friedrich, Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (TDNT), vol. 7, 41. 494 According to Eppstein, it is possible that they were eliminated after the hakhamim (60–61 CE) since it stated that Jews believing in a Sadducean understanding could not enter the temple. Eppstein cites Geiger, Urschrift, which was unavailable for me at the time of writing this dissertation. Victor Eppstein, “When and How the Sadducees Were Excommuniated,” JBL 85, no. 2 (1966): 214. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 124 negatively by Josephus.495 During Jesus’ life, Sadducees would have represented authority and knowledge; this makes Jesus’ answer to them all the more remarkable. Public Debates In his writings, Socrates taught rules to deal with arguments and interrogation. The exchange between Jesus and the Sadducees resembles his description, implying that both knew how to debate in a Hellenistic culture. For example, the Sadducees seemed to have followed this prescription when they introduced their question: “[an] argument by ‘example’ is highly suitable for political oratory” (Rhet. III. 18).496 In his response to the Sadducees, Jesus complies with the general rhetorical expectation of his time.497 Following Greco-Roman expectation of public debates does not deny a Jewish influence on the NT, but it demonstrates that Greco-Roman rhetoric was part of the Jewish culture. One should note that Jesus’ response is not simply a polite exchange; his words are severe: “Is this not the reason you are wrong, because you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God” (12:24) and “You are quite wrong” (12:27). Jesus’ practice also corresponds to what is sometimes called “correction stories” where opponents take opposing views to correct the other party.498 As the main objective of rhetoric is not to convince one’s opponent—but the audience—by demonstrating superior knowledge, Jesus was able to convince his audience of his authority. Therefore, his rejection of the Sadducees’ position would have made a stronger impact: Jesus, the ‘simple’ teacher, comes with a better 495 Admittedly, Josephus may also be very biased in his description, especially if he was a Pharisee (Life 2 §§ 1012). 496 Aristotle, Rhetoric, vol 2., trans. W. Rhys Roberts, (Dover Publications, 2012), 591. Concerning interrogation and jests, Socrates states one should answer jesting with earnestness, and earnestness with jesting. 497 Aristotle says that a debate “has four parts. You must (1) make the audience well disposed towards yourself and ill-disposed towards your opponent, (2) magnify or minimize the leading facts, (3) excite the required kind of emotion in your hearers, and (4) refresh their memories by means of a recapitulation.” Aristotle, Rhetoric, 592. It does not follow that Jesus knew about Aristotle or his teaching; it is more likely that Aristotle’s principles were applied in general public debates and easily observable. 498 Adela Yarbro Collins, Mark: A Commentary on the Gospel of Mark, 558. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 125 understanding of the Jewish Scriptures than the known scholars of the time.499 This would presumably be shocking to those who considered Sadducees to be the elites.500 Resurrection It is likely that most first-century Jews believed in the resurrection. Josephus indirectly demonstrates this when he states that Sadducees believed that the soul dies with the body (A.J. 18.1.4 §§ 16), implying that the rest thought otherwise. As indicated in Acts 23:8, Pharisees believed in resurrection; they believed in an interim state where the dead existed as angels or spirits, before a final corporeal resurrection still to come.501 Many Jews believed they would exist as spirits after death, to be raised in the future,502 while some believed in the immortality of souls without resurrection.503 Besides the Sadducees, some other groups rejected resurrection, as As discussed above, Sadducees were usually associated with the priesthood and were influential because “it was the priests and their aristocratic lay allies who ruled the Jewish state.” Schürer, The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ (175 B.C. - A.D. 135), 2:404. 500 A non-Jewish audience would probably recognize that Jesus had managed to offer a response to some kind of authoritative figures, even without any foreknowledge of Sadducees. 501 Wright adds that the Pharisees did not believe that corporeal resurrection had already occurred so Jesus’ resurrection was out of question. A belief in an interim state would also explain the servant’s reaction to Peter when he was freed from prison; she believed his angel was visiting them (Acts 12:14-16). Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God, 133–34. This could explain why Jesus told his audience in Mark 12:25 that people who die are “like angels”; Sadducees and Pharisees had the wrong idea about resurrection. 502 Wright explains that translation in the LXX made bodily resurrection clear: “First, the passages which already speak unambiguously of bodily resurrection come through loud and clear: there is no attempt to soften them” (p.147). He adds that “No second-Temple reader would have doubted that this [passages from Isa 26:19; 26:14; Hosea 6:2] referred to bodily resurrection.” Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God, 147. Some passages from 2 Macc. also point to a belief in bodily resurrection (for ex: 7.31-33, 36-38). 503 Ps.-Phoc. Death and After Life 105–115 states: “For the souls remain unharmed among the deceased. For the spirit is a loan of God to mortals … we are but dust; and then the air has received our spirit … But (our) soul is immortal and lives ageless forever.” James H. Charlesworth, Old Testament Pseudepigrapha Vol. 2 ; Wright mentions that some Jews believed “that there was indeed a future life beyond death, but who equally rejected the increasingly popular belief in resurrection.” Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God, 140–47. 499 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 126 attested by 1Macc. and Tobit.504 As a belief in resurrection easily becomes a revolutionary doctrine, it is not surprising that the elites—like the Sadducees—would easily reject it.505 Despite its later date, the Mishnah may reflect first-century tradition when it states, “he who says that there is no allusion in the Torah concerning resurrection.”506 The Mishnah never uses Exod 3:6 to justify resurrection like Jesus does—4 Macc 7:19; 16:25 only hint at it.507 Greek literature mentions the resurrection of certain individuals, but does not discuss much the notion of a general resurrection.508 Summary of Socio-Cultural Texture By the time Mark’s Gospel was written, the author felt he needed to comment on the Sadducees’ belief concerning resurrection.509 Mark does not mention a conflict between the 504 Wright mentions some Samaritans who might have denied resurrection as well as some writings from 1 Macc and Tobit. The last words of Mattathias in 1 Macc. 2:49-68 present no hope for future life, except for the memories of descendants. Although the book of Tobit talks a lot about death, it never refers to eternal life, except maybe in the last prayer. Death was to be avoided (Tob. 4:10; 12:19). Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God, 139. 505 If one is convinced that eternal glory awaits after death, to die for a cause is not an obstacle; this would have been an efficient propaganda tool. Revolutionaries tended to disturb the social order—something that would have been precious for Sadducees if they had higher social status. If resurrection was also considered as somewhat of a new notion for the students of the Bible, it may have appeared as revolutionary in a different way to the Sadducees: tradition was being overwritten by some ‘well-wishers’ who were happy to believe that a better life awaited after death. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God, 138. 506 M. Sanh, 10.1. The following section explains that the resurrection was hinted at in Num 18:28 (if sacrifices were to be given to Aaron, it suggests that it would continue after his death, therefore implying the resurrection); in Ex 6:4 (because the land would be given to “them,” therefore implying the resurrected); in Isa 26:19 (where Isaiah announces that dead shall live); Deut 4:4 (since it claims that those who cleaved unto God are alive); Ps 84:5 (where the verb to praise is in the future, implying resurrection). Ex 3:6 is not included in the discussion. 507 Because it is likely that 4 Macc. was written in the 1st or 2nd century CE, it demonstrates similar thinking, but it does not prove influence on the NT. 508 Plato used ‘ἀναβιώσκεσθαι’ to refer to the transmigration of souls (or metempsychosis): a doctrine stating that a soul migrates from a body to another until purification. Beside that belief, Greeks spoke of resurrection as being impossible, or as an isolated miracle (Apollonius of Tyana was reported having raised a dead girl). A. Oepke, “Ἀνίστημι, Ἐξανίστημι, Ἀνάστασις, Ἐξανάστασις,” in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (TDNT), vol. 1, 369. 509 It is possible that Mark expected his audience to be ignorant of their practice, especially if they were Gentiles. If the Sadducees were already diminishing in popularity by the time of the temple’s destruction, this is not a justification for a late date. Both Jewish and non-Jewish audiences may not have known Sadducees’ beliefs enough only one generation after the events of 70 CE, especially if living outside of Palestine. The lack of familiarity with the Sadducees’ belief may also be explained by distance or language if Mark’s audience was partially Gentile, but the author may have added this only to underline the issue behind the discussion. One must note that Matthew includes the same description (22:23), despite the fact that he refers to Sadducees earlier in Matt 3:7 (without any WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 127 Sadducees and the Pharisees, but instead he makes them appear to cooperate (as they did in Acts 26:6 at first510), but Matthew and Luke imply the conflict by describing a positive reaction from the Pharisees following Jesus’ rebuttal. In Mark 12, Sadducees and Pharisees appear to have the same general goal to trap Jesus (12:13), and the Sadducees’ question in Mark 12 seems to be very theological in comparison to the more political question of the taxes in 12:13-17. The Sadducees demonstrated mostly a desire to discredit Jesus—and possibly also the Pharisees who believed in the resurrection. Jesus’ debate with the Sadducees followed the regular debate methods common in GrecoRoman rhetoric of the time. This would explain partially why Jesus’ audience was so amazed by his answers (12:17, 37); Jesus was proving to be an excellent orator, despite his apparent limited education. A Jewish audience (hearing Jesus or a reading of Mark) would also have recognized that by responding with Moses’ words, Jesus used an authoritative source as important as the Sadducees’ source; furthermore, he demonstrated higher abilities at understanding the Jewish Scriptures. This would have been very impressive, especially for those who considered the Sadducees biblical scholars.511 The challenge posed by the Sadducees would have corresponded to the view of the minority, making Jesus’ response probably quite appreciated by his audience, even by the description). Luke also adds the description (20:27), which he repeats in Acts 23:28. They both judged that the addition of the description was necessary for their audiences to understand the conflict. 510 Matthew continues with “But when the Pharisees heard that he had silenced the Sadducees, they gathered together. And one of them, a lawyer, asked him a question to test him” (Matt 22:34-35); if Matthew follows Luke, this demonstrates enthusiasm, but it could also indicate fear. Luke does something similar “Then some of the scribes answered, ‘Teacher, you have spoken well.’ For they no longer dared to ask him any question” (Luke 20:39-40). While this does not point to clear conflict, it implies satisfaction at an opponent’s defeat—the Sadducees in this case. 511 Although even a non-Jewish audience could appreciate that Jesus responded with authority to those who presented themselves as knowledgeable in the writing of an ancient source: Moses’ writings. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 128 Pharisees. Because of these first-century beliefs, it is likely that a Markan audience would have been pleased by Jesus’ response and would have accepted it easily. Conclusion and Evaluation The Sadducees are using their composite citation as a summary of the law to introduce their question concerning the resurrection. Although they demonstrate great understanding of their sacred tradition by joining together two texts related on the same question of levirate marriage, they do not try to understand the law, but use the texts to dispute resurrection instead. It is unnecessary for an audience to recognize the small citation from Gen 38:8 to understand the law of levirate marriage,512 but the association between Deut 25:5-7 and Gen 38:8 is very natural for those who know about it.513 It is likely that the originator of the composite citation purposefully linked two thematically related texts together to show parallelism since it demonstrates literary prowess.514 The Sadducees appear to use the example from the law to introduce a scenario of a woman with seven husbands, and a ridiculous scene that would follow resurrection. If they were only using the story to show the absurdity of the resurrection, it would not explain Jesus’ harsh response, or why the Sadducees invoked Moses’ authority. Beyond a ridiculous story, the Sadducees were suggesting that a man’s survival depends on the continuity of his existence—which was only made possible by a descendant.515 To make It seems to have been included because of the use of σπέρμα to express the sense of descendants, and the inclusion of the verb ἐξανίστημι to create a word play with resurrection. 513 “The fashioning of connections between analogous traditions, whether through quotation or allusion, is constitutive of the reuse of scripture in Jubilees.” Allen, “Composite Citations in Jewish Pseudepigraphic Works: Re-Presenting Legal Traditions in the Second Temple Period,” 148. 514 Greco-Romans would sometimes use composite citations to show their literary abilities; it would have been an efficient tool to prove biblical knowledge and a capacity to link related texts together. Stanley, “Composite Citations: Retrospect and Prospect,” 207. 515 As Deut 25:5-7 mentions that the goal of the levirate marriage was to ensure that a man’s name “may not be blotted out of Israel,” this understanding is not farfetched. The importance of preserving the name of the father can also be understood as a way to ensure that all tribes and family preserve their share of heritage in the land of Israel. 512 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 129 their claim with authority concerning the falsehood of resurrection, the Sadducees required an example from Moses’ Law, because the writings of Moses formed the bedrock of the Jewish worldview. From the Sadducees’ standpoint, the law was provided by Moses to make ‘survival’ possible.516 This would imply that Moses did not believe in resurrection—otherwise he would not have provided for a different means of survival through one’s descendants.517 The Sadducees have implied that the law had failed to produce an heir for the family, therefore insinuating that if the law could not provide for survival through an heir, survival via resurrection would be impossible if it was not ordained by Torah.518 This deserves a harsh response from Jesus since it demonstrated a lack of understanding of God’s ways and a very deficient hermeneutic. Jesus answered the Sadducees’ question using their own rhetorical techniques: to take a passage from the Pentateuch to prove that the text implies more than it says. Whereas the Sadducees had to stretch the meaning of the law to imply that it denied resurrection, Jesus used Ex 3:6 to demonstrate that when God reveals himself to Moses as “the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob,” he reminds him of the covenant that he was fulfilling. It is God’s relation to people that is being emphasized, not the role of the three patriarchs as worshipers. By declaring God to be the God of the living, Jesus is declaring that God’s faithfulness implies a Since one’s name insured one’s part of heritage, it was especially relevant in Israel. However, things had changed since the first deportation. Israel’s identity was still associated with the land, but each individual’s identity did not seem to depend on their portion of land as it did when Israel was still owning their land. 516 “The use of the verb ἐξαναστήσῃ in the echo of Gen. 38:8 (LXX ἀνάστησον), following so soon after the reminder that the Sadducees do not believe in ἀνάστασις, neatly emphasises that this is the only sort of ‘resurrection’ they can envisage.” France, The Gospel of Mark, 473. 517 However, this does not explain why the Sadducees did not choose to preserve the reason for the levirate marriage, that is “to perpetuate his brother’s name in Israel” (Deut 25:7) in their composite citation. 518 Trick believes that the Sadducees were making a mockery of the foundation of Jewish belief. Trick, “Death, Covenants, and the Proof of Resurrection in Mark 12:18-27,” 237-238. Such a stand is unnecessary, and I believe he goes too far since, as demonstrated above, the Sadducees favored a strict adherence to the law. It would be surprising if they chose to ridicule the law in public, but they may have implied that if the law did not always solve the problem of survival, resurrection—not mentioned in the law—could certainly not solve it. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 130 continuity of his alliance with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob since death would have released God from the covenant.519 In essence, God is telling Moses that he is the one who had done all those things for his ancestors, and he was still acting through Moses for Abraham’s descendants.520 Jesus expands this meaning by applying the truth of Ex 3—that God was still saving Abraham’s descendants— to the resurrection. Jesus declares God to be the provider for Abraham’s children by a transfer of his promises.521 The ‘three-ancestor formula’ is used as a reminder of all God has done for Israel’s ancestors, all he is doing for Moses’ generation, and all he will do for his elect.522 God is the God of the living because he has the power to raise the dead and continue his covenant with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob; he is the God of the living because his elect have to be alive to continue their alliance with God and testify to his glory. The Sadducees and Jesus used a type of hermeneutical interpretation where they both went beyond the original meaning of the text to relate it to a larger comprehension of Scriptures, but Jesus demonstrates superior understanding regarding God’s power in its revelation. Jesus showed that he recognized what God intended for his people in Ex 3:6, and in his explanation, he included an awareness of promises made by later prophets. By his words and actions, Jesus is the Trick, “Death, Covenants, and the Proof of Resurrection in Mark 12:18-27,” 236. “Already within Exodus 3, then, the hermeneutical connection between the ancestors and the generation of the Exodus contains elements of continuity and discontinuity.” Janzen, “Resurrection and Hermeneutics: On Exodus 3.6 in Mark 12.26,” 45. 521 As discussed above, in his article, Dreyfus explores different passages demonstrating how the expression “God of Abraham, God of Isaac and God of Jacob” always relates to the protection and blessings that God grants to them. He also demonstrates how Ezekiel already speaks of the resurrection of God’s elect. Dreyfus, “L’Argument Scripturaire de Jésus En Faveur de La Résurrection Des Morts (Marc XII, 26-27).” 522 “We may note that the use of the three-ancestor formula in Exodus and then by later generations may be said to constitute a three-term analogical vector: the ancestors in their generation; the generation of the Exodus; and later generations in their respective and various situations.” Janzen, “Resurrection and Hermeneutics: On Exodus 3.6 in Mark 12.26,” 45. 519 520 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 131 Christ, the Son of God who is bringing the Gospel (Mark 1:1), and Mark underlines this effectively by preserving Jesus’ response. Furthermore, by declaring that God had the power and the desire to raise his people, and by condemning the so-called law experts who denied resurrection, Jesus is demonstrating his mastery. He understands anything relating to God because he is “the Son of God” (Mark 1:1), and this role gives him both authority and foreknowledge. Mark is not afraid to use this theme throughout his Gospel.523 Mark emphasizes Jesus’ power in miracles, but also his authority in explaining Jewish Scriptures in a progressive way. Mark has declared Jesus to be the “Son of God.” He has illustrated that Jesus came as the Messiah and he has shown him to be the “decisive interpreter of the law.” 524 Since he has proven resurrection, Jesus has also proven that his own prophesied resurrection is possible. The early church usually explained resurrection in terms of Jesus’ resurrection. This makes it more likely that Mark 12:18-27 is authentic and not a later addition. If the early church had added an explanation relating to resurrection, Ex 3:6 would not have been a first choice. Furthermore, Jesus’ interpretation of Ex 3:6 and its application to resurrection is not reflected in earlier Jewish interpretation of this text; in all probability, Jesus’ hermeneutic is original. The Rhetorical Role of the Composite Citation The question to be asked is: how effective is the summary composite citation from Mark 12:19 to produce understanding in the audiences (the first listeners, including Jesus, and Mark’s implied audience)? To be considered as a rhetorical device, it must be a more efficient 523 Already, Jesus had calmed a storm (4:35-41), healed demons (5:1-13), raised a girl (5:35-43) and redefined commandments (7:1-23). 524 “Der Evangelist hat jeweils Jesus als entschiedenden Interpreten des Gesetzes dramatisch in Szene gesetzt,” (In each case the evangelist has dramatically staged Jesus as the decisive interpreter of the law), Breytenbach, Cilliers von, “Die Vorschriften Des Mose Im Markusevangelium.” ZNW 97, no. 1 (2006): 23–43. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 132 way to convey the necessary information than verbatim citations. The answer to the question comes partially from the frequent use of summaries as found in the Bible, the Dead Sea Scrolls or Greek texts: a synopsis avoided unnecessary material in order to make a point. When they were trying to make their case, the Sadducees were not attempting to begin a discussion on the law of levirate marriage (as the co-text demonstrates). The point was not the application of the law, but its existence and the implication that resurrection is an absurd idea. A composite citation acting as a summary allows for a fluid discussion moving toward the primary goal: to ridicule the belief in resurrection. A longer discussion on the finer points of the law, that would accompany a longer citation, would only have distracted any audience. Regarding the composite citation’s understanding, there are two camps in the audience: those who already knew about the law of levirate marriage, and those who did not. In both cases, a simple summary is sufficient. It acts as a reminder for those who were aware of the law and it communicates basic information for those who were not. Either way, the composite citation is efficient at preserving the important crucial point of the law while keeping it very simple and condensed. As with the other composite citations in Mark’s Gospel, it is difficult to know who composed it. It is very plausible that the Sadducees created the summary themselves because such devices were common,525 and they may have debated the question of resurrection extensively. The Sadducees may have created a summary, but the final wording of the first section could belong to Mark.526 525 Presumably, Mark could have written the composite citation itself if the Sadducees had used a longer explanation in order to facilitate the flow of his narrative. Matthew summarizes Mark’s summary by removing a few words: “If a man dies having no children, his brother must marry the widow and raise up offspring for his brother” (Matt 22:24) instead of “if a man’s brother dies and leaves a wife, but leaves no child, the man must take the widow and raise up offspring for his brother” (Mark 12:19). Both preserve the main point of the law, but Matthew’s version is even shorter (19 words vs 24 in Greek). However, since the Sadducees’ main point was not served by the summary, but by the following hypothetical scenario, it is likely that they produced the summary themselves. 526 Matthew and Luke made slightly different choices in their wording. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 133 By including the composite citation in the Sadducees’ speech, the Markan author allows them to be skillful interrogators. Their fictive scenario may seem ridiculous, but the scene has been carefully arranged by the Sadducees, and it is well represented by Mark. Jesus is not simply a competent orator in front of clueless opponents, he is portrayed as a formidable rival for those who are masters of the law. His authority is only enhanced by the Sadducees’ abilities; by demonstrating Jesus’ superior hermeneutic against accomplished interpreters, Mark proves that Jesus is the master of them all. This would increase the trust and faith of Mark’s audience in Jesus since they are following the one who really understands God’s way. The composite citation is used to demonstrate superior knowledge of the Jewish Scriptures—as it is attributed to Jesus’ opponent, it underlines their prowess. Jesus’ victory over them can only be viewed as an extraordinary victory. One should not wonder at the fascination of Jesus’ audience. Not only did Jesus use an entirely different text to respond to them, he also put the focus where it should be: on God himself. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 134 Chapter 5 Composite Citations in Mark 13:24-26 and 14:62 Two angels were taking in all the beauty of the earth being formed in front of their eyes when one of them frowned, turned to the other and asked: “Do you know why God chose the colour blue for the sky?” The other angel looked up and answered: “Yes, it is very simple. God is creating the humans to feel calm and reassured whenever they look at the colour of the sky. This way, they can remember he loves them.” “Oh, uttered the first angel, do you think they will realize this?” The second angel pondered the question a moment and replied: “They will if they want to. If they look for God’s love, they will find it.” And that is why the sky is blue: because God’s love is shown—hidden in plain sight. This chapter considers two composite citations, one from Mark 13:24-26 and the second from 14:62. The Markan author placed both citations in Jesus’ dialogue, and both occur toward the end of Jesus’ ministry. The first one happens in a longer speech in Mark 13, full of warnings of deceptions and tribulations to come. The second one appears as Jesus’ sole response to his accusers when he is led to the high priest and the council (14:53-65). Mark 13:24-26 is not introduced as a citation, but is incorporated into a long discourse where Jesus refers to Scriptures.527 Some authors consider that Mark 13:24-26 is an amalgam of allusions, not citations.528 In this thesis, the accepted definition of an allusion is a text where an “event is recognizable but there is little verbal parallelism.”529 Since Mark 13:24-26 contains recognizable verbal parallelism referring to specific texts, it is considered a composite citation 527 The audience would expect allusions or citations to present themselves in the continuity of that discourse. Here are a few examples of allusions or citations: 2 Chr 15:6 and Isa 19:2 in 13:8; Dan 12:12 in 13:13; Dan 9:27 in 13:14; Dan 9:23 in 14:14; Isa 65:8 in 13:20. 528 Thomas R. Hatina, In Search of a Context: The Function of Scripture in Mark’s Narrative (London: Sheffield Academic Press, 2002), 326. 529 See footnote 10 in the introduction. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 135 for the purposes of this thesis.530 The three verses combine Isa 13:10, 13 with 34:4 or Joel 2:10 (or both), and Dan 7:13 to express one idea; they are therefore considered composite.531 Moyise believes that Mark 13:26 is not part of the composite citation of 13:24-26 as it is separated by the conjunction καὶ.532 Regardless, since the text is presented as a unified text with one main idea, as discussed below, it is included in the analysis of this composite citation.533 The two composite citations investigated in this fifth chapter are linked by the expression the Son of Man found in Mark 13:26 and 14:62. The reference to Dan 7 in Mark 13:26 is important as it relates directly to Mark 14:62 and Jesus’ response. It is therefore discussed in this chapter as an important co-text linking both composite citations together, and it is examined more carefully in the discussion regarding 14:62. Because of some similarities in their co-text, Mark 13:24-26 and 14:62 are sometimes treated together, and, as such, they will be similarly treated in this chapter. In Mark 14:62, Jesus’ words are also formulated as one line of argument and contain close verbal parallels to Dan 7:13 and Ps 110:1. Because of their identifiable vocabulary, they can be identified as two citations combined, or potentially as a citation combined with an allusion.534 Since the expression Son of Man alludes to a specific text, for the purpose of this 530 As mentioned earlier, combinations of citations or allusions would share similar rhetorical impact by drawing audiences to a specific previous tradition. Since the point of this thesis is to prove such rhetorical intent, and not analyze the difference between the use of citations and allusions, even a less ‘clear-cut’ citation serves the purpose. 531 As discussed below, the exact origin of the wording for the composite citation of 13:24-25 is not easy to pinpoint since similar vocabulary is used in more than one location. Most likely, the composite citation combines Isa 13:10 with an influence of Isa 34:4, Joel 2:10 or both. Hooker considers Mark 13:24-25 to be a composite citation because the audience’s familiarity with such texts would have evoked clear “memories of the prophetic threat of judgment.” Hooker, “Isaiah in Mark’s Gospel,” 44. 532 Moyise, “Composite Citations in the Gospel of Mark,” 29. 533 The verb phrase “and then they will see” (καὶ τότε ὄψονται) could act as a transition to introduce the following citation from Dan 7:13 or be an adaptation of the citation (as discussed below). 534 Some might consider the expression Son of Man too short for verbal parallelism, but it is not the first time that Jesus uses a simple expression to refer to a larger portion of Scriptures. In Mark 1:44, he tells a healed leper to follow Moses’ prescription, a clear reference to the law of Lev 13; in 2:25-28 he refers to David’s actions from 1 Sam 21, in 6:4 he alludes to Jer 12:6, where a prophet has no place among his relatives. This is not to say that Jesus’ WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 136 thesis, it is considered as part of a composite citation. A composite allusion (or citation with allusion) would have the same rhetorical effect of alluding to a text and its co-text; therefore a different label does not affect this analysis.535 As his narrative draws to a close, Mark underlines many of the themes that he used and alluded to in his Gospel.536 His two last composite citations are important since they emphasize many aspects of Jesus’ identity: Jesus is prophet, king, Messiah and God. “But in those days, after that tribulation, the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will be falling from heaven, and the powers in the heavens will be shaken. And then they will see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory.” Mark 13:24-25 “And Jesus said, ‘I am, and you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven.’” Mark 14:69537 answers were always very short and full of Jewish Scriptures, but at times, Mark records only Jesus’ short answer as an evocation of Scriptures. 535 As mentioned before, the main point of this thesis is to examine the rhetorical effect of combining texts. Even if the text is too short by some people’s standard to be considered a citation, it still reminds the audience of previous specific tradition. 536 As in the previous chapters, after a consideration of the narrative NT and OT context, the co-text of the original literary setting in its original language and a few important social and cultural concepts, an analysis of the use of the composite citations is offered. 537 I include the Greek version of those two texts later, and a parallel comparison between the NT Greek, and the LXX (or MT if relevant). 137 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK Inner Texture of the NT538 As with the previous two chapters, this section considers particularly the co-text of the passage containing the composite citations, and the co-text of the cited tradition. To facilitate recognition of the narrative flow between Mark 13 and 14, the two Markan chapters are discussed one after the other, whereas the co-texts of the original tradition are examined later. Five texts from the Jewish Scriptures are considered, namely Isa 13, Isa 34, Joel 2, Dan 7, and Ps 110. Mark 13 Ἀλλʼ ἐν ἐκείναις ταῖς ἡμέραις μετὰ τὴν θλῖψιν ἐκείνην ὁ ἥλιος σκοτισθήσεται, καὶ ἡ σελήνη οὐ δώσει τὸ φέγγος αὐτῆς, καὶ οἱ ἀστέρες ἔσονται ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ πίπτοντες, καὶ αἱ δυνάμεις αἱ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς σαλευθήσονται. καὶ τότε ὄψονται τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐρχόμενον ἐν νεφέλαις μετὰ δυνάμεως πολλῆς καὶ δόξης Mark 13:24-26 Following a detailed discussion in the temple (Mark 11:27), various challenges are brought to Jesus (12:1-34). A puzzle is then proposed by Jesus about the Christ, the son of David, where Ps 110 is cited (12:35-37).539 After these events, Jesus and his disciples leave the temple (13:1). One disciple mentions the architectural grandeur of the temple and Jesus uses this introduction to warn them of its coming destruction (13:2). Moving on to the location of the Mount of Olives, Jesus later expands on this prophecy in more detail (13:3-37).540 Not only does 538 This includes observing within the text: the repetitive and progressive patterns, the structure of the pericope (opening-middle-closing), the narration, the argumentation, and the aesthetic of the text. Analysis of patterns, repetitions, and structure aims to establish the limits of the pericope, and to understand the nature of the discourse and the construction of the argument. The narration, argumentation and aesthetic inform the interpreter about the different devices used to create effects and argumentation as they relate to writer’s presumed culture. 539 This is followed by a warning against scribes and by the touching example of a generous widow (12:38-44). 540 Mark 13:3 informs the audience that Peter, James, John and Andrew ask Jesus privately about the accomplishment of the signs he had announced. It is unclear if only those four had accesses to Jesus’ longer answer, or if the teaching was more public than the questioning. However, it is reasonable to assume that the four mentioned WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 138 Mark underline the location of the discussion with “κατέναντι τοῦ ἱεροῦ” (opposite the temple buildings, on the Mount of Olives), but he also marks its subject: the future destruction of the temple. The audience can easily imagine the group facing the temple as they discuss its future.541 In Mark 13, the author uses a series of conjunctions and temporal adverbs to shift to new topics,542 linking the discourse together as the so-called apocalypse of Mark.543 Mark 13 could be considered instead as a parenesis—a farewell discourse, but it still contains some clearly apocalyptic language with celestial bodies losing their light or the Son of Man coming in the clouds.544 The tone of this section is sad and dramatic; Jesus warns his disciples to expect difficulties, and the vocabulary relates to warnings545 and deception.546 The composite citation of 13:24-26 is also full of dark images evoking a theme of judgment547 where the motif of vigilance is omnipresent.548 These sinister motifs are contrasted disciples listened to Jesus’ answer. If tradition is correct and Mark wrote his gospel according to Peter’s testimony, the mention of his name has the further advantage of making the following speech likely to be original—even if one considers that the discourse of Mark 13 may be a summary of Jesus’ teaching. 541 The Markan narrative only mentions the four disciples who ask the question privately about the events Jesus previously mentioned regarding the temple: Peter, James, John and Andrew (13:3). Matthew (23:37) and Luke (21:7-8) do not mention this. 542 Twice he uses δὲ (13:9, 14, 32) and once ὰλλὰ (13:24); they show shifts to new topics while linking the discourse together. 543 Its qualification as apocalyptic depends on one’s definition of the genre. Hooker states, “the description is perhaps not entirely appropriate, since the discourse lacks many of the features of apocalyptic writing: there is no heavenly vision, no use of bizarre imagery, no description of what happens after the Parousia.” Hooker, Gospel According to Saint Mark, 299. Of course, this would depend on what one means by apocalyptic, but Hooker seems to neglect the allusion to Dan 7 with “The Son of Man coming in clouds” that may very well qualify as a “heavenly vision”. 544 This point is debated by Hatina. His main goal is to argue that the combined citation of Mark 13:24-26 does not refer to the parousia at all, but is simply Jesus’ farewell discourse. Hatina, In Search of a Context: The Function of Scripture in Mark’s Narrative, 341–49. However, despite Mark 13 sharing some resemblance with the parenesis genre, it still contains many similitudes with apocalyptic genre. Mark may not have written an apocalyptic text, but he was clearly inspired by the apocalyptic genre, foreshadowing God’s future reign and humans’ judgment. 545 “Rumors of wars … nation will rise against nation … famines … brother will deliver brother over to death, and the father his child … abomination of desolation … such tribulation” (13:7-23). 546 “Lead you astray … many will come in my name … lead many astray … for false christs and false prophets will arise and perform signs and wonders, to lead astray (13:6-22). 547 “… that tribulation, the sun will be darkened … no light … powers in the heavens will be shaken” (13:24-25). 548 “See that no one … do not be alarmed … But be on your guard … do not be anxious beforehand what you are to say … But the one who endure to the end will be saved … Let the one … pray … do not believe it … But be on your guard … Be on guard, keep awake … Stay awake (13:6-37). WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 139 with the following coming of the Son of Man (13:26) where the vocabulary evokes glory and fulfillment.549 The composite citation also mentions four celestial entities being weakened: the sun, the moon, the stars and the “powers in the heaven.”550 They are presented as two parallels: the sun and the moon will lose their light, the stars and powers in the heavens will lose their stable position as one falls, and the other one is shaken. Like the rest of chapter 13, the composite citation contains vocabulary evoking vivid images, striking the imagination. In verse 27, the terminology emphasizes how all the elect551 will be gathered—wherever they are—with its three metaphors: “four winds,” “end of the earth,” “ends of heaven.”552 Mark 13 acts as a crescendo in Jesus’ speech that begins with general warnings and progressively grows in intensity with a description of desolation (13:14-23). The discourse then culminates with the announcement of the weakening of the earth’s luminaries, before declaring Jesus’ glory and the salvation of the elect (14:26-27). The discourse ends with two parabolic lessons underlining the theme of vigilance—the first one about fig trees showing observable signs and events being near (13:28-31), and a short narrative about a master who leaves on a journey, but leaves a doorkeeper who needs to stay awake because he does not know when his master will return (13:37).553 “Coming in clouds with great power and glory … send out the angels” (13:26-27); “gather his elect from the four winds, from the ends of the earth to the ends of heaven.” (13:27). 550 The expression “the powers of heaven” could have been understood as a metaphorical expression to refer to celestial bodies in general, or to celestial beings as understood in the first century: divinities or angels. Either way, since the sun, the moon and stars were often considered divinities in ancient civilizations, distinction between a physical entity and mythical ones may not be very useful. The main point is that divinities or not, those celestial bodies will lose their own power and be shaken when the Son of Man arrives—his implied power is undeniable. 551 The expression the elect was presumably understood by the Markan audience as those who followed Jesus. Jesus’ audience might have understood it as a reference to the saints in Daniel or the notion of remnant found in Isaiah (Isa 14), or the ones who will return to the Lord in Joel 2. 552 This does not necessarily imply three separate locations; they are used as reference to the same completeness with strong imagery. 553 Presumably the two parables refer to different divine actions; the first one explaining the events in 13:5-23 which could be observed and predicted, while the second refers to 13:24-27 with its unknow timeline. 549 140 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK Mark 14 ὁ δὲ Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν·ἐγώ εἰμι, καὶ ὄψεσθε τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐκ δεξιῶν καθήμενον τῆς δυνάμεως καὶ ἐρχόμενον μετὰ τῶν νεφελῶν τοῦ οὐρανοῦ. Mark 14.62 Chapter 13 ends with Jesus’ warning and the narrative moves on from the discourse to narration: “two days before the Passover” (14:1). This implies the beginning of a new day that probably follows the event of the temple’s discussion.554 After being warned of a plot to kill Jesus (14:1-2), the audience hears about the anointing of Jesus (14:3-9),555 followed by a small pause in the action for another warning about a plot twist: Judas decides to betray Jesus (14:1011). The narrative continues with the preparation (14:12-16) and celebration (14:17-31) of Passover. The action moves on to Gethsemane, where Jesus is in distress and prays (14:32-42), is arrested (14:43-52) and is led before the council (14:53-65).556 Mark’s narrative implies a chronology of events but does not inform the audience on its timeline. The text implies that Jesus’ anointing in Bethany closely follows Jesus’ discourse, but the timeline is not presented clearly. Matthew follows Mark’s sequence of events. Jesus’ discourse appears in Matthew 24–25, but the discourse material is presented differently; it is longer, and two parables are inserted in the text. Judas’ decision to betray Jesus also follows Jesus’ anointing (26:6-14); it is followed by the Passover, Jesus’ prayer, the arrest, and the appearance in front of the Jewish Council (26:15-68). Luke also follows Mark’s and Matthew’s sequence closely (21:5-37) with the same crescendo about the destruction of luminaries and the coming of the son of Man (21:25-28) and ending with a warning to stay awake (21:34-37). However, the anointing is placed much earlier in the narrative (7:36-50), and Peter’s denial appears prior to Jesus’ appearance before the Jewish Council (22:54-71). 555 There is an interesting mention of the gospel being proclaimed in the whole world that echoes 13:10, “And the gospel must first be proclaimed to all nations.” Mark demonstrates here a certain ability to integrate some motifs within his narrative and link them back. 556 Matthew narrates a similar arrest, followed by a meeting with the high priest at night (the high priest is identified as Caiaphas). Matthew adds that two witnesses mentioned they heard Jesus announcing he would destroy the temple, whereas Mark only mentions that witnesses did not agree. The rest of the narrative is very similar. Jesus’ response is also similar, but adds, “You have said so. But I tell you…” (Matt 26:57-63). Luke’s arrangement is different; he does not record the night meeting and only includes the next day’s assembly (22:66-71) that Mark and Matthew only mention in passing (Mark 15:1; Matt 27:1-2). In Luke, Jesus’ composite citation is recorded during the daytime assembly. Luke adds Jesus’ words: “If I tell you, you will not believe, and if I ask you, you will not answer” (23:67-68). Luke also includes a second question, “Are you the Son of God then?” to which Jesus answered, “You say that I am” (23:70). Each of the Synoptics includes Peter’s denial and Pilate’s trial (Mark 15:2-5; Matt 27:11-14; Luke 23:1-5); Luke is the only one to record a further trial in front of Herod (Luke 23:6-16). 554 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 141 The scene of the so-called trial of Jesus in Mark has been greatly debated. Since the Mishnah Sanhedrin describes the proper procedures for a Jewish trial557—which appear remarkably different from Mark’s description—some believe the narrative to be Mark’s creation.558 Despite this, it is possible to consider the prescription of the Mishnah Sanhedrin as a future and idealistic description which was not put in practice during Jesus’ days.559 The events of Mark 14 could also describe a Sadducean practice instead of a Pharisaic custom, or refer to another form of trial from the Mishnah.560 More likely, Mark is not narrating a trial, but a hearing—a sort of pre-trial, preceding a more legal (and Roman) trial.561 Effectively, the 557 M. Sanh. 7.5 states that only those who have fully pronounced the divine name could be liable. M. Sanh 4.1 stipulates that during a capital trial, cases needed to be tried by day (and could be finished at night). It also states that an accused could not be convicted on the same day, and that the judgment could not be held during the eve of a festival. Herbert Danby, trans., The Mishnah: Translated from the Hebrew (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1933), 712–13. 558 Sanders, for example, offers many objections against the events surrounding Jesus’ accusation as related in Mark 14. He believes that there is no blasphemy in Jesus’ actions or words since “would-be Messiahs were not charged with blasphemy, and ‘son of God’ might mean almost anything.” He also believes details about the trial could not have reached Mark, the court could not have met on the first night of Passover, and there could not be two trials. He states that the Gospels were mostly interested in accusing the Jews to exculpate Rome, and so “we cannot know even that ‘the Sanhedrin’ met.” E. P. Sanders, Jesus and Judaism (Philadelphia: Augsburg Fortress, 1985), 297–99. 559 In his article, Danby discusses the possibility that such a prescription did not exist in the first century; he considers documents such as Josephus’ description of some trials. Danby demonstrates that the NT was not the only text that did not correspond to the later Jewish description and concludes that the Mishnah describes a short period when a Jewish council had some power, prior to the events of the NT. He also believes that it was written down as an ideal form of trial which was not always put into practice. H. Danby, “The Bearing of the Rabbinical Criminal Code on the Jewish Trial Narratives in the Gospels,” JTS 21, no. 18 (October 1919): 51–76. Collins discusses Danby’s finding and offers the possibility (first proposed by Israel Abrahams) that the Mishnah’s description of the trial was written to discredit early Christianity’s version of events. He also mentions that the main point is that Mark clearly wrote the “trial” narrative as an unjust procedure—whether the process was acceptable in the early first century or not. Adela Yarbro Collins, “The Charge of Blasphemy in Mark 14.64,” JNST 26, no. 4 (2004): 379–401. 379-380. 560 In this case, the explanation would simply be that m. Sanh 4:1 is not describing a Jewish trial of the first century, presided by the Sanhedrin. Darrell L. Bock, Blasphemy and Exaltation in Judaism: The Charge against Jesus in Mark 14:53-65 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 2000), 63. It is also possible that the trial followed different rules if Jesus’ case was accused of deceiving. Deceivers were to be put to death without delay (m. Sahn. 11:4) during the festival. This would explain why the events of Mark 14:57-68 did not respect the prescription of m. Sahn 4:1. A deceiver would be “someone whose mighty acts attracted interest, crowds, and a regular following, and whose teaching to that following sounded like radical disloyalty.” Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God, 439–92. 561 “One must reckon with the real possibility that this gathering was never seen or intended as a formal Jewish capital case but a kind of preliminary hearing to determine if Jesus was dangerous … and whether he could be sent credibly for judgment by Rome” (p. 64). Bock believes that the Sanhedrin was trying to establish Jesus’ guilt, but especially to find proof to bring him to the attention of the Roman authorities. Since Romans held the Pax Romana in high regard, anyone disturbing the peace would be arrested and punished. If some Jewish leaders could have WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 142 vocabulary used by Mark would points in the direction of a hearing since Mark’s words reports the council’s conclusion, but not a legal condemnation.562 The Markan recounting of Jesus’ meeting with the Jewish Council is therefore plausible, especially considering that the narrative implies that the circumstances were not ideal or habitual—they could be construed as fraught with criminality.563 The trial would later happen with “the elders and scribes and the whole council” who met with Pilate the next day (15:1-5). The precise accusation is not mentioned in the narrative, but Pilate’s question (15:1-3) implies his conviction that Jesus was pretending to be a king. Presumably, the council “rephrased” Jesus’ answer to make it more menacing for Roman interests. In this case, Jews and Romans would share the blame for Jesus’ death since leaders from both nations came to their own conclusion leading to Jesus’ crucifixion. According to John 18:31, Jews could put no one to death.564 This did not stop them from influencing events to that regard and condemn him with all the authority they possessed. demonstrated that Jesus was planning to destroy the temple (or at the very least promote the idea), the accusers would have solid reasons to facilitate Rome’s involvement—and Jesus’ arrest. Bock also notes that the evaluation “ἔνοχον εἶναι θανάτου” could easily function as an opinion to pass on to Pilate. He also explains how the original accusation about the destruction of the temple would be sufficient to worry Roman leaders who wanted to preserve the peace (if they had managed to build a solid case). Bock, Blasphemy and Exaltation in Judaism, 64. 562 The verb κατακρίνω is used to pronounce a determination of guilt (“Pronounce a sentence after determination of guilt, pronounce a sentence on” BDAG, 519) but not necessarily in a legal sense. Since Luke uses a different term to discuss Jesus’ guilt in Roman setting αἴτιος (“ground for legal action,” BDAG, 31) in Luke 23:4, 14, 22, Bock suggests that κατακρίνω expresses the council opinion that Jesus deserved death—a statement “to pass on to Rome.” Bock, Blasphemy and Exaltation in Judaism, 192–93. 563 The clear indication that it happened at night, the secret manner of Jesus’ arrest and the false witness point to the author’s indignation against the events. There is irony in Mark’s retelling and a hint of condemnation, but there is no Jewish pride in his description of the proceedings followed by the council. 564 This has been disputed since Josephus refers to the death of James, Jesus’ brother, who was condemned by the Sanhedrin to be stoned (J.A. 20.9.1 §§ 197–203). Stephen’s stoning also shows an exception to the Johannine rule (Acts 7:54-60). It is important to note that Josephus mentioned James’ stoning as something deserving punishment. He mentions that the event occurred when Albinus—obviously in position of influence—was absent. When he returned, Albinus wrote in anger to the leadership and the high priest lost his position (A.J. 20.9.1 §§ 201–203). Despite Paul’s approval of Stephen’s stoning (Acts 8:1), it appears that the Jews did not continue to execute Christians on a large scale since they were thrown in jail (Acts 8:3). Presumably, Stephen and James’ deaths were exceptions tolerated by Rome since tensions were mounting in the period leading to the destruction of the temple between Jews and Romans, although Acts 26:10 mentions that some saints “were put to death” without stating if Jews or Romans oversaw the execution. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 143 The Markan narrative makes it clear that “the chief priests and the whole council” (14:55) were trying to find some blame to get Jesus arrested. Mark manages to convey the impression that they are not very successful at finding proof against Jesus. Mark’s irony can be perceived in his retelling of the attempts to accuse Jesus since his accusers “were seeking testimony against Jesus to put him to death, but they found none … their testimony did not agree … Yet even about this their testimony did not agree” (14:55-59). Even the high priest’s question seems flippant: “Have you no answer to make? What is it that these men testify against you?” (14:60). Jesus does not answer the high priest’s first questions; since no real accusation had been made, there was no reason to. Regardless, Jesus’ silence has been purposefully underlined by Mark and implies a motif of the Suffering Servant of Isa 53:7.565 The second time, the high priest’s query is more precise: “Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?” and Jesus answers—as if he was just waiting for that specific question.566 This is where the second composite citation, Mark 14:62, is placed in Jesus’ mouth as his sole answer: “I am [the Son of the Blessed], and you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven.” (14:62). Besides a brief answer to Pilate (“You have said so” Mark 15:2), Jesus’ response in Mark 14:62 corresponds to the only recorded words from Jesus in the narrative of his arrest and accusation. Even before his death, Jesus speaks very 565 Some believe the silence was partial only, since Jesus ends up giving an answer, claiming Mark could have been more explicit. This would be true if Mark had wished to use Isa 53:7 as a fulfillment text. However, as Mark has already introduced Isaiah as a prophet who taught about the gospel (I have discussed this in ch. 3 above), it is likely that Mark is using Jesus’ silence to allude to the motif of the Messiah, without needing a direct citation. Mark has already demonstrated an ability to use and integrate motifs in his text (again, see ch. 3 of this thesis). As for Jesus’ eventual response (the same pattern of answers and responses, or vice versa, is observed in 15:5), it could be argued that in Isaiah, the silence “is only in response to false accusations.” Watts, Isaiah’s New Exodus in Mark, 363–64. 566 Previous obvious attempts to ‘trap’ Jesus had failed (as seen in Mark 12). However, one must note there were legitimate reasons for the council to be afraid of what could be a potential rebellion in progress. Jesus was not only publicly denouncing some leaders’ authority; he was disturbing the social order. As John had noted, some—like Caiaphas—believed that it was better for one man to “die for the people, not that the whole nation should perish” (John 11:50). Despite this, Mark’s narrative makes the council appear as unfair rulers in Mark 14. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 144 little, but uses scriptures.567 Because of the rarity of Jesus’ speech in the narrative of his hearing, his words become even more central to the narrative. The co-text of 14:62 contains many words related to testimony568 and opposition.569 The words used in the composite citation echo Jesus’ words from 13:24-26, but contrast with the narrative of Mark 14:53-65 where no imagery is used beside the composite citation. The reaction of the high priest demonstrates that he considers Jesus’ answer to be blasphemy as he tore his garments (14:63). The high priest appeals to the others in the council to agree and condemn570 him as deserving death—ἔνοχον εἶναι θανάτου (14:64).571 The following reaction from the council—condemning572 Jesus to death—approve the high priest’s accusation.573 At this point, witnesses are no longer necessary to establish Jesus’ guilt. From the high priest’s standpoint, Jesus has proven his own culpability. Even Peter’s betrayal is well presented with a chiasm surrounding Jesus’ hearing where it is foretold (14:26-31) before being later told (14:66-72), creating a fitting temporary conclusion “Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani?” (15:34), using the words of a scriptural text. This supports my contention that Jesus intentionally incorporates scriptural texts and terms in 14:62. 568 Terms such as testimony (μαρτυρία), testify against (καταμαρτυρέω), witness (μάρτυς), as well as testify falsely (ψευδομαρτυρέω) appear 7 times in Mark 14:53-65. 569 To put him to death (εἰς τὸ θανατῶσαι αὐτόν), testify falsely (ψευδομαρτυρέω), tore his clothes (διαρρήξας τοὺς χιτῶνας), blaspheme (βλασφημία), to condemn (κατακρίνω), deserving to die (ἔνοχον εἶναι θανάτου), spit on him (ἐμπτύω αὐτῷ), beat with fists (κολαφίζω), slap one’s face (ῥάπισμα), and destroy (καταλύω, as part of the accusation). 570 Mark is the only one to use κατακρίνω to refer to the council’s judgment. Matthew uses it in the forecast (20:1819) but not during the hearing. Luke does not use a term for judgment in his narrative concerning the council, only for accusations—κατηγορέω—when describing the council/Jews accusing Jesus to the Romans (23:2, 10). 571 When facing Pilate, Mark mentions that “the chief priests accused him of many things” (15:3). Matthew says something similar— “many things they testify against you” (27:13), but Luke adds the precision, “We found this man misleading our nation and forbidding us to give tribute to Caesar, and saying that he himself is Christ, a king” (23:2). Luke’s accusation makes more sense to justify a Roman response. 572 The verb used is κατακρίνω, a term used for the “determination of guilt” (BDAG 519), however, it was not a Roman legal term, as discussed previously. For legal condemnation, αἰτία was used as it can be observed in Mark 15:26 “And the inscription of the charge [αἰτία] against him read, ‘The King of the Jews.’” 573 The nature of the blasphemy is discussed below. Expressions like the Son of Man may have carried some ambiguity, but the word Christ was understood as referring to the Messiah. 567 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 145 for the day’s events. Peter’s actions are judged, and they are contrasted with Jesus’ faithfulness and obedience. 146 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK Inner Texture of the OT Isaiah 13 (for Mark 13:24-25) “For the stars of the heavens and their constellations will not give their light; the sun will be dark at its rising, and the moon will not shed its light … Therefore I will make the heavens tremble, and the earth will be shaken out of its place.”574 Isa 13 :10, 13a Isa 13 is an oracle of judgment on Babylon that Isaiah relates to the Day of the Lord (13:6-8). It is in a section regarding punishment for nations,575 and the word oracle576 is recurrent (chaps. 13–23).577 The “consecrated ones” are summoned to execute God’s anger (13:2-3). The Day of the Lord is announced as a day of destruction for sinners (13:4-9). The theme of vengeance (v. 8–10) includes the text of Isa 13:10 used by the originator of the composite citation in Mark 13:24-25. Nonetheless, the originator of Mark 13:24-25 inverts the parallel found in Isa 13:10, the “stars of the heavens and their constellations” appear before the sun and moon. Since the Markan author also inverted the parallelism of Isa 6:9-10 in Mark 4:12, maybe such editing was not unnatural for him.578 Since the sun, the moon and the stars were central figures in the pantheons of many cults, their worship allowed people to gain a sense of control over their own destiny.579 God’s Hebrew: ‫אֹורם חָ ׁשַ ְך הַ שֶׁ מֶׁ ׁש בְ צאתֹו וְ יָרחַ ל ֹא־יַגִ יּהַ אֹורֹו׃‬ ָ ‫( כִ י־כֹוכְ בי הַ שָ מַ ִים ּוכְ סִ יליהֶׁ ם ל ֹא יָהלּו‬Isa 13:10) ‫עַל־כן‬ ‫( ׁשָ מַ ִים אַ ְרגִ יז וְ ִת ְרעַׁש הָ אָ ֶׁרץ ִמ ְמקֹומָ ּה‬Isa 13:13a); LXX: οἱ γὰρ ἀστέρες τοῦ οὐρανοῦ καὶ ὁ Ὠρίων καὶ πᾶς ὁ κόσμος 574 τοῦ οὐρανοῦ τὸ φῶς οὐ δώσουσι, καὶ σκοτισθήσεται τοῦ ἡλίου ἀνατέλλοντος, καὶ ἡ σελήνη οὐ δώσει τὸ φῶς αὐτῆς· … ὁ γὰρ οὐρανὸς θυμωθήσεται καὶ ἡ γῆ σεισθήσεται ἐκ τῶν θεμελίων αὐτῆς (Isa 13:10, 13a). 575 Babylon (13:1-14:27), but also Philistia (14:28-32); Moab (15:1-16:14); Damascus/Ephraim (17:1-18:7); Egypt (19:24-25). ‫ מַ שָ א‬has the sense of burden or pronouncement. Koehler et al., HALOT, 639; John N. Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah, Chapters 1-39, NICOT (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1986), 298. 577 Oswalt, Isaiah 40-66, NICOT, 1986, 298. 578 Mark 4:12 “so that ‘they may indeed see but not perceive, and may indeed hear but not understand, lest they should turn and be forgiven.’”; Isa 6: “Keep on hearing, but do not understand; keep on seeing, but do not perceive.” The originator of the citation of Mark 4:12 chose to mention seeing before hearing—or more likely, he underlines hearing my making it the central section of the citation. Doing so, he created a small chiasmatic structure. This shows how the Markan author does not mind modifying citations for stylistic effects. 579 See Isa 24:21; 34:4, 5; Jer 7:18; 8:2; 44:17, 18, 19; Ezek 8:16—18. Oswalt, Isaiah 40-66, NICOT, 1986, 306. 576 147 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK domination over those celestial bodies underlines his power; Creation dissolves in chaos when God decides to act on “his Day.” Isa 13:13 mentions “Therefore I will make the heavens tremble580, and the earth will be shaken out of its place.”581 All this devastation is aimed at Babylon and its inhabitants; it is a prophecy of judgment, vengeance, and destruction. Since Jews in the first-century experienced suffering at the hands of invading enemies, like they did with Babylon, it would make sense for such texts to have a certain popularity, and for those vivid images to be recognized. 582 This is especially true since Isa 13 is followed by a chapter on the restoration of Jacob (ch. 14) and Israel’s remnant. Isaiah 34 (for Mark 13:24-25) “All the host of heaven shall rot away, and the skies roll up like a scroll. And their host shall fall, as leaves fall from the vine, like leaves falling from the fig tree.”583 Isa 34 :4 Isa 34 is a prophecy of salvation and judgment within a universal proclamation on the nations that begins in Isa 33:13-24.584 The judgment is revealed to be caused by God’s anger (34:2); he has a desire for vengeance for “the cause of Zion” (34:8). The descriptions are linked with vocabulary related to nature, where wild animals take over land and human buildings; this stands in contrast with the ordered Creation under human rule—everything turns to chaos and In the LXX, “the heavens” is the subject. As discussed below, it might explain the inclusion of “the powers in the heavens will be shaken” in Mark 13:25. 582 Apo. Adam 5.10 (1-4th century CE) states that, “Then they will cast fire and sulfur and asphalt upon those men; and fire and mist will come over those aeons, and the eyes of the powers of the luminaries will be darkened so that the aeons may not see by them in those days.” This occurs in a text of judgment. 1 En. 18.6; Apoc. Zeph. 12.6; Ps of Sol 15.12 use the expression Day of the Lord in texts of judgment against sinners. 583 Hebrew: ‫ ;וְ נָמַ קּו כָל־צְ בָ א הַ שָ מַ ִים וְ נָגֹ לּו כַספֶׁר הַ שָ מָ ִים וְ כָל־צְ בָ אָ ם ִיבֹול כִ נְ בֹ ל ָעלֶׁה ִמ ֶׁגפֶׁן ּוכְ נֹ בֶׁ לֶׁת ִמ ְתאנָה׃‬LXX: καὶ ἑλιγήσεται ὁ οὐρανὸς ὡς βιβλίον, καὶ πάντα τὰ ἄστρα πεσεῖται ὡς φύλλα ἐξ ἀμπέλου καὶ ὡς πίπτει φύλλα ἀπὸ συκῆς· 584 J. Alec Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1996), 268. 580 581 148 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK desolation.585 The prophecy ends with a promise for the hawks to be gathered with their mates, and a promise that no one from the “book of the Lord” shall be missing (34:15-16).586 The Hebrew expression ‫כָל־צְ בָ א הַ שָ מַ יִ ם‬ found in 34:4 is sometimes translated as stars or “host of heaven.” It may have referred to physical stars, but also to the pantheon of gods they represented in the mind of ancient audiences.587 Joel 2 (for Mark 13:24-25) “The earth quakes before them; the heavens tremble. The sun and the moon are darkened, and the stars withdraw their shining.”588 Joel 2 :10 The chapter begins with a warning from God: “… Let all the inhabitants of the land tremble, for the day of the Lord is coming; it is near” (2:1).589 Once again, the theme of the Day of the Lord appears here, as it did in Isa 13:6. Like Isa 13, Joel 2 underlines the relationship between the Day of the Lord and darkness; v. 2 announces coming darkness and v. 10 mentions the sun and the moon darkening and the stars losing their light. The prophecy mentions “a great and powerful people” (2:2) coming and devouring everything, like a powerful army (2:6-7). While “people” will provoke all this Nature taking over is described vividly: “Thorns shall grow over its strongholds, nettles and thistles in its fortresses. It shall be the haunt of jackals, an abode for ostriches. And wild animals shall meet with hyenas; the wild goat shall cry to his fellow; indeed, there the night bird settles and finds for herself a resting place” (Isa 34:13-14). 586 This relates to the elect in Mark 13 that the Son of Man gathers from all places. 587 See also 2 Kgs 17:16; 21:3,5; 23:4-5. Oswalt, Isaiah 40-66, NICOT, 1986, 609. The Hebrew expression ‫כָל־צְ בָ א‬ ‫ הַ שָ מַ יִ ם‬means all the hosts of heaven, or stars of heaven, and it is translated into Greek as: πάντα τὰ ἄστρα in the LXX (Göttingen). 588 Hebrew: ‫ ;לְ ָפנָיו ָרגְ זָה אֶׁ ֶׁרץ ָרעֲׁשּו ׁשָ מָ ִי ם ׁשֶׁ מֶׁ ׁש וְ יָרחַ קָ דָ רּו וְ כֹוכָבִ ים אָ ְספּו נָגְ הָ ם׃‬LXX: πρὸ προσώπου αὐτῶν συγχυθήσεται ἡ γῆ καὶ σεισθήσεται ὁ οὐρανός, ὁ ἥλιος καὶ ἡ σελήνη συσκοτάσουσι, καὶ τὰ ἄστρα δύσουσι τὸ φέγγος αὐτῶν· 589 Joel 2:1 refers to people trembling, but 2:10 mentions earth and heavens trembling. Since Luke 22:26 mentions people fainting with fear, it is possible that the author had the entire ch. of Joel 2 in mind. 585 149 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK destruction, God is the one who demonstrates actual power.590 The text leaves no doubt: God is the one leading the destruction in his judgment. Joel 2, with its theme of the judgment of the Day of the Lord and the same darkening, is a possible influence on the composite citation of Mark 13:24-26.591 The rest of the prophecy invites people to return to God “for he is gracious and merciful” (2:13) and is followed by promises of restoration (2:18-27) with an announcement of the Spirit being poured on all flesh (2:28). The chapter ends with another declaration that the sun will become dark (and the moon turn to blood) before the Day of the Lord comes (2:30) when “the survivors shall be those whom the Lord calls” (2:32).592 It is a prophecy of judgment, but also of mercy for those who will be called by the Lord. Daniel 7 (for Mark 13:26 and 14:62) “I saw in the night visions, and behold, with the clouds of heaven there came one like a son of man, and he came to the Ancient of Days and was presented before him.”593 Daniel 7 :13 Daniel 7 describes a dream and visions that Daniel had as he lay in bed (7:1), followed by an interpretation of what he saw (7:15-28).594 The visions depict a location where thrones were placed, and where “the Ancient of Days” sits. His appearance is glorious: white as snow on a “The earth quakes before them; the heavens tremble. The sun and the moon are darkened, and the stars withdraw their shining. The Lord utters his voice before his army … For the day of the Lord is great and very awesome; who can endure it?” (Joel 2:10-11). 591 Luke 21:25—26 preserves the idea of fear in the presence of those wondrous sings. 592 As in Isa 34, there is here an echo (found in Mark 13) about the “elect” who are God’s “survivors.” 593 Hebrew: ‫ענָני ְׁשמַ יָא כְ בַ ר ֱאנָׁש אָ תה ֲהוָה וְ עַד־ע ִַתיק יֹומַ יָא ְמטָ ה ּוקְ דָ מֹוהִ י הַ קְ ְרבּוהִ י׃‬ ֲ ‫;חָ זה הֲוית בְ חֶׁ זְוי לילְ יָא ַואֲרּו עִ ם־‬ LXX: ἐθεώρουν ἐν ὁράματι τῆς νυκτὸς καὶ ἰδοὺ ἐπὶ τῶν νεφελῶν τοῦ οὐρανοῦ ἤρχετο ὡς υἱὸς ἀνθρώπου, καὶ ἕως παλαιοῦ ἡμερῶν παρῆν, καὶ οἱ παρεστηκότες παρῆσαν αὐτῷ· 594 Daniel describes four winds of heaven on the sea and four great beasts coming out of the sea (7:2-3). The first one resembled a lion with eagles’ wings, before losing its wings and walking like the man, with the mind of a man (7:4). The second one was like a bear, devouring flesh (7:5). The third had the aspect of a leopard with four wings and four heads; it received dominion (7:6). The fourth one is described as terrifying and strong, with ten horns. Another small horn grew and took the place of three of the first horns. It had eyes and a mouth (7:7-8). 590 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 150 fiery throne, with thousands serving him (7:9-10). Daniel then narrates the destruction of the great beast and tells of restrictions put on the other three beasts (7:11-12), before coming back to the Ancient of Days who gives dominion to the “one like a son of man” who came “with the clouds of heaven.” The interpretation is given to Daniel by “one of those who stood there” (7:16) and he was told that the four beasts correspond to four kings, “but the saints of the Most High shall receive the kingdom and possess the kingdom forever, forever and ever” (7:18). Descriptions about the fourth beast explain how this kingdom would devour the whole earth and combats the saints, but only for a time before “the greatness of the kingdoms under the whole heaven shall be given to the people of the saints of the Most High” (7:27). Dan 7 presents a Son of Man as the one receiving the authority to rule the earth, given by the Ancient of Days—God himself.595 The following interpretation attributes the ruling of the kingdom to the “saints of the Most High” (7:18), which implies that the “saints” relate in some manner to this Son of Man figure. The most reasonable explanation is that the anarthrous Son of Man of v. 13 will receive dominion over “peoples, nations and languages” (7:14) and he will share the ruling of the kingdom with the “saints.”596 Psalm 110597 (for Mark 14:62) “The LORD says to my Lord: ‘Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool.’”598 595 For a longer discussion on the Son of Man see below in the Social and Cultural Texture. Owen demonstrates that 7:27 shifts to the singular “his kingdom shall be an everlasting kingdom” (7:27), indicating that an individual is in view at this point, not a community of “saints.” Owen believes that “the transfer of power to his hands [the hands of this Son of Man] would, of course, include all those for whose cause he advocates.” Paul Owen, “Problems with Casey’s ‘Solution,’” in “Who Is This Son of Man?”: The Latest Scholarship on a Puzzling Expression of the Historical Jesus", ed. Larry W. Hurtado, Paul L. Owen, and Mark Goodacre, vol. 390, LNTS (London: T&T Clark, 2011), 36–37. Just as the beasts are collective figures, so is the one like a Son of Man. 597 Ps 110 in the ESV English version, but 109 in the LXX. For the sake of simplicity, I preserve 110 here in the discussion. 596 151 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK Psalm 110 :1 The first line of this psalm can be translated as “oracle599 from YHWH to my Lord.”600 The text is presented as a speech situation where a prophet first declares the word of God in v. 1, and “then explains the speech.”601 The mention of the “footstool” from v. 2 informs the audience that the Lord—or King—has been invited to sit on the throne.602 Sitting meant the exercise of YHWH’s rule in all nations, and by inviting the Lord-Adonai to sit at his right, YHWH is inviting him for a co-enthronement and a share of the ruling and power.603 Making the enemies one’s footstool implied complete submission to the Lord’s ruling. The invitation to sit at the right of God is followed by a description of YHWH giving power to the Lord.604 The rest of the psalm announces judgment “among the nations” (110:6) with a description of punishment that will be rendered by the Lord. Ps 110:7 presents the victorious ending of the war when the leader drinks and lifts his head in a sign of final triumph.605 Hebrew: ‫ימינִ י עַד־אָ ִׁשית אֹ ְיבֶׁ יָך הֲדֹ ם לְ ַרגְ לֶׁיָך׃‬ ִ ִ‫ ; לְ דָ וִ ד ִמזְמֹור נְ אֻם יהוה לַאדֹ נִ י ׁשב ל‬LXX (109:1): Εἶπεν ὁ κύριος τῷ κυρίῳ μου Κάθου ἐκ δεξιῶν μου, ἕως ἂν θῶ τοὺς ἐχθρούς σου ὑποπόδιον τῶν ποδῶν σου· 598 599 ‫ נְ אֻם‬has the sense of “whispering, announcement” Koehler et al., HALOT, 657. “The formula is usually either at the end of or within a prophecy.” Frank-Lothar Hossfeld and Erich Zenger, Psalms 3: A Commentary on Psalms 101-150, ed. Klaus Baltzer, trans. Linda M. Maloney, Hermenia—A Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2011), 147. 601 Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3: A Commentary on Psalms 101-150, 147. Hossfeld and Zenger add that it is “(fictional) speech situation, something that is attested in Neo-Assyrian prophecy when divine oracles are conveyed.” 600 602 ‫ אָ דֹון‬has the sense of “lord, master” or “God” Koehler et al., HALOT, 13. As Hossfeld and Zenger point out, YHWH’s invitation implies that he is also sitting on the throne. YHWH’s ruling while sitting is demonstrated in Isa 6, Ps 93; 99. Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3: A Commentary on Psalms 101-150, 147–48. 604 “Your mighty scepter … your people … your power” (110:2-3). The implied “speaker” seems to be explaining God’s authority, but v. 2–3 could also be part of God’s speech. 605 After examining a few options, Hossfeld and Zenger conclude that the accent is on the Lord who is the tireless warrior since ANE descriptions of wars have shown that the gesture of drinking on the ‘way’ is a military language. Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3: A Commentary on Psalms 101-150, 152. 603 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 152 Ps 110:1 is first cited in Mark 12:35-37 before being used in the composite citation of Mark 14:62. 606 Jesus’ puzzling question to his audience ends with a declaration that David’s son—the Messiah—is David’s superior.607 By first using this citation in 12:35-37, Mark allows his narrative of the arrest of Jesus in Mark 14 to pursue this point as he alludes to Ps 110:1 again in the composite citation: Jesus is the Messiah who is David’s Lord.608 Jesus may have rejected the title of Messiah as a political deliverer, but he accepts it for his role as the Messiah-saviour as Ps 110 announces it.609 Summary of the Inner Texture Mark 13 and 14 are among of the last chapters of Mark and narrate the events leading to Jesus’ hearing resulting in his death. Mark 13:24-26 fruitfully incorporate themes like judgment, God’s glory, and vindication from a few citations from the Jewish Scriptures. Those themes emphasize the surrounding narrative and summarize it vividly. The narrative of Mark 14 mostly centres on the last events in Jesus’ ministry, culminating with his hearing. The theme of innocence and injustice is woven within the narrative as it becomes obvious to an attentive audience that Jesus’ arrest is not justified. Jesus’ silence and unjust suffering is also elegantly underlined by the surprise felt by his accuser, followed by a As Kidner states it so well: “The authority and power conferred by such an address will be illustrated in the remaining verses of the psalm: but it will take the New Testament to do it justice.” Derek Kidner, Psalms 73-150: An Introduction and Commentary, TOTC 16 (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1975), 427. 607 “Jesus is simply affirming that David’s calling Messiah Lord is more important than his being called Son of David.” This would have been very strange for the society of the time: one’s descendant could not be one’s superior. Darrell L. Bock, “The Use of Daniel 7 in Jesus’ Trial, with Implications for His Self-Understanding,” in “Who Is This Son of Man?”: The Latest Scholarship on a Puzzling Expression of the Historical Jesus, ed. Larry W. Hortado, Paul L. Owen, and Mark Coodacre, vol. 390, LNTS (London: T&T Clark, 2011), 82. 608 Dispute against the authenticity of this text is based on a LXX reading where the wordplay for ‘Lord’ is only possible in Greek. However, even if the original discussion is in Aramaic, substitution for the name of God could preserve the ambiguity of the Greek (‫)אמר מריא ל מראי‬. The substitution around the Hebrew ‫ אדני‬is also an option; Greek is not necessary for the wordplay attributed to Jesus. Bock, “The Use of Daniel 7 in Jesus’ Trial, with Implications for His Self-Understanding,” 81. 609 As Bock states, Jesus is the one who redefined the term Messiah, not the Church. Bock, “The Use of Daniel 7 in Jesus’ Trial, with Implications for His Self-Understanding,” 84. 606 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 153 succinct answer—an underlying motif of the suffering servant from Isa 53. The motif of the Son of Man links both composite citations and presents an eschatological expectation for Jesus’ ultimate vindication and future glory.610 Combined with Ps 110, the resulting composite citation of 14:62 points to Jesus’ glorious rule and his vindication from his accusers; Jesus is presented as a king, and God’s equal. Intertexture611 This section analyzes the original language of the composite citations and the modifications made by the originator to facilitate the flow and integration of the material in its new setting. 610 As discussed below, this all depends on the recognition of the expression during the first century, but there are good reasons to believe that at least a portion of a Jewish audience would have recognized the implication. 611 It is the analysis of the influence by previous tradition, oral or written. The influence includes oral-scribal, cultural, social, and historical intertextures. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 154 Mark 13:24-25 Comparison between Mark 13:24-25 and influences from Isa 13:10; 34:4; Joel 2:10612 Mark 13:24-25 … ὁ ἥλιος σκοτισθήσεται, καὶ ἡ σελήνη οὐ δώσει τὸ φέγγος αὐτῆς, καὶ οἱ ἀστέρες ἔσονται ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ πίπτοντες, καὶ αἱ δυνάμεις αἱ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς σαλευθήσονται. … the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will be falling from heaven, and the powers in the heavens will be shaken Isa 13:10, 13 LXX οἱ γὰρ ἀστέρες τοῦ οὐρανοῦ καὶ ὁ Ὠρίων καὶ πᾶς ὁ κόσμος τοῦ οὐρανοῦ τὸ φῶς οὐ δώσουσι, καὶ σκοτισθήσεται τοῦ ἡλίου ἀνατέλλοντος, καὶ ἡ σελήνη οὐ δώσει τὸ φῶς αὐτῆς […] ὁ γὰρ οὐρανὸς θυμωθήσεται καὶ ἡ γῆ σεισθήσεται ἐκ τῶν θεμελίων αὐτῆς For the stars of heaven and Orion and all the ornament of heaven will not give light, and it will be dark when the sun rises, and the moon will not give its light. […] For heaven will be enraged, and the earth will be shaken out of its foundations, Isa 34:4a MT/LXX ‫וְ נָמַ קּו כָל־צְ בָ א הַ שָ מַ יִם‬ All the host of heaven shall rot away καὶ ἑλιγήσεται ὁ οὐρανὸς ὡς βιβλίον, καὶ πάντα τὰ ἄστρα πεσεῖται ὡς φύλλα ἐξ ἀμπέλου καὶ ὡς πίπτει φύλλα ἀπὸ συκῆς Heaven shall roll up like a scroll, and all the stars shall fall like leaves from a vine and as leaves fall from a fig tree. Joel 2:10 LXX πρὸ προσώπου αὐτῶν συγχυθήσεται ἡ γῆ καὶ σεισθήσεται ὁ οὐρανός, ὁ ἥλιος καὶ ἡ σελήνη συσκοτάσουσι, καὶ τὰ ἄστρα δύσουσι τὸ φέγγος αὐτῶν. The earth shall be disturbed before them, and the sky shall be shaken. The sun and the moon shall grow dark, and the stars shall shed their brightness. The vocabulary from Isa 13:10b has been somewhat preserved in the first part of the composite citation in Mark 13:24-25, although some differences are noticeable. The originator of the composite citation changed the word order and chose sun instead of the “sunrise.” The 612 The NT Greek texts come from: NA28; the LXX Greek texts come from Ziegler, Isaias; Ziegler, Duodecim Prophetae; Pietersma and Wright, NETS. The Hebrew text is from the Andersen-Forbes Analysed Text. Since the LXX did not preserve the small pericope of Isa 34:4a from the MT (“all the hosts of heaven shall rot away”), I include its Hebrew version. Mark 13:26 is investigated below with Mark 14:62. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 155 originator also made the sun (ἥλιος) the subject by shifting it from the genitive absolute to the nominative.613 Those choices could be stylistic since sun as a subject fits an enumeration of celestial bodies more adequately than “sunrise”—this reformulation allows for allusion to related false divinities.614 Isa 13:10a mentions stars first, but Mark 13:24-25 has them follow the first parallel of sun and moon.615 The originator of the composite citation also chose φέγγος instead of φῶς for light given out by the moon; both are synonymous, but φῶς is sometimes used for light coming from God.616 It is also plausible that Joel 2:10 influenced this choice given that its LXX version uses φέγγος. Since the composite citation of Mark 13:24-25 mentions stars falling and the powers in the heavens shaking—instead of the stars losing their light (following Isa 13:10)—it is possible that Isa 34:4 influenced the composition for the second parallel. Nevertheless, the section about “the stars will be falling from heaven” is not verbatim with Isa 34:4 and Mark uses a periphrastic construction (ἔσονται […] πίπτοντες) where the LXX reads πεσεῖται.617 Moyise argues that the 613 It is possible that the LXX translators did not follow the rules for the genitive absolutes of the classical Greek. Therefore, it is possible that ἥλιος was the ad sensum subject in Isaiah (“it [the sun] shall be darkened when the sun rises”). 614 If I am correct and Mark is also referring to false gods in his composite citations, as discussed below. In this case, a ‘sunrise’ would not be an effective term to illustrate God’s power over false gods. 615 As discussed above, the originator of the citation of Isa 6:9-10 in Mark 4:12 was not above modifying citations for stylistic purposes. 616 The choice of a variant word may have been voluntary (Matthew follows Mark in this). In the NT, φέγγος is used for “light, radiance,” (BDAG 1051), but φῶς is used as a light contrasted with darkness (“what fellowship has light with darkness,” 2 Cor 6:14) or to refer to a godly light (“And he was transfigured before them, and his face shone like the sun, and his clothes became white as light,” Matt 17:2), BDAG 1072. In this case, to refer to a light—φῶς— given by the sun, or the moon, could create an association between celestial bodies and idolatry. Matthew and Luke use φῶς in many occasions to refer to light in a spiritual sense and coming from God (Matt 4:16, 5:14; 17:2; Luke 2:32; 11:35; 12:3). Of course, one cannot discount the possibility that the originator of the composite citation may have created their own translation from the MT. 617 Matthew rephrased Mark’s composite citation: “οἱ ἀστέρες πεσοῦνται ἀπὸ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ” (Matt 24:29), choosing πεσοῦνται and staying incidentally closer to πεσεῖται from Isa 34:4 LXX. Luke avoided the term in his simplification of the composite citation. Moyise believes that Matthew’s modification, along with his simplification from the Markan “αἱ δυνάμεις αἱ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς” to “αἱ δυνάμεις τῶν οὐρανῶν” show that “he understood these words to be a reference to Isa. 34.4.” Moyise, “Composite Citations in the Gospel of Mark,” 29 (emphasis original). WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 156 influence of Isa 34 is probable despite the fact that the LXX version does not contain the first section of the MT in Isa 34:4 (‫)כָל־צְ בָ א הַ שָ מַ יִם‬, but the originator of the composite citation seems to include it.618 The originator’s transformation of the neuter τὰ ἄστρα from the LXX to the masculine οἱ ἀστέρες in Mark 13:25 also points to a possible allusion to false gods.619 Joel 2:10 uses similar vocabulary, mentioning the darkening of the sun and moon (the stars “withdraw their shining”). Since it mentions “the earth quakes before them; the heavens tremble” it could also have influenced the composition of the citation in Mark 13:24-25.620 Considering how Luke uses the allusions from Isa 34:4 to mention people’s fear, it is possible that the originator of Mark’s composite citation chose σαλεύω for its double meaning of shaking and inward disturbance. Still other texts from Jewish Scriptures allude to the heavens being shaken.621 It is also possible that the originator of the composite citation looked further in Isa 13 618 If the originator had access to the MT, or a variant Greek version, it would reinforce the possibility that Isa 34:4 was alluded to despite the fact that the order is reversed between stars and powers of heavens. Moyise states that “although the translation of the first clause of the Hebrew text of Isa 34.4 (‫ )כָל־צְ בָ א הַ שָ מַ ִים‬found in B L (αἱ δυνάμεις αἱ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς) is marked with an asterisk in O and is not printed by Rahlfs and Göttingen, it would provide an explanation for Mark’s fourth element, if such a text was known to him.” Moyise, “Composite Citations in the Gospel of Mark,” 29. Moyise also defends an influence of Isa 34 by pointing out that Isa 34:4 also contains a reference to a fig tree (34:4), as Mark does (13:28-31). 619 It could also be simply stylistic since the other celestial bodies are not neuter, in fact, there is a certain parallelism since ἥλιος and ἀστέρες are masculine, while σελήνη and δυνάμεις (αἱ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς) are feminine—whether this is voluntarily or not. 620 This would be the case even if the originator of the composite citation uses σαλεύω (shake/disturb) for the “powers in the heavens” in Mark instead of σείω (shake) for “heavens” from Joel 2:10. The verb σείω is only found in a few locations in the NT (Matt 27:51; Heb 12:26; Rev 6:13) for “to cause to be in a state of commotion, shake, agitate.” The verb σαλεύω “to cause to move to and fro, shake, cause to waver/totter” is used by Matthew, Luke and Mark to refer to heavens shaking (Matt 24:29; Mark 13:25; Luke 21:26). Elsewhere, it is used to refer to weeds shaken by the wind (Matt 1:7; Luke 7:24) or fruits shaken (Rev 6:13 varia lecto), or for things or people who have been disturbed (Acts 2:25; 17:13; Heb 12:26-28). BDAG, 911, 918. 621 For ex.: Hag 2:6, but also Heb 12:26 and 2 Pet 3:6. Ez 32:7 is especially close to the composite citation since it mentions darkness of heaven, stars, sun and moon; however, it speaks of clouds darkening the celestial bodies Since the darkness announced is caused by clouds covering the light for Egypt, the effect seems more temporary than eschatological. It still announces reactions of troubled hearts and destruction, but it does not relate to the Day of the Lord” or a final judgment since the prophecy refers to Babylon’s attack on Egypt. Amos mentions darkening on the earth, Amos 8:9 says, “I will make the sun go down at noon and darken the earth in broad daylight.” It does not refer to the Day of the Lord but mentions that “the days are coming” (8:11). The association with Mark 13:24-25 is weak, but the influence possible. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 157 to v. 13 where the text says: “Therefore I will make the heavens tremble622, and the earth will be shaken (σεισθήεσται) out of its place.” Instead of the earth shaking (same Greek verb in the LXX: σαλεύω), the originator of the composite citation mentions that “powers in the heavens will be shaken” (13:25)—maybe the originator chose these stylistic effects to preserve the enumeration of celestial bodies. Remarkably, Luke’s rendering in 21:25 mentions signs in the sun, moon and stars, but continues with distress of nations on earth, before a mention that “the power of the heavens will be shaken” (21:26). It seems that the originator of Luke’s version was aware of Isa 13:13 in his version.623 Isa 13 therefore appears as a very plausible influence for Mark 13:24-25. Presumably, the originator used Isa 13:10—since there is sufficient verbal parallelism to recognize it—and combined it with influence from various Jewish Scriptures (from Joel 2 and Isa 34). The originator uses expressions from the Jewish Scriptures to remind the audience of God’s power and punishment to come since the various texts using celestial bodies with notions of weakening also refer to God’s judgment. By incorporating different key citations and allusions of judgment, the originator is speaking of an all-encompassing judgment that the OT prophecies The LXX chose to translate it with θυμόω “make angry,” (BDAG 462) based upon the Hebrew verb ‫רגז‬, but the Hebrew could take the sense of “to tremble, be caught in restless motion” or “to come out quaking with fear … to agitate, arouse … to cause unrest to someone.” Koehler et al., HALOT, 1183. 623 Matthew’s version follows Mark’s, but Luke’s text appears as a composite allusion more than a composite citation and it could also be inspired by Joel 2. Matthew and Luke follow Mark since they include the mention of the main elements of the composite citation, but only Matthew follows Mark closely even if he reformulates some elements. Matthews adds some precision, and makes a few different vocabulary choices. For example, he begins the pericope with εὐθέως, he uses πεσοῦνται, instead of ἔσονται … πίπτοντες: “Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken” (Matt 24:29). In the following description of the son of man, Matthew also rephrases the text slightly by writing about the sign of the son of Man. Matthew expanded Mark’s description. If Matthew followed Q instead, he seems to have taken different literary liberties than Mark. Luke rephrases the whole composite citation, mentioning signs in the celestial bodies (not darkness), and distress on earth. He emphasizes the fear that humans will experience. Following the composite citation (or allusion in the case of Luke), all three synoptic evangelists mention that “they will see the Son of Man coming,” but Mark does not mention who they are. Matthew writes about “all the tribes of the earth” (Matt 24:30) and Luke mentions “people” (Luke 21:26-27). 622 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 158 only spoke of partially. Whether prophecies are cited, or only alluded to, does not change the integration of their motifs in the new literary setting in Mark’s Gospel. One should also note the natural association between celestial bodies and the various idols and cults. This connection would be expected in a culture where proof of their worship was everywhere—even Jewish audiences could hardly fail to notice them.624 In this case, God’s power is not only over celestial bodies, but also their corresponding false gods. 624 Although I believe that Van Iersel goes too far in linking Mark 13:24-25 with Isa 14:12-15 where divinities are mentioned, I believe he rightly underlines the popularity of such cults. Van Iersel, “The Sun, Moon, and Stars of Mark 13,24-25 in a Greco-Roman Reading,” Bib 77, no. 1 (1996): 84–92. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 159 Mark 14:62 Comparison between Mark 13:26 and 14:62 and influences from Daniel 7:13 and Ps 110 (109):1625 Mark 13:26 καὶ τότε ὄψονται τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐρχόμενον ἐν νεφέλαις μετὰ δυνάμεως πολλῆς καὶ δόξης. And then they will see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory. Mark 14:62 … καὶ ὄψεσθε τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐκ δεξιῶν καθήμενον τῆς δυνάμεως καὶ ἐρχόμενον μετὰ τῶν νεφελῶν τοῦ οὐρανοῦ … and you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven.” Dan 7:13 LXX / [Dan 7:13 Θ] ἐθεώρουν ἐν ὁράματι τῆς νυκτὸς καὶ ἰδοὺ ἐπὶ τῶν νεφελῶν τοῦ οὐρανοῦ ἤρχετο ὡς υἱὸς ἀνθρώπου, [ἐθεώρουν ἐν ὁράματι τῆς νυκτὸς καὶ ἰδοὺ μετὰ τῶν νεφελῶν τοῦ οὐρανοῦ ὡς υἱὸς ἀνθρώπου ἐρχόμενον] I was watching in the night visions, and lo, as it were a son of man was coming upon/in the clouds of heaven. Ps 109 LXX Εἶπεν ὁ κύριος τῷ κυρίῳ μου Κάθου ἐκ δεξιῶν μου, ἕως ἂν θῶ τοὺς ἐχθρούς σου ὑποπόδιον τῶν ποδῶν σου The Lord said to my lord, “Sit on my right until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet.” Mark 13:26 and 14:62 both introduce the mention of the Son of Man with the verb to see (ὁράω),626 but it is not part of Dan 7:13.627 It seems that the originator of the composite citation 625 The Greek texts come from: NA28, Joseph Ziegler, Olivier Munnich, and Detlef Fraenkel, Suzanna, Daniel, Bel et Draco, vol. 16 , Vetus Testamentum Graecum (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1999); Joseph Ziegler, Olivier Munnich, and Detlef Fraenkel, Suzanna, Daniel, Bel et Draco: Theodotion Text, vol. 14, Vetus Testamentum Graecum (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1999); Alfred Rahlfs, Psalmi Cum Odis, vol. 10, Vetus Testamentum Graecum (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1979). 626 Verses show some nuances: 13:26 has the third person of the plural, 14:62 has the second person of the plural; both adapting the verb to fit the context. ‘They’ are unknown onlookers who will see the Son of Man coming in Mark 13:26, or possibly refer to the implied divinities or “powers” of the celestial bodies. However, one must note that Matthew mentions “all the tribes of the earth” (Matt 24:30) and Luke “people” (Luke 21:26-27). In 14:62, you in its plural form include the High Priest and probably implies those who are present. 627 Marcus discusses Mark’s use of the verb “to see” and its possible presence by the influence from Zech 12:10 “they will look upon him whom they have pierced….” Regardless, Zechariah’s context of repentance does not fit WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 160 adapted the verb θεωρέω describing Daniel’s dream to announce the action of witnesses.628 In 13:26, it plausibly refers to the celestial bodies—or more likely their associated divinities. This is particularly relevant in Mark 14:62 where Jesus is telling his accusers they will one day need to attest how their accusations were true since he is the Messiah. Each usage point to a future vindication of Jesus—as well as his qualification as a prophet. Both composite citations also include a form of the verb coming (ἔρχομαι) from Dan 7:13 in their preface, indicating that the Son of Man will be on his way, or to indicate events that are to take place.629 The citation from Dan 7:13 found in Mark 13:26 differs slightly from the one in 14:62 in its formulation regarding clouds.630 These variations could suggest that the originator of the composite citation found it already combined in some sources,631 but it is more likely to indicate the originator made stylistic choices for each citation since both create different emphases. The expression ἐρχόμενον ἐν νεφέλαις μετὰ δυνάμεως πολλῆς καὶ δόξης (“coming in clouds with great power and glory”) from Mark 13:26 draws attention to the great power and glory accompanying the Son of Man coming in the clouds, whereas 14:62 ἐρχόμενον μετὰ τῶν νεφελῶν τοῦ οὐρανοῦ (“coming with the clouds of heaven”) underlines the celestial and divine Mark 13:26 or 14:62. 1 En. 62.2-5 could explain the use made by the Markan author since it refers to “seeing” the Elect One. Since Enoch wrote about judgment, the context is appropriate. Marcus, The Way of the Lord, 166–67. The date for the Book of the Similitudes (37-71) is debated, but the consensus is that it is a Jewish text dating from the first century CE; however, it is difficult to determine how popular it was. James H. Charlesworth, The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha: Expansions of the “Old Testament,” vol. 1, 7. 628 Lee notes that ὁράω in the LXX took the sense of “perceive visually” (Gen 13:15, 31:5; Ex 2:6, to name a few). J. A. L. Lee, A Lexical Study of the Septuagint Version of the Pentateuch (Chico. CAL: The Society of Biblical Literature, 1983), 138. There is an interesting use of verbs related to vision in the chapter: the aorist of ὁράω (Mark 13:14, 28) as well as ἴδε (13:1, 21) and βλέπω (13:2, 5). Visual perception appears as one of the motifs of Mark 13, and a contrast is created between what “you see” (13:14, 28) and what “they will see” (13:26). Since the future form of θεωρέω is not used in the NT, perhaps this explains the choice of the future of ὁράω. 629 BDAG, 394. In Mark 13:26 and 14:62, the verb ἔρχομαι appears as an adjectival participle, but in the LXX version, the Greek translation of ἔρχομαι is imperfect. Since the originator describes future events, it appears that the participle was preferred to describe Jesus’ coming. 630 Mark 13:26 says “ἐν νεφέλαις” whereas Mark 14:62 mentions, “μετὰ τῶν νεφελῶν.” 631 Moyise mentions “in his sources,” referring to personal notes a writer could make during research. Moyise, “Composite Citations in the Gospel of Mark,” 30. Moyise’s suggestion is very similar to the theory of the testimonies discussed in chap. 1 of this thesis. If Moyise is right, the author of Mark 13:26 would have to be a different person than the originator of the composite citation of Mark 14:62. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 161 position of the Son of Man sitting “at the right hand of Power” and coming with the clouds of heaven. Both expressions emphasize the divine powers and position of the Son of Man, but in slightly different ways—both also point to Jesus’ glorious vindication. Jesus plausibly refers to the parousia in 13:24-26 since the composite citation occurs in a series of events to come.632 Here, the allusion to the Son of Man underlines God’s glory: he is more powerful than celestial bodies and their corresponding divinities, and Jesus is partaking in that glory.633 This event described leads to the gathering (and implied eternal salvation) of the elect. In 14:62, the expression of the Son of Man is used as a self-referent for Jesus to describe his coming glory. The other half of the composite citation from Ps 110 (LXX 109):1 refers to the enthronement of the “Lord,” but also to judgment. Jesus’ response indicates that his listeners would witness his glory during their judgment.634 Since Jesus has used the expression the Son of Man to refer to the parousia in 13:26, the events described by the composite citation of 14:62 could refer to the parousia or a time closely following Jesus’ resurrection (and the eventual demise of the Jewish leaders).635 Furthermore, the use of “you will see” (ὄψεσθε) indicates that Perkins proposes to understand Jesus’ warnings in Mark 13 as prophecies for two events: the first one for the temple’s destruction (13: 1-25) and the second one for the parousia (13:24-27). Larry Perkins, “Mark 13:14 - A Cryptic Prophecy of the Messiah’s Death?” Northwest Institute for Ministry Education Research (blog), 2020, https://nimer.ca/mark-1314-a-cryptic-prophecy-of-the-messiahs-death/ accessed Oct 2021. 633 Since in 14:62 mentions Jesus sitting before coming, it could allude that his coming glory is imminent and will be fulfilled before his coming—especially if the parousia is alluded to. 634 The point of the composite citation is not to indicate when or where the judgment will occur, simply that they will see the extent of their mistake and the depth of their blasphemy when they will be judged: Jesus will be vindicated. While Mark does not mention when the event will occur, Matthew and Luke modify Mark’s words and add that Jesus’ glory will happen now, “Mark has not made the point quite strongly enough for them, so they develop the implication more fully.” Bock, Blasphemy and Exaltation in Judaism, 202. 635 Lane believes Jesus refers to “the enthronement and Parousia of the Son of Man.” Lane, The Gospel of Mark, 537. Contra Lane, Wright believes that “it would be a serious misreading of the Daniel reference, and a serious misjudging of its first-century meaning, to see this as a reference to Jesus flying downwards towards the earth; so too, it would be a crass literalism to make it refer to a physical ‘seeing,’ by Caiaphas and the rest, of Jesus physically sitting on a throne.” N. T. Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God: Christian Origins and the Question of God, vol. 2 (London: Fortress, 1996), 643. Wright believes that the composite citation refers to Jesus’ glory and vindication, 632 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 162 Jesus’ listeners (the Jewish council) will be the ones seeing Jesus’ vindication, not “some future generation.”636 Since Jesus’ death was followed by glorious enthronement—as it will be during the parousia—maybe such distinctions are unnecessary and the vocabulary may be intentionally ambiguous.637 The crucial point of the composite citation is that Jesus will be vindicated gloriously. Josephus has noted that the book of Daniel was popular during the first century.638 Here, it would make sense for the expression “Son of Man” to be recognized in its association with eschatological literature—especially in association with clouds of heaven.639 Ps 110 (LXX 109):1 has already been cited by Jesus in 12:36, as discussed above. The same association of the verb κάθημαι and the location δεξιός640 are present in Mark 14:62 and Ps 110 (LXX 109):1, but the expression is reformulated to fit the context.641 It is also remarkable that Jesus’ response acts as a prophecy by its modification from an imperative in Ps 110 (LXX 109):1, to a participle in Mark 14:62. An alert Markan audience would recognize the association between the two usages recorded by Mark. Jesus’ audience would also without any indication of time or location. It seems that Mark 14:62 focusses more on the inevitable judgment to come than its time or location. 636 France, The Gospel of Mark, 611. 637 Matthew and Luke add a temporal clause “from now on” that points to Jesus’ enthronement more than the future parousia, despite Hooker’s belief that Mark’s words imply judgment, something she does not consider to be possible until the parousia. Hooker, Gospel According to Saint Mark, 361. 638 “For the several books that he wrote and left behind him are still read by us till this time; and from them we believe that Daniel conversed with God; for he did not only prophecy of future events, as did the other prophets, but he also determined the time of their accomplishment.” (J.A. 10.11.7 §§ 267). 639 There are some stylistic differences between LXX and Θ, for example the LXX uses ἐπί + νεγελῶν and the genitive, and Θ uses μετὰ + the genitive νεφελῶν, but the same sense is preserved. 640 The word δεξιός was frequently used in symbolism. The expression refers to “imagery relating to prestige or power,” and it is also used in this sense in Mark 10:37; 16:19; Acts 2:34, Ro 8:34. BDAG, 217–218. 641 The psalm uses the imperative to ask “the Lord” to sit at his right, but the composite citation mentions that the speaker will be seated at the right of the “right hand of Power.” The same meaning is intended, but word order and verb conjugation differ. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 163 presumably recognize it since he had used it only a few days earlier.642 The allusion to a position of power in proximity with God was clear.643 The expression “Power” was “a recognized circumlocution for God,”644 and sitting at someone’s right was a clear indication of shared power, as indicated above. While the verbal parallelism between Mark 14:62 and Ps 110 (LXX 109):1 is very short (and NA28 does not recognize it), because the same psalm has been used in Jesus’ speech previously in the narrative, it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that the writer intended his audience to make this association. Even if Jesus’ audience did not recognize the association—and that would be surprising since it may very well have been part of the accusations—the Markan audience would certainly recognize it.645 Jesus’ answer beginning with “ἐγώ εἰμι” (I am) needs not point to Ex 3:14. It is a simple affirmation following the high priest’s question.646 It is an emphatic response, declaring clearly that Jesus is the expected Messiah. Oral-Scribal Texture Presumably, Isa 13 influenced the composition of Isa 34, and Joel 2 acted as an influence on it, or vice versa. Since those texts referred to the same idea of darkness preceding the Day of Since the events are presented as being chronologically close, it is plausible that some of Jesus’ accusers were present during his teaching. 643 See footnote above about δεξιός. By associating it with God by the expression “ἐκ δεξιῶν καθήμενον τῆς δυνάμεως,” the sense of divine self-proclamation is difficult to deny. 644 Lane, The Gospel of Mark, 537. 645 Since recognition of verbal parallelism is important in a study of rhetorical intent, I believe this composite citation to be a combination of two citations. Since Jesus referred to Ps 110 during public discourses where his authority was discussed, it would be conceivable that it came up when he was accused of claiming to be the Messiah. 646 “There is no need then to assume, as many commentators do, that I am is not the original reading in Mark” (emphasis original). Hooker, Gospel According to Saint Mark, 361. Since Matthew and Luke did not include this particular response from Jesus (they use a less emphatic “you have said so”), it indicates that they have not recognized an allusion to the famous “I am” godly identification. Since it is grammatically correct, there is no reason to believe that the high priest would have recognized this common use of the verb to be to indicate an association with God from Ex 3:14; the rest of Jesus’ response does it clearly enough. 642 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 164 the Lord,647 their combination appears even more plausible for an originator knowledgeable in the Jewish Scriptures.648 The same could be said for Ps 110 (LXX 109):1 and Dan 7 with their common notion of enthronement.649 If OT authors made those natural connexions, it makes the connections between the citations from the composite citations even more likely. Summary of Intertexture Despite the fact that Mark 13:24-25 and 14:62 are not introduced as citations, they are references to specific texts from the Jewish Scriptures.650 The language from prophecies of judgment against the nations and the motif of the Day of the Lord would make the intertextual references recognizable for a first-century Jewish audience. Both composite citations were modified for their context; this is quite noticeable in a comparative study between Mark 13:26 and 14:62. The concept of The Son of Man was integrated to fit each setting; especially the notion of “seeing” and being witness to the events described. By referring to texts discussing the Day of the Lord and by using them in conjunction with the glorious image of Dan 7, the Markan author has been able to evoke final judgment, destruction of God’s opponents, Jesus’ divine glory and vindication using a few words. Mark has used Jesus’ judicious double mention of Ps 110 (LXX 109):1 and Dan 7:13 to create interwoven themes. This connection between Jesus’ discourses makes the last few days of Jesus significant and appear cohesive. The Markan author uses the composite citations to show his audience how the events of the last few days precipitated Jesus’ death; this also underlines how Jesus was still in control of the events leading to his crucifixion. 647 Isa 13:6 and Joel 2:11 mention the Day of the Lord, Isa 34:8 refers to the day of his vengeance. There seems to be no clear association between those texts in Jewish pseudepigraphs. 649 “The combination of Psalm 110 and Daniel 7 (cf. Midr. Ps. 2:9) is not surprising seeing the former probably influenced the latter.” Steve Moyise and Maarten J. J. Menken, The Psalms in the New Testament (London: T&T Clark, 2004), 41. 650 “Although these lines in Mark 13:24-25 are not introduced as a citation, they would clearly evoke memories of the prophetic threat of judgment among Mark’s Jewish readers, together with those gentiles familiar with the Jewish scriptures.” Hooker, “Isaiah in Mark’s Gospel,” 44. 648 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 165 Socio-Cultural Texture651 This section discusses one particular expression and one cultural concept since both are relevant to the understanding of the two composite citations of this chapter: the expression the Son of Man and Jewish condemnations in the first century. The aim of this section is to improve the understanding of those concepts since they are foreign to a 21st-century audience, but also to try to determine how a first-century audience—including Jesus’ audience and the Markan audience—could have understood them. The Son of Man The expression Son of Man relates to both composite citations in this chapter, and it is fraught with difficulties. Its literal meaning in the Jewish Scriptures refers to a human being (or more specifically to a man or a male person), and in the NT Jesus primarily is the one who uses it.652 Since it is not a Greek idiom, its Semitic and biblical source is important.653 Geza Vermes claims that the expression should be understood as a circumlocutional selfreference; he believes that it simply means “I am” and nothing more. 654 Going a little further, 651 This texture addresses ideology in traditional interpretation, in the text, in intellectual discourse, and in individuals and groups. It focusses on certain key aspects in their understanding for a first-century audience. 652 The expression is only found in the Gospels and Acts, and in the book of Hebrews (when citing Ps 8:4 and in Rev 1:13; 14:14), often as a self-referent for Jesus. Elsewhere, other titles are used to describe Jesus, such as the Son of God or Lord. 653 In the LXX, the expression occurs 166 times in various forms (singular or plural). Ninety-four are vocative singular and found in Ezekiel; it is the way in which YHWH addresses the prophet. All the singular forms do not have a definite article (like the examples from Daniel). “There is certainly no basis for thinking that the Semitic articular/definite forms were used somewhat interchangeably with the anarthrous/indefinite forms of the expressions involved. Instead, the impression given is that the articular/definite singular expression, the son of man, would have been regarded as highly unusual, perhaps even peculiar” (p. 162). Regardless, some LXX translators added the definite article in some cases of plural forms (ex: Ps 11:4/LXX 10:4); the article in Ps 10:4 (LXX) may reflect Greek idiom—the generic use of the article. In the Gospel, there are 80 instances of the expressions (one in Acts 7:56), all of them used by Jesus (or placed in a report of Jesus’ speech as in Jn 12:34). Larry W. Hurtado, “Summary and Concluding Observations,” ed. Larry W. Hurtado, Paul L. Owen, and Mark Goodacre, vol. 390, LNTS (London: T&T Clark, 2011), 160. 654 Vermes explains that the expression is not Greek, but a Hellenized version of an ordinary Galilean Aramaic expression of the first century. He believes that the expression can refer to one specific person. Vermes states that the expression was used as an evasive phrase demanded by circumstances and used as self-effacement when motivated by modesty, fear or awe, “to say, ‘the son of man’ has this power is more discreet and acceptable” WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 166 Maurice Casey believes that the expression comes from a generic Aramaic expression for someone in my position, therefore using the expression in a very generic sense.655 He also states that Jesus used the expression to refer to men, but the early church later used the expression to link it to Dan 7:13 to describe Jesus’ parousia.656 Similarly, Larry Hurtado proposes Jesus used the expression “to refer, not to characterize.”657 Although some have demonstrated a previous common Aramaic usage, it does not follow that a new use may not be introduced by Jesus or by other Jews.658 In fact, the expression was likely already employed in Judaism of the first century as an eschatological term. 1 Enoch makes (p. 198). Geza Vermes, “The Son of Man Debate Revisited (1960-2010),” JJS LXI, no. 2 (2010): 193–210. Bauckham agrees that a specific use is found in Aramaic for the speaker to refer to himself. He does not claim that all uses of the Son of man refer to ‘I’ and admits to a reference to Dan 7, but believes Jesus usually used it to avoid claiming messiahship directly. Richard Bauckham, “The Son of Man: ‘A Man in My Position’ or ‘Someone’?” JSNT 23 (1985): 23–33. 655 Following works from some German authors such as M. Müller, H. Lietzmann and J. Wellhausen, Casey states that “it is not surprising that many scholars have preferred to turn to a sacred text, Dan 7.13, supported chiefly with translations of a corrupt translation of a translation of the Similitudes of Enoch” (p. 164). In his article, Casey looks at some Aramaic texts to try to demonstrate that the only possible usage of the expression had a very generic sense of one man or one among men (for example “For a man goes as it is written of him, but woe to that man by whom a man is betrayed” Mark 14:21—rephrased with Casey’s understanding). Maurice Casey, “Idiom and Translation: Some Aspects of the Son of Man Problem,” New Testament Studies 41 (1995). 656 However, he does not explain why the expression is so little used by the authors of the NT. Contra Casey, Owen states that “it requires us to assume that the early church invented the ‘son of man’ title, put it on the lips of Jesus in the gospel sayings, and then utterly abandoned the expression elsewhere.” Owen, “Problems with Casey’s ‘Solution,’” 39. 657 Hurtado, “Summary and Concluding Observations,” 166 (emphasizes original). Hurtado believes that Jesus uses it as a self-designation in situations where various claims are made about himself. Hurtado states that it is “the sentence/saying that conveys the intended claim or statement, not ‘the son of man’ expression itself” (p. 166, emphasizes original). Nel agrees, and following Bultmann, he proposes that Jesus’ uses of the expression can be divided in three categories: earthly activities (Mark 2:10, 28), his passion (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 12, 31; 10:33, 45; 14:21, 41), and his second coming (Mark 8:38; 13:26, 34; 14:62). Marius Nel, “‘Son of Man’ in the Gospel of Mark,” IDS 51, no. 3 (2017): 4. Hurtado also argues that if the expression had come from Jesus, the early church would have used it (Hurtado, “Summary and Concluding Observations,” 171.) Nevertheless, it is very plausible that the early Church would have avoided it because of its ambiguity for a Gentile audience and obviously, the Church had other clearer titles to use. W. Horbury, “The Messianic Associations of ‘The Son of Man,’” JTS 36, no. 1 (1985): 53. 658 Casey believes that opponents of his point of view “have denied the basic nature of the translation process.” Casey, “Idiom and Translation: Some Aspects of the Son of Man Problem,” 182. Contra Casey, I believe that expressions are not only the fruit of translation, but also of usage. The expression “Son of God” was a Hellenistic expression used to refer to an emperor, or a Jewish expression to refer to faithful Jews (see ch. 3) before Mark used it to refer to Jesus. Jesus, as demonstrated by Mark, redefined the expression Son of God; if the Markan author redefined this expression, why not also Son of Man? WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 167 many son of man references; 62.5-7 clearly allude to Dan 7, and 46.1 and 47.3 suggest it.659 A later text, 4 Ezra 13 (2 Esdras 13), also discusses the figure of Daniel.660 Depending on the dating of those documents, this could prove that the expression does not require a post-Easter scenario to be in usage. Since Daniel was an esteemed prophet, it is likely that Dan 7 was well known by first-century Jewish audiences.661 There are also reasons to believe that such an expression was being identified with the Messiah in some first-century Jewish contexts.662 Such recognition did not require a Christian development, and it is very plausible that Jesus used the features common between Dan 7 and a description of the future Messiah to give them “his own, innovative twist in his teaching.”663 In Mark, the expression the Son of Man is used to describe Jesus’ lordship/glory (2:28; 8:38; 9:9; 13:26; 14:62) or to prophesy his passion (8:31; 9:9, 12, 31; 10:33, 45, 14:21). The “… when they see that Son of Man sitting on the throne of his glory … For the Son of Man was concealed from the beginning, and the Most High One preserved him in the presence of his power; then he revealed him to the holy and the elect ones.” 1 En. 62:5-7; “At that place, I saw the One to whom belongs the time before time. And his head was white like wool, and there was with him another individual, whose face was like that of a human being. His countenance was full of grace like that of one among the holy angels … This is the Son of Man, to whom belongs righteousness … This Son of Man whom you have seen is the One who would remove the kings and the mighty ones from their comfortable seats” 1 En. 46.1-4; “In those days, I saw him—the Antecedent of Time …” 1 En. 47.3. Charlesworth, The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha Vol. 1. Collins adds that the Enochic Son of Man was not simply an allusion of a commentary on Daniel, it articulated “the worldview of a particular group of Jews in the first century.” John Joseph Collins and Adela Yarbro Collins, Daniel: A Commentary on the Book of Daniel, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993), 82. Other texts from 1 Enoch include Son of Man: 48.2; 62.5, 7, 9, 14; 63.11; 69.27, 29; 70.1; 70.1; 71.14, 17. Since the first chapters of Enoch are presumably pre-Maccabean, they are likely to reflect Jewish thoughts of the first century, although it is difficult to determine if those writings have been largely read. 660 The text discusses a man who flew on clouds as a glorious character who won against those who waged war against him. It is a later text, probably a Jewish text written at the end of the first century CE. It would not have influenced the NT, but it shows that “Daniel 7 was a text that was present in the theologically reflective thinking of those strands of eschatologically-oriented Judaism.” Bock, “The Use of Daniel 7 in Jesus’ Trial, with Implications for His Self-Understanding,” 86. 661 As stated earlier, Josephus mentioned Daniel’s popularity (J.A. 20.9.1 §§ 197–203). Bock adds, “the Gospel texts tied to Dan 7 are probably traditional texts, passed on orally long before they were recorded.” Darrell L. Bock, “Did Jesus Connect Son of Man to Daniel 7? A Short Reflection on the Position of Larry Hurtado,” BBR 22, no. 3 (2012): 401. 662 Bock cites IIQMelch 2.18 as an example: “And the messenger i(s) the anointed of the spiri(it) as Dan(iel) said (about him).” This passage probably refers to Dan 9:25, but it is likely that the same “messenger of good who announces salvation” IIQMelch 2.16 is in view. Bock, “The Use of Daniel 7 in Jesus’ Trial, with Implications for His Self-Understanding,” 84–85. Also Horbury, “The Messianic Associations of ‘The Son of Man,’” 42. 663 Collins and Collins, Daniel: A Commentary on the Book of Daniel, 90. 659 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 168 expression the Son of Man is used to underline effectively two aspects of Jesus’ identity: he is the prophet and the Son of God/God. Since Jesus makes the anarthrous Son of Man from Dan 7 into an arthrous the Son of Man in his discourse, he is applying a passage from beloved tradition in a prophetic statement to declare his vindication by God and announce himself as God’s equal. The first allusions to the expression may appear cryptic for a new listener, but its clearer association with Dan 7 in Mark 13 and 14 underlines Jesus’ Deity. Mark has demonstrated elsewhere his ability to introduce themes from the Jewish Scriptures in his Gospel by the means of citations (composite or not) and allusions. By hinting at Jesus’ prophetic role and his Deity by using the Son of Man as he approaches the denouement, the Markan author creates a web of literary links—he invites his audience to solve the apparent mystery with him.664 By his inclusion of the expression as the end came to its close, Mark expresses a high Christology. He declared Jesus to be the Son of God from the beginning and he used a close expression—the son of Man—to affirm Jesus’ equality with God by linking the title with the glorious description in Dan 7 that occurs in a vision. Council and Condemnation The scene recorded by Mark in 14:53-65 also presents its sets of difficulties.665 As mentioned earlier, some of those difficulties are diminished if one considers the events as describing a hearing instead of a trial, but this does not explain the exact nature of the 664 While it is possible that not everyone would have understood the expression the Son of Man as an eschatological figure—especially a Gentile audience—Jesus’ reference to Dan 7 could have been explained by a reader to any audience listening to a reading of the Gospel of Mark. 665 In his first chapter, Bock examines many discussions on the subject of Jesus’ trial. Bock, Blasphemy and Exaltation in Judaism, 5–29. To this list could be added: Collins, “The Charge of Blasphemy in Mark 14.64”; Robert H. Gundry, “Jesus’ Supposed Blasphemy (Mark 14:61b-64),” BBR 18, no. 1 (2008): 131–33, as well as Bock’s more recent articles: Darrell L. Bock, “Blasphemy and the Jewish Examination of Jesus,” BBR 17, no. 1 (2007): 53–114; Bock, “The Use of Daniel 7 in Jesus’ Trial, with Implications for His Self-Understanding.” WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 169 blasphemy.666Jesus could have been guilty of pronouncing God’s name—a clear blasphemy— which would have been edited out by the Markan author (or a court scribe) to avoid repeating the offence.667 While this cannot be discounted completely, it is likely that it was the composite citation from Ps 110:1 and Dan 7:13 that was considered blasphemous.668 Effectively, both passages refer to images of Deity, describing God’s formidable rule.669 Since Jesus made an obvious selfreference with the expression the Son of Man, he clearly applies God’s glory to himself. The selfclaim to share authority and glory with God would have been offensive for the Jews because this would associate Jesus with God’s throne. Furthermore, Jesus is presenting himself as the one who will come to judge his accusers and vindicate the saints. This could be understood as a contradiction of Ex 22:28 stating that one could not curse a ruler.670 666 Of course, this implies that Mark did not make up the answer, but wrote down what had been transmitted to him. Sanders states that disciples were ignorant of the procedures of a Jewish court and he finds it hard to believe that a “chain of transmission” could have informed outsiders of the proceedings. Sanders, Jesus and Judaism, 297–300. This does not consider that some people may have informed outsiders, like Joseph of Arimathea (Mark 15:43), a member of the council who disagreed with Jesus’ condemnation (Luke 23:50-51), or Nicodemus (John 3; 19:39) who were likely present during the discussions. Later, Josephus referred to James’ trial (A.J. 20.9.1 §§ 197-203); he obviously had access to the proceedings, either by talking with someone present or by access to some court documentation. Since Jesus’ death was certainly very public, it would be difficult to imagine that no information leaked out in one way or another, even if secrecy regarding the hearing was required—and nothing points to this. 667 In the Mishnah (m. Sanh. 7.5), the blasphemer is guilty if he pronounces the name of God. However, Jesus’ recorded words only include “the Power” (14:62), a natural way to avoid God’s name in Jewish speech as demonstrated by the High Priest’ question when he refers to the “Blessed” (14:61). Despite Mark’s recording, Gundry believes that Jesus actually pronounced God’s name in his answer as he quoted Ps 110:1. He thinks that Mark would have modified this detail to avoid repeating Jesus’ offence of mentioning God’s name; alternatively, the court would only record an amended version of Jesus’ response (records that Mark could have used). Gundry, “Jesus’ Supposed Blasphemy (Mark 14:61b-64).” Discussing Gundry’s proposal, Bock argues that it was acceptable to use God’s name in a Biblical citation, especially since he is doing so in the temple precincts. Bock, Blasphemy and Exaltation in Judaism, 73. Bock believes that even if it is a plausible explanation, there is more to Jesus’ answer to justify the accusation of blasphemy. For a longer discussion on the nature of blasphemy in first-century Jewish thinking, consider Collins, “The Charge of Blasphemy in Mark 14.64”; Bock, Blasphemy and Exaltation in Judaism. If Jesus had pronounced God’s name in vain, one could hardly speak of his innocence. It may be more plausible to see the blasphemy in the second part of his reply. As discussed below, Jesus’ imagery identifies him with YHWH by claiming to sit at his right hand on the same throne. 668 “A growing consensus among many scholars that the key to the blasphemy resides in the functions Jesus claims through the combination of Ps 110:1 and Dan 7:13.” Bock, Blasphemy and Exaltation in Judaism, 26. 669 In Jewish Scriptures, clouds are only ridden by gods (Ex 14:20; Num 10:34; Ps 104:3; Isa 19:1). 670 The priesthood would understand their role of leadership as ordained by God. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 170 The combination of the imagery of Dan 7 with the invitation to rule of Ps 110 effectively underlines the seriousness of Jesus’ implication since it was usually accepted that God could elevate someone, but no one could self-claim being God’s equal.671 It should not come as a surprise that the combination of what seemed like personal aggrandizement and condemnation of leaders was perceived as blasphemy—whether the name of God was pronounced or not.672 Summary of Social and Cultural Texture The combination of Dan 7:13 with Ps 110:1 would have been quite offensive for a firstcentury Jewish group of leaders. Jesus’ words show a self-reference to the glory and the authority of God, marking Jesus as God’s equal, and implying that the council would be judged by the simple Galilean teacher. Mark has incorporated this with irony: Jesus’ claims would have indeed been quite blasphemous if they were not also very true. Mark’s astute narrative has made Jesus’ hearing appear first as a farce with its ironical presentation of a so-called denunciation, but the composite citation underlines the tragedy of the accusation: by condemning Jesus, the council ends up condemning itself. Conclusion and Evaluation The composite citations of Mark 13:24-25 and 14:62 both appear in the last section of Mark’s narrative. From the first words of his narrative, Mark has invited his audience on the way to the discovery of the gospel. He has used themes, expressions, and citations to demonstrate Jesus’ identity progressively as prophet, king, Messiah and God. 671 A dream of a scene of enthronement is described in Ezekiel the Tragedian (2nd cent. BCE). The author describes a dream that Moses would have described to this father-in-law of a “man of noble mien” making him sit on the throne (Ezek. Trag. 68–82). It is followed by an interpretation from his father-in-law stating that it indicates that he would govern men (Ezek. Trag. 83–89). This is an example of divine elevation, but not self-elevation. 672 For further discussion on the subject, Bock, “Blasphemy and the Jewish Examination of Jesus,” 202–9. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 171 Prophet In one of the longer speeches attributed to Jesus by Mark,673 the composite citation of 13:24-26 uses wondrous images to describe the events preceding the coming of the Son of Man. The vocabulary would have been known to Jews since they were present in texts of judgment and destruction found in the prophecies of the Jewish Scriptures. Mark 13:24-26 acts as a reminder of ancient prophecies where the Day of the Lord was announced, and 14:62 speaks of coming judgment. The double mention of Dan 7 suggests judgment from God, but also a coming kingdom for the “saints.” By alluding to some prophecies of terrible destruction, but also of blossoming restoration, the composite citations bring hope since the elect will be gathered from “the four winds” (13:27). The two composite citations also underline Jesus as a prophet since he is portrayed as the one who has a superior understanding of, and direct access to, God’s intentions. Jesus’ disciples certainly received his words as encouragement in Mark 13:24-27, and his opponents as judgment in 14:62. Just like the prophecies of old, they are used to warn the audience of judgment and call for repentance. The composite citations also call to attention Jesus’ role as a prophet who declares God’s intentions. Jesus prophesied his own death, and it came to pass; this increases the audience’s confidence that his other prophecies will also come true. King and Messiah When he is confronted with the question concerning his identity as the Messiah, Jesus answers that he is the Messiah, simply and emphatically. He continues by telling his audience that they will see “the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power and coming with the clouds of heaven” (14:62). Jesus’ response is a combination of a scene of enthronement for the son of 673 The other long discourse attributed to Jesus is his teaching regarding parables in Mark 4. Both longer discourses occur in discussions related to the mysteries of the kingdom. Incidentally, Mark 4 is placed not long after the discussion on blasphemy and the accusation against Jesus (3:20-35) and Mark 13 precedes Jesus’ accusation by the Jewish Council. Both discourses warn of persecutions, the actions of Satan and preoccupation with worldly affairs. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 172 David, where ruling and power are announced to the “Lord,” with images of Deity. It is once more a scene of judgment, but with a kingly emphasis. Since YHWH is named (Ps 110:1, 2, 4), there is no doubt about the identity of the one who is inviting the Lord-Adonai (Ps 110:1, 5) to rule by his side. Whereas Ps 110 alludes to kingship, Dan 7 emphasises Jesus’ Deity and rule— both underline his authority. Furthermore, when Jesus quoted Ps 110:1 during his hearing, he effectively solved the riddle that he had given to the crowd about the Messiah, who is the son of David, in chapter 12. In Mark 14:62, Jesus declares himself to be more than simply the son of David—he is the Messiah-saviour.674 It creates a connection between Jesus’ disputed authority in Mark 12 and his condemnation in Mark 14. With the composite citation, the originator states that Jesus is the Messiah-king who is coming to bring salvation, and judgment—this was foreshadowed in Mark 12. The accusation made against Jesus at his so-called ‘trial’ also acts as a warning against blasphemy toward God. In Mark 3, Jesus had already warned his audience that a blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is unpardonable (Mark 3:29). The council is now blaspheming against the Son of God by accusing him. While Jesus is vindicated by God through his resurrection, the council accusing him is not. Blasphemy against God is unacceptable for the council, and it is unacceptable for the Markan audience. God Jews from the first century expected a few select people like Abraham or Moses to be invited to share in God’s glory, but never to be regarded as equal with YHWH. Jesus’ selfidentification with the Lord-Adonai in Mark 14:62 would be shocking for many Jews. The “Jesus is simply affirming that David’s calling Messiah Lord is more important than his being called Son of David.” Bock, “The Use of Daniel 7 in Jesus’ Trial, with Implications for His Self-Understanding,” 82. 674 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 173 composite citations present Jesus as the one who is the wondrous figure who will come and will possess the kingdom that he will share with the vindicated saints in Dan 7. Once again, the composite citation allows for a combination of themes from the Jewish Scriptures. Jewish audiences would probably have recognized allusions to scriptural tradition. While the allusion to the Son of Man may not have been understood by all as a messianic term,675 the obvious selfreference and the mention of being “at the right hand of Power and coming with the clouds of heaven” (14:62) could hardly have been missed as an allusion to Deity.676 The reaction of the high priest is undeniable: he understood Jesus’ meaning.677 Jesus attributes to himself God’s glory, and he also announces himself as the future judge of the leadership that is now condemning him. The Markan audience would understand the irony. Since they have been directed from the beginning of Mark’s Gospel to see Jesus as the Son of God, they would understand that the accusation against Jesus is true, but not in the way the council expected it. The audience of the Gospel is invited to evaluate the council’s decisions with the Markan author and agree, creating complicity between audience and author. The originator of the composite citation declared the power of God over celestial bodies and their related pantheon, with notions of darkness and fear—a dissolution of the entire created order. This would have been effective to convince any first-century audience, Jewish or Gentile, 675 As discussed earlier, there are good reasons to believe that the expression was already used as a messianic term, but it is difficult to determine how widespread such thinking was. Even without a messianic association, many would have recognized the allusion to Dan 7 because of the association with clouds. Of course, the Markan audience could receive explanations from a reader or from previous teaching from the Church. 676 It is difficult to know how much a Gentile audience would have recognized the expression “the Power” as a referent to God, although a position “in the clouds” would generally be understood as something mere humans could not reach on their own. Since Jesus’ audience would have been Jewish, only the non-Jewish Markan audience may have required some explication. 677 “Where Dunn argues that the early Church ‘emptied the title [son of Man] of its traditional content and filled it with new content provided by the law and the prophets and the psalms’ after Good Friday, I contend it was Jesus who started them on this road to reconfiguration by his acts as well as words like those present here.” Bock, “The Use of Daniel 7 in Jesus’ Trial, with Implications for His Self-Understanding,” 83–84. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 174 of God’s power over idols and creation. Beyond a judgment of false divinities—and by implication the followers of their idolatrous cults—it is difficult to imagine a scarier scenario than the loss of life-sustaining light. By associating himself with that power, Jesus declares himself to be God’s equal. The Rhetorical Role of the Composite Citation Mark’s last two composite citations are used by the originator to allude to specific themes of judgment by using a few key terms found in similar traditional, Jewish writings of judgment and divine glory. Since the composite citations allude to a larger co-text from the Jewish Scriptures, they carry motifs from prophecies embedded in the Markan narrative. This makes them very effective as rhetorical tools; they introduce and interconnect motifs from Jewish Scriptures with Jesus’ mission by using only a few words.678 Mark weaves into his narrative the motifs of the composite citations of Mark 13:24-26 and 14:62, just as he integrated the composite citation of Mark 1:2-3.679 The surrounding narrative acts as the perfect context to underline the importance of the composite citations, and the composite citations explain the surrounding narrative. The very succinct nature of the composite citations makes them powerful literary devices in their rhetorical intention; they contribute to the message of urgency for the necessity of the gospel. Since both composite citations refer to similar texts of glory, Mark’s audience may also recognize a similar imagery used previously to describe Jesus’ future glory (8:38) and his transfiguration (9:2-8). Incidentally, the composite citations become the new prophecies directed to the people of his 678 Most interpreters analyze Mark as if it had to be read and understood on first reading. Most likely, such Scripture was read, memorized, discussed, and loved. Looking at Mark in a retrospective manner is not a bad way to understand it. 679 As discussed in ch. 3. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 175 day, and to every audience through the ages. Since Jesus’ other prophecies have been fulfilled, the audience can trust that the ones to come will also unfold. Mark began his narrative by declaring Jesus as the Messiah and the Son of God—and by presenting him as a king in Mark 1:2-3. The last chapters of his Gospel wrap up his rhetorical message: follow Jesus the Christ, the Son of God who is also king and prophet. The events related in Mark’s Gospel have started with a declaration of God’s intent: the gospel is beginning because of Jesus’ arrival, as is the preparation of the way, as it was promised (Mark 1:1-3). Everything is happening according to God’s will, and if he carries out his promises for his Son, he will also fulfil the promises for those who follow his Son faithfully. Jesus dies, but he is vindicated; so, too, will those who walk along the way of the Lord.680 By using composite citations to weave allusions and citations in his text, Mark creates the perfect narrative setting to integrate various motifs from tradition. Hope and warning are part of Mark’s Gospel—hidden in plain sight. 680 Jesus even alludes to that moment in Mark 14:25 when he will “drink it new in the kingdom of God.” WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 176 Conclusion An old woman looked at the tapestry she was working on. She had received a precious golden thread and did not know where to embroider it. Should it become a beautiful bird in the corner, or a delicate flower border on the left? Pensive, she sat for a moment when the solution came to her. She would weave it within the fabric of the tapestry so it would appear within the pattern. The golden colour would be subtle, but by appearing here and there, it would connect the entire work. Pleased with her idea, she set to work, not yet knowing that she was creating a masterpiece that would last for generations to come. Existing within the larger family of the use of the OT in the NT, composite citations may appear to some as text manipulation. Authors seem to remove words without hesitation, adapt verbs to their new literary setting and amalgamate vocabulary from different sources. In the NT, some composite citations are introduced by a formula; others are not announced, but rather implied. All share some vocabulary with the original text that is more or less recognizable by a first-century audience.681 Since each one is woven within the surrounding text in a unique way, they should be examined as such. Composite citations do not follow the usual 21st century norms for proper citations—and they should not be expected to since they should comply with the literary forms of their times. In this conclusion, I summarize my results, but also offer some observations noted throughout this research. I end with some considerations concerning composite citations and further research. 681 As stated in the introduction, the audience within the Gospel narrative is usually predominantly Jewish, but the Markan audience was probably a mix of Jews and Gentiles, Christians and non-Christians. An average first-century audience would usually include people who grew up in a largely Hellenistic context and who would have a basic understanding of public rhetoric. They would usually understand some form of Greek (at various degrees). Regardless, the various types of audiences would not receive composite citations always the same way—each case must be considered. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 177 Evaluation The primary goal of this thesis is to examine if composite citations could result from intentional efforts by their originator to act as part of a rhetorical intent. The use of a simplified Socio-Rhetorical-Interpretation (SRI) method has allowed me to examine the many aspects of composite citations by looking at the original language, the narrative setting, the socio-cultural aspects, and the theological influence of the OT in the NT.682 It is a challenging method of exegesis because it looks at so many variables. Even simplified, this method of interpretation is complex, but it is also comprehensive since it allows for a multifaceted view of each passage. Literary interpretations usually look at a text in isolation from other NT texts or any socio-cultural studies. These methods of exegesis often ignore the possibility that audiences would have some prior knowledge, or the simple notion of having access to a reader who offers explanations. The strength of the SRI method is promoting a literary exegesis of a discourse’s rhetorical content, in combination with an exhaustive examination of a text in its grammatical and cultural context. Using the SRI for the analysis of the composite citations in Mark has underlined how much more effective those citations are at alluding to the distant past while also integrating theological notions and motifs from Israel’s history. The two levels of rhetoric683 observed in composite citations have shown how the originator of the composite citation incorporated ancient 682 The Socio-Rhetorical Interpretation has been discussed in more details in ch. 2. It examines the many textures of a text: the inner texture (narrative text, repetition, choice of vocabulary, literary devices), the inter texture (the influence of a previous text upon a text, including a comparison of citations from their original setting and their new setting in their original language), the socio-cultural texture (any relevant discussion on cultural or social aspects in the text relevant to the discussion), and the conclusion and evaluation (analysis of the theological impact of the text with its presuppositions, and an evaluation of the reception from the audience). 683 As mentioned above, the originator of the composite citation—who may, or may not be the Markan author— presents a first level of rhetoric as it was first taught to a first-century audience. This audience usually corresponds to Jesus’ audience within the narrative. The second level of rhetoric is the rhetoric of the Markan author who integrated the composite citations in his narration. Beside the first composite citation which is placed in the narration (Mark 1:2-3), all other composite citations (11:17, 12:19, 13:24-25 and 14:62) are attributed to speakers. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 178 tradition, and how the author of the Gospel wove these themes into his narrative. Since each composite citation was studied in its literary context, it was possible to observe how their inclusion offers various rhetorical intents and demonstrates the authority of Scriptures. The conclusion of this thesis does not deny that other explanations may exist to rationalize some composite citations in the NT.684 Some may very well have been created by imperfect recall or by an accidental combination in a personal list; each case must be considered individually. Nevertheless, the examination of the rhetorical impact of composite citations in Mark’s Gospel strongly suggests that they have purposefully been created by their originator. Since every composite citation examined in this thesis has proven to be an impressive use of previous tradition within rhetorical discourse, I conclude that composite citations can be very effective literary devices with rhetorical intent.685 Observations Originator and Influence Given that composite citations appear in the Greco-Roman culture preceding the first century as a practice that is more Hellenistic than Jewish, their presence in the NT implies a Greco-Roman influence. As discussed earlier, there are good reasons to believe that despite their resistance, Jewish communities incorporated some Hellenistic practices when these proved useful. The first Christians were not always welcomed in Jewish populations, but gained a 684 The various theories to explain composite citations are presented in ch. 1: imperfect recollection, derived from lists or testimonies, result of midrashic interpretation, following the rule of two witnesses or rhetorical devices. 685 The conclusions of chapter 3, 4 and 5 underline how each composite citation in its own setting has been an effective literary device within the Markan discourse. Mark was able to integrate themes and theological messages from each OT co-text in his narrative as part of his rhetorical intent. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 179 growing influence among non-Jews. Therefore, it would make sense for them to adopt some Hellenistic practices more naturally than other Jewish groups.686 This begs the question: who created most of the composite citations: Jesus, the authors of the NT or some other communicator of the Jesus tradition? While it is impossible to prove either case, nothing contradicts the possibility that Jesus may have been the precursor for composite citations. Since it was not a very popular Jewish practice—and yet composite citations appear regularly in the NT—it is plausible that one Christian author acted as an example for the others. In the Gospels, composite citations are usually attributed to Jesus, so it is reasonable to consider him the influential exegete.687 In that case, Jesus would have used the Jewish Scriptures with more imagination, knowledge, and authority than any Jew before him. Witness and Unity It has been proposed that composite citations appear as double witnesses required in the OT for testimony.688 Their combination cancels the double-witness effect by making it one, but they underline the authoritative and unified nature of the Jewish Scriptures. In the Markan Gospel, Jesus demonstrated that many prophecies were fulfilled by his actions. The combined nature of composite citations highlights the thematic and ideological agreement between many texts from the Jewish Scriptures. This also implies that the originator of the composite citation believes the audience shares the same belief in the authority of Scriptures—or shows they should. This creates a complicity 686 The influence from Hellenistic culture is discussed in ch. 1. As it has been discussed in ch. 1, an influence of Hellenistic culture would be quite expected in such a bilingual setting. Jesus would not require major Greco-Roman education to be exposed to public rhetoric. 688 As proposed by Mánek, a double witness would follow the rule of Deut 19:15 stating that two witnesses are necessary to create testimony. This is discussed in ch. 1 above. 687 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 180 between the originator and the audience; the audience is invited to share in the belief in tradition and in its unity. Presentation and Reception The invitation to share in this belief is also linked to the dramatic effect created by composite citations since they play a role in the text by inviting the audience to read, or hear, the Jewish tradition. Audiences are encouraged to engage in interpretation and agree with the originator. They also learn how to interpret Jewish scriptures in the light of Jesus. The dramatization of composite citations also plays a role in the usual public reading during the first century.689 Citations act as characters, linking tradition to the narration. Using language from the past, they strike one’s imagination and operate as a reminder of ancient teaching. Because of their succinct nature, composite citations emphasize specific keywords that facilitate recall. Themes and Combination Citations ease retention, and they also refer to more than simple words of authority since they can bring into play past stories, ancient prophecies or deep-rooted teaching to remind their audience of the implication of the Jewish tradition. By linking texts with similar theological messages, originators can integrate themes from the Jewish Scriptures and expand on them. This combining of citations allows for amalgamation of common motifs that make a new understanding of the OT possible—they enable the originator to make sense of the significance of events related to Jesus. They also show literary prowess and a deep knowledge of the tradition and this increases confidence in the new gospel now being presented. 689 Presentation and reception are discussed in ch. 1, but also in the various following chapters discussing each case. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 181 Considerations Readers Most interpreters analyze Mark’s Gospel as if it can only be read once. They analyze all that can be gathered from that unique reading, but contrary to works of fiction, the Gospels were usually not read only once, especially not in private. Most likely, such Scriptures were read, memorized, discussed and explained. The importance of the public readers690 should not be downplayed; it would have been their responsibility to provide additional insights as they proclaimed the text. What may appear as mysteries to some would easily be simplified by a knowledgeable teacher who could guide and inform the hearers. Research Because of the constraints of this thesis, only the composite citations from the Mark’s Gospel have been considered. Further study would be necessary to examine how the other Synoptic Gospels (and the book of Acts) have used composite citations, and if John’s Gospel has used the same type of literary devices in a similar way. The epistles would also benefit from better consideration of their composite citations. Finally, a study of composite allusions would also prove useful in comparing their use with composite citations. Reflection From these observations and considerations, it is possible to conclude that composite citations may not be as strange or out of place as they first appear. Just as a pithy line is a very effective rhetorical device, composite citations are efficiently meaningful. By incorporating images, theological meaning, and history, they give opportunity for an author to weave their message into a larger text. Mark has proven that he has the aptitude to use motifs throughout his 690 As discussed earlier in the thesis, public readers would frequently be required for public readings since the majority of first-century Greco-Roman habitants could not read or write well enough for the task. In this case, most audiences would listen to an oral reading of biblical texts. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 182 narrative, creating links between various sections of his text, but also between his Gospel and the Jewish Scriptures. He has created a beautiful tapestry of the ministry of Jesus-Christ, Son of God, who came into this world to bring salvation, and the gospel. All that is left is for the audience to notice the golden thread, and to follow it. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 183 Bibliography Adams, Sean A. “Greek Education and Composite Citations of Homer.” In Composite Citations in Antiquity: Jewish, Graeco-Roman, and Early Christian Uses, edited by Sean A. Adams and Seth M. Ehorn, 17–34. LNTS 525. London: T&T Clark, 2016. Adams, Sean A., and Seth M. Ehorn. “Composite Citations in Antiquity: A Conclusion.” In Composite Citations in Antiquity: New Testament Uses, edited by Sean A. Adams and Seth M. Ehorn, 209–49. LNTS 593. London: T&T Clark, 2018. ———. “Composite Citations in the Septuagint Apocrypha.” In Composite Citations in Antiquity: Jewish, Graeco-Roman, and Early Christian Uses, edited by Sean A. Adams and Seth M. Ehorn, 119–39. LNTS 525. London: T&T Clark, 2016. Adams, Sean A., and Seth M. Ehorn, eds. Composite Citations in Antiquity: Jewish, GraecoRoman, and Early Christian Uses. LNTS 525. London: T&T Clark, 2016. ———, eds. Composite Citations in Antiquity: New Testament Uses. LNTS 593. London: T&T Clark, 2018. Aland, Kurt, et al. eds. Novum Testamentum Graece. 28th ed. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2012. Albl, Martin. “The Testimonia Hypothesis and Composite Citations.” In Composite Citations in Antiquity: Jewish, Graeco-Roman, and Early Christian Uses, edited by Sean A. Adams and Seth M. Ehorn, 182–202. LNTS 525. London: T&T Clark, 2016. Allen, Garrick V. “Composite Citations in Jewish Pseudepigraphic Works: Re-Presenting Legal Traditions in the Second Temple Period.” In Composite Citations in Antiquity: Jewish, Graeco-Roman, and Early Christian Uses, edited by Sean A. Adams and Seth M. Ehorn, 140–57. LNTS 525. London: T&T Clark, 2016. Allen, Graham. Intertextuality (The New Critical Idiom). 2nd ed. New York: Routledge, 2011. Allen, Leslie C. Jeremiah: A Commentary. Edited by William P. Brown, Carol A. Newsom, and David L. OTL. Petersen. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, 2008. Andersen, Francis I., and A. Dean Forbes, eds. The Hebrew Bible: Andersen-Forbes Analyzed Text (AFAT), Bellingham, WA: Lexham, 2008. Aristotle. Rhetoric. Edited by W. D. Ross. Translated by W. Rhys Roberts. Mineola, NY: Dover Publications, 2012. Austin, J. L. How To Do Things with Words. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1962. Baldwin, Joyce. Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi: An Introduction and Commentary. TOTC 28. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1972. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 184 Bauckham, Richard. “The Son of Man: ‘A Man in My Position’ or ‘Someone’?” JSNT 23 (1985): 23–33. Bauer, Walter. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (BDAG). Edited by Frederick William Danker. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2001. Beale, G. K. “Positive Answer to the Question Did Jesus and His Followers Preach the Right Doctrine from the Wrong Texts?” In The Right Doctrine from the Wrong Texts? Essays on the Use of the Old Testament in the New, edited by G. K. Beale, chap. 22, Kindle. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1994. Beale, G. K, ed. The Right Doctrine from the Wrong Texts? Essays on the Use of the Old Testament in the New. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1994. ———, ed. Handbook on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament: Exegesis and Interpretation. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2012. Beale, G. K., and D. A. Carson, eds. Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2007. Black, David Alan, and Benjamin L. Merkle, eds. Linguistics and New Testament Greek: Key Issues in the Current Debate. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2020. Blomberg, Craig L. “The Gospels for Specific Communities and All Christians.” In The Audience of the Gospels: The Origin and Function of the Gospels in Early Christianity, edited by Edward W. Klink III, 111–33. London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2010. Bobichon, Philippe. “Composite Features and Citations in Justin Martyr’s Textual Composition.” In Composite Citations in Antiquity: Jewish, Graeco-Roman, and Early Christian Uses, edited by Sean A. Adams and Seth M. Ehorn, 159–81. LNTS 525. London: T&T Clark, 2016. Bock, Darrell L. Blasphemy and Exaltation in Judaism: The Charge against Jesus in Mark 14:53-65. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 2000. ———. “Blasphemy and the Jewish Examination of Jesus.” BBR 17, no. 1 (2007): 53–114. ———. “The Use of Daniel 7 in Jesus’ Trial, with Implications for His Self-Understanding.” In “Who Is This Son of Man?”: The Latest Scholarship on a Puzzling Expression of the Historical Jesus, edited by Larry W. Hortado, Paul L. Owen, and Mark Coodacre, 390:78– 100. LNTS. London: T&T Clark, 2011. ———. “Did Jesus Connect Son of Man to Daniel 7? A Short Reflection on the Position of Larry Hurtado.” BBR 22, no. 3 (2012): 399–402. Bolt, Peter. “What Were the Sadducees Reading? An Enquiry into the Literary Background of Mark 12 18-23.” TynBul 45, no. 2 (1994): 369–94. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 185 Booth, Wayne C. The Rhetoric of Fiction. 2nd edition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2010. Botha, Pieter J. J. “History and Point of View: Understanding the Sadducees.” Neot 30, no. 2 (1996): 235–80. Bourin, Guillaume. “ Évaluer les connexions intertextuelles au sein du Canon Biblique: Une méthodologie.” RRef 289 (2019): 41-60. Breytenbach, Cilliers von. “Die Vorschriften Des Mose Im Markusevangelium.” ZNW 97, no. 1 (2006): 23–43. Bridle, Wayne. “A Definition of the Title ‘Son of God’ in The Synoptic Gospels.” PhD diss., Dallas Theological Seminary, 1988. Brown, Francis, Samuel Rolles Driver, and Charles Augustus Briggs. Enhanced Brown-DriverBriggs Hebrew and English Lexicon (BDB). Oxford: Clarendon, 1977. Casey, Maurice. “Idiom and Translation: Some Aspects of the Son of Man Problem.” NTS 41 (1995): 164–82. Charlesworth, James H. The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha: Expansions of the “Old Testament” and Legends, Wisdom, and Philosophical Literature, Prayers, Psalms and Odes, Fragments of Lost Judeo-Hellenistic Works. Vol. 1. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1983. ———. The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha: Expansions of the “Old Testament” and Legends, Wisdom, and Philosophical Literature, Prayers, Psalms and Odes, Fragments of Lost Judeo-Hellenistic Works. Vol. 2. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1985. Childs, Brevard S. The Struggle to Understand Isaiah as Christian Scripture. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2004. Cole, R. Alan. Exodus: An Introduction and Commentary. TOTC 2. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1973. ———. Mark. TNTC 2. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1989. Collins, Adela Yarbro. “Mark and His Readers: The Son of God among Jews.” HTR 92, no. 4 (1999): 393–408. ———. “The Charge of Blasphemy in Mark 14.64.” JNST 26, no. 4 (2004): 379–401. ———. Mark: A Commentary on the Gospel of Mark. Hermeneia—a Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2007. Collins, John Joseph, and Collins, Adela Yarbro. Daniel: A Commentary on the Book of Daniel. Hermeneia—a Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 186 Cross, Frank Moore. Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic: Essays in the History of the Religion of Israel. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1973. Danby, H. “The Bearing of the Rabbinical Criminal Code on the Jewish Trial Narratives in the Gospels.” JTS 21, no. 18 (October 1919): 51–76. Danby, H., trans. The Mishnah: Translated from the Hebrew. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1933. Daube, David. “On Acts 23: Sadducees and Angels.” JBL 109, no. 3 (1990): 493–97. ———. The New Testament and Rabbinic Judaism. Reprint ed. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1998. Dodd, C. H. According to the Scriptures: The Sub-Structure of New Testament Theology. Great Britain: Fontana, 1965. ———. “The Old Testament in the New.” In The Right Doctrine from the Wrong Texts? Essays on the Use of the Old Testament in the New, edited by G. K. Beale, chap. 10, Kindle. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1994. Dreyfus, François. “L’argument scripturaire de Jésus en faveur de la résurrection des morts (Marc XII, 26-27).” RB 66, no. 2 (1959): 213–24. Doane, S. “Les Citations de Matthieu 1-2: Charnières Théologiques Entre l’ancien et Le Nouveau.” Theoforum 47, no. 1 (2016–2017): 133–48. Edwards, James R. The Gospel According to Mark. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2001. Ehorn, Seth M. “Composite Citations in Plutarch.” In Composite Citations in Antiquity: Jewish, Graeco-Roman, and Early Christian Uses, edited by Sean A. Adams and Seth M. Ehorn, 35–56. LNTS 525. London: T&T Clark, 2016. Ellis, E. Earl. Prophecy and Hermeneutic in Early Christianity: New Testament Essays. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2003. Emadi, Samuel. “Intertextuality in New Testament Scholarship: Significance, Criteria, and the Art of Intertextual Reading.” CurBR 14, no. 1 (2015): 8–23. Eppstein, Victor. “Historicity of the Gospel Account of the Cleansing of the Temple.” ZNW 55, no. 1–2 (1964): 42–58. ———. “When and How the Sadducees Were Excommunicated.” JBL 85, no. 2 (1966): 213–24. Evans, Craig A. Ancient Texts for New Testament Studies: A Guide to the Background Literature. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2009. ———. Mark 8:27-16:20, Volume 34B. Edited by Bruce M. Metzger, David Allen Hubbard, and Glenn W. Barker. Revised ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Academic, 2018. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 187 Ferda, Tucker S. “Jeremiah 7 and Flavius Josephus on the First Jewish War.” JSJ 44, no. 2 (2013): 158–73. France, R. T. The Gospel of Mark. NIGTC. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2002. Gaiser, Frederick J. “The Gospel According to Isaiah.” WW 38, no. 3 (2018): 239–51. Graves, Michael. “Scholar and Advocate: The Stories of Moses in Midrash Exodus Rabbah.” BBR 21, no. 1 (2011): 1–22. Green, J. ed. Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2020. Guelich, Robert A. Mark 1-8:26, Vol. 34A. Edited by David Allen Hubbard and Glenn W. Barker. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Academic, 2018. Guelich, Robert A. “‘The Beginning of the Gospel’: Mark 1:1-15.” BR 27 (1982): 5–15. Gundry, Robert H. “Jesus’ Supposed Blasphemy (Mark 14:61b-64).” BBR 18, no. 1 (2008): 131– 33. Hatch, Edwin. “On Composite Quotations from the Septuagint.” In Essays in Biblical Greek. Oxford: Clarendon, 1889. Hatina, Thomas R. In Search of a Context: The Function of Scripture in Mark’s Narrative. London: Sheffield Academic Press, 2002. Hays, Richard B. Echoes of Scripture in the Gospels. Waco, TX: Baylor University Press, 2016. Henderson, Ian H. “(Mark 9:42-50): Style, Oracles and (Socio)Rhetorical Gospel Criticism.” JSNT 80 (2000): 44–65. Hengel, Martin. Judaism and Hellenism: Studies in Their Encounter in Palestine during the Early Hellenistic Period. Reprint ed. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981. Hollander, William den. Josephus, the Emperors and the City of Rome: From Hostage to Historian. Edited by Cilliers Breytenbach and Martin Goodman. Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity 86. Leiden: Brill, 2014. Hooker, Morna. Gospel According to Saint Mark. BNTC 2. London: Continuum, 1991. ———. “Isaiah in Mark’s Gospel.” In Isaiah in the New Testament, edited by Steve Moyise and Maarten J. J. Menkel, 35–49. London: T&T Clark, 2005. Horbury, W. “The Messianic Associations of ‘The Son of Man.’” JTS 36, no. 1 (1985): 34–55. Hossfeld, Frank-Lothar, and Erich Zenger. Psalms 3: A Commentary on Psalms 101-150. Edited by Klaus Baltzer. Translated by Linda M. Maloney. Hermenia—A Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2011. Hurtado, Larry W., Paul L. Owen, and Mark Goodacre, eds. “Who Is This Son of Man?”: The Latest Scholarship on a Puzzling Expression of the Historical Jesus.” LNTS 390. London: T&T Clark, 2011. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 188 Janzen, J. Gerald. “Resurrection and Hermeneutics: On Exodus 3.6 in Mark 12.26.” JSNT 23 (1985): 43–58. Johnson, Franklin. The Quotations of the New Testament from the Old, Considered in the Light of General Literature. Philadelphia: American Baptist Publication Society, 1896. Joosten, Jan. “Son of God in Wisdom 2:16-18: Between the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament.” In Son of God: Divine Sonship in Jewish and Christian Antiquity, edited by Garrick V. Allen, Kai Akagi, Paul Sloan, and Madhavi Nevader, 41–52. University Park, PA: Eisenbrauns, 2019. Kaiser, Walter C. Jr. “The Single Intent of Scripture.” In The Right Doctrine from the Wrong Texts? Essays on the Use of the Old Testament in the New, edited by G. K. Beale, chap. 3, Kindle. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1994. Kee, Howard Clark. “The Function of Scriptural Quotations and Allusions in Mark 11-16.” In Jesus Und Paulus: Festschrift Für Werner Georg Kümmel Zum 70sten Geburtstag, 165– 88. Göttingen, Germany: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1975. Kennedy, George A. Classical Rhetoric and Its Christian and Secular Tradition from Ancient to Modern Times. 2nd ed. Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North Carolina Press, 2003. Kidner, Derek. Psalms 73-150: An Introduction and Commentary. TOTC 16. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1975. Kimondo, Stephen Simon. The Gospel of Mark and the Roman-Jewish War of 66–70 CE: Jesus’ Story as a Contrast to the Events of the War. Eugene, OR: Pickwick Publications, 2019. Koehler, Ludwig, et al. The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament (HALOT). Leiden: Brill, 1994. Kruger, Paul A. ‘The Removal of the Sandal in Deuteronomy XXV 9: “A Rite of Passage”?’ Vetus Testamentum 46, no. 4 (October 1996): 534–39. Lane, William L. The Gospel of Mark. NICNT. 2nd rev. ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1974. Lane-Mercier, Gillian. “Quotation as a Discursive Strategy.” Kodikas 14, no. 3/4 (1991): 199– 214. Lange, John Peter, et al. A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures: Jeremiah. Bellingham, WA: Logos Biblical Software, 2008. Lee, J. A. L. A Lexical Study of the Septuagint Version of the Pentateuch. Chico, CA: Scholar Press, 1983. Lieberman, Saul. Greek in Jewish Palestine/Hellenism in Jewish Palestine. New York: Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1994. Liddell, Henry George, et al. A Greek-English Lexicon (LSJ). Oxford: Clarendon, 1996. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 189 Longenecker, Richard N. “Negative Answer to the Question ‘Who Is the Prophet Talking About?’ Some Reflections on the New Testament’s Use of the Old.” In The Right Doctrine from the Wrong Texts? Essays on the Use of the Old Testament in the New, edited by G. K. Beale, chap. 21. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1994. Louw, Johannes P. and Albert Nida. Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Based on Semantic Domains. New York: United Bible Societies, 1996. Mack, Burton L. Rhetoric and the New Testament. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1989. Mack, Burton L., and Vernon K. Robbins. Patterns of Persuasion in the Gospels. Rev. ed. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2008. Males, Akiva Rabbi. “Reconstructing the Destruction of the Tabernacle of Shiloh.” JBQ 44, no. 1 (2016): 8–12. Mánek, Jindřich. “Composite Quotations in the New Testament and Their Purpose.” CV 13, no. 3–4 (1970): 181–88. Marcus, Joel. The Way of the Lord: Christological Exegesis of the Old Testament in the Gospel of Mark. London: T&T Clark, 2004. Marrou, H. I. A History of Education in Antiquity. Reprint ed. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press, 1982. Martin, Michael W., and Mikeal C. Parsons. Ancient Rhetoric and the New Testament: The Influence of Elementary Greek Composition. Waco, TX: Baylor University Press, 2018. Martínez, Florentino García, and Eibert J. C. Tigchelaar, eds. The Dead Sea Scrolls Study Edition (Translations). Leiden: Brill, 1997. Mauser, Ulrich W. Christ in the Wilderness: The Wilderness Theme in the Second Gospel and Its Basis in the Biblical Tradition. Reprint ed. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2009. McLay, R. Timothy. “Biblical Texts and the Scriptures for the New Testament Church.” In Hearing the Old Testament in the New Testament, edited by Stanley E. Porter. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2006. McWhirter, Jocelyn. “Messianic Exegesis in Mark 1:2-3.” In “What Does the Scripture Say?”: Studies in the Function of Scripture in Early Judaism and Christianity: The Synoptic Gospels, edited by Craig A. Evans and H. Daniel Zacharias, 1:158–78. London: Bloomsbury, 2013. Morgan, Michael L. “Mercy, Repentance, and Forgiveness in Ancient Judaism.” In Ancient Forgiveness, edited by Charles L. Griswold and David Konstan, 137–57. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012. Motyer, J. Alec. The Prophecy of Isaiah. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1996. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 190 Moyise, Steve. Jesus and Scripture: Studying the New Testament Use of the Old Testament. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2011. ———. “Composite Citations in the Gospel of Mark.” In Composite Citations in Antiquity: New Testament Uses, edited by Sean A. Adams and Seth M. Ehorn, 16–33. LNTS 593. London: T&T Clark, 2018. Moyise, Steve, and Maarten J. J. Menken. The Psalms in the New Testament. London: T&T Clark, 2004. Nel, Marius. “‘Son of Man’ in the Gospel of Mark.” IDS 51, no. 3 (2017): 1-9. Neyrey, Jerome H. “‘How Does This Man Have Learning, Since He Is without Education’ (John 7:15).” BTB 48, no. 2 (2018): 85–96. Norton, Jonathan D. H. “Composite Quotations in the Damascus Document.” In Composite Citations in Antiquity: Jewish, Graeco-Roman, and Early Christian Uses, edited by Sean A. Adams and Seth M. Ehorn, 92–118. LNTS 525. London: T&T Clark, 2016. Owen, Paul. “Problems with Casey’s ‘Solution’.” In “Who Is This Son of Man?”: The Latest Scholarship on a Puzzling Expression of the Historical Jesus, edited by Larry W. Hurtado, Paul L. Owen, and Mark Goodacre, 390:28–49. LNTS. London: T&T Clark, 2011. Oswalt, John N. The Book of Isaiah, Chapters 1-39. NICOT. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1986. ———. The Book of Isaiah, Chapters 40-66. NICOT. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1998. Payne, Philip Barton. “The Fallacy of Equating Meaning with the Human Author’s Intention.” In The Right Doctrine from the Wrong Texts? Essays on the Use of the Old Testament in the New, edited by G. K. Beale, chap. 4, Kindle. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1994. Perkins, Larry. “The Markan Narrative’s Use of the Old Greek Text of Jeremiah to Explain Israel’s Obduracy.” TynBul 60, no. 2 (2009): 217–38. ———. “Mark 13:14 - A Cryptic Prophecy of the Messiah’s Death?” Northwest Institute for Ministry Education Research (blog), 2020, https://nimer.ca/mark-1314-a-cryptic-prophecyof-the-messiahs-death/ accessed Oct 2021. Philo. Edited by Yonge, C. D. The Works of Philo: Complete and Unabridged. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1995. Piégay-Gros, Nathalie. Introduction à l’intertextualité. Paris: Dunod, 1996. Pietersma, Albert, and Benjamin G. Wright, eds. A New English Translation of the Septuagint (Primary Texts). New York: Oxford University Press, 2007. Porter, Stanley E. “Did Jesus Ever Teach in Greek?” TynBul 44, no. 2 (1993): 199–235. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 191 ———. “Further Comments on the Use of the Old Testament in the New Testament.” In Intertextuality of the Epistles: Explorations in Theory and Practice, edited by T. L. Brodie, D. R. MacDonald, and Stanley E. Porter, 98–110. Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix, 2007. Porter, Stanley E., and Beth M. Stovell, eds. Biblical Hermeneutics: Five Views. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2012. Rahlfs, Alfred, ed. Psalmi cum Odis. Vetus Testamentum Graecum. Auctoritate Academiae Scientarum Gottingensis editum. Vol. X. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1979. ———. Septuaginta with Logos Morphology. Electronic ed. Stuttgart. Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1979. Regev, Eyal. “The Sadducees, the Pharisees, and the Sacred: Meaning and Ideology in the Halakhic Controversies Between the Sadducees and the Pharisees.” RRJ 9 (2006): 126–40. Rhoads, David, Joanna Dewey, and Donald Michie. Mark as Story: An Introduction to the Narrative of a Gospel. 3rd ed. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2012. Robbins, Vernon K. Jesus the Teacher: A Socio-Rhetorical Interpretation of Mark. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992. ———. Exploring the Texture of Texts: A Guide to Socio-Rhetorical Interpretation. Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 1996. ———. The Tapestry of Early Christian Discourse: Rhetoric, Society and Ideology. New York: Routledge, 2003. Royse, J. R. “Composite Quotations in Philo of Alexandria.” In Composite Citations in Antiquity: Jewish, Graeco-Roman, and Early Christian Uses, edited by Sean A. Adams and Seth M. Ehorn, 74–91. LNTS 525. London: T&T Clark, 2016. Ruzer, Serge. “The Technique of Composite Citation in the Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5:21-22, 33-37).” RB 103, no. 1 (1996): 65–75. Saldarini, Anthony J. Pharisees, Scribes and Sadducees in Palestinian Society. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2001. Sanders, E. P. Jesus and Judaism. Philadelphia: Augsburg Fortress, 1985. Schürer, Emil. The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ (175 B.C. - A.D. 135). Edited by Géza Vermès, Fergus Millar, Matthew Black, and Martin Goodman. Vol. 2. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1979. Snodgrass, Klyne. “Streams of Tradition Emerging from Isaiah 40:1-5 and Their Adaptation in the New Testament.” JSNT 2, no. 8 (1980): 24–45. Spicq, Ceslas. Theological Lexicon of the New Testament. Translated by James D. Ernest. Hendrickson Publishers. Vol. 1. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1994. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 192 Stafford, John K. “Paul’s Use of the Psalms. Beyond Midrash.” Perichoresis 11, no. 2 (2013): 211–20. Stanley, Christopher D. Paul and the Language of Scripture: Citation Technique in the Pauline Epistles and Contemporary Literature. Rev. ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992. ———. Arguing with Scripture: The Rhetoric of Quotations in the Letters of Paul. New York: T&T Clark, 2004. ———. “Composite Citations: Retrospect and Prospect.” In Composite Citations in Antiquity: Jewish, Graeco-Roman, and Early Christian Uses, edited by Sean A. Adams and Seth M. Ehorn, 203–9. LNTS 525. London: T&T Clark, 2016. Strauss, Mark L. Mark. ZECNT. Edited by Clinton E. Arnold. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2014. Strickland, Michael, and David M. Young. The Rhetoric of Jesus in the Gospel of Mark. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2017. Sundberg, Albert C. “On Testimonies.” Nov T 3, no. 4 (1959): 268–81. Thiessen, Matthew. “A Buried Pentateuchal Allusion to the Resurrection in Mark 12:25.” CBQ 76, no. 2 (2014): 273–90. Thiselton, Anthony C. New Horizons in Hermeneutics: The Theory and Practice of Transforming Biblical Reading. Rev. ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Academic, 1997. Thompson, John A. Deuteronomy: An Introduction and Commentary. TOTC 5. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1974. Trick, Bradley R. “Death, Covenants, and the Proof of Resurrection in Mark 12:18-27.” Nov T 49, no. 3 (2007): 232–56. Van Cangh, J.-M. “La Bible de Matthieu: Les Citations d’accomplissement.” Revue Théologique de Louvain 6, no. 2 (1975): 205–11. Van Iersel, Bastiaan M. F. “The Sun, Moon, and Stars of Mark 13,24-25 in a Greco-Roman Reading.” Bib 77, no. 1 (1996): 84–92. Vermes, Geza. “The Son of Man Debate Revisited (1960-2010).” JJS LXI, no. 2 (2010): 193– 210. Wallace, Daniel B. Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1996. Watts, Rikki E. Isaiah’s New Exodus in Mark. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2001. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 193 Wevers, John William, and U. Quast, eds. Genesis. Vetus Testamentum Graecum. Auctoritate Academiae Scientarum Gottingensis editum. Vol.1. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1974. ———, eds Deuteronomium. Vetus Testamentum Graecum. Auctoritate Academiae Scientarum Gottingensis editum. Vol. III,2. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1976. ———, eds. Exodus. Vetus Testamentum Graecum. Auctoritate Academiae Scientarum Gottingensis editum. Vol. II.1. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1991. Whiston, William, and Flavius Josephus. The Works of Josephus: Complete and Unabridged. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1987. Wierzbicka, Anna. “The Semantics of Direct and Indirect Discourse.” Papers in Linguistics 7 (1974): 267–307. Williams, Margaret. “Citation in the Elite Roman Epistolary Writing: Cicero, Seneca, and Pliny.” In Composite Citations in Antiquity: Jewish, Graeco-Roman, and Early Christian Uses, edited by Sean A. Adams and Seth M. Ehorn, 57–73. LNTS 525. London: T&T Clark, 2016. Witherington III, Ben. The Gospel of Mark: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2001. ———. New Testament Rhetoric: An Introductory Guide to the Art of Persuasion in and of the New Testament. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2009. Wright, N. T. Jesus and the Victory of God: Christian Origins and the Question of God. Vol. 2. London: Fortress, 1996. ———. The Resurrection of the Son of God: Christian Origins and the Question of God. London: SPCK, 2003. Zetterholm, Karin Hedner. Jewish Interpretation of the Bible: Ancient and Contemporary. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2012. Ziegler, Joseph, ed. Isaias. Vetus Testamentum Graecum. Auctoritate Academiae Scientarum Gottingensis editum. Vol. XIV. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1983. ———, ed. Duodecim Prophetae. Vetus Testamentum Graecum. Auctoritate Academiae Scientarum Gottingensis editum. Vol. XIII. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1984. ———, ed. Jeremias, Baruch, Threni, Epistula Jeremiae. Vetus Testamentum Graecum. Auctoritate Academiae Scientarum Gottingensis editum. Vol. XV. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2006. Ziegler, Joseph, Olivier Munnich, and Detlef Fraenkel. Suzanna, Daniel, Bel et Draco Vetus Testamentum Graecum. Auctoritate Academiae Scientarum Gottingensis editum. Vol. XVI, 2. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1999. WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK ———. Suzanna, Daniel, Bel et Draco: Theodotion Text. Vetus Testamentum Graecum. Auctoritate Academiae Scientarum Gottingensis editum. Vol. XVI, 2. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1999. 194 WOVEN TAPESTRY: COMPOSITE CITATIONS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 195 Curriculum Vitae Marie-Josée Fortin (b. February 23, 1975) From 1994 to 1999, Marie-Josée studied at the University of Québec in Trois-Rivières, graduating with a first-degree doctorate in chiropractic studies. Theological studies were less accessible in the 1990s in Québec than today. Despite this limitation, Marie-Josée still enrolled in classes whenever she could from 1995 to 2015, when she received her Master of Divinity. In 1998, she married Emmanuel. She homeschooled their three children while also working parttime as a chiropractor. Because she and her husband wanted to serve God more actively, she closed her office, but ended up developing health issues that limited her involvement in church ministry. She chose to pursue studies from home with ACTS to complete a MTh on the road to studying at the PhD level. She has recently been conditionally accepted at the Union School of Theology, and hopes to begin her doctorate in the late spring of 2022. Marie-Josée has been serving at SEMBEQ (the French Fellowship Baptist seminary in Montreal) in various capacities such as writing or reviewing material, grading papers, and teaching. She has also volunteered as a translator and editor for a Christian publishing house, Exit, as well as a French content editor for Power to Change Digital Strategies. Marie-Josée is also an editor for a small academic journal created by SEMBEQ. She has also authored two papers for this publication: “Une rencontre unique : Analyse narrative de Marc 7.24-30” Revue Théologique Sembeq, vol 1, 33-43, and “Analyse rhétorique de Marc 3.20-35 : Quand un péché devient impardonnable.” Revue Théologique Sembeq, vol 2, 49-60. In 2020, Marie-Josée became an academic coach for SEMBEQ (in collaboration with Northwest University), a role she enjoys, and she has also written children’s stories, hoping to publish them one day.