Markan Fabrications: The Petrine Denial, V. The Disciples' Breakthrough: Peter's Revelation
Ted Weeden
weedent@atw.earthreach.com
Fri, 26 May 2000 12:11:06 -0500
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_002A_01BFC70B.78727D40
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
V. The Disciples' Breakthrough: Peter's Revelation
Thus it is, with the pattern of disciples' inability to comprehend =
anything Jesus teaches or does clearly established, as well as =
underscored with Jesus' exasperated querying of the disciples in =
8:14-21, Mark has skillfully set the reader up for a total surprise, the =
sudden, inexplicable and penetrating insightfulness of Peter: Jesus is =
"the Christ." But that is not the only surprise which Mark has in store =
for his hearers. He actually scripts a series of four surprises, all of =
which together produce a parabolic jolt that sends his drama into a =
completely unexpected direction. But I am getting ahead of myself. Let =
me back up and point out how, in the surprise confession of Peter, Mark =
has so skillfully crafted the moment of the startling Petrine revelation =
and subsequently crafts the other surprises.
Mark leads into the surprise confession of Peter by having Jesus, in a =
unusual departure, join the identity "game" and actively pursue pressing =
the ultimate christological identity question with his disciples. Mark =
constructs this engagement of Jesus in identity-probing by having Jesus =
ask a general question that purposely leads to the specific question =
that evokes Peter's confession. In Jesus' first question to his =
disciples, Mark has Jesus asks them to tell him who humans say he is. =
This gives Mark an opportunity to recapitulate for his hearers the =
previous human speculation about Jesus' identity. That previous =
speculation surfaced the following possible candidates: John the =
Baptist, Elijah or one of the prophets. And those are the candidates =
that the disciples list for Jesus in response to his inquiry (8:28). =
Parenthetically, Mark does not tell us how the disciples became aware =
that people were speculating about Jesus' identity. Given the fact that =
Mark has portrayed disciples as totally oblivious to what happens around =
them, it is a bit surprising that they suddenly appear to have been =
aware of what others were saying about Jesus. I chalk this dramatic =
inconsistency up to Mark not thinking through how his need to rehearse =
the public speculation about Jesus' identity, for the benefit of his =
hearers- repetition being a common technique of oral performance-, has =
undermined the logical coherency of his drama.
It is at this point that Mark demonstrates his dramatic craftsmanship in =
framing Jesus' critical question that prompts Peter's confession. In =
framing the identity question that Jesus next poses to the disciples, =
Mark returns to the identity question which the disciples posed to =
themselves regarding Jesus following his stilling of the storm, "Who is =
this....?" Mark took this former question which he had scripted for =
them, rephrased it and has Jesus throw it back at them for an answer =
they failed to give when they posed it to themselves in the first place. =
Thus, Jesus says to them in effect, "All right, who do * you* say that I =
am?" (8:29).=20
To return to the likely response of the hearers in the real world to =
Peter's confession, I think, as I stated, that they would have been =
stunned that dense Peter could have come up with such an answer to =
Jesus' question. I surmise also that the hearers would likely have =
wondered why it took so long for Peter to catch on and wondered, as =
well, what brought about this sudden clairvoyance on his part. I also =
surmise, that Peter's surprising confession may also have come as a =
relief to the hearers. It would have been a relief to know that the =
disciples have now recognized Jesus' christological identity, and that =
they really are the insiders and trusted followers of Jesus and not the =
outsiders they have made themselves to be by their denseness, hardness =
of heart, and total lack of comprehension. The hearers might well have =
concluded, as a result of Peter's burst of insight, that "we" are headed =
for a happy ending, at least as far as the disciples' future =
relationship with Jesus is concerned. But they quickly discover that is =
not the case. Mark has more surprises for them.=20
The next surprise is Jesus' response to Peter's confession. Mark tells =
his hearers that Jesus silenced Peter's confession by commanding the =
disciples not to tell any one what they now know about him (8:30). Why =
would this command to silence come as a surprise to Mark's hearers? For =
this reason: since Peter, by his confession identified Jesus =
christologically with the title "Christ," one of the christological =
titles Mark ascribes to Jesus in his gospel's opening line, and since =
the purpose of a gospel is proclamation, then I would surmise that =
Jesus' command to not tell away one about his christological identity, =
presumably accurately perceived by Peter, would have come as quite a =
surprise to the hearers in the real world (8:30). I imagine that Mark's =
hearers might well be asking themselves, "Why does Jesus tell his =
disciples to keep silent about Peter's christological insight?"=20
Why did Mark once more employ his literary device of silence after =
Peter's christological confession, as he did previously when the demonic =
forces recognized Jesus' christological identity? I think in this case, =
as well as the previous cases where Mark employed it, the purpose of his =
literary device is both for dramatic impact and to maintain =
christological control.
It is certainly clear later on in the drama that the Markan Jesus' =
suppression of his identity is not for the purpose of keeping his =
christological identity a "messianic secret," to be hidden from the =
public. For Jesus himself publicly acknowledges his christological =
identity before the high priest (14:61f.), ironically before his =
enemies. My theory is that the suppression of Jesus' identity here as =
earlier in the drama is in part for dramatic effect. That is, its =
purpose is to pique the hearers' curiosity and thus have them "sitting =
on the edge of their seats" to find out what comes next. The suppression =
of Jesus' identity is also intended, in my judgment, for christological =
control. I will get to that purpose shortly.
But for the moment I turn to Mark's next surprise for his hearers. =
Immediately, after commanding his disciples not to tell anyone who he =
is, Jesus proceeds to do something he has never done before. At Caesarea =
Philippi, for the first time, the Markan Jesus reveals to persons in the =
narrative world something definitive about his christological identity. =
And what he reveals must have come to hearers of the real world as a =
tremendous shock. It certainly does come as a shock to the disciples in =
the narrative world. With virtually no previous warning to the hearers =
of the gospel (Mk. 3:6 being the one possible exception), and certainly =
no previous warning to the disciples, the Markan Jesus lays out his =
christological profile: namely, he sees himself as having, and in fact =
declares that he has been mandated by God (the divine DEI : "it is =
necessary"), to suffer, be rejected by the chief priests, elders and =
scribes, killed and then be resurrected (8:31; 9:31: 10:32).=20
Then comes Mark's fourth and final surprise to his hearers in this part =
of his drama. However, this time it is not just a surprise Mark presents =
them. It is a total shock. No sooner does Jesus reveal his self-defined =
christology, previously unknown to any one, than Peter turns on Jesus. =
With language previously reserved for the exorcism of demons (EPITIMAW: =
1:25; 3:12; 4:39 [I read Jesus' stilling of the storm as an exorcism of =
demonic forces disrupting the natural environment]), Peter rejects =
Jesus' christological revelation in the most scathing way. Jesus, Mark's =
hearers then discover, in retaliation turns on Peter and with the same =
scathing language repukes Peter. But Jesus does not stop there. He goes =
one step further in his scathing repudiation of Peter. He declares that =
Peter is Satan himself (8:32f.).
This whole exchange between Jesus and Peter must have been extremely =
disturbing, if not completely dismaying to the hearers. How might they =
have responded to such shocking behavior manifested by Peter and Jesus =
against one another. It must have been shocking, particularly as it =
effects their image of Jesus. For at no other time prior to this =
exchange with Peter has Jesus ever evidenced such a scathing attack, =
such a damning condemnation, on another person. He does not turn on any =
of the Pharisees in this fashion, and they seem to stalk his ministry at =
every point, challenging Jesus, finding fault with him (e. g. 3:22) and =
generally being a "thorn in his flesh." The hearers know that they have =
plans to kill Jesus (3:6). But Jesus up to this point in the drama has =
not turned upon them and castigated them as he has Peter at Caesarea =
Philippi. Moreover, after this castigating of Peter, Jesus, as the first =
hearers will soon learn, never attacks any of the religious leaders who =
are out to destroy him as he attacks Peter.=20
For the most part Jesus remains silent when under attack from his =
opponents, as is the case in his trial before Pilate (15:3-15). Even in =
his trial before the religious leaders, Jesus does not strike back =
against his accusers when they level their trumped-up charges against =
him (14:57-61a). The only time Jesus breaks his silence in that trial is =
when the high priest pushes him to answer the priest's christological =
question (14:61f.). But then after the high priest charges Jesus with =
blasphemy and condemns him to death, Jesus does not retaliate, let alone =
castigate the high priest as he does Peter at Caesarea Philippi. Not =
even on the cross does Jesus hurl down condemnation upon his mockers =
below (15:29-32). The only other time in the gospel drama that Jesus =
unleashes a scathing attack upon another, as he does with Peter, is in =
the case of one other disciple, namely, Judas (14:18-21). Given Jesus' =
normal pattern of response to those who oppose him, given the fact that =
he deviates from that pattern, aside from the incident with Peter, only =
one other time, and that in the case of his damning condemnation of =
Judas (14: 21), it is hard for me to come to any other conclusion but =
that Mark is purposely "anti-Peter."
I return now to suggest the likely response Mark's hearers had to this =
verbal battle going on between Peter and Jesus. Even though Jesus' =
scathing condemnation of Peter is uncharacteristic of what the hearers =
know of Jesus thus far, I doubt that the hearers would have questioned =
Jesus' repudiation of Peter, because of the exalted reverence for Jesus =
they likely would have held. Thus, my guess is that it is Peter, and not =
Jesus, who would have evoked the hearers' disdain, if not condemnation, =
for turning on Jesus and rejecting Jesus' God (DEI)-mandated =
christological mission. And in their disdain or contempt for Peter, the =
hearers in the real world, I submit, would likely have come to the =
realization, as unsettling as it was, that Peter had, by his rejection =
of Jesus' christology and Jesus' denouncing him as Satan in return, =
"crossed over the boundary line." Peter had put himself perilously close =
to being an apostate. That, I am convinced, is precisely what Mark =
wanted his hearers to conclude. For Mark once again carefully crafts =
this exchange to produce that effect on the hearers.
What Mark does to the image of Peter is clearly iconoclastic. Why is =
Mark out to destroy Peter in the eyes of his hearers? Mark's treatment =
of Peter would not seem so invidious if Mark had not for a few brief =
moments elevated Peter to the most exalted position anyone in the =
narrative world has been placed through 8:29. If Mark had just =
maintained Peter as essentially a dunce, along with the other disciples, =
and then had Jesus turn upon Peter with something like the scathing =
debasing in 8:33, one might see that it was all "par for the course" =
insofar as Peter and the disciples' relationship with Jesus was =
concerned. But what Mark does to Peter comes across as being almost =
cruel. In one moment he exalts him with a profound, perspicuous =
revelation regarding the nature of Jesus' identity, a christological =
confession no other human in the drama even comes close to. And then =
just a few moments later Mark has Jesus debase and almost anathematize =
Peter. When the character of Mark's treatment is seen in the light of =
Mark's scripting of the passage, it is difficult for me to see Mark's =
treatment of Peter as anything else but "anti-Peter."=20
------=_NextPart_000_002A_01BFC70B.78727D40
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>
<P>V. The Disciples’ Breakthrough: Peter’s Revelation</P>
<P>Thus it is, with the pattern of disciples’ inability to =
comprehend anything=20
Jesus teaches or does clearly established, as well as underscored with =
Jesus’=20
exasperated querying of the disciples in 8:14-21, Mark has skillfully =
set the=20
reader up for a total surprise, the sudden, inexplicable and penetrating =
insightfulness of Peter: Jesus is "the Christ." But that is not the only =
surprise which Mark has in store for his hearers. He actually scripts a =
series=20
of four surprises, all of which together produce a parabolic jolt that =
sends his=20
drama into a completely unexpected direction. But I am getting ahead of =
myself.=20
Let me back up and point out how, in the surprise confession of Peter, =
Mark has=20
so skillfully crafted the moment of the startling Petrine revelation and =
subsequently crafts the other surprises.</P>
<P>Mark leads into the surprise confession of Peter by having Jesus, in =
a=20
unusual departure, join the identity "game" and actively pursue pressing =
the=20
ultimate christological identity question with his disciples. Mark =
constructs=20
this engagement of Jesus in identity-probing by having Jesus ask a =
general=20
question that purposely leads to the specific question that evokes =
Peter’s=20
confession. In Jesus’ first question to his disciples, Mark has =
Jesus asks them=20
to tell him who humans say he is. This gives Mark an opportunity to =
recapitulate=20
for his hearers the previous human speculation about Jesus’ =
identity. That=20
previous speculation surfaced the following possible candidates: John =
the=20
Baptist, Elijah or one of the prophets. And those are the candidates =
that the=20
disciples list for Jesus in response to his inquiry (8:28). =
Parenthetically,=20
Mark does not tell us how the disciples became aware that people were=20
speculating about Jesus’ identity. Given the fact that Mark has =
portrayed=20
disciples as totally oblivious to what happens around them, it is a bit=20
surprising that they suddenly appear to have been aware of what others =
were=20
saying about Jesus. I chalk this dramatic inconsistency up to Mark not =
thinking=20
through how his need to rehearse the public speculation about =
Jesus’ identity,=20
for the benefit of his hearers– repetition being a common =
technique of oral=20
performance–, has undermined the logical coherency of his =
drama.</P>
<P>It is at this point that Mark demonstrates his dramatic craftsmanship =
in=20
framing Jesus’ critical question that prompts Peter’s =
confession. In framing the=20
identity question that Jesus next poses to the disciples, Mark returns =
to the=20
identity question which the disciples posed to themselves regarding =
Jesus=20
following his stilling of the storm, "Who is this....?" Mark took this =
former=20
question which he had scripted for them, rephrased it and has Jesus =
throw it=20
back at them for an answer they failed to give when they posed it to =
themselves=20
in the first place. Thus, Jesus says to them in effect, "All right, who =
do *=20
you* say that I am?" (8:29). </P>
<P>To return to the likely response of the hearers in the real world to =
Peter’s=20
confession, I think, as I stated, that they would have been stunned that =
dense=20
Peter could have come up with such an answer to Jesus’ question. I =
surmise also=20
that the hearers would likely have wondered why it took so long for =
Peter to=20
catch on and wondered, as well, what brought about this sudden =
clairvoyance on=20
his part. I also surmise, that Peter’s surprising confession may =
also have come=20
as a relief to the hearers. It would have been a relief to know that the =
disciples have now recognized Jesus’ christological identity, and =
that they=20
really are the insiders and trusted followers of Jesus and not the =
outsiders=20
they have made themselves to be by their denseness, hardness of heart, =
and total=20
lack of comprehension. The hearers might well have concluded, as a =
result of=20
Peter’s burst of insight, that "we" are headed for a happy ending, =
at least as=20
far as the disciples’ future relationship with Jesus is concerned. =
But they=20
quickly discover that is not the case. Mark has more surprises for them. =
</P>
<P>The next surprise is Jesus’ response to Peter’s =
confession. Mark tells his=20
hearers that Jesus silenced Peter’s confession by commanding the =
disciples not=20
to tell any one what they now know about him (8:30). Why would this =
command to=20
silence come as a surprise to Mark’s hearers? For this reason: =
since Peter, by=20
his confession identified Jesus christologically with the title =
"Christ," one of=20
the christological titles Mark ascribes to Jesus in his gospel’s =
opening line,=20
and since the purpose of a gospel is proclamation, then I would surmise =
that=20
Jesus’ command to not tell away one about his christological =
identity,=20
presumably accurately perceived by Peter, would have come as quite a =
surprise to=20
the hearers in the real world (8:30). I imagine that Mark’s =
hearers might well=20
be asking themselves, "Why does Jesus tell his disciples to keep silent =
about=20
Peter’s christological insight?" </P>
<P>Why did Mark once more employ his literary device of silence after =
Peter’s=20
christological confession, as he did previously when the demonic forces=20
recognized Jesus’ christological identity? I think in this case, =
as well as the=20
previous cases where Mark employed it, the purpose of his literary =
device is=20
both for dramatic impact and to maintain christological control.</P>
<P>It is certainly clear later on in the drama that the Markan =
Jesus’=20
suppression of his identity is not for the purpose of keeping his =
christological=20
identity a "messianic secret," to be hidden from the public. For Jesus =
himself=20
publicly acknowledges his christological identity before the high priest =
(14:61f.), ironically before his enemies. My theory is that the =
suppression of=20
Jesus’ identity here as earlier in the drama is in part for =
dramatic effect.=20
That is, its purpose is to pique the hearers’ curiosity and thus =
have them=20
"sitting on the edge of their seats" to find out what comes next. The=20
suppression of Jesus’ identity is also intended, in my judgment, =
for=20
christological control. I will get to that purpose shortly.</P>
<P>But for the moment I turn to Mark’s next surprise for his =
hearers.=20
Immediately, after commanding his disciples not to tell anyone who he =
is, Jesus=20
proceeds to do something he has never done before. At Caesarea Philippi, =
for the=20
first time, the Markan Jesus reveals to persons in the narrative world =
something=20
definitive about his christological identity. And what he reveals must =
have come=20
to hearers of the real world as a tremendous shock. It certainly does =
come as a=20
shock to the disciples in the narrative world. With virtually no =
previous=20
warning to the hearers of the gospel (Mk. 3:6 being the one possible =
exception),=20
and certainly no previous warning to the disciples, the Markan Jesus =
lays out=20
his christological profile: namely, he sees himself as having, and in =
fact=20
declares that he has been mandated by God (the divine DEI : "it is =
necessary"),=20
to suffer, be rejected by the chief priests, elders and scribes, killed =
and then=20
be resurrected (8:31; 9:31: 10:32). </P>
<P>Then comes Mark’s fourth and final surprise to his hearers in =
this part of=20
his drama. However, this time it is not just a surprise Mark presents =
them. It=20
is a total shock. No sooner does Jesus reveal his self-defined =
christology,=20
previously unknown to any one, than Peter turns on Jesus. With language=20
previously reserved for the exorcism of demons (EPITIMAW: 1:25; 3:12; =
4:39 [I=20
read Jesus’ stilling of the storm as an exorcism of demonic forces =
disrupting=20
the natural environment]), Peter rejects Jesus’ christological =
revelation in the=20
most scathing way. Jesus, Mark’s hearers then discover, in =
retaliation turns on=20
Peter and with the same scathing language repukes Peter. But Jesus does =
not stop=20
there. He goes one step further in his scathing repudiation of Peter. He =
declares that Peter is Satan himself (8:32f.).</P>
<P>This whole exchange between Jesus and Peter must have been extremely=20
disturbing, if not completely dismaying to the hearers. How might they =
have=20
responded to such shocking behavior manifested by Peter and Jesus =
against one=20
another. It must have been shocking, particularly as it effects their =
image of=20
Jesus. For at no other time prior to this exchange with Peter has Jesus =
ever=20
evidenced such a scathing attack, such a damning condemnation, on =
another=20
person. He does not turn on any of the Pharisees in this fashion, and =
they seem=20
to stalk his ministry at every point, challenging Jesus, finding fault =
with him=20
(e. g. 3:22) and generally being a "thorn in his flesh." The hearers =
know that=20
they have plans to kill Jesus (3:6). But Jesus up to this point in the =
drama has=20
not turned upon them and castigated them as he has Peter at Caesarea =
Philippi.=20
Moreover, after this castigating of Peter, Jesus, as the first hearers =
will soon=20
learn, never attacks any of the religious leaders who are out to destroy =
him as=20
he attacks Peter. </P>
<P>For the most part Jesus remains silent when under attack from his =
opponents,=20
as is the case in his trial before Pilate (15:3-15). Even in his trial =
before=20
the religious leaders, Jesus does not strike back against his accusers =
when they=20
level their trumped-up charges against him (14:57-61a). The only time =
Jesus=20
breaks his silence in that trial is when the high priest pushes him to =
answer=20
the priest’s christological question (14:61f.). But then after the =
high priest=20
charges Jesus with blasphemy and condemns him to death, Jesus does not=20
retaliate, let alone castigate the high priest as he does Peter at =
Caesarea=20
Philippi. Not even on the cross does Jesus hurl down condemnation upon =
his=20
mockers below (15:29-32). The only other time in the gospel drama that =
Jesus=20
unleashes a scathing attack upon another, as he does with Peter, is in =
the case=20
of one other disciple, namely, Judas (14:18-21). Given Jesus’ =
normal pattern of=20
response to those who oppose him, given the fact that he deviates from =
that=20
pattern, aside from the incident with Peter, only one other time, and =
that in=20
the case of his damning condemnation of Judas (14: 21), it is hard for =
me to=20
come to any other conclusion but that Mark is purposely =
"anti-Peter."</P>
<P>I return now to suggest the likely response Mark’s hearers had =
to this verbal=20
battle going on between Peter and Jesus. Even though Jesus’ =
scathing=20
condemnation of Peter is uncharacteristic of what the hearers know of =
Jesus thus=20
far, I doubt that the hearers would have questioned Jesus’ =
repudiation of Peter,=20
because of the exalted reverence for Jesus they likely would have held. =
Thus, my=20
guess is that it is Peter, and not Jesus, who would have evoked the =
hearers’=20
disdain, if not condemnation, for turning on Jesus and rejecting =
Jesus’ God=20
(DEI)-mandated christological mission. And in their disdain or contempt =
for=20
Peter, the hearers in the real world, I submit, would likely have come =
to the=20
realization, as unsettling as it was, that Peter had, by his rejection =
of Jesus’=20
christology and Jesus’ denouncing him as Satan in return, "crossed =
over the=20
boundary line." Peter had put himself perilously close to being an =
apostate.=20
That, I am convinced, is precisely what Mark wanted his hearers to =
conclude. For=20
Mark once again carefully crafts this exchange to produce that effect on =
the=20
hearers.</P>
<P>What Mark does to the image of Peter is clearly iconoclastic. Why is =
Mark out=20
to destroy Peter in the eyes of his hearers? Mark’s treatment of =
Peter would not=20
seem so invidious if Mark had not for a few brief moments elevated Peter =
to the=20
most exalted position anyone in the narrative world has been placed =
through=20
8:29. If Mark had just maintained Peter as essentially a dunce, along =
with the=20
other disciples, and then had Jesus turn upon Peter with something like =
the=20
scathing debasing in 8:33, one might see that it was all "par for the =
course"=20
insofar as Peter and the disciples’ relationship with Jesus was =
concerned. But=20
what Mark does to Peter comes across as being almost cruel. In one =
moment he=20
exalts him with a profound, perspicuous revelation regarding the nature =
of=20
Jesus’ identity, a christological confession no other human in the =
drama even=20
comes close to. And then just a few moments later Mark has Jesus debase =
and=20
almost anathematize Peter. When the character of Mark’s treatment =
is seen in the=20
light of Mark’s scripting of the passage, it is difficult for me =
to see Mark’s=20
treatment of Peter as anything else but "anti-Peter." =
</P></DIV></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_002A_01BFC70B.78727D40--