Kata Markon

["Rick Frommich" <eugor3 AT hotmail.com>]

Let me start this post by saying that my primary goal in studying Mark is very basic. I am most interested in why he wrote/compiled the document and what role the document played in the Jesus Movement. What was the purpose in the mind of the person responsible for producing this document.

Logically, the most pertinent evidence is to be found within the document itself. Using traditional methods of literary criticism is one appropriate method for determining the reason for the work. I would recommend two books that have made inroads in this direction. "Mark’s Story of Jesus" by Werner Kelber and "Mark as Story" by David Rhoads and Donald Michie.

The narrator’s point of view is discernible throughout

There is a consistent plot

The narrative anticipates events that come to pass

Predictions are fulfilled

Characters remain consistent throughout

"The unity of the Gospel is apparent, in the integrity of the story that it tells" Mark as Story. I fully agree with this statement. And because this is true, redaction criticism has mush less value than literary criticism in determining purpose.

The compiler of Mark has a strong passion for similitude’s, metaphors, parables and allegories. His mind finds them in many forms of ancient literature. The most evident of these resources, I would list as follows:

Isaiah

The writer sees the Kingdom of God being fulfilled according to the Prophesy of Isaiah. It is Isaiah that prophesied the Good News that was now beginning with Jesus. The key parable to understanding all of the parables as well as the Gospel of Mark is presented in allegory based upon the metaphor in Isaiah 55. Mark carries the metaphor even farther, bread becomes spiritual food and those who listen to the word become eaters of the bread/word. As in Isaiah the Word is seed to the sower and bread to the eater. The soils are people who hear the word, the events that transpire with each type of soil that encounters the Word are reflected in the narrative as Jesus encounters various people and groups. Seeing, perceiving, hearing and laying the Word to heart are the constant admonitions to those who would be part of the kingdom.

Homer

The compiler of Mark, like most educated men of his time probably learned to read and write with Homer’s epics as his textbooks. The theme of reincarnation or resurrection into the body of another is clearly part of his interest in the Odyssey. He sees in Jesus many similarities to the main character in the Great Poem. His Jesus is coming home to face interlopers who have laid waste to his Father’s house. Jesus, because he is John raised from the dead as I am convinced Mark intends to say, is like Odysseus come back from the underworld. The Holy Spirit that comes into him at his Baptism is like Athena, and functions as his guide and divine aid. Because He has this spirit, like the gods in the Odyssey, the spirits recognize each other, "even when they are a long way off" says Homer. Jesus like Odysseus, had fellow travelers that depended on him and like Odysseus, Jesus was unable to save them and bring them to safety do to their own stubborn disobedience. So many of the parallels have already been mentioned. At one time I actually logged over 40 parallels in the two stories. At that point I was thoroughly convinced that Mark wrote with the Odyssey in mind.

Aeschylus

Not only did Mark draw from Homer but the story of Jesus caused him to make a connection with another famous piece of classical Greek Literature. Mark appears to have been struck profoundly with the tragedy of the crucifixion, so much so that he was drawn to the story of Prometheus bound written by the father of Greek Tragedy, the poet Aeschylus. At the point of Mark’s passion narrative the Odysseus paradigm shifts. Unlike Odysseus, Jesus did not vanquish the religious authorities that were in control of temple Jadism at the time (of course under a watchful Roman eye). Jesus comes to Jerusalem and is arrested and put to death. He came with words of truth and healing. For his efforts he was beaten and executed. Prometheus too was nailed to a rock for bringing salvation in the form of fire and medicine to humankind. Like Prometheus, Jesus, an immortal, is raised aloft fixed with arms outstretched and scoffed at by his detractors. As in Prometheus there is the foreshadowed promise of vindication though it has not happened yet. The interlopers have been dealt with but there is only the hint that Prometheus/Jesus is free. More direct internal evidence that Mark draws from these two sources (Homer and Aeschylus) is to be found in the story of the Greek woman who comes to Jesus for the sake of her possessed daughter. This curious saying about crumbs under the table comes from a very famous quotation of Aeschylus concerning his work and that of Homer. By using these word signals Mark is alerting the educated reader about his two paradigms. Odysseus and Prometheus.

"The great poet Aeschylus in referring to his work makes the following comment: "My poems are but fragments fallen from the rich table of Homer" Origin of the Homeric Poems, Hermann Bonitz, Harper & Brothers 1879. Mark’s allusion to Aeschylus’ famous saying is an intentional clue readers who may have known of a then popular saying. By alluding to a quotation of Aeschylus, Mark has pointed to two great literary figures that he drew from, Homer and Aeschylus. By placing the saying in the mouth of a Greek woman and clearly designating her nationality he alerts Greeks to be especially attentive. At the same time Mark is continuing the word/food metaphor from a Greek source

I have observed the same type of connections in other ancient Greek myths as well as in, Ezekiel, Esther, Ruth, and 4^th Esdras (said by many to come after the New Testament period). I hope someone finds this helpful in the discussion.

Rick Richmond.

---

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com