Mark 1-8:26, Volume 34A

by Robert A. Guelich, John D. W. Watts (Editor), Ralph P. Martin (Editor)

Overview

The Word Biblical Commentary delivers the best in biblical scholarship, from the leading scholars of our day who share a commitment to Scripture as divine revelation. This series emphasizes a thorough analysis of textual, linguistic, structural, and theological evidence. The result is judicious and balanced insight into the meanings of the text in the framework of biblical theology. These widely acclaimed commentaries serve as exceptional resources for the professional theologian and instructor, the seminary or university student, the working minister, and everyone concerned with building theological understanding from a solid base of biblical scholarship.

Overview of Commentary Organization

• Introduction—covers issues pertaining to the whole book, including context, date, authorship, composition, interpretive issues, purpose, and theology.
• Each section of the commentary includes:
• Pericope Bibliography—a helpful resource containing the most important works that pertain to each particular pericope.
• Translation—the author’s own translation of the biblical text, reflecting the end result of exegesis and attending to Hebrew and Greek idiomatic usage of words, phrases, and tenses, yet in reasonably good English.
• Notes—the author’s notes to the translation that address any textual variants, grammatical forms, syntactical constructions, basic meanings of words, and problems of translation.
• Form/Structure/Setting—a discussion of redaction, genre, sources, and tradition as they concern the origin of the pericope, its canonical form, and its relation to the biblical and extra-biblical contexts in order to illuminate the structure and character of the pericope. Rhetorical or compositional features important to understanding the passage are also introduced here.
• Comment—verse-by-verse interpretation of the text and dialogue with other interpreters, engaging with current opinion and scholarly research.
• Explanation—brings together all the results of the discussion in previous sections to expose the meaning and intention of the text at several levels: (1) within the context of the book itself; (2) its meaning in the OT or NT; (3) its place in the entire canon; (4) theological relevance to broader OT or NT issues.
  • General Bibliography—occurring at the end of each volume, this extensive bibliographycontains all sources used anywhere in the commentary.

Product Details

ISBN-13:	9780310588375
Publisher:	Zondervan Academic
Publication date:	01/09/2018
Series:	Word Biblical Commentary
Sold by:	HarperCollins Publishing
Format:	eBook
Pages:	496
Sales rank:	724,859
File size:	5 MB

About the Author

Robert A. Guelich is Professor of New Testament at Fuller Theological Seminary. He holds the B.A. from Wheaton College, M.A. from the University of Illinois, S.T.B. from Fuller Theological Seminary, and the D.Theol. from the University of Hamburg. He has also done postgraduate studies at the University of Aberdeen and the University of Tübingen. His previous publications include The Sermon on the Mount: A Critical-Historical Commentary; Matthew in the New International Commentary; and as Editor; Unity and Diversity in New Testament Theology: Festschrift for George Ladd.

David Allan Hubbard (1928 – 1996), former president and professor of Old Testament at Fuller Theological Seminary in Pasadena, California, was a recognized biblical scholar. In addition to over 30 books, he has written numerous articles for journals, periodicals, reference works. He was a general editor of the Word Biblical Commentary (1977 - 1996).

Glenn W. Barker (d. 1984) was a general editor of the Word Biblical Commentary (1977 - 1984). 

John D. W. Watts (1921 – 2013) was President of the Baptist Theological Seminary, Ruschlikon, Switzerland, and served as Professor of Old Testament at that institution, at Fuller Theological Seminary, and the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky. His numerous publications include commentaries on Isaiah (2 volumes), Amos, and Obadiah. He was Old Testament editor of the Word Biblical Commentary (1977 - 2011).

 

Ralph P. Martin (1925-2013) was Distinguished Scholar in Residence at Fuller Theological Seminary and a New Testament Editor for the Word Biblical Commentary series. He earned the BA and MA from the University of Manchester, England, and the PhD from King's College, University of London. He was the author of numerous studies and commentaries on the New Testament, including Worship in the Early Church, the volume on Philippians in The Tyndale New Testament Commentary series. He also wrote 2 Corinthians and James in the WBC series.

Read an Excerpt

Mark 1-8:26, Volume 34A

---

By Robert A Guelich, David A. Hubbard, Glenn W. Barker

ZONDERVAN

Copyright © 1989 Thomas Nelson, Inc.
All rights reserved.
ISBN: 978-0-310-52196-9

---

CHAPTER 1

The Beginning of the Gospel according to Isaiah (1:1–15)

Introduction

The Gospel of Mark opens with a series of vignettes depicting the beginning of the ministry of Jesus Messiah, the Son of God. The focus on Jesus' coming begins with the OT promise (1:2–3) of a precursor that is fulfilled by John the Baptist (1:4–6) whose own role as a prophet, indicated by his food and clothing (1:6), culminates in his heralding of Jesus' coming (1:7–8). The Baptist's preaching and baptism set the stage for the divine declaration that attests Jesus to be the Son of God (1:9–11) who resists Satan in the wilderness temptations (1:12–13) and who himself emerges in Galilee to herald the fulfillment of time, the good news of God's reign (1:14–15). Thus the opening section sets forth the "beginning of the gospel of Jesus Messiah, Son of God" (1:1).

Yet this opening section has given rise to a variety of opinions regarding its proper designation, its limits and its sources. Cranfield (33) reflects the diversity in the passage's designation by entitling the section "The Beginning" and then noting that it serves as a "prologue" to the Gospel that "introduces" Jesus of Nazareth. It has become rather common to refer to these opening verses as a "prologue" (e.g., Bacon, JBL 26 [1907] 84; Grundmann, 34; Lane, 39; Pesch, 71–72; Seitz, JBL 82 [1963] 201), while others prefer the more neutral "introduction" (e.g., Dautzenberg, BZ 21 [1977] 3; Keck, NTS 12 [1965–66] 352–70; Lightfoot, Message, 15; Taylor, 151) or "preface" (e.g., Anderson, 63). The evangelist (1:1) apparently referred to this section as the "beginning" (so Cranfield, 33; Gnilka, 1:39 ["initium"]; Lohmeyer, 9; Schweizer, 28).

Behind the choice of terminology lies the basic question of the section's relationship to the rest of the Gospel. Whereas "prologue" and "preface" connote a more self-contained section, "introduction" and clearly "beginning" signal a more integral relationship between this material and the rest of the Gospel. The answer ultimately lies in the significance of the opening verse.

The limit of this opening section has been variously set as 1:1–8, 1:1–13, and 1:1–15 (Feneberg, Markusprolog, arbitrarily chose 1:1–11 apparently for the purposes of his survey). The division of 1:1–8 found in the Greek texts of Westcott and Hort, Nestle, and the GNT (cf. Nestle26) has few followers today (e.g., Haenchen, 28–51, and Schmithals, 1:73–82, without comment). Since the appearance and preaching of the Baptist (1:4–8) hardly represent the "beginning of the gospel" for Mark and since the thrust of 1:2b–3, 7–8 points to the one who would follow John, Mark's opening section must include at least 1:1–13 (e.g., Bacon, JBL 26 [1907] 87–88; Cranfield, 32–60; Lane, 39–62; Lightfoot, Message, 15–20; Lohmeyer, 9–28; Schniewind, 44–50; Schweizer, 28–43; Taylor, 151–64).

Yet the grounds for drawing the line at 1:13 rather than 1:15 are seldom stated. They are implied by the headings given the following sections. For most of the above commentators, 1:14–15 represent the outset of Jesus' public or Galilean ministry. Thus by implication 1:1–13 merely set the stage for Jesus' entry into his public ministry. Since, however, such a chronological orientation appears at best to be of secondary importance to the evangelist both in 1:1–13 as well as in the following pericopes that lead to the passion narrative, one wonders if it should be accorded such significance in the relationship of 1:1–13 to 1:14–15. The evidence suggests a third option.

The recent trend has been to include 1:14–15 within the opening section (e.g., Anderson, 63–64; Dautzenberg, BZ 21 [1977] 219–34; Gibbs, TU 112 [1974] 154–88; Gnilka, 1:39–40; Grundmann, 34; Keck, NTS 12 [1965–66] 352–70; Langkammer, RTK 20 [1973] 57; Pesch, 1:71–73; Mann, 193–94). Three arguments support this option. First, terminologically [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] forms an inclusion between 1:1 and 1:14–15 and the related term [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] links John and Jesus in 1:4,7, 14. Second, thematically John the Baptist as the forerunner provides the foil for Jesus' appearance in 1:9–15. In addition to the contrast explicitly stated in 1:2–8, the threefold division of the traditional units regarding John and Jesus respectively parallel each other in such a manner as to accent this contrast. For example, both units open with an identifying word from God (1:2b–3, 11), contain a reference to their person and work (1:4–6, 12–13), and climax with a reference to their preaching (1:7–8, 14–15). Third, structurally the second major section of the Gospel (1:16–8:26) can be divided into three subsections, each beginning with a reference to discipleship (1:16–3:12; 3:13–6:6; 6:7–8:26; so Keck, NTS 12 [1965–66] 362–63) that supports the break between 1:15 and the call of the four disciples in 1:16–20.

This opening section consists of several traditional units. At issue in the discussion of sources is the extent of the evangelist's redactional contribution to and the shaping of the material. On the one side, some have argued for a preevangelist traditional unit (1:1–15) with little redactional activity by the evangelist (e.g., Langkammer, RTK 20 [1973] 57; Pesch, 1:71–108; Schnackenburg, Orientierung, 318–19). Accordingly, this material would have come to the evangelist as the product of the community's previous combination of traditional materials. On the other side, several have assigned the combination of the traditions in 1:2–8 and at least the shaping, if not the whole, of 1:14–15 to Mark (e.g., Dautzenberg, BZ 21 [1977] 226–27; Gnilka, 1:39–40; Grundmann, 34–35; van Iersel, Concil 7 [1971] 717–18).

Based on an examination of this material, Mark appears to have formed the opening of his Gospel from a mixed quotation (1:2b–3) taken either from a setting similar to 1:4 or found as an isolated testimonium, a traditional unit on the appearance and ministry of John the Baptist (1:4–8), a tradition of Jesus' baptism by John (1:9–11) previously combined with an account of Jesus' temptation in the wilderness (1:12–13) and a summary statement consisting of several traditional formulas to summarize Jesus' message (1:14–15). The evangelist has aligned these units under his heading of 1:1–3 to show how the "beginning of the gospel of Jesus Messiah, Son of God" corresponds to Isaiah's promise. In this way, he introduces and identifies John the Baptist and the main character of his story, Jesus Messiah, Son of God.

A. The Heading (1:1–3)

Form / Structure / Setting

Mark 1:1 beginning with an anarthrous noun [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] and containing no verb has the form of a heading, title or superscription (e.g., LXX Hos 1:2; Prov 1:1; Eccl 1:1; Cant 1:1; Matt 1:1; Rev 1:1). Although it is frequently designated the title or superscription for the entire Gospel (Anderson, 66; Gnilka, 1:42; Haenchen, 38–39; Pesch, 1:74–75; Schnackenburg, Orientierung, 322–23; Taylor, 152), syntactical considerations and comparable literary models make such a designation most improbable (Arnold, ZNW 68 [1977] 121–27).

Syntactically, to function as a title 1:1 would need to stand grammatically independent from the following verse(s), since the content of 1:1–2 (3) could hardly form the title for the Gospel that follows. But this is not the case. First, [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] never introduces a sentence in either Mark or the rest of the NT documents except in the unrelated [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] combination (cf. Taylor, 153; Anderson, 67–68; Haenchen, 39). Second, when [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] occurs in a formula with [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], it always refers to the preceding rather than to the succeeding material (cf. Schmidt, 18; Haenchen, 39; Marxsen, Mark, 32–33). Therefore, 1:2 clearly requires a close syntactical relationship with 1:1.

From a literary standpoint, 1:1 compared with similar openings in extrabiblical literature indicates that similar headings refer either to the immediate introduction of a work (e.g., Isocrates, Phil. 1; Philo, de Sob. 1; de Spec. Leg. 1; Tacitus, Hist. 1.1.1—cited by Arnold, ZNW 68 [1977] 124–25) or to the opening of the main part of that work in contrast to the preliminary comments (Polybius 1.5.1; Dionysius Halic. 1.8.4; Josephus, War 1.30) and not to the work as a whole. The frequent reference to the apparent parallel of Hos 1:2 merely offers a comparable sentence, since the analogy breaks down when one recognizes that Hos 1:1 rather than 1:2 is the title of the book. Indeed, Hos 1:2 provides the heading for the following section. Therefore, 1:1 designates the heading of the initial section as the "beginning of the gospel" rather than entitling the Gospel as a whole (Arnold, ZNW 68 [1977] 123–27; Cranfield, 34–35; Feneberg, Markusprology 186–87; Lane, 42; Lohmeyer, 9–11, Schweizer, 30).

But where does the heading end? Apart from the majority of commentators who would place the period at the end of 1:1, some, recognizing the syntactical impossibility of this alternative, have settled for 1:1–4 with the quotation of 1:2a–3 being parenthetical (e.g., Feneberg, Markusprolog, 186–87; Lagrange, 1–2; Lane, 42; Turner, JTS 26 [1925] 146). But this reading deemphasizes what Mark has emphasized, namely, that which was "written by the prophet Isaiah." Therefore, it seems most logical to place the final period at the end of 1:3, even though this leaves us with a clumsy heading signaled by the evangelist's use of an anarthrous [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] and a verbless opening statement (1:1) materially connected to the quotation of 1:2b–3 by the introductory formula of 1:2a.

Mark 1:2b–3 is a composite citation of three OT passages. The first (1:2b) corresponds to the LXX text of Exod 23:20; the second (1:2c) to the Hebrew text of Mai 3:1; the third (1:3) to the LXX of Isa 40:3. The interplay, however, of the Hebrew text of Exod 23:20 and Mai 3:1 reflected in the LXX rendering of the respective texts (Exod 23:20 [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] has [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], cf. [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] of Mal 3:1; Mal 3:1 [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] has [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] cf. [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] of Exod 23:20) and the similarity of the LXX text and the Tg. Isa 40:3 cautions one against concluding too readily that Mark 1:2bc simply reproduces the respective LXX and Hebrew texts (Pesch, 1:78). The presence of the same composite citation (1:2bc) in a Q context pertaining to the Baptist (Matt 11:10//Luke 7:27) as well as the same composite citation in Rabbinic circles to refer to the "forerunner" (e.g., Exod. Rab. 23:20; Str-B, 1:597; Snodgrass,/SAT8 [1980], 24–45) demonstrates the traditional character of the citation in 1:2bc and precludes its being the product of Markan redaction (cf. Marxsen, Mark, 37, n. 28).

Comment

1 "The beginning" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] has various nuances (BCD, s.v.; G. Delling, TDNT 1 [1964] 479–84). Its position in 1:1 is reminiscent of Gen 1:1 (LXX) and John 1:1. Yet the difference in content between "in the beginning" referring to a time prior to creation in John 1:1–2 and the "beginning of the gospel" quickly becomes evident. Thus the apxv of 1:1; Gen 1:1 and John 1:1 have little in common apart from their location in the respective works.

"Beginning" can also mean more than the starting point implying a chronological when to which one can return by proceeding backwards or from which one begins (e.g., 10:6; 13:19, cf. Marxsen, Mark, 41). It can also denote the "first things," "elementary principles" or the "rudimentary elements" (BGD, s.v.; Wikgren, JBL 61 [1942] 16–19; e.g., LXX Ps 110:10; Prov 1:7; 9:10; Sir 1:14). Consequently, the [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] of the gospel could lexically signify the "starting point" or "outset" of the gospel as its "beginning," or it could point to the "rudiments" of the gospel as comprising its ultimate "origin." The meaning of [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] ultimately depends on the meaning of the qualifying phrase, "the gospel of Jesus Messiah, Son of God," and the relationship of 1:1 to what follows.

"Of the gospel" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. A comparison with the other Gospels indicates that Mark alone uses the noun [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] in the absolute (1:15; 8:35; 10:29; 13:10; 14:9; cf. Acts 15:7). Matthew follows Mark four times but always with a qualifier ("the gospel of the Kingdom"—4:23; 9:35; 24:14—and "this gospel"—26:13). Both Matthew (11:5//Luke 7:22) and Luke (10x, Acts 15x) use the verb [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], which is missing from Mark. The data appear to support Marxsen's suggestion that Mark "has introduced the noun [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] into the synoptic tradition" {Mark, 125). It remains to be seen in the discussion of the respective passages, however, whether or not these occurrences stem from Mark's redaction or his tradition.

"The gospel of Jesus Messiah, Son of God" (1:1) represents what Schweizer has called the "theological accomplishment" of the evangelist (EvT 19 [1964] 339). Does, however, this "achievement" represent a novum? Was Mark the first to perceive Jesus' earthly ministry as part of the "gospel"? Did Mark's achievement consist in his setting forth in literary fashion what was already commonly accepted as inherent to the "gospel," namely, the Christian message of salvation through Jesus Christ? In other words, does Mark's "achievement" lie in the literary creation of the gospel genre by being the first to write out the gospel as understood and preached by the Church (so apparently Schweizer, EvT 19 [1964] 339) or does his "achievement" lie in his altering the content of the Church's mission proclamation of Jesus' death, resurrection and exaltation by setting it within Jesus' earthly ministry (so apparently Marxsen, Mark, 117–50)? The answer to this question lies in 1:1–15.

It has become common consensus that [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] in 1:1 refers to at least the content of the literary work that follows. Drawing on other common mission terminology of his day, the evangelist makes reference to the "gospel" as the proclaimed message six times and designates his work as such at the outset. But in what sense is his work "the gospel"? Although it sets the stage for the development in the second century (e.g., Justin, Apol. 66.3), "the gospel" of 1:1 can hardly be taken as intended merely to name a literary genre. Rather [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] here also refers to the good news as proclaimed, though set forth here in written form. The clue to the evangelist's intent lies in the genitive qualifier, "concerning Jesus Messiah."

"Concerning Jesus Messiah." The "gospel of Jesus Christ" can mean "the gospel concerning Jesus Christ" with [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] being an objective genitive (e.g., Klostermann, 3–4; Lane, 44–45; Pesch, 1:75; Schnackenburg, Orientierung, 322; Schweizer, 30–31; Taylor, 6) or the "gospel proclaimed by Jesus Christ" with [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]being a subjective genitive (e.g., Cranfield, 3536; Dautzenberg, BZ 21 [1977] 223–24; Schniewind, 44; Strecker, Jesus Christus, 535). Several have taken the construction to include both objective and subjective elements (e.g., Anderson, 66–67; Ernst, 33; Friedrich, TDNT 2 [1964] 798; Gnilka, 1:43; Grundmann, 35; Marxsen, Mark, 131–33).

Of these three options, the last poses a grammatical difficulty, since one or the other emphasis has to dominate. The second generally results from the misplaced emphasis on 1:14 from which 1:1 has been interpreted rather than interpreting T. 14 in terms of 1:1 with the latter providing the redactional setting for the traditional reference of the former (see Comment on 1:14). The objective genitive not only corresponds with the use of [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] in the Church's mission but also with the other redactional uses of [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] in Mark (8:35; 10:29; 13:10; 14:9). Therefore, the [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] the message of "good news concerning Jesus Messiah" whose very content includes both the word and works of Jesus for Mark.

(Continues...)

---

Excerpted from Mark 1-8:26, Volume 34A by Robert A Guelich, David A. Hubbard, Glenn W. Barker. Copyright © 1989 Thomas Nelson, Inc.. Excerpted by permission of ZONDERVAN.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.

---

Table of Contents

Contents

Editorial Preface, ix,
Author's Preface, x,
Abbreviations, xi,
Main Bibliography, xvii,
INTRODUCTION, xix,
Genre, xix,
Mark as Narrative, xxii,
Author, XXV,
Place, xxix,
Date, xxxi,
Sources, xxxii,
Structure, XXXV,
Outline, xxxvii,
The Theology of Mark, xxxvii,
The Purpose of Mark's Gospel, xl,
MARK: TEXT AND COMMENTARY, 1,
I. The Beginning of the Gospel according to Isaiah (1:1–15), 3,
II. New Wine in Old Wineskins (1:16–3:12), 47,
III. The Mystery of the Kingdom of God (3:13–6:6), 152,
IV. "Do You Not Yet Understand?" (6:7–8:26), 316,
Indexes, 437,