Mark 1.1-8 2nd Sunday of Advent - Year B (2024)

QUESTIONS AT THE BEGINNING

Mark begins his writing with a statement by the narrator:"The beginning of the good news of Jesus Christ [or Messiah] [(a?) Son ofGod]." Right from the beginning, we, the readers, know more than most ofthe characters in the narrative. We are already anticipating this writing to be"good news" -- which is a comment about what the writing doesto us, rather than just what it says. We are already anticipating ways thatJesus will be attested as the Messiah, the Son of God -- and watching how thecharacters come to realize this -- if they ever do.

This first verse raises some important questions.

QUESTION 1: What is the "beginning of the gospel"?Is the beginning just the prologue (vv. 1-13 or vv. 1-15 where euaggelionforms "bookends")? Is the entire book the beginning of the Gospel?

I lean towards the entire writing being the"beginning". Especially since the probable last verse 16:8 is not anending. For the readers of Mark, including us, this book is only the beginningof the gospel. The end has not yet come. The story continues beyond chapter 16as we proclaim the good news to all nations (13:10).

I also wonder how we can revive the excitement and enthusiasmof the gospel. So often it becomes passé. We need to begin again -- to hearafresh the good news of Jesus Christ, Son of God.

QUESTION 2: What is the "good news" of JesusChrist?

R.T. France (The Gospel of Mark, NIGTC) writes aboutthe grammar: "The genitive [Jesus Christ] may, in theory, be read either assubjective ('the good news proclaimed by Jesus Christ') or objective ('the goodnews about Jesus Christ'). Some commentators take up positions on one side orthe other, but most prefer to have it both ways" (p. 53).

While France thinks it is more natural to read the genitiveas objective and notes that it is the more normal usage in the rest of the NT,he also notes that vv. 14-15 make clear that the good news is also preached byJesus (p. 53).

Schweizer (The Good News According to Mark) states:"The Greek word euaggelion denotes 'good news,' primarily of avictory in battle. This term figures prominently in stories of the lives of theRoman emperors who were honored as gods" (p. 30).

James Edwards (The Gospel According to Mark) expandson Schweizer's comments:

In 9 B.C., within a decade of Jesus' birth, the birthday of Caesar Augustus (63 B.C. - A.D. 14) was hailed as euangelion (pl.). Since he was hailed as a god, Augustins's "birthday signaled the beginning of Good News for the world." In the Greco-Roman world the word always appears in the plural, meaning one good tiding among others; but in the NT euangelion appears only in the singular: the good news of God in Jesus Christ, beside which there is no other. The concept of "good news" was not limited to military and political victories, however. In the prophet Isaiah "good news" is transferred to the inbreaking of God's final saving act when peace, good news, and release from oppression will be showered on God's people (Isa 52:7; 61:1-3). For Mark, the advent of Jesus is the beginning of the fulfillment of the "good news" heralded by Isaiah." [p. 24]

I have been reading Let the Reader Understand:Reader-Response Criticism and the Gospel of Mark, by Robert M. Fowler. Hestresses in his opening chapters that first century rhetoric was meant to dosomething to the hearers. He offers this comparison:

At the most superficial level, the aims of the joke and of the Gospel of Mark are similar: both seek to do something to the hearer or reader. In particular, both stories use covert means to induce an understanding or a belief in the reader or hearer. What they then do with the belief they have elicited differs immensely. The joke induces a belief to deceive the hearer only momentarily, until the deception is dropped and the belief exploded in an instant of comic revelation. The Gospel of Mark is also designed to elicit belief, but a belief that bids to have a profound and lasting significance for the reader's life and to persist long after the initial encounter with the story. In other words, both stories use the rhetorical resources of narrative to affect the reader, but the aim of Mark's Gospel is more difficult to achieve. The joke is designed to seduce us temporarily; the Gospel is designed to seduce us permanently [p. 10]

I think that euaggelion is word that evokes aresponse. It is like shouting, "We won!" or "Victory isours." When game show contestants are told that they've won, there isshouting and jumping and waving of arms. The words are more than justinformation. They are an event that engulfs the hearers.

What if these opening words were paraphrased: "Thebeginning of the victory of Jesus, the Messiah, the Son of God"? Howmight that color our reading/hearing of the rest of the story? I think that,among other things, we might be better able to see the many ironies in thisstory of Jesus -- the many times when the victor appears much more like avictim.

Jumping ahead a little, I wonder if Mark purposely used euaggelionat the beginning, as well as "Christ" and "Son of God,"figuring that the hearers would misinterpret all three terms, which he will thenreinterpret throughout his writing -- with meanings that the disciples don'tget.

QUESTION 3: What was meant by "Christ"? A title?Part of Jesus' name?

• This Greek word for "anointed" or"Messiah," would have probably made little sense to a Greek audience.

  See Also

  Crossmark Wallet - Chrome Web StoreEen avond vol retailinspiratie op de eerste editie van het NowHow kennisevent - Crossmarks

• The uses of "Messiah" or "anointed (one)"in the OT do not help much in understanding Jesus as Messiah.

• The word is used of "the anointed priests" (Lv 4:3,5, 16, 6:22; 2 Macc 2:10)

• The word is used of the king. (Throughout 1 & 2 Sam)

• The word is used of Cyrus, a Persian! (Is 45:1)

• The word is used of the prophets (Ps 105:15; 1 Chr 16:22)

Often, in the Psalms, it refers to God giving victory to aking (his "anointed") (2:2; 18:50; 20:6; 132:17?)

Would the Jews have understood the term "Christ" torefer to a conquering king? an anointed priest? a prophet?

QUESTION 4: What is meant by "(a?) Son of God"?

This phrase (two words in Greek huiou theou) ismissing in many ancient manuscripts. Normally shorter readings are to bepreferred over longer ones. It is more likely that copyists would add to a textrather than to delete. However, the omission of these words might be explainedby an oversight in copying. The first six words in Greek all end with "ou,"so a copyist may have jumped to the last "ou" before he shouldhave.

It's also noted that the Greek does not have a definitearticle ("the"). The same is true when the centurion could beconfessing: "Truly, this man was a son of God" (15:39). Thedemons, however, declare: "You are the Son of the God"(3:11) and "Jesus, (a) Son of the Most High God" (5:7). Incontrast, definite articles are always found in the phrase: "the Sonof the human". A grammatical argument can be made for supplying"the" in the phrase "Son of God." I present this bit ofgrammar so that we might understand how Mark's first readers/hearers might haveunderstood the phrase.

If it were Greeks hearing this for the first time, I wouldthink that their reference would be to their mythological children of gods. Forexample, Hercules was a son of the god Zeus and the human mother Alcmene.

A Jewish audience, based on Psalm 2, might think that "ason of God" (v. 7) was a king. Note also that "anointed" (christosin LXX) is used in v. 2.

These words do something to the hearers. They create apicture in their minds from their own experiences of someone called "Son ofGod". It is likely that this picture at the beginning is a wrong one -- andMark will seek to change it through his story.

A MASTER OF SURPRISE?

Donald Juel has a book called A Master of Surprise: MarkInterpreted. Mark begins with some loaded words: "good news" =military victory, "Christ" & "son of God" = anointedconquering king (or Greek "super-hero"). He will surprise usthroughout his story by radically redefine these terms through his presentationof Jesus, the Son of Man -- the one who will be crucified.

JOHN OR JESUS

We often interpret vv. 2-3 in light of Matthew and Luke wherethey clearly refer to John the Baptist. John is presented before the OTquotes are given. However, in Mark, the only person who has been named prior tothe quotes is Jesus. Note also, for those who have difficulty memorizingscripture, Mark's quote is a hybrid: v. 2 seems to come from Ex 23:20 (LXX) andMal 3:1 (MT) and v. 3 from Isaiah 40:3, but not quoted exactly.

The phrase "just as it has been written" (kathosgegraptai) that begins verse 2, is never used at the start of a new sentencein the Septuagint or the New Testament according to Robert Guelich in TheBeginning of the Gospel -- Mark 1:1-15, quoted by Mary Ann Tobert in Sowingthe Gospel: Mark's World in Literary-Historical Perspective.

In addition, Guelich states that when the phrase is used asan introductory formula, it forms a bridge between what has preceded andthe quotation that follows. The only preceding person is Jesus.

Grammatically, this means that vv. 2-3 should be connectedwith v. 1, rather than with v. 4. Perhaps the period at the end of v. 1 and thecomma at the end of v. 3 in the NRSV should be switched.

This arrangement allows for two major divisions centered onthe word egeneto = "it happened"

v. 4 -- it happened that John the Baptist was in thewilderness
v. 9 -- and it happened that in those days Jesus came

WHOSE VOICE IS CRYING OUT IN THE WILDERNESS?

Although John is in the wilderness (eremos) in verse4, Jesus is in the wilderness (or deserted places) much more often (1:12, 13,35, 45; 6:31, 32, 35).

John is never described as "crying out" (boao),but Jesus does -- from the cross (15:34) where he is forsaken by God -- awilderness moment? Even though Matthew quotes Isaiah 40:3 with boao, hedoesn't use that same word for Jesus' cry from the cross, but a closely relatedterm, anaboao (27:46).

WHO IS "THE LORD"?

Clearly the LORD in Isaiah 40:3 is Yahweh. When Mark quotesthat verse, does "the Lord" refer to God or to Jesus? Does Mark wantto indicate that John prepares the way for Jesus or that Jesus prepares the wayfor God?

"Lord" (kyrios) is never used as a title forJesus in Mark, except as a title of respect, "sir" or"master" (7:28; 11:3). Jesus calls God "Lord" (5:19; 13:20).In every other scriptural quotation that uses kyrios in Mark, it refersto God as distinct from Jesus (11:9; 12:11, 29, 30, 36).

[In contrast to Mark's non-use of "Lord" as a titlefor Jesus, such a use occurs twice in the addendum 16:19, 20.]

Unfortunately, if Mark intends vv. 2-3 to refer to Jesus asthe apocalyptic preacher who prepares the way for the coming of God, thatdoesn't make for a very good Advent theme. So we move on to John.

JOHN THE BAPTIST

I have described John's role to be like that of Ed McMahan.For nearly 30 years he introduced the star of the show with,"H-e-e-e-r-r-e-e's Johnny."

Sometimes an introducer can cause quite an embarrassment forthe main speaker. I was at a church gathering where the introducer had muchfunnier jokes and a better delivery than the famous main speaker. He was not agood introducer. He shouldn't outshine the star of the show.

Actually, John the B is the third introducer in Mark. Wefirst had the narrator tell us about Jesus Christ, Son of God. We've heard the (mis-)quotedwords of the prophet about "My messenger" (aggelos or"angel" in Greek) -- probably referring to Jesus. Now we hear John'switness about Jesus.

John appears as a prophet, wearing garments reminiscent ofElijah (hairy and a leather belt -- 2 K 1:8, see also Zech 13:4). This alsobrings to mind Malachi 4:5: "Lo, I will send you the prophet Elijah beforethe great and terrible day of the LORD comes" (see also Mark 9:11-13).

John has two proclamations (kerusso):

(1) "a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness ofsins," (v. 4) which involved the confession of sins (v. 5).
(2) "a stronger one is coming after me" (v. 7)

Concerning (1): Repentance is not a dominant theme in Mark.This is the only occurrence of the noun (metanoia -- 2 times in Mt, 5 inLk, 0 in Jn) and the verb (metanoeo) only occurs twice: in Jesus'preaching (1:15) and, literally, as a result of the disciples' preaching (6:12)-- (5 times in Mt, 9 in Lk, 0 in Jn).

Besides the use of "sins" (hamartia) in vv.4 & 5, it occurs only in Mark in 2:5, 7, 9, 10; where Jesus forgives thesins of the paralytic. This chapter also includes the account of Jesus eatingwith tax collectors and sinners (hamartolos -- vv. 15-17).

If John had been completely successful, baptizing all for theforgiveness of their sins, would there have been any "sinners" forJesus to call (2:17)?

This is also the only time "confessing" is used inMark. Perhaps, in contrast to Matthew where Jesus' continues John's work --proclaiming exactly the same message: "Repent for the kingdom of heaven hascome near" (Mt 3:2 for John; Mt 4:17 for Jesus), Mark seems to have agreater separation between the ministries of the two men. While Jesus forgivessins, it has nothing to do with the ritual that John proclaimed. In Mark, Jesusdoesn't call people to confess their sins, like John does. They seem to havedistinct functions in Mark: John points to the greater one, Jesus; who is theapocalyptic preacher who prepares the way for the coming of the LORD.

THE GREATER OR STRONGER ONE

I think that this is the more important part of John'sproclamation. Especially if John had a following at the time of Mark, Mark seeksto have John witness to Christ.

A few years ago saw a video tape on worship, Paul Westermeyer,the presenter used the phrase, "Music broken to word and sacrament."He also indicated that the leaders need to be broken to word and sacrament. Hismeaning for these images was that neither music nor leaders are to drawattention to themselves, but to the Christ who comes through the means of grace.This preaching of John could be a good model to follow concerning worship -- orministry in general. No matter how "successful" we might be -- Johnhad crowds come from the "whole Judean countryside and all the people fromJerusalem" (v. 5) -- our function is to always point to the stronger one.

This distinction can be difficult. As a church musician and apreacher, I want to do those tasks as best I can. I want my"performance" to be polished. I don't want to be making mistakes orstumbling over musical notes or words (even though that may happen). Bothmessing up and performing exquisitely can draw undo attention to one's selfrather than to the God we have gathered to proclaim and to worship. The worshipservice is not about me, nor is it about the congregation. We are to be brokento Word and Sacrament. We have gathered to serve and be served by these Means ofGrace.

BAPTISMS

The Greek word baptizo means "to wash" --usually by dipping or immersing in water. Note its use in Mark 7:4.Symbolically, it can mean: "ritual purification,""immersion". What meaning(s) are implied by the phrase "He willbaptize in the Holy Spirit"? How is that the similar or different fromJohn's baptism in water?

I can't find that Jesus ever baptized in the Holy Spirit inthe gospel of Mark. The word pneuma ("spirit") occurs 23 times.

Only 4 of those include the word hagios("Holy"):

• Jesus will baptize in the Holy Spirit (1:8)

• Blaspheming against the Holy Spirit is unforgivable (3:29)

• David spoke by the Holy Spirit (12:36)

• The Holy Spirit will speak for those who are brought to trial(13:11)

Two others refer to Spirit (capital "S")

• Jesus' baptism (1:10)

• Jesus' being driven into the wilderness to be tempted (1:12).

Eleven times it is used with "unclean". Three moretimes, "unclean" or "evil" is implied. The"spiritual" theme in Mark centers more on the unclean ones – whooften recognize Jesus and whom Jesus is able to cast out.

Perhaps the "baptism in the Holy Spirit" refers tothe tempting persecution and suffering that the disciples would go through(13:9-13). Jesus uses "baptism" in reference to his suffering anddeath and indicates that at least James and John will undergo the same type ofbaptism (10:38-39).

This would be quite a change from the ecstatic "baptismin the Holy Spirit" proclaimed by Charismatics and Pentecostals.

Perhaps, like I indicated earlier in the note, as Mark seeksto redefine the good news and Jesus as the Christ/Messiah and Son of God, so heseeks to redefine what following Jesus means and what life immersed in the HolySpirit means. All of these point to the cross. An ironic sign of victory or goodnews for God's anointed, the Son of God.

I've heard the gospel of Mark summarized with the statement,"Before you decide to become a Christian, you had better make sure that youlook good on wood."

As we enter the fantasy of the commercial Christmas season,it may be good to remind our hearers about the real costs of following that babywho will be born.

Perhaps we need to look at the Advent/Christmas season as atime to begin to hear the good news again for the first time. While we probablydon't have the same misconceptions about "Christ/Messiah" or "Sonof God" as the ancient Greeks and Hebrews did, our understandings"victory" and of Jesus and what following him means probably needssome redefining, just as it did for those first readers of Mark. The waythat is being prepared is a way that will lead to suffering and death on thecross.

Brian Stoffregen
Faith Lutheran Church, 1000 D St., Marysville, CA 95901
e-mail: brian.stoffregen@gmail.com