The Effects of the Christ-Event: Mark’s Thoughts

Last updated on: May 12, 2006 at 2:03 am by mogget

7 Comments

The Effects of the Christ-Event: Mark’s Thoughts 2006-05-12T02:03:49-05:00 mogget

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

One of the questions I get asked when talking about the effects of the Christ-event has to do with whether this avenue of approach is fruitful outside of the Paulines. The fact is, the entire NT pretty uniformly teaches Jesus in terms of what he did/does/will do. This time we’ll take a couple of examples from Mark.

Jesus as a “Ransom for Many”

Let’s start with Mark 10:45. This saying occurs just as Jesus reaches Jericho, his last stop before the final 15 mile trek into Jerusalem. The disciples were arguing over precedence in the Kingdom (Mk 35-45). Jesus responded by demanding that the disciples not imitate “the Gentiles,” but that they instead imitate him, for:

…the Son of Man did not come to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.

The point we are interested in here is the idea of Jesus giving “his life as a ransom for many.” This is a very interesting statement in which Jesus actually gives his own rationale for his mission. There are a handful of other “I came” statements; these expressions are not to be missed because they are all descriptions of the effects of the Christ-event.

In Jesus’ wider Greco-Roman society, the word “ransom” (lytron) was used to denote a payment made to secure release from slavery or captivity. In the LXX, the verb occurs frequently in describing God’s redemption of his people from Egypt or from spiritual oppression. It is also the verb used for payments to preserve a life that is somehow forfeit such as that of the firstborn.

But the entire phrase is something else again: “to give his life as a ransom for many.” Where did this phrase come from? There are two schools of thought: one is that it comes from Isa 53, the Fourth Servant Song. In that citation, the Servant is said to “pour out his soul unto death” in behalf of others (Is 53:10-12).

The other possibility is that it comes from the tradition of the Maccabean martyrs, who gave their lives that the nation might live (4 Macc 17:21-22). You will not, for obvious reasons, run into this line of reasoning in Gospel Doctrine classes. Nevertheless, it may well be the more important, with the Servant Song hovering in the background for both Mark and the Maccabean heroes.

A Less Well-Know Effect: the Rending of the Veil

Another far more ambiguous effect of the Christ-event is found in the report of the rending of the veil of the temple at the death of Jesus. You may be familiar with the idea that this portended the return of Jesus to God, or the ability of all God’s people to approach him. This is broadly part of the argument in The Epistle of Paul to the Hebrews. The Synoptics are quite different and among the Synoptics, Mark is a bit unique.

First of all, in Luke the rending of the veil precedes the death of Jesus (Lk 23:45), while in Matthew (Mt 27:51) and Mark (Mk 15:38) it follows his death. In Matthew and Luke the torn veil is a prodigy. In Mark it may be something more. Focusing now on Mark’s account (Mk 15:37-39):

But Jesus cried with a loud voice and expired. And the veil in the temple was torn (schizō) in two from the top to the bottom. When the centurion who was standing opposite him saw how he expired, he said “Truly this man was the Son of God.”

The verb schizō is often used in connection with fabric. It denotes a rip that cannot be repaired and is quite appropriate when used to describe the rending of the temple veil. What makes it interesting is that this verb is also the word used to describe the parting of the heavens at the baptism of Jesus (Mk 1:10):

10 On coming up out of the water he saw the heavens being torn open *(schizō)*and the Spirit, like a pigeon, descending upon him.

The only difference between these two uses is that schizō is an aorist (English simple past) at the death of Jesus and a present participle at his baptism. This word appears nowhere else in Mark. It is never used in the LXX for the opening of heaven, indeed both Matthew and Luke follow the LXX in using the common anoigō, simply meaning “to open,” when they report the baptism of Jesus.

So what we have is this: at the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, the heavens were being ripped open. At the completion of his ministry, the veil of the temple was ripped completely in two. Neither the “fabric of heaven” nor that of the veil can be repaired.

Beyond the clear presence of inclusio, is there a connection? Mark never explains himself. What, precisely, was this supposed to convey?

Marginalia

Speculation

Previous Post

May 9, 2006

Whassup with that “one-third the hosts of heaven” stuff?

Next Post

May 18, 2006 The Effects of the Christ-Event: Wider Aspects of Justification

Recent Comments

7 Comments | Leave a Comment

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category 2013 Scriptures Administrative Apologetics Atonement Bible Book of Mormon Book Review BYU Doctrine Extra-Biblical Literature Family Feminism Guests History LDS Church History Leadership Marginalia Metaphysics Mormon Culture Mormon Studies Personal Issues Political Philosophy Politics Scripture Sexuality Speculation Spotlights Studying Religion Ten Tidbits The Tenure Track Theology Tips on Applying Series Tips on Being an Independent Scholar Uncategorized

Select a Month June 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 July 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz