A Rejoinder to Joel F. Williams's "Is Mark's Gospel an Apology for the Cross?"

Against Joel Williams's critique, this rejoinder argues for a Markan Christology of divine strength in word and deed to counteract the shame of Jesus' crucifixion, thus to convert unbelievers, not a Christology of weakly human suffering designed to brace believers for the endurance of pers...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Gundry, Robert Horton 1932- (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: Eisenbrauns 2002
In: Bulletin for biblical research
Year: 2002, Volume: 12, Issue: 1, Pages: 123-139
Online Access: Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Parallel Edition:Non-electronic
Description
Summary:Against Joel Williams's critique, this rejoinder argues for a Markan Christology of divine strength in word and deed to counteract the shame of Jesus' crucifixion, thus to convert unbelievers, not a Christology of weakly human suffering designed to brace believers for the endurance of persecution. In his Gospel, Mark included material seemingly antithetical to such an apologetic, evangelistic aim because he felt obliged to write up everything he had heard Peter say about Jesus' ministry (so John the Elder). At the same time Mark tweaked this very material in ways that allied it to the massive amount of power-material (much underplayed by Williams) in service of the apologetic, evangelistic aim. Even Mark's passion narrative exhibits such tweaking, for example, in emphases on the fulfillments of Jesus' various predictions, on Jesus' dying with a burst of strength, and on the shortness of time he hung on a cross. This interpretation of Mark's text arose out of a close reading, not out of a presupposition.
ISSN:2576-0998
Contains:Enthalten in: Bulletin for biblical research
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.2307/26422343