I believe that in gMark Jesus
is of physical (or fleshly) Davidic descent. I wouldn't use the term 'physical' though, because I think the early Christian understanding of God's spirit was as a physical phenomenon, like for example the stoic concept of spirit. A fine, incorruptible subtance found up in the heavens, akin to breath and wind etc., and very different from the corruptible, earthly flesh down here.
And I think everything makes best sense if Mark considered Jesus to be of Davidic descent. Except: It is only in fleshly form that Jesus is a descendant of David. Which means that he is the Davidic messiah as long as he is in the flesh, but after his death and resurrection his body has changed into a spiritual incorruptible, heavenly body, like angels, and then he is no longer a descendant of David. Instead he is now just a descendant of God. According to Mark, I think, the whole concept of lineage and family as we normally know it is abolished with the resurrection because of the change of the human body from fleshly to spiritual. Mark even elaborates explicitly on this in 12:18-27 (the Saducees and the resurrection).
I believe we shall understand it along with another early Christian, Paul, especially in Romans. Paul argues that when a human being converts and is baptized he takes part in the same
change of existence from fleshly to spiritual which happened with Jesus at his death and resurrection (Rom 6-8). This is the change of the human bodies that will happen fully at the general resurrection after judgement day, when God will have his perfect servant eternally, but it can already happen beforehand, now, within the fleshly bodies of humans.
Now, for Paul it is very important that just like there will happen a physical change away from a fleshly existence, so will the special election of Israel also be cancelled, and God’s perfect, chosen servant to serve him eternally in the Kingdom of God is therefore not dependant upon Israelite lineage. Instead one’s lineage will be to God, and everyone will be “children of God” or indeed “sons of God” (Rom 8:14-17), and therefore also brothers of Jesus. So even though the Jews, i.e. “Israel”, still does have some special place in salvation history, according to Paul, it no longer matters if you’re a Jew. Only the new inner, spiritual 'family' relations matter.
For Paul this is extremely important to explain, I think, because one of his main purposes of the letter is to unite the communities of Rome before his arrival, and in my reading of the letter there is perhaps a conflict where a Jewish Christian minority is being treated with contempt by the larger Gentile Christian majority (the addressees of the letter). So for once Paul actually defends Jewish Christians, underscoring that Jewish Christians also have an equal place in the Christian community, 'in Christ'.
In any case his letter is all about the equality which is 'in Christ' between all humans before God, and for this very reason he also frames his fundamental christology right from the beginning of his letter, in Rom 1:3-4, in order to help support and carry the great argument that in baptism all family lineage has changed and fleshly descent has vanished, so we are all now sons of God instead of merely sons of our fleshly parents - just like Jesus. So this is most likely not a traditional formula, but more likely Paul’s own words, shaped meticulously and perfectly to set up the christological foundation of the main argument of his letter:
Rom 1:3-4:
... concerning His son, who came to be from the seed of David according to the flesh,
set apart by power as son of God according to the spirit of holiness from the resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ, our Lord
This change away from fleshly existence which happened to Jesus and also happens to all (believing) human beings at the resurrection (and partly at baptism) when they “are like angels in heaven”, Mark 12:25, also means a change of covenant. Because the covenant with Israel was based on the fleshly lineage of Jacob. So I think Mark with his story says that when this Davidic Jewish messiah died, the “messiah according to the flesh” as Paul puts is (Rom 9:5), the “king of the Jews” (Mark 15:26), the “king of Israel” (Mark 15:32), so does Israel's covenant die with him. (Also, his death is at the same time the cultic sacrifice that constitutes the new covenant.)
So what, then, is the answer to the question in 12:37: David himself calls him Lord, so how can he be his son?
Of course: He was his son according to the flesh, but he is his lord as the spiritual messiah, i.e. the one who is resurrected and sitting at the right hand of God, which would be the messiah that David is talking about in this Psalm 110. (The exaltation of Jesus to his heavenly (non-fleshly) form hadn't happened at the time of David, so therefore it was a prophetic utterance, i.e. David "spoke in the holy spirit".)
One detail is apparantly always overlooked in the Bartimaeus story, which is probably important (I have never seen a commentator deal with this): The cry of Bartimaeus "have mercy on me" is found as a slogan in the Book of Psalms. Now, this has been pointed out by several commentators. But: this particular slogan, or prayer, is specifically from the
Davidic psalms, the very psalms in which David "spoke by the holy spirit" according to Mark (12:36). Which means that
Bartimaeus is de facto mimicking David's prayer from Psalms: "Lord, have mercy on me". Only, instead of "Lord" he says "Son of David". What is going on here? "David himself calls him Lord, so how can he be his son?", Jesus asks in 12:37. In some way, Bartimaeus is David calling for salvation from his Lord, which is in fact his own son: "Son of David, have mercy on me!"
Ben C. Smith wrote: ↑Sun Nov 12, 2017 1:39 pm
I gave the two following options in the OP (plus another couple which do not seem relevant here):
- In Mark, Jesus is not of physical Davidic descent.
- In Mark, Jesus is of physical Davidic descent, but he is also much more than that (Lord, for example), and the "much more" is the more important bit.
So I think option two. He is of physical Davidic descent, or fleshly. And when his flesh dies, so does his Davidic descent, inevitably. And this is a central element, in that there is the other side to it. The messiah turned out to have to modes of existence, one fleshly, Davidic messiah, son of David, and one spiritual Godly messiah, son of God. Just like any Christian is son of his fleshly father as well as son of God, crying “Abba! Father!” (Rom 8:15).
But I also think that the Bartimaeus story has even more to it, with the 'son of David' title also referring cryptically to the wise temple builder king Solomon (cf. Mark 10:36f, 51; 1 Kings 3:5, 9), the original son of David who was also the son of God (2 Sam 7:13-14).