Ben C. Smith wrote: ↑Sat Nov 11, 2017 7:42 am
But what about Mark? No genealogy is given, and the only statements related to Davidic descent in the gospel can be taken in more than one way.
What do you think? Did Mark regard Jesus as a physical descendant of David, as a spiritual descendant of David, as both, or as neither?
Ben.
Bernard Muller wrote: ↑Fri Nov 17, 2017 3:52 pm
I think there is a pattern: "Mark" seemed to concede to Jewish Christian beliefs, and then have them crushed;
The 3 examples:
... 3) The blind beggar calls repeatedly Jesus, son of David, with no narrated objection from Jesus but later the psalm episode denies it ...
Yes (well, sort of)
Ben C. Smith wrote: ↑Sun Nov 19, 2017 9:27 am
Okay, Bernard ... The thing is, I agree with you that Mark 12.35-37 is probably against Jesus being David's son ...
Ben C. Smith wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2017 10:19 am
... what about just plain old fashioned good storytelling techniques? ...
Yes.
I think the conundrum of the “son-of David question” can be clarified by interpreting the relevant passages in terms of storytelling.
Like many good storytellers, the author of gMark set-up expectations for both the characters in his story, and for his readers. This set the stage for a dramatic reversal --- the dashing of those expectations exposing a deeper truth.
Here are the most relevant passages in the order presented in Mark’s story (using the NASB for no particular reason) ---
... And as He was leaving Jericho with His disciples and a large crowd, a blind beggar named Bartimaeus, the son of Timaeus, was sitting by the road. When he heard that it was Jesus the Nazarene, he began to cry out and say, “Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!” Many were sternly telling him to be quiet, but he kept crying out all the more, “Son of David, have mercy on me!” And Jesus stopped and said, “Call him here.” So they called the blind man, saying to him, “Take courage, stand up! He is calling for you.” Throwing aside his cloak, he jumped up and came to Jesus. And answering him, Jesus said, “What do you want Me to do for you?” And the blind man said to Him, “Rabboni, I want to regain my sight!” And Jesus said to him, “Go; your faith has made you well.” Immediately he regained his sight and began following Him on the road. (Mark 10:46-52)
Those who went in front and those who followed were shouting:
“Hosanna!
BLESSED IS HE WHO COMES IN THE NAME OF THE LORD;
Blessed is the coming kingdom of our father David;
Hosanna in the highest!”
Jesus entered Jerusalem and came into the temple; and after looking around at everything, He left for Bethany with the twelve, since it was already late. (Mark:11:9-11)
The author of gMark set the expectations of the many here. A blind man expecting a “son-of-David” and an expectant crowd hoping for the establishment of a kingdom of David --- a political kingdom to expel the Romans and establish a kingdom of God on earth.
And Jesus began to say, as He taught in the temple, “How is it that the scribes say that the Christ is the son of David?
“David himself said in the Holy Spirit,
‘THE LORD SAID TO MY LORD,
“SIT AT MY RIGHT HAND,
UNTIL I PUT YOUR ENEMIES BENEATH YOUR FEET.”’
“David himself calls Him ‘Lord’; so in what sense is He his son?” And the large crowd enjoyed listening to Him. In His teaching He was saying: “Beware of the scribes who like to walk around in long robes, and like respectful greetings in the market places, and chief seats in the synagogues and places of honor at banquets, who devour widows’ houses, and for appearance’s sake offer long prayers; these will receive greater condemnation.” (Mark 12:35-40)
I think the plain meaning of the text is the intended meaning here.
Jesus himself dashed the expectations --- the scribes are wrong --- he is not the expected Davidic messiah. Mark’s Jesus Christ is a different kind of anointed savior --- a different kind of redeemer.
And I don’t think the author of Mark broke ranks with Paul here, unless of course one is willing to accept the funny-business of the early catholics in the first and 15th chapter of Romans, and with 2 Timothy.