Mark 16 and the silence of the women: The disciples redeemed?
Posted: Mon Jun 04, 2018 1:40 am
I just had an idea concerning the woman at the tomb and the reason they don't convey the message they're told. Firstly, my theory is based on the premise that it's a literary device, something put in there by Mark for some specific reason. I've always wondered why interpreters and preachers and biblical historians often talk about this scene as if it involved an historical problem or some kind of mystery, i.e. if the women "didn't say anything to anyone", then how could the Word get out and Christianity begin? But that is not a very close reading of the text at all.
Because the message that the women fail to convey, Jesus has of course already conveyed himself way before his crucifixion, as we know, when he says in 14:28: "After I am raised up, I will go before you to Galilee" (14:28). So the disciples have already been told the very message, that the angel in the tomb asks the women to tell them.
Indeed, the reader is reminded of this very fact by the angel himself, when he says to the women:
So there is no historical problem or narratological problem in that the women fail to convey the message, because the message they fail to convey is not a message as such, but merely a confirmation of a message they have already been given. So with the silence of the women it is up to the disciples to remember that Jesus had told them and to have faith that it is true, that Jesus has indeed risen like he said. And that is what I suggest Mark means with this ending and the silence of the women. That the disicples, after all, in the end, succeed.
The term used, "go before", προαγω, implies that they will subsequently follow. Which is of course an all-important concept in gMark. So the question Mark raises with the silence of the women is: Will the disiples "follow", now that they have realised what the gospel message is, i.e. a message that also concerns suffering, a suffering messiah? So if they still choose to go to Galilee despite the fact that their messiah has just been killed, then yes, they are true 'followers'. They now recognize the gospel as a message of suffering, and they still "follow". Is this what the silence of the women is all about?
Because the message that the women fail to convey, Jesus has of course already conveyed himself way before his crucifixion, as we know, when he says in 14:28: "After I am raised up, I will go before you to Galilee" (14:28). So the disciples have already been told the very message, that the angel in the tomb asks the women to tell them.
Indeed, the reader is reminded of this very fact by the angel himself, when he says to the women:
But go and tell to his disciples and to Peter: 'He will go before you to Galilee, you are going to see him there, like he told you'.
So there is no historical problem or narratological problem in that the women fail to convey the message, because the message they fail to convey is not a message as such, but merely a confirmation of a message they have already been given. So with the silence of the women it is up to the disciples to remember that Jesus had told them and to have faith that it is true, that Jesus has indeed risen like he said. And that is what I suggest Mark means with this ending and the silence of the women. That the disicples, after all, in the end, succeed.
The term used, "go before", προαγω, implies that they will subsequently follow. Which is of course an all-important concept in gMark. So the question Mark raises with the silence of the women is: Will the disiples "follow", now that they have realised what the gospel message is, i.e. a message that also concerns suffering, a suffering messiah? So if they still choose to go to Galilee despite the fact that their messiah has just been killed, then yes, they are true 'followers'. They now recognize the gospel as a message of suffering, and they still "follow". Is this what the silence of the women is all about?