From the little I know, I would say that Mark is the NT-author who has a real and deep interest in the OT. We find in him no naive instrumentalization or a NT-typical OT-argument, which is wrong (as in Matthew or Paul). He wrote his gospel with many references to the OT and has deeply rooted it in these beliefs. He may have had a special view of the OT and his understanding may have been singular. But for me there is no doubt that the Septuagint was in fact his “holy” book. I am inclined to say that for Mark a “good” Christian faith must be based on a “good” Jewish faith (A different question is what Mark meant by good.) Perhaps this “good” Jewish faith is symbolized by the good “earth” (γῆ – ge) in the parable of the sower (Mark 4:8,20), the same earth (γῆ – ge) on which the Gentiles should sit down during the feeding of the 4000 (Mark 8:6).Ulan wrote:Sure. Although I'm certain that we will stay uncertain even after weighing the pros and cons. If it were that easy, we wouldn't have a book about Mark come out every few years. That's what I meant when I said that I have the feeling that "Mark" was a bit too clever for himself.Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote:[It could be an interesting thread to weigh the pros and cons. I am very uncertain
Or let's put a bit more flesh to these bones:
- I am relatively certain that the temple is the central motif of Mark's gospel and that he meant the spiritual destruction of the temple when God leaves this temple and the Jews behind to find a new home among the gentiles, which obviously withdraws his protection from Jerusalem.
- I am less sure that the gospel really refers to what happened in 70. A single prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem doesn't make a convincing case, as often as that had already happened before. Scenes like that with the Gerasene demoniac let me think more of the mid to late 60s as likely date of writing.
It seems to me that a careful reading of the story of the fig tree raises some questions about the traditional understanding. First, there are some very suspicious comments (Mark 11:14 “And his disciples heard him say it.”, Mark 11:20 “they saw the fig tree withered from the roots”, Mark 14:21 “Peter remembered”). It seems that it is not sure, that Jesus has “cursed” the fig tree. This is just a claim of Peter and the interpretation is possible, that only the disciples “saw” the tree withered. Jesus answers: “Have faith in God” and in Mark 13:28 the summer is near “Now learn this lesson from the fig tree: As soon as its twigs get tender and its leaves come out ...” Again there is the possibility that Mark only contradicts early Christian assertions (represented in the person of Peter.)
The opponents in the parable of the tenants are only the “chief priests, the teachers of the law and the elders”, so no probs for the jews.
The young man in the tomb made a very interesting claim: “He is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him, just as he told you.” The problem is that Jesus did not say this. In Mark 14:28 he only said “But after I have risen, I will go ahead of you into Galilee.” It is not a statement that they will see him. I am firmly in the belief that Mark is trying to say something here.
. I could think of several possibilities, but all of those don't have much to do with the destruction of the temple.
.