166 GEERT VAN OYEN Mark, are meant to give life and not to destroy it: “those who lose their life for my sake, and for the sake of the gospel, will save it”. The order of the two clauses is very important. The tension between pre-paschal and post-paschal meaning created by this addition is minimal. The paradox expresses “une structure fondamentale de la foi tant avant qu’après Pâques” 15. Such an interpretation is only possible within a more fundamental perspective on the theme of resurrection in the gospel of Mark. In fact, every saying and every act of Jesus expresses the idea of the paradox of the passion and the resurrection (cf. below), which “infiltrates” the whole gospel. With regard to the interpretation of the paradox, it is almost impossible to draw a line between the level of the “historical Jesus” and the “ resurrected Jesus”. In this regard, it is interesting that most commentators now rightly notice that the audience is certainly broader than the group of the disciples 16. And the introductory formula ov gar ean . . . , ov dà an. . . transcends the story level and ™ ù ßù ™ û appeals to the reader 17. I am not sure one has to “solve” the paradox, for example by understanding the word “life” in a double way, and interpreting it the first time as (losing) a “physical” life and the second time as (saving) a “spiritual” life, or the first time as (losing one’s) “ earthly ” or “present” life and the second time as (saving one’s) “ eternal ” or “future” life. I would prefer to leave the paradox as it stands, mysterious and not explicable by one single opposition. It is clear that the double paradox in both half-verses shows there is a clash of two perspectives, as presented in the untranslatable expression preceding this section: thinking ta toy ueoy or ta twn ù ˜ ˜ ù˜ anurwpwn (8,33). It is also clear that at the crossroads of these two ß ¥ perspectives stands Jesus with his life, death and resurrection 18. It is FOCANT, Marc, 330. 15 FOCANT, Marc, 326: “... la foule ne doit pas être limitée au seul peuple 16 d’Israël, mais inclure des païens. C’est donc tout homme indépendamment de ses origines ethniques qui est visé par cette convocation de Jésus et ses sentences sur la condition du disciple”. FOWLER, Let the Reader Understand, 188-189. 17 For the paradoxes in Mark 8, 9 and 10 as a major example of the 18 “ standards of judgment for human behavior”, see D. RHOADS, “Losing Life for Others in the Face of Death: Mark’s Standards of Judgment”, Interpr 47 (1993) 258-269 ; = ID., Reading Mark Engaging the Gospel (Minneapolis 2004) 44-62. The idea is taken up by among others F.J. MATERA, New Testament Ethics. The