176 GEERT VAN OYEN themes of the cross and resurrection, they are also actualizations of that theme in the concrete life of Jesus’ followers. II. Paradox as criterion and the vulnerable authority of the narrator We have already mentioned how the paradoxical teaching of Jesus in the three paradoxes functions as a standard of judgment for the reader. The reader finds a criterion to judge the characters in the gospel, their actions and thoughts and their conflicts. It may sound a little bit awkward, but the first character who falls under the judgment of the paradoxes is Jesus himself 44. As a matter of fact, the challenge here is to see if the narrator has successfully presented Jesus as a trustworthy character, i.e. as a person whose words and deeds are consistent. Does the reader have the impression that Jesus serves, that he is the last one and the slave of all, that he loses his life ? The answer is positive. In Markan exegesis it has always been emphasized that this is especially the case when the reader reaches the passion story and sees how the “promises” leading to Jesus’ death are “fulfilled” in the story. As the second part of the gospel is focused on the theme of the passion, it is obvious that in this part we will find the climax of Jesus’ own experience of the verbal paradoxes. Indeed, it is clear that Jesus’ passion is presented as a kind of fulfillment of one half of the paradoxes: losing one’s life, being last, servant of all. Biblical scholars are familiar with seeing this one aspect of the paradox in Mark’s gospel (the famous theologia crucis, sometimes seen as a correction of the theologia gloriae). But what about the tension in the paradox, created by the other half? What about “he will save his life”, “he will be great”, “ he will be first”? We have seen that in the three paradoxes these first parts are each time expressed in a clause with the form of eı ¶ tiv — ov an uelq 45, but that the exact content of these intentions is ©û ¥ We will limit ourselves here to the protagonist Jesus, but it might be clear 44 that in the end, the criterion proposed by Jesus leads to conflict with several groups in the gospel. See (for instance) J.D. KINGSBURY, Conflict in Mark. Jesus, Authorities, Disciples (Minneapolis, MN 1989). On the significance of the paradoxes for the first half of the gospel, see below (3 c). LAMBRECHT, “Power as Service”, 57, mentions a shift from the most 45 primitive version of the saying in which Jesus addresses his words to people