Eve-Marie Becker, «Mk 1:1 and the Debate on a 'Markan Prologue'» filologia-neotestamentaria, Vol. 22 (2009) 91-106 page 101

Eve-Marie Becker, «Mk 1:1 and the Debate on a 'Markan Prologue'», Vol. 22 (2009) 91-106

On the basis of observations to the syntactical structure and the literary style of Mk 1:1-15 as well as to the literary genre of the Markan Gospel, this paper questions those concepts of subdividing Mk 1 according to which Mk 1:1-13/15 is classified as a 'Markan prologue'. It is argued instead, that already Mk 1:4 opens up the Gospel narration and that only Mk 1:1-3 has to be regarded as a literary unity: Mk 1:1-3, however, is in no case part of a 'Markan prologue' or a 'prologue' in itself. These verses are rather more to be understood as a prooemium to the overall prose-text of the Gospel narrative, consisting of a 'Buchüberschrift'/title (1:1) and an opening introductory close (1:2-3).

TAGS

Prologue of Mark

Page 101/106
«
‹
101
102
103
104
105
106
›

Mk 1:1 and the debate on a ‘Markan prologue’ 101 What precisely is meant in 1:1 by the temporal expression aörxhß? Does it mean 1. the literary beginning of the Gospel narration and/or 2. the ‘historical’ beginnings of the history of events that will be nar- rated in the Gospel story (cf. also Acts 10:37) and/or 3. the kerygmatical beginnings of the Gospel proclamation (cf. also Phil 4:15: eön aörxh#q touq euöaggelißou)? 4. Or should aörxhß simply be understood as a topical expression that refers to the ‘origins’ and ‘beginnings’ (Lk 1:2; Joh 1:1; 1 Joh 1:1-4) anyway? In my perspective aörxhß remains polyvalent. Because of this polyva- lence, Mk 1:1 has to be considered as an unique Markan construction62. (b) Mk 1:1 in the frame of Mk 1:1-3 Mk 1:1 is followed by a mixed quotation (1:2b, 3), which is again unique in the Markan Gospel. The mixed quotation is introduced by an opening clause (1:2a). And – again – this opening clause is in regard to its structure unique for Mark63. Those elements of uniqueness certainly point to a redactional hand. Mk 1:2a contains a reference to the prophet Isaiah. The phenomenon of mixed quotations (Mk 1:2b, 3, cf.: Ex 23:20; Mal 3:1; Ies 40:3) also oc- curs e.g. in Mt 2:5f. The question about the precise origin of the traditions behind Mk 1:2b, 3 is difficult to answer64 (cf. Mk 1:2a/b par. Q 7:27 [= Lk 7:27/Mt 11:10]65; Ex 23:20 and Mal 3:1; cf. Mk 1:2a, 3 parr. Lk 3:4; Mt 3:3; Ies 40:3): It could be the case that Mk 1:2b is a so-called double-tradition (‘Doppelüberlieferung’)66 to Q 7:27, while Mk 1:3 goes back to a complex 62 Cf. Becker, Markus-Evangelium, 110: „Mk 1,1 benennt also den Buchanfang, leitet den zeitlichen Anfang der Ereignisgeschichte ein und benennt eine mit der Verkündigung des euöaggeßlion verbundene zentrale Thematik des Markus-Evangeliums”. – Concerning the polyvalence of such an expression cf. e.g. also Philo, De opificio mundi I:3 where Philo defines the book of Genesis as an aörxhß – both in a literary viz. narratological as well as in a historical sense. 63 Cf. the conjecture of K. Lachmann. – Other quotations from LXX, such as e.g.: Is 6:9 in Mk 4:12, Jer 5:21 in Mk 8:18 or Dan 11:31/12:11 in Mk 13:14 do not have a reference to LXX-writings explicitly. In Mk 7:6-7, 7:10, 9:11, 10:4ff., 12:19, 26 we find references to Iesaiah and Moses, or to David (Mk 12:36), but not in a regular opening clause for a quota- tion, as we find it in Mk 1:2a. In Mk 11:17 and 14:27 we just find geßgraptai as an opening element. In Mk 12:10 we just find: th?n grafh?n taußthn aöneßgnvte. 64 Concerning the discussion cf. Becker, Markus-Evangelium, 240-246. 65 Quoted according to: P. Hoffmann/C. Heil (Hg.), Die Spruchquelle Q. Studienaus- gabe Griechisch und Deutsch (Darmstadt 2002) 48. Cf. in comparison: J. M. Robinson/P. Hoffmann/J. S. Kloppenborg (Ed.), The Critical Edition of Q (Hermeneia S.; Minneapolis/ Leuven 2000) 134f. 66 Cf. Becker, Markus-Evangelium, 242 with reference to R. Laufen, Die Doppelüberlie- ferungen der Logienquelle und des Markusevangeliums (BBB 54; Königstein/Bonn 1980) 83.