Markan Christology and the Omission Of υἱοῦ θεοῦ in Mark 1:1 47 lation, Today’s New international Version, has omitted the title “Son of God” from Mk. 1:117. (only the New World Translation previously). The new perspective by which I will approach this problem is to argue that Markan Christology demands that the title “Son of God” be included in the prologue. If a reference to Jesus as “Christ” were the only designation in Mk. 1:1, then the reader would expect the title “Messiah” to express Mark’s intended theology of the person of Jesus. However, I will argue that the lone title “Christ” is insufficient Christology for Mark. I will con- centrate on this main thesis and then conclude with additional arguments for the inclusion of this phrase from the external evidence as well as a justification for my thesis that the omission in a few manuscripts is acci- dental through periblepsis (an “eye-skip”) occasioned by homoioteleuton. The Turning Point of Mark’s Gospel? To merely entitle Jesus “the Christ” is an insufficient declaration for Mark. In this Christological section I will substantiate this claim by first challenging the assertion that Peter’s confession of Jesus’ Messiahship (8:27-30) is the turning point of the Gospel of Mark, then by demonstra- ting from the context that an additional title like “suffering Son of Man” or “Son of God” is necessary to adequately capture Mark’s Christology, and finally by arguing that Matthew and John have similarly positioned crucial Christological titles in the prologues of their gospels. Frequently Peter’s confession in 8:27-30 is posited as the turning point of the gospel so that the term “Messiah” captures the heart of Markan Christology18. The central arguments call attention to a change of geo- graphy, an alteration in genre from miracle stories to Jesus’ teaching, the equal division of the text around this event, and a possible chiastic structure, but each of these arguments can be countered. Peter proclaims his confession at Caesarea Philippi (8:27-30), the nor- thernmost point reached by Jesus in the gospels, and then immediately Less well-known editions have omitted “Son of God” at Mk.1:1: The New World 17 Translation; The Twentieth Century New Testament (Chicago: Moody Press 1961; original 1904); The Complete Gospels: Annotated Scholars Version (ed. Robert J. Miller; Polebridge Press 1992); and the 1946 edition of the RSV New Testament, although “Son of God” was included in the full Bible of 1952. John Paul Heil, The Gospel of Mark as Model for Action: A Reader- Response Com- 18 mentary (Mahwah, N.J: Paulist 1992) 179 for instance, claims that in Peter’s confession “Je- sus has finally managed to bring his ‘deaf’, ‘mute’, (7:31-37) and ‘blind’ (8:22-26) disciples to ‘see’, ‘hear’, and ‘speak’ his true identity (8:29).”