05_Eubank_247_268 15/07/14 12:19 Pagina 249 DYING WITH POWER 249 earthquake and “the things that happened” (ta. geno,mena) 5. In both Mark and Matthew the temple curtain rips, but Mark gives no in- dication that the centurion could see this, and if he was at all aware of the topography of Jerusalem he would have known that the centurion could not have seen it. Indeed, as noted above, Mark explicitly states that the centurion made his remark upon seeing Jesus expire. Matthew resolves this ambiguity by adding the words to.n seismo.n kai. ta. geno,mena and by having those who were with the centurion join him in his confession; the centurion saw not simply a death but an earthquake and other remarkable things, all of which led him and the other soldiers to confess that Jesus was the son of God. Matthew’s version of the “confession” itself changes ui`o.j qeou/ to qeou/ ui`όj, increasing the emphasis on God. Moreover, unlike the Markan version, there can be no doubt that the confession is sincere, for Matthew informs us that it was spoken in great fear (evfobh,qhsan sfo,dra) 6. Interestingly, Luke’s redaction of Mark 15,39 matches Matthew’s point by point. Like Matthew, Luke does away with Mark’s odd ra- tionale for the centurion’s remark, making “what had happened” (to. geno,menon) the impetus for his confession. Similarly, just as Matthew increased the objective grandeur of Jesus’ death by de- picting those who were with the centurion joining him in his con- fession, Luke mentions that all the crowds who had gathered to see Jesus die returned home in sorrow, beating their breasts (Luke 23,48). Luke also eliminates the ambiguous expression ui`o.j qeou/, replacing it with di,kaioj, and, like Matthew, clarifies the intent of the centurion’s remark by explaining that the centurion “glorified God saying, ‘Truly this man was just’” 7. The Gospel of Peter shows some of the same concerns as Matthew and Luke but offers a much more radical solution. To be sure, we cannot be certain that the Gospel of Peter was interpreting Mark at all 8. Nevertheless, it is worth noting that, like Matthew 5 B D 33 pc have the present tense ta. gino,mena. 6 This argument presumes Markan priority, but it does not depend on it. If one were to argue that Mark used Matthew as a source it would make Mark’s ambiguities even more striking. 7 This forms the climax of the emphasis on Jesus’ innocence throughout the Lukan passion narrative. See 23,4.14-15.22.41. 8 Note, however, that Peter, like Mark, uses the Latin kenturi,wn rather than e`kato,ntarcoj like Matthew and Luke. Also, the centurion’s confession