Mark Jennings, «The Fourth Gospel’s Reversal of Mark in John 13,31‒14,3», Vol. 94 (2013) 210-236
I argue that the author/s of the Fourth Gospel knew Mark, based on the reversal of certain Markan themes found in John. No attempt is made here to suggest the kind of literary dependence which is the basis of the Synoptic problem. Rather, my thesis is that the author/s of John may have used Mark from memory, writing deliberately to reverse the apocalyptic tendencies found in the Second Gospel. Isolated incidents of this possible reversal demonstrate little, but this paper proposes that the cumulative force of many such reversals supports the thesis of John's possible knowledge of Mark.
The Fourth Gospel’s Reversal of Mark in John 13,31‒14,3
Questions regarding the Fourth Gospel’s relationship with the
Synoptic tradition are ancient and contentious. Over the history of
biblical scholarship, the case has been made that John 1 wrote to
supplement the Synoptic tradition (B.W. Bacon, B.H. Streeter), to
displace it (Hans Windisch), or was simply unaware of it (Percival
Gardner-Smith, C.H. Dodd) 2. Since Gardner-Smith, the majority
view has probably been the latter — John had no knowledge of the
Synoptic Gospels.
More recently, Ian Mackay has made the argument that John is
likely to have known and “performed†Mark 3. The fourth evangelist
then composed his gospel utilising this comprehensive knowledge.
Obviously, Mackay is not advocating direct literary dependence as
is evident in the relations between the Synoptic gospels. On the con-
trary, if John knew Mark, he used the tradition loosely, perhaps writ-
ing from memory.
If Mackay’s thesis is held to be plausible, the significant textual
and theological differences between John and Mark remain intrigu-
ing. On the basis of a critical exegesis of John 13,31-43 and com-
parable passages in Mark, this paper analyses the significance of
the many similarities and differences between the two works. Sim-
ilarities do not strongly support the hypothesis that John knew
Mark, as they are probably better explained by elements of a com-
mon tradition. However, this paper demonstrates that significant
Johannine differences function to reverse several key Markan
themes. The reversal observed here cautiously supports the view
that John was familiar with Mark and composed his Gospel in order
to reverse the second evangelist’s apocalyptic themes, in order to
provide new answers to issues such as the delay of the Parousia and
the need to persevere in suffering.
In keeping with tradition, I have usually referred to the author of the Second
1
and Fourth Gospels as ‘Mark’ and ‘John’ respectively, and used the male pronoun.
D.M. SMITH, John Among the Gospels (Columbia, SC 2001) 1-37.
2
I.D. MACKAY, John’s Relationship with Mark. An Analysis of John 6 in
3
the Light of Mark 6-8 (WUNT II 102; Tübingen 2004).
BIBLICA 94.2 (2013) 210-236
© Gregorian Biblical Press 2013 - Tutti i diritti riservati
FOLLOW US