236 MARK JENNINGS the destruction of the temple and transformed the motif entirely to point to a spiritual dwelling place. The argument is strengthened when we consider the common elements we have already observed between John 14,1-3 and Mark 13,24-27. However, the language and emphasis of the two evangelists are too different to make a strong case. * * * Indeed, taken separately the pericopes would provide very flimsy evidence of anything, as apparent textual similarities (for instance in the prediction of Peter’s denial) could be explained in other ways. My thesis rests on the cumulative force of common motifs in all the sections outlined above. This, together with evi- dence of a possible reversal of the apocalyptic tendencies of Mark executed by John, provides the basis of the claim that John knew and used Mark. No more definitive statement can be made about what is, after all, an ancient bone of contention. If John knew Mark as theorised here and “flipped” the tradition to reverse the direction of Markan eschatology — from the “not yet” to the “already” — this would be a fascinating glimpse into the way a community knew and made use of the Jesus tradition. Inevitably, this raises possibilities for how believing communities may use the tradition today. Murdoch University Mark JENNINGS Australia SUMMARY 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 knowl- edge of Mark. © Gregorian Biblical Press 2013 - Tutti i diritti riservati