Hostname: page-component-6898cfcb55-zsp5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-11T19:39:56.495Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Mark – Interpreter of Paul

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 October 2000

JOEL MARCUS
JOEL MARCUS
Affiliation:
Boston University School of Theology, 745 Commonwealth Avenue, Boston, MA 02215, USA
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.

Claiming that Mark is a Paulinist does not require that he agree with Paul about everything, and plausible reasons can be advanced for a later Paulinist wanting to write the story of the earthly Jesus. Martin Werner's assertion that the agreements between Mark and Paul reflect general early Christian viewpoints is not valid with regard to the theology of the cross, which was a controversial Pauline emphasis and a stress that the later Gospels attenuated in editing Mark. Contrary to Werner, Mark and Paul agree in ascribing Jesus' death to a combination of human and demonic opponents.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
New Testament Studies , Volume 46 , Issue 4 , October 2000, pp. 473 - 487
Copyright
© 2000 Cambridge University Press

Footnotes

The title, of course, plays upon Papias's famous description of Mark as the interpreter of Peter (Eusebius, E.H. 3.39.15). There may be something to the suggestion of Rudolf Pesch, Das Markusevangelium (HTKNT 2; Freiburg: Herder, 1976) 1.8–9, that Papias's description, like the pseudonymous ascription of 1 Peter to Peter, is an attempt to reconcile the Pauline and Petrine wings of the church by attributing to Peter a work that highlights Pauline theology.