The Deity of Christ in the Gospel of Mark
1. Challenge(s):
a. The Gospel of Mark does not teach the deity of Christ.
· One author has written: “Mark makes no attempt to suggest, imply, or hint that Jesus is anyone other than the human Messiah…”[1]
b. Only later does the Gospel of John explicitly teach the deity of Christ (John 1.1; 20.28; etc.)
· Sometimes this is claimed to be a result of an evolutionary or legendary development.
c. Therefore we have different versions of Christology in the early church.
d. Liberal theologians and even Islamic teachers will point to this to confirm their views.
2. Answering the challenge
a. Different Gospels have different emphases and they articulate their view of Christ in different ways.
b. We can agree that the Gospel of John more clearly and explicitly teaches the deity of Christ.
c. There is no need to assume evolutionary development.
· High Christology (i.e., the deity of Christ) is found in the earliest literature of the New Testament—Paul’s epistles…
· And Mark knew and traveled with Paul: Acts 13.5, 13; 15.37, 39; Philemon 24; Colossians 4.10; 2 Timothy 4.11
d. There are a number of significant texts in Mark where it can said that Mark suggests and implies that Jesus is God.
3. Mark 1.2-3[2]--Old Testament quotations (Malachi 3.1 and Isaiah 40.3) applied to Jesus
a. Malachi 3.1
· Original context: God (Yahweh) himself is the one who is coming
· “In order to make this point even more clearly, Mark offers a messianic interpretation of the verse. Mal 3:1 originally read ‘prepare the way before me,’ but Mark changes the phrase to ‘who will prepare yourway.’ But doing this, Mark introduces a thirdperson into the OT citation. Originally the verse spoke of God (who is coming) and the messenger (who is preparing the way). Now, with Mark’s adjustment, the text speaks of God, the messenger, and the one who is coming in God’s place. And that one who is coming [in] God’s place is none other than Jesus.”[3]
b. Isaiah 40.3
· “Notice again that in the original context of Is 40:3, it is the LORD who is coming. And Mark applies this verse to Jesus. Moreover, notice that Mark offers another Christological change to his citation. Originally, Is 40:3 read ‘make straight…a highway for our God’ but Mark changes it to ‘make his paths straight.’ Once again, Mark uses this little textual change to show that the coming of Yahweh, promised in Is 40:3, will be fulfilled by another coming in God’s place. And that person is Jesus. In the end, Mark’s use of these OT passages is rather stunning. Rather than seeing Jesus as merely human, Mark wastes no time presenting Jesus as the fulfillment of Yahweh’s promise to come visit his people. Thus, for Mark, Jesus is God.”[4]
c. Commentators
· “Christologically speaking, the striking identification of Jesus (1:1) with Yahweh’s coming (1:2-3) can hardly be missed (see Horbury 1998: 78-83). Key here, especially given present debates concerning the influence of exalted mediatorial angelic or patriarchal figures on NT Christology, is that two of Mark’s texts, Mal. 3:1 and Exodus 23:20, explicitly contrast such figures with the very presence of Yahweh himself. Whatever else, for Mark Israel’s Lord is, in some mysterious and unparalleled sense, present in Jesus.”[5]
4. Mark 2.1-2—Jesus forgives sins
a. Jesus forgives sins of the paralytic man (2.5)
b. Scribes—“He is blaspheming; who can forgive sins but God alone?” (2.7)
c. Jesus doesn’t correct their reasoning by saying, “No, you misunderstood. I’mnot forgiving his sins; I’m just saying that God has forgiven him.”
d. Commentators:
· “Jesus, on the other hand, forgave sins in his own name, and this was understood by the scribes as blasphemous. In a context in which God alone was seen as being able to forgive sins (Mark 2:7; cf. Luke 7:49), Jesus does so. When accused of blasphemy, he does not state that he was misunderstood and that what he said was a divine passive. On the contrary, in the clearest of terms Jesus states, ‘I shall prove to you that I, the Son of Man, have authority to do this,’ and proceeds to do so by healing the paralytic.”[6]
· “Up to this point, all Jesus’ activities in Mark are commensurate with his being a charismatic healer: gathering followers, teaching, casting out demons and healing. But in forgiving sins Jesus’ action is without parallel and is outside the scope of the law. Besides, there is nothing known in any Jewish literature of any person, including the Messiah, who can or would be able to forgive sin, except God. Therefore, although Jesus is being portrayed as a healer, he is more than that: in his healing (and forgiving) he is acting for God or, perhaps, even as God.”[7]
5. Mark 5.1-23—Jesus’ exorcism of Legion
a. The demon(s) recognize Jesus as the “Son of the Most High God” (v. 7)
· Takes us back to the beginning of the Gospel (1.1)
b. Subtle connection of “Lord” and “Jesus” in verses 19-20
· Readers of Mark’s Gospel would catch this phraseology
c. Commentators:
· “As discussed previously, consonant with the identification of Jesus as ‘Lord’ in 1.3, now in 5.19-20 the former demoniac identifies ‘the Lord’ with ‘Jesus’. Mark’s Jesus’ statement in 5.19 seems to imply that Jesus acts as God’s agent, or, to put it another way, God himself is the underlying ‘power source’ in Jesus’ exorcistic activity. On the other hand, the emphasis on Jesus in 5.20 (in connection with ‘the Lord’ in 5.19) subtly confirms the point which the evangelist has been making in 4.35-41/5.1-20, i.e. Jesus’ powerful speech and actions identify him closely with Yahweh (‘the Lord’) the D[ivine] W[arrior] himself.”[8]
· “Although one should not read into 5:19-20 a fully developed Nicene Christology, Mark’s understanding of Jesus in this account goes far beyond such descriptions as ‘prophet’ or even ‘Messiah.’ There exists between God and Jesus a unique relationship and unity. Jesus in his actions and deeds is the Lord (5:19), and what Jesus has done (5:20) is what God the Lord has done (5:19).”[9]
6. Mark 6.45-52—Jesus walks on sea and calms the wind (cf. 4.35-41)
a. Jesus’ “I am” saying in 6.50 and the name of Yahweh in Exodus 3.13-14[10]
b. Jesus wanted “to pass by them”—language used in OT theophanies
· Exodus 33.19, 22; 34.6
· 1 Kings 19.11
· Same Greek word used in Mark 6.48 as in Septuagint (LXX)—Greek translation of OT—in Exodus and 1 Kings passage
c. Jesus’ “I am” and his walking on the sea
· In Job 9 Yahweh is described as the One “who alone stretches out the heavens and tramples down the waves of the sea” (v. 8). Also see v. 11 about Yahweh “passing by.”
d. Commentators:
· “Jesus is being portrayed here [in walking on the sea] as divine…”[11]
· “But he is also showing that in this epiphany Jesus has been revealed not only as directly empowered by God but also as God uniquely present. The conclusion is corroborated by the Old Testament assertion that God can control the wind (Ps 104:4; 107:25-30) and that only God is able to walk on the waves (Job 9:8).”[12]
[1]Brant Pitre, “Is Jesus Merely a ‘Human Messiah’ in Mark?” The Jesus Blog(February 3, 2016). Pitre is quoting Dustin Smith. Online: http://historicaljesusresearch.blogspot.com/2016/02/is-jesus-merely-human-messiah-in-mark.html.
[2]See Michael Kruger, “Does the Gospel of Mark Present Jesus as God?” Canon Fodder(October 14, 2013). Online: http://michaeljkruger.com/does-the-gospel-of-mark-present-jesus-as-god/.
[5]Rikk E. Watts, “Mark” in Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament, edited by G. K. Beale and D. A. Carson (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker, 2007), 120.
[6]Robert H. Stein, Mark—Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker, 2008), 119.
[7]Graham H. Twelftree, Jesus the Miracle Worker: A Historical and Theological Study(Downers Grove, Ill.: Intervarsity Press, 1999), 65.
[8]Marcus Throup, “Mark's Jesus, Divine?: A Study of Aspects of Mark's Christology with Special Reference to Hebrew Divine Warrior Traditions in Mark, and in Relation to Contemporary Debates on Primitive Christology”. PhD thesis, University of Nottingham (2014), 182.
[9]Robert H. Stein, Mark—Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker, 2008), 261.
[10]I am indebted for this point and the next two to Brant Pitre, “Is Jesus Merely a ‘Human Messiah’ in Mark?” The Jesus Blog(February 3, 2016).
