Pisteuomen - πιστευομεν - T. Michael W. Halcomb

Below is a .pdf that I created which you can download. It looks at the word economy of Mark's Gospel. In particular, it lists all of the words that appear in Mark's Greek text from most frequent to least frequent.

Here's some notes I made from the first small group session I led at my house tonight. We began ruminating over Mk. 1.1-13 and will return to these same verses for our next session. Needless to say, an hour and a half wasn't nearly enough time to work through these verses doing group exegesis, so, we'll work on them some more soon. Anyway, if you're interested in what sorts of discussions took place and some of the thoughts offered, check this out: Don't have a Scribd account? Click here to download: Study Notes: Session 1

The enitre first chapter of Mark's Gospel (and to some extent, the entire story) is laced with imagery of preaching and heralding. During the recent "Mark Dig" that was hosted at my house, this became even more apparent to me. Yet, it also became apparent to me that there is a distinct relationship between "heralding" and "authority" that Mark seems to want his audiences to be aware of. To be sure, Mark acts as a sort of herald himself when he writes the opening line denoting that this is "the Good News of Jesus Christ, God's Son". To bolster his own claim, Mark then draws on two great prophets, using their language and imagery to suggest the same thing. For Mark, his view of this "Jesus Story" is that Jesus was a prophetic figure and as such, His story not only hearkens back to earlier prophets but that His story must be cloaked in such imagery and language. Thus, Jesus and John are painted by Mark as "prophetic heralders...

It is not uncommon when reading a Lukan commentary or article, to find that commentator repeatedly pointing out that Luke loves role reversal. One of the best examples that persons often point to in Luke’s story is that of Lazarus and the rich man. As the story goes, Lazarus is poor here on earth where the rich overlook him. However, in the next life, it is Lazarus who is higher in rank than the man who had previously been wealthy. While it is commonplace to find such statements among Lukan scholars, it is rarely (if ever) pointed out that in Mark’s narrative, this also happens quite frequently. This notion of reversal, which I refer to in literary terms as “cruciality” is sometimes easy to spot and other times more difficult. This device of pivot, which produces a radical reversal or complete change of direction can be used by a speaker or author to illumine the material on either side of the pivot. Just as well, the cruciality can have major narrative as well as social & theologi...

After Jesus’ crucifixion, it is noted in Mk. 15.40-1 that: “Some women were watching from a distance. Among them were Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James the younger and of Joses, and Salome. In Galilee these women had followed Jesus and cared for his needs. Many other women who had come up with him to Jerusalem were also there.” Of many of the verses in Mark’s Gospel, I think few have been overlooked so much as these. Why? Well, because at the very beginning of the story, all we see is Jesus calling “men” to come and follow Him. Indeed, there is not even an inkling that He has women disciples who are trekking with Him as well. Thus, when we get to Mk. 15.40-1, if we decide not to gloss over it but rather, to let it sink in, we are forced to stop and rethink matters. To be sure, when we look closer, women are prominent throughout Jesus’ encounters. Could it be such women that were or became His followers? Peter’s mother-in-law, whom He healed (1.30; what about Peter’s wife?), the ...

Saturday morning I leave for a week to lead a group session on Mk. 8-16 at a retreat/conference. I'm quite excited about this and as you might expect, I won't be blogging a whole lot next week. My schedule, as of now, consists of 29 hours of working through the second portion of Mark's narrative (though, I personally don't neatly divide it into 2 sections e.g. chapters 1-7 and the chapters 8-16). Even though that seems like a lot of time to get through the 42 pericopes in that portion of the story, I actually feel like it's still not enough hours! Regardless, this is the task at hand and I'll do my best to achieve the goal before me. After sitting down and working through some planning, here's a rough draft of my schedule: * Saturday: Travel & Prepare * Sunday: 4p-6:30p (Introductions, Recaps, Mk. 8.1-30); 7:30p-10p (Mk. 9.2-50) * Monday: 9:30a-12:30p (Mk. 10.1-52); 4p-6:30p (Mk. 11.1-33) * Tuesday: 9:30a-12:30p (Mk. 12.1-44); 4p-6:30p (Mk. 13...

Here's a sermon that I delivered at the church I'm currently attending. It was last Sunday (Palm Sunday) and covers Mk. 11.1-11. Let me know what you think.

This is the second listing concerning “Key Figures in Markan History” and the first one can be found HERE which covers the years 1900-1949. However, there is some overlap between these two posts as the last prominent person I listed in the previous post was from the year 1942. These are, in my opinion, the key figures in Markan exegesis during this time span. Let me know if I missed anyone you would include and if so, why I should include them. · (1947) Joachim Jeremias: Jeremias was interested in the search for the historical Jesus and is noted for his attempt to get back to the very words of Jesus (ipsissima verba). He paid close attention Jesus’ linguistic mannerisms and wrote a lot on the parables. In his NT Theology (1970) he argued that Mk. is written in primitive Greek and is quite unsophisticated (an argument many would later disagree with). · (1947) Morton S. Enslin: Wrote “The Artistry of Mark” contending that Mark’s “canvas” is laced with creativity and is a beautiful p...

Recently, I have been working through the history of the interpretation of Mark's Gospel in the twentieth century (so, S. P. Kealy). Below is a list, in my opinion, of the "key" figures in Markan exegesis in the years ranging from 1900-1949. Let me know if I missed anyone you would include and if so, why I should include them. · (1900) Benjamin W. Bacon: Bacon is “often called the founder and pioneer of American biblical criticism” despite the fact that he never achieved a PhD and still claims that he could not pass Yale examinations today. He wrote a lot on the Synoptics, an introduction to the NT and a also a work on its creation. One of his most famous Markan works was: The Beginnings of the Gospel Story: A Historico-Critical Inquiry into the Sources and Structure of the Gospel According to Mark . Perhaps two of his most influential works, however, were: Is Mark A Roman Gospel? and The Gospel of Mark: Its Composition and Date . · (1901) William Wrede: Wrede’s influe...

Today, while working my way through Mark’s story, an interesting but simple thought came to mind: Mark’s narrative contains some great wordplay. In this short study / post, I want to share just a few examples of where I think Mark’s wordsmithing shows up (which definitely makes the story more fun to read). One example is Mk. 1.1. Notice how in this verse, there is a lot of rhyming: του ευαγγελιου ιησου υιυο θεου. Another example stems from that phrase υιυο θεου. Of course, in English that translates to “Son of God”. The phrase appears a number of times throughout the rest of the narrative. Now, I think something interesting occurs when this relationship is underscored in 14.36 when Jesus prays saying αββα ο πατερ (abba ho pater), which, in English, is “Father, my Father” / “Father, the Father”. Of course, “abba” is Semitic and is often appears in context with the word “באר” (bar). “Bar” means “Son”. So, here, we see the relationship between the “Son” and the “Father”. Now, it is right ...

Yesterday I posted a photo of me standing next to my stack of Markan books and articles. Since you can't get a good look at the titles in that picture, I thought I'd upload a sort of photographic bibliography here (it's much easier than typing all of that info. out!!!). Of course, you can't see the journal articles but oh well. Anyway, check out the panorama below. You can use the "hand icon" to forward or backward by moving it left to right and you can zoom in or out on the photos using the small "magnifying glass" icons in the bottom right corner. For the titles that are a bit fuzzy, you can zoom in to get a better view:

I've been wanting to get around to this subject / post for a while but I've recently found myself taken up by other things. One reason I wanted to write about prophecy in Mk. is because before SBL, Mark Goodacre and NT Wrong were discussing the literary function of prophetic remarks. Bill Heroman also weighed in on the matter . Mr. Goodacre's thesis was that one could, in fact, date the Markan account (pre-temple, if I remember correctly) by considering the literary function of the prophetic instances in the story. If one subscribes to this thesis, they most likely see Mk. 13 as "prophetic" (especially in a predictive sense) and even "eschatalogical". In the history of Markan scholarship, there is a longstanding tradition of reading Mk. 13 this way (e.g. it is typically referred to as the "little apocalypse"). It is with humility that I toss my hat into the ring and offer a different view. I have already written a lengthy post on Mk. 13 HERE ...

When we read Mark's Gospel or any other ancient text for that matter, the fact is, there are many things that we are not privvy to. The distance between our world and theirs is immense and because of this, we misunderstand cultural norms, ethical mores, theological stances, figures of speech, social metaphors, familial practices, etc. The work of Bible readers, in many ways and on many levels, is to uncover and understand as much about these things as we can so that we bridge some of the distance between the two horizons. When it comes to Mk. 10, the section of Mark's story where marriage is in view, there is a lot going on. Attempting to reconstruct the situation, understand it, bridge the gap and read between the lines can be quite tough. So, I want to start by reminding us that the Gospel writers were highly selective in the materials they chose to include in their respective accounts. For example, when one reads Matthew 19.3, a text quite similar to that in Mk. 10, this ...

One question that has intrigued Gospels scholars for centuries, especially those with Markan affinities, is: Why is the wilderness temptation narrative so short (and pretty much absent) from Mark's Gospel? This is something that I have pondered for a while too and until now, I have not said much about it. Before I offer my thoughts on the matter, though, it might be best to say a little more about the subject. Usually, this topic comes up when bible scholars are discussing the "synoptic problem" (a discussion that focuses on the order in which the Gospel accounts were written; for example, was Mk. written first or was Mk. based on Mt. & Lk.?). As I have said a number of times in this series and on this site, in my opinion, the so-called "synoptic problem" is not really much of a "problem" at all. Anyway, I won't get into that again in this post. But in regards to the temptation narrative and the synoptic problem, text and literary critics often...

A few weeks ago, some good discussion ( here and here , for example) was taking place here at Pisteuomen on the relationship between the gospel accounts of Mark and John. At the heart of those discussions was whether or not the two writers had the Passion & Passover events taking place on the same days or different days. As I showed, I think that the evidence certainly corroborates with the former supposition. One thing I didn't get to discuss in those posts or in the discussion afterwards was Mark's view of Jesus as the Passover Lamb. In my view, the reason this topic is important at all is because people try to assert that the reason John's timeline didn't corroborate with that of Mark's is because John (or Lazarus, whomever wrote that account) had a different theological agenda. The argument is that John's theological agenda was to make sure everyone knew that Jesus was "the" Passover Lamb. Now, it is clear that John's text does go this rou...

As we all know, when it comes to Mark's Gospel, scores of great resources exist. Indeed, even I have enough books and journal articles on Mk. to fill numerous bookshelves. I have vocalized my opinion more than once on Pisteuomen regarding these resources. I have said, for example, that finding a commentary on Mk. that makes new contributions to the field and offers fresh insights, etc. is tough. Having read nearly every major English commentary on Mk., I can honestly say that for the most part, it is all regurgitated information--every commentary sounds pretty much the same. Not only is this problematic in the way of commentaries but when one consults homiletical texts concerning Mk., they find the same things (e.g. the authors of the homiletics books were, of course, drawing knowledge from the commentaries). It is more than clear to me that if you want to find anything new in Markan studies, journal articles (and occasionally monographs) are the way to go. Having said that, I want...

My last two posts have focused on both the “ time of day ” that Jesus was crucified and the actual “ day ” of His crucifixion. In this post, I want to piggyback on some of my thoughts there and think here, about the religious leaders and two of their hesitancies: 1) Their fear of riots (Mk. 14.2) and, 2) Their fear of not being able to participate in Passover events (Jn. 18.28). It is my contention that if we can square these two passages, the things that I have said so far, become even clearer. Here are the two passages: Mk. 14.2 says: “For they said, ‘But not during the Feast or the crowds may riot.’” Jn. 18.28 says: “…But it was morning and they did not want to enter into the Praetorium in order that they did not become ceremonially unclean (for) they wanted to eat the Passover." In these two passages, the players are the same: the Jewish religious officials. While they have two concerns (mentioned above), these concerns focus on the same thing: Passover Week. Now, I have argue...

In study #76 of my “Studies in Mark” series, I explored some issues surrounding the “time” of Jesus’ crucifixion in the four Gospel accounts. In the main, I gave some thoughts on how time was viewed, understood and used in Mediterranean antiquity and how these factors should be borne in mind when reading the various NT accounts. In the end, I concluded that in the work titled “John” (and the same is true of Luke) the author’s are using temporal approximations—in more simple terms: they were saying “Jesus was crucified at about or around such and such time of day.” John says Jesus was crucified at about Noon while Mark says it was 9am. The fact is, John is clearly approximating when he uses the word “about” (again, Luke does the same). Mark does not offer a specific word that denotes approximation; at first glance he seems to be more specific. However, given the cultural norms of time-telling back then, any seemingly specific time that was given should still be taken lightly. To find o...

As many New Testament scholars have pointed out, those from the New Testament era and more specifically, the non-Roman Elite of the NT era, understood “time” differently. Bruce Malina, for instance, has repeatedly shown that while 21st century Americans are predominantly future-oriented people (e.g. retirement funds, savings accounts, planning for education, hoping to get married, waiting to have kids, etc.), those we read of in the NT were quite the opposite—these agricultural and usually lower class personages were present-minded folk. In fact, Malina has argued that no NT personage could have possibly had a future orientation similar to that of a 21st century American. For the sake of argument and belaboring, I will say here that this is a view I, for the most part, share (I say “most part” because I certainly have not done away with the “already, not yet” aspect so apparent in the NT documents). As Cadbury has pointed out, the NT word “hora” (English “hour”) is only attested to one...

For those of you who frequent Pisteuomen, you are well aware that I have had an ongoing study of Mark's Gospel since the commencement of this blog. For those of you who are newer to Pisteuomen or are visiting for the first time, well, now you know! At the summons of others, I have decided to take the fruits of my labors and place them on a page all of their own. So, if you look at the top of the site, just below the header, you will see the words "Studies In Mark". Click that and it will take you to the aforementioned page. From this point on, I will add each new study to the page so that the ongoing list will always be updated and maintained. Enjoy! *Note: I have also updated the "Misc." page quite a bit. I have placed things in categories and tidied the page up a bit. If you notice sermon or audio links that say something about "Mozart" be warned that this is not an error of my doing and that I am currently working to fix those links.