Mark's Interpretation of the Death of Jesus

(ProQuest: ... denotes formulae omitted.) Two articles on the significance of Jesus' death in Mark appeared in this journal in 2006.1 Each of these studies opens up intriguing perspectives on the topic, yet aspects of each are problematic. The article by Sharyn Dowd and Elizabeth Struthers Malbon is treated here first because of its more comprehensive character. The most problematic aspect of their study is their interpretation of the ransom saying in 10:45, "for the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve and to give his life as a ransom in behalf of many." They rightly place this saying in the context of the request of James and John and the Markan Jesus' teaching on discipleship that responds to it. In focusing on the context, however, Dowd and Struthers Malbon infer that "what 'the many' need-and, in fact, what the Markan Jesus urges his followers to provide-is ransoming from 'their great ones who are tyrants over them' and 'those whom they recognize as their rulers [who] lord it over them' (10:42)."2 They quote with approval Ched Myers, who argued: The phrase "as a ransom (lutron) for many" appears to be an allusion back to "slave" [at 10:43-44]. The term referred to the price required to redeem captives or purchase freedom for indentured servants. Jesus promises then that the way of "servanthood" has been transformed by the Human One into the way of liberation.3 The problem with this interpretation is that it misconstrues the relation between the saying and its context. The speech of the Markan Jesus in 10:42.45 does not instruct the Twelve that their duty is to serve "especially those undervalued and 'lorded over' by the powerful," as Dowd and Struthers Malbon claim, however much such service is to be valued and encouraged.4 Rather, he is teaching by means of a negative example: the actual relations of power among the nations involve mastery and the exercise of authority. Leadership among the followers of Jesus is not to be of that type. Instead, those who wish to be "great" or "first" ought to practice a leadership of service, based on genuine concern for the welfare of every member of the group. This ideal had already been articulated among the Greeks. For example, the Macedonian philosopher-king Antigonos Gonatas (ca. 320.239 b.c.e.) taught his son, "Do you not understand, my son, that our kingdom is held to be a noble servitude [...]?"5 The issue is not the oppression of the followers of Jesus and others by the tyrants and rulers of Judea and Rome. The issue is how the alternative society constituted by the followers of Jesus will organize and conduct itself. Dowd and Struthers Malbon rightly conclude that the links between the Son of Man saying in Mark 10:45 and the Greek version of the poem of Isa 52:13-53:12 signify only that both the Servant and Jesus lost their lives for the benefit of many.6 The nature of that benefit is not illuminated by this intertextual relationship because the word ... does not occur in the relevant poem in Isaiah-yet it is the controlling image in Mark 10:45. They overstate, however, their next conclusion. They claim that all parties to the discussion admit that "the word group ... relates to the necessity of setting free those being held captive or enslaved by another."7 All would agree that the word group concerns "loosing" or "setting free," but the question of "from what" or "from whom" depends on the context and shared cultural assumptions. The Son of Man saying in Mark 10:45 clarifies the cryptic allusions to "the cup" that Jesus will drink and "the baptism" with which he will be baptized in vv. 38-39. The aim of giving his life makes clear that these two metaphors refer to the death of Jesus. The idea that he will give his life as a "ransom" (...), however, is a new image in relation to the context of Mark, as well as to the inter-text of Isaiah 53. The usage of the term ... in the LXX applies to a wide variety of contexts. …