OT in Mark

With an ultimate view toward building a comprehensive understanding of Mark’s dependance on and use of the Hebrew Bible, I’m writing now to just quickly record the various locations Mark quotes from.  Be forewarned that the following quotes come only from the most superficial survey of the book.  So, while I am sure that Mark’s dependance extends far beyond the present listing, I figure this is at least a start.

Hebrew Bible Passages Quoted in Mark:

Genesis 1:27, 2:24; 5:2

Exodus 3:6; 20:12-16; 21:17; 23:20

Leviticus 19:18; 20:9

Dueteronomy 4:35; 5:16-20; 6:4-5; 24:1, 14

Joshua 22:5

Psalm 22:1; 110:1; 118:22-23

Isaiah 29:13; 40:1; 56:7

Jeremiah 7:11

Daniel 7:13

Zechariah 13:7

Malachi 3:1

Hebrew Bible Quotations as They Appear Throughout Mark

Mark 1:2-3 (Ex. 23:20; Mal 3:1; Is. 40:1)

Mark 4:12 (Is 6:9-10)

Mark 7:6-7 (Is. 29:13)

Mark 7:10 (Ex 20:12; Dt 5:16) and (Ex 21:17; Lev 20:9)

Mark 10:4 (Dt. 24:1)

Mark 10:6 (Gen 1:27; 5:2)

Mark 10:8 (Gen 2:24)

Mark 10:19 (Ex 20:12-16; Dt 5:16-20; 24:14)

Mark 11:9 (Ps 118:25-26)

Mark 11:17 (Is 56:7; Jer 7:11)

Mark 12:10 (Ps 118:22-23)

Mark 12:19 (Dt 25:5)

Mark 12:27 (Ex 3:6)

Mark 12:29-30 (Dt 6:4-5; Josh 22:5)

Mark 12:31 (Lev 19:18)

Mark 12:32 (Dt 4:35)

Mark 12:33 (Dt 6:5; Leve 19:18)

Mark 12:36 (Ps 110:1)

Mark 14:27 (Zech 13:7)

Mark 14:62 (Ps 110:1; Dan 7:13)

Mark 15:34 (Ps 22:1)

Any good understanding of the Gospel of Mark that we come up with will inherently make room for Mark’s perspective of the OT, including questions like: “Why does Mark draw so much from the Torah?”  ”Why start with the Isaiah/Exodus/Malachi quote he starts with in Mark 1:2-3?”  etc.  Hopefully this post helps us all become better readers over time.

Going back to the beginning

Recently I posted a post (post a post) about Genesis and animals and Cain and plants and Abel and curses and transformers. Cain was a transformer.

Anyways, Ryan Topper had brought up the verse from Genesis chapter 4 that has the woman, Eve, saying she has made/acquired/conceived a man by the help/from/like the Lord. How your interpretation has it is up to you and it matter not in what I am talking about. Here we will quote what the NET bible has:

4:1 Now the man had marital relations with his wife Eve, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Cain. Then she said, “I have created a man just as the Lord did!”

And just previously in Genesis, in an earlier episode, during the curse God says to the serpent:

3:15 And I will put hostility between you and the woman and between your offspring and her offspring; her offspring will attack your head, and you will attack her offspring’s heel.”

Now a cool thing that the NET says in it’s commentary (which can be read by clicking on the verse link) is that the woman believes she has given birth to the one who will crush the serpent’s head, the promised Messiah. This turns out not to be true as Cain instead just goes buck-wild and kills his brother, then becomes a vampire. You know, like common vampire mythology.

So we know it isn’t true that Cain is that Messiah and the Jews have been looking forward to this Messiah for years, looking for the one whom God will send to crush the serpent’s head. So I was thinking about that and since I have also been reading Luke at the same time I began to ponder this Messiah who will crush the serpent’s head. And I began to think about the controversy surrounding Jesus birth and how we often see it as bad because in society that day it would have been terrible for the woman to have a baby before Joseph had even married her, much less by someone other than Joseph. But I began to think about the controversy as well of what the authors’ created by writting the story down. In the story of Jesus conception Mary gives birth to a child by the help of the LORD. Let that sink in. Okay, so Jews are reading this story about this guy who the author claims is the Messiah and the first thing the Jew reads about is the child being conceived by the help of the LORD. Already at the beginning the author is claiming not that the child is just unique because he fulfills the virgin birth prophecy but the author is also showing that this child fulfills the original prophecy that a child is born by the help of the Lord that will strike the head of the serpent. This woman and child are like Eve and Cain, but where one had failed, this one succeeds. It all harkens back to the beginning.

If I were a Jew at the time, knowing the Torah as they did, I’d already be tuned into what the author is saying. Maybe the authors of the gospels were not just showing how Jesus was born but also tuning us into the idea that this is the one who will fulfill the prophecy of old.

Which then is interesting in that John doesn’t have the account of the virgin birth in his gospel. And Sailhamer would say that omission is a literary device to show us something.

Jesus recites Exodus 3:6 to the Sadducees

After reading N.T. Wright’s “Surprised By Hope”, I can’t help but find scripture dealing with the idea of heaven interesting. I was reading the classic “marriage in heaven” piece with Jesus and the Sadducees (who are so sad, you see) and these are some thoughts. I believe Wright brings this up at one point in his book, but very briefly.

Matthew 22:23-33 (NIV)

23That same day the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to him with a question. 24“Teacher,” they said, “Moses told us that if a man dies without having children, his brother must marry the widow and have children for him. 25Now there were seven brothers among us. The first one married and died, and since he had no children, he left his wife to his brother. 26The same thing happened to the second and third brother, right on down to the seventh. 27Finally, the woman died. 28Now then, at the resurrection, whose wife will she be of the seven, since all of them were married to her?”

 29Jesus replied, “You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God. 30At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven. 31But about the resurrection of the dead—have you not read what God said to you, 32‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? He is not the God of the dead but of the living.”

 33When the crowds heard this, they were astonished at his teaching.

     First of all, the point of this passage seems to be the ressurection itself, not marriage in the afterlife. Matthew notes that the Sadducees say there is no resurection even before the discussion begins. In verse 31 Jesus says, “Now as for the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was spoken to you by God,” and then He quotes Exodus 3:6. That seems like a strange verse to quote when dealing with the resurection. What are you doing, Jesus? “I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.” What does that have to do with the resurection?

Exodus 3:6-10 (NIV)

6 Then he said, “I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob.” At this, Moses hid his face, because he was afraid to look at God.

 7 The LORD said, “I have indeed seen the misery of my people in Egypt. I have heard them crying out because of their slave drivers, and I am concerned about their suffering. 8 So I have come down to rescue them from the hand of the Egyptians and to bring them up out of that land into a good and spacious land, a land flowing with milk and honey—the home of the Canaanites, Hittites, Amorites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites. 9 And now the cry of the Israelites has reached me, and I have seen the way the Egyptians are oppressing them. 10 So now, go. I am sending you to Pharaoh to bring my people the Israelites out of Egypt.”

     I find this incredibly interesting because Jesus seems to be reading this in light of the ressurection, which is definately not the way the Sadducees read it, nor the way I have ever read it. Maybe that’s what Jesus was talking about in Matthew 22:29…the whole “you don’t know the scriptures” thing. But anyways, God declares himself as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and then promises deliverance of His people. He talks of the promise land.

 7 The LORD said, “I have indeed seen the misery of my people in Egypt. I have heard them crying out because of their slave drivers, and I am concerned about their suffering. 8 So I have come down to rescue them from the hand of the Egyptians and to bring them up out of that land into a good and spacious land, a land flowing with milk and honey—the home of the Canaanites, Hittites, Amorites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites.

     I don’t think Jesus just picked out a random verse from Exodus to recite to the Sadducees. He is reading Exodus completley different then they do. Jesus seems to be associating the promise land with the ressurection! Now that’s cool. That’ll change the way you read things.

Ruth and Luke Connections

Although it is only a 4 chapter book, Ruth is oozing with the juices of biblical connections. Mmm, that was a tastey sounding first sentence. I’m not exactly sure where the author(s) wants the connections to be made, but Ezekiel, Proverbs, and Luke seem to jump out at me the most. I’d love to go into the possible connections with Ezekiel and Proverbs, but for now lets just discuss Luke. I actually read this about a half hour ago so my mind is still damp and soggy from the splish splashes of exegesis. Here we go.

Ruth 4:14-17   “The village women said to Naomi, “May the Lord be praised because he has not left you without a guardian today! May he become famous in Israel!  He will encourage you and provide for you when you are old, for your daughter-in-law, who loves you, has given him birth. She is better to you than seven sons!” Naomi took the child and placed him on her lap; she became his caregiver.  The neighbor women named him, saying, “A son has been born to Naomi.” They named him Obed.   Now he became the father of Jesse – David’s father!”

Before we go into Luke, let me first of all say that this part is wild. It seems to be calling the son (Obed) the “gauardian” (or “kinsmen-redeemer” in the NIV). If you’ve read through Ruth (if you haven’t then you’re a heathen), this should be surprising becuase the “guardians” for the whole story have been both Boaz, and the closer relative. After the discussion between both of them, Boaz becomes the guardian that “redeems” Naomi and Ruth the Moabite…Then the author throws you a curve and decides to call the baby son the “guardian” right at the end. POW! Right in the kisser! Anyways, that has nothing to do with what I’m trying to say, so we’ll move on.

A few years later this Luke guy comes along and writes this.

Luke 2:28-32   28Simeon took him in his arms and praised God, saying:
 29“Sovereign Lord, as you have promised,
      you now dismiss your servant in peace.
 30For my eyes have seen your salvation,
    31which you have prepared in the sight of all people,
 32a light for revelation to the Gentiles
      and for glory to your people Israel.”  (NIV)

Here we have Joseph and Mary…hmm sounds a little bit like “Mara”. (Ruth 1:20) Anyways, Joseph and Mary are bringing Jesus to the temple to present him to the LORD. The author introduces you to this guy named Simeon, and right off the bat he is described as “righteous and devout”. (Luke 2:25) If I remember correctly, Boaz has a similar introduction. (Ruth 2:1) So Simeon takes the baby in his arms and starts speaking all of this prophecy. Salvation will come through this child? Even salvation for Gentiles, like “Ruth the Moabite”? I don’t know about you guys, but I can’t think of any other stories in the scriptures where a baby is born and people talk about him or her like this. Already, Luke seems to be drawing from Ruth…but that’s not all!

Luke 2:36-40  ”There was also a prophetess, Anna the daughter of Phanuel, of the tribe of Asher. She was very old, having been married to her husband for seven years until his death. She had lived as a widow since then for eighty-four years.  She never left the temple, worshiping with fasting and prayer night and day.  At that moment, she came up to them and began to give thanks to God and to speak about the child to all who were waiting for the redemption of Jerusalem.  So when Joseph and Mary had performed everything according to the law of the Lord, they returned to Galilee, to their own town of Nazareth.  And the child grew and became strong, filled with wisdom, and the favor of God was upon him.”

So right after Joseph and Mary talk to Simeon, somebody else comes along and throws some Ruth at them. Anna is introduced as a widow who’s husband died many years ago. Hmmm, That sounds alot like Naomi. Anna comes up and speaks of this child to “…all who were waiting for the redemption of Jerusalem.” Redemption? That’s a huge theme throughout the book of Ruth! And check out those last couple of lines. Joseph and Mary return to “their own town” and the child grows up strong. Returning also plays an important role in the story of Ruth.

It seems as though Luke is wanting his readers to be reminded of the story of Ruth as they are introduced to baby Jesus in chapter 2. A Boaz-like character draws from the book of Ruth, and then a Naomi-like character does so right afterwards! The themes of redemption for both Jews and Gentiles, returning home, and even the way the characters talk about the baby all remind me of the book of Ruth. Perhaps this is intentional. Perhaps there are connections to be made with the story of a father of David, and the story of the Son of David.

Any thoughts?