UNDERSTANDING OF CHRISTOLOGY IN

MARK’S GOSPEL AND ITS IMPLICATION FOR

THE CHURCH’S MISSION IN ASIA TODAY

  

by Rev. Dr. M. Gnanavaram

Teaches in Tamilnadu Theological Seminary, Madurai, India.

 

 

     A right understanding of Christ leads to the right understanding of God. Therefore, Christology becomes the starting point for theology.[1] It has been an easy way out for Asian Christians in multi-religious context to speak of a God centered theology and mission than a Christ centered one. However, in recent days, with the understanding of Christ as God Immanuel taking concrete expression in the life of the suffering people of Asia, such as the Dalits in India, the Minjung of Korea, the Aboriginals of Australia, the Burakumin of Japan and the Maori of Aotearoa-New Zealand, Christology becomes the central point of theology and mission. This is also the case which we see in the New Testament, especially in the gospels. In this paper, Mark’s Christology is taken as an example for the same.

      It is Christology the central theme of Mark’s gospel.[2] It also has a central place in the understanding of the synoptic Chris­tology. In order to narrow down the scope of this paper, I have limited the following discussion to the understanding of the themes such as the Son of Man (ho huios tou anthropou – hereafter “the Human One”) and the Son of God (ho huios tou theou) in Mark’s gospel.

 

 

1. The Human One In Mark

      The designation to Jesus that occurs most frequently in Mark’s gospel is “the Human One”. It appears only twice in the first half of the gospel (2:10, 28). However the expression appears twelve times from 8:31 through 14:62.[3] This gives us the clue that the gospel writer wanted us to understand this title in the light of the suffering and death of Jesus. Contrary to “Christ” and “Son of God”, “the Human One” is used exclusively by Jesus and always with reference to himself.[4]

1.1  The Background Of The Human One In The Hebrew Scripture

>– In the Old Testament, this term occurs first of all in Ps 8:5 which means an ordinary human being (see also Heb 2:8). It is also used in the same sense in Ezekiel (2:1; 3:1, etc.). However, it is Dan 7:13-14 which has caused much discussion among schol­ars. Nowadays it is accepted by significant number of scholars that the humanlike figure in Dan 7:13 stands for the faithful people of Israel who suffered the oppression by Antiochus Eppiphanes.[5] Therefore it is argued that the Danielic Human One is a symbol for a collective entity of the oppressed humanity. It is true that it can refer to a messianic individual (which is also supported by the occurrences in 1 Enoch 37-41 and 4 Ezra 13).. However, it is the messianic individual who identifies himself with the suffering people, the victims of oppression and margin­alization. He is portrayed as a co-sufferer with the suffering people. Therefore, it is not the meaning of either individual or collective, but both individual and collective.[6] With this understanding, now we move on to the Human One sayings in Mark.

1.2 The Human One Sayings In Mark

(i) The Human One Who Forgives Sin (2:10) – This occurs in the context of the charge of blasphemy (2:7). This is the first of the conflict stories which lead to the conspiracy to kill Jesus (3:6). It is God who has the prerogative to for­give. But Jesus here claims that the Human One has the authority to forgive. The implied meaning seems to be that God exercises his authority to forgive sins only by virtue of being caught up as the supremely offended person through his involvement in human misery through the son who became the Human One”.[7] If the Human One is a collective representative of the suffering people, then it means that only the hurt-people have the right to forgive (see also Jn 20:23).[8] Who are these hurt-people? They are the Gali­lean disciples, the persecuted church.        

(ii) The Human One Who Is The Lord Of The Sabbath (2:28) – This is also one of the conflict stories in which Jesus supports the so called law-breaking of the disciples. Here the Human One stands in the Deuteronomic line and declares that the Sabbath was made for humankind and not humankind for the Sabbath, so the Human One is lord even of the Sabbath. He identifies himself with the people who are in need, especially those who are hungry (cf. Mt 12:1). The Sabbath is made for their liberation. All Jesus’s Sabbath miracles mean that the Sabbath is the day of freedom from oppression. Thus the Human One is part of the suffering humanity and has the right to interpret the Sabbath (which was used as a religious ritual to oppress people) as means of liberating them. In this way, Jesus the Human One becomes the lord of the Sabbath.

(iii) The Human One Who Suffers And Dies (8:31; 9:31; 10:33)[9] – I have already mentioned that the term Human One occurs mostly in the second half of Mark’s gospel, the passion narratives. In all these places, the Human One identifies with all those who suffer, the victim sector of humankind. This idea of expressing the community’s experience of suffering in a single person’s cry is already in the lament Psalms of the Old Testament (e.g. Ps 22). Mark wants to challenge the powerful ruling class which oppresses the powerless by focusing the Human One as the one who exposes them by incorporating in himself all the oppressed.[10] Thus the on-going suffering of the powerless is gathered up together in the suffering of Jesus the Human One.

(iv) The Human One Who Judges At The Consummation (8:38; 13:26; 14:62) – Finally, Mark also shows the Human One who comes in glory with great power and judges the world. He is the same Human One who was crucified and died. That powerless Human One is now given power to judge the world.[11] He judges not only because of his divine sonship, but mainly because he is the Human One who was crucified.[12] This reminds us of the vision of Daniel (Dan 7:13-14) in which the powerless and suffering Israel is identified in the Human One to whom was given dominion and glory and kingship. Here we see a reversal of the status quo.

1.3  Concluding Remarks On The Human One

– Thus the Human One sayings in Mark bear a consistent and coherent interpretation on the assumption that there was a widespread coinage of the phrase among the persecuted and oppressed Chris­tians of Mark’s community. This has a background thought in the history of the people of Israel who suffered persecution. The Human One is both individual and collective representative of the oppressed humanity.

 

 

2. Son Of God In Mark

      Mark makes it obvious at the outset that his understanding of Christ is that of the Son of God (1:1). Again Jesus is called the Son of God by the heavenly voice at his baptism (1:11) and at the transfiguration (9:7). Demons recognize him as the Son of God (3:11f; 5:7). While in 13:32 Jesus confesses his own igno­rance of the exact time of the end of the age, yet the clear juxtaposition in this verse of the words “the son” and the “fa­ther” points to the divine sonship of Jesus. In the parable of the tenants of the vineyard, Jesus sonship is again mentioned in the words, Finally he sent his son... (l2:6ff). The High Priest challenges him with the question of whether he is the Son of the Blessed (14:61) to which Jesus gives a positive answer (14:62). This is culminated in the declaration by the gentile centurion at the cross (15:39).

      How did Jesus become the Son of God? Or, how did he prove himself to be the Son of God? In the first part of the gospel, with help of the miracle stories, the term Son of God could be interpreted to mean that Jesus was viewed as a typical Hellenistic “divine man” (Theios Aner) or “wonder worker”. However, there are many evidences that make the wonder worker concept questionable.

2.1  The Background Of The Son Of God In The Hebrew Scripture

– Before we go to exegesis of the Son of God passages in Mark’s gospel, it will be helpful to understand the background of the thought in the Hebrew scripture, especially in the Old Testament.

     The term is used with regard to the king (2 Sam. 7:14; Ps 2:7; Ps. 89:26-27). However, it also refers to the people of Israel (Ex. 4:22-23; Hos. 11:1; Mal. 2:10). It is interesting to see the term “son” is used for Israel as a collective term only in their experience of suffering in Egypt (Ex. 4:22-23; Hos. 11:1) and in their experience of a displaced community which struggles for its rebuilding after the exile in Babylon (Mal. 2:10).

     The above mentioned understanding also accords with the under­standing of the Isaianic “servant songs” (Isa. 42-53). Who is this servant? The church has been understanding it as a predictive prophecy about the mission of Jesus. But when we see the exilic background of these servant songs, it is the reflective under­standing of the life of Israel: a reflection on the suffering of Israel. In other words, it is the people of Israel who are identified in the suffering of the servant.[13] They become the chil­dren of God not purely because of election and covenant, but mainly because of their suffering to witness to YHWH. it is also accepted by scholars that, in many places in the later Hebrew scriptures, the term “son” is an interpolation in the place of servant’.[14] It is because of the suffering in obedience to God’s will, Israel becomes “the son”. With this understanding now we move on to the “Son of God” sayings in Mark’s gospel.

2.2 The Son Of God Sayings In Mark

(i) Jesus’ Baptism (1:9-11) – At the beginning of his ministry, a voice from heaven acclaims Jesus to be the Son of God with whom the Father is well pleased. In what sense is Jesus designated here as God’s son? Generally this is taken as an allusion to PS 2:7, which reads, “You are my son, today I have begotten you”. However, this is also a confla­tion of the words from Isa 42:1: “Behold my servant, whom I up-hold, my chosen in whom my soul delights”. This indicates the fact that the messianic mission is to be carried out in terms of “the chosen servant of the Lord” as expressed in the servant songs of Isaiah.[15] This is the servant who suffers to establish justice (Isa 42:4), lie is the anointed one who came to proclaim good news to the poor... (Isa 61:1ff)

(ii) Jesus’ Transfiguration (9:1ff) – In the transfiguration scene, which follows Jesus’ declaration that some standing with him “would not taste death until they see that the kingdom of God has come with power”, the heavenly voice declares to Peter, James and John: “This is my beloved son”. Here also we see the same Son of God who gets affirmation from the father as the chosen son-servant to fulfill his redemptive ministry by his suffering and death in Jerusalem.

(iii) The Ignorance Of The Son (13:32) – Jesus refers to himself as the Son of God in his word about the time of his parousia, “But of the day or that hour no one knows, not even the angels in heave, nor the son, but only the father” (13:32). Here we do not see a son with a supernatural knowledge, but the one who identifies with the ignorance of other human be­ings. He is the Son of God who humbles himself and identifies with the humanity (see Phil. 2:6ff)

(iv) The Wicked Tenants Of The Vineyard (12:1-12) – In this parable, we read the messianic mission of the son to receive the inheritance. Here also we see the suffering Son of God who was killed and thrown out of the vineyard when he comes to fulfill his mission.

(v) Before The High Priest (14:61ff) – When the High Priest asks Jesus the direct question, “Are you the Christ, the son of the blessed?”, Jesus answers, “I am, and you will see the Son of Man seated at the right of the Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven (14:62). This reminds us of Dan 7:13-14, where the Son of Man is identified with the suffering Israel. We can also see that there is a close connection between Son of God and son of Man here.[16]

There is one more point here. Jesus’ answer has this effect: Now I am standing before your unjust court and being judged unjustly; but the day will come when this circumstance will be reversed and when you will see the one, whom now you are judging, sitting as the Son of Man to judge you. Thus Jesus identifies with all those who suffer because of unjust judgments and assures that there will surely be a reversal of the unjust status quo.

(vi) Centurion’s Declaration (15:39) – The centurion who stood beside Jesus at the cross saw the way in which Jesus died on the cross. He said, Truly this man was God’s son. This is the climax of the gospel which provides narrative (and theological) resolution to the “messianic secret”[17] Scholars argue that Mark’s Christology stipulates that only at the foot of the cross” can Jesus “sonship” legitimately be extolled.[18]

    This confession is a significant one. The pagan centurion is a representative of an oppressive power which upheld an ideology which allowed the marginalization of the people and the dominance of the economic and cultic system. In the desolation of an execu­tion a man sees another extinguished by his opponents yet con­fesses him Son of God. The moment when the opponents thought they had won is in fact the moment of their defeat.[19] It is not the oppressors who won, but the Son of God who was considered to be defeated. It is the crucified Son of God who challenges the oppressive power.

2.3  Concluding Remarks On Son Of God

– Therefore, “Jesus is the Son of God not as a miracle-worker, but in the obedient fulfillment of his task – precisely his task of suffering”.[20] Mark wanted to tell his readers that this Jesus was the Son of God, yet his mission was to suffer and be rejected. It is not merely a theologia crucis (an Interventionist Christology), but a theologia crucis (an Incarnation Christology) that Mark wanted to present through his gospel. This is the paradox which we see in Mark.

 

 

3. Summary And Concluding RemarksOn Mark’s Christology

      Our understanding of Mark’s presentation of Jesus both as the Human One and as the Son of God is very much related to the understanding of the suffering servant in the Hebrew scriptures, especially the Isaianic servant songs. Therefore Mark’s Christology is centered around the passion and death of Jesus, This points towards God’s identification with the suffering humanity. Jesus is not only an individual but also a collective representa­tive of the new Israel, the suffering minority. For Mark, the starting point of Christology is the historical Jesus identifi­cation with the suffering humanity.

 

4. Missiological Implications

     The mission of the Human One who incorporates in himself all the oppressed and marginalized has far reaching implication to the mission of the church. The church should involve in a mission of incorporation in itself all the victims sector which leads to betrayal, rejection, suffering and death. We should also find the Human One in the experience of the victim sector. The hope of resurrection gives us the courage to continue the mission. It is with that hope of vindication of the oppressed we affirm God’s continuous presence among the burning bushes of Asia.[21]

     In the exegesis above, we see God’s son getting implicated to bring about liberation to the suffering humanity. Jesus’ ministry is the ministry of “binding the strong man” and establishing God’s redemptive rule. That gives us the impetus to involve in actions to bind the strong evil forces of oppression. By volun­tarily accepting the vicarious suffering and death, Jesus proves his divine sonship. Thus he fulfills his mission as the servant of the Lord. This has a very significant implication for the mission of the church today.

      In the Asian, especially in the Indian, religious context, the divine power of religious people is mainly seen in their miraculous works and their supernatural knowledge, One can cite a number of examples from all the religious traditions including the church. But Mark sees Jesus’ divine power in his suffering and death for the liberation of the people, This has a challeng­ing model to the mission of the church today, It is not in a triumphalistic, interventionist and imperialistic attitude that the church has to fulfill its mission as a servant or instrument of God. But it is by getting implicated in the struggles of the people and experiencing the suffering of the, people as God’s son did it on the Cross.

 

 

A Response to the paper

 

by Ms. Evangeline Rajkumar

Graduate Student at Southern Asia Theological Research Institute, Bangalore, India