at la 0001904593

7/28/2019 At La 0001904593

1/18

7/28/2019 At La 0001904593

2/18

RESTORATION QUARTERLY 54:3 (2012)170

proclaiming Jesus miraculous power (1:44; 5:43; 7:36; 8:26) and Jesus ten-

dency to seek privacy (1:35[?], 45; 3:7, 9; 4:10; 5:37, 40; 6:31-2; 7:17, 24,

33; 8:23; 9:2, 28, 30-1, 33; 13:3; 14:33). While several scholars have cor-

rectly noted that these and other concepts are not identical with the messianic

secret proper, this paper will treat them as connected with the secret.Such a decision4 must depend at least in part on the extent to which Mark

draws out these themes in his presentation. First, Wrede correctly noted that

both the theme of secrecy and those elements that run contrary to it occur

throughout the narrative;5there is no progression in the revelation of Jesus

identity.6 The prevalence of the theme of hiddenness throughout the text does,

however, indicate that Mark did not accidentally imbed the theme throughout

his narrative.7

Also consistent with the intent to represent Marks conception of the

theology of hiddenness is the decision to trace the distinct but related conceptswithin that cluster not separately from each other, but instead by reading them

together, following the text of the Gospel straight through from beginning to

end to see how the evangelist develops the interrelated ideas through the

course of the narrative.

At this point one more word about methodology will suffice, after which

I will commence with the proposed reading of the Second Gospel. Without

wishing to deny the validity o f other reading strategies, this paper will pursue

a sequential synchronic reading. Risnen8 and others have provided quite

fitting redaction-critical treatments of the text of the Gospel in general and themessianic secret in particular. This paper, however, will for the most part

leave aside the diachronic aspects of tradition and redaction in favor of an

attempt to read the final form o f the text as a coherent document.9 The ap-

proach is thus synchronic in that it has to do with the final form of the text.

4For a presentation of the evidence somewhat similar to that offered here, see.19(:1967)1Lewis Scott Hay, 6Marks Use of the Messianic Secret,JAAR

5William Wrede, Messianic Secret, 16-18, 12425. On the other hand, N. T. ,104(,1992,Wright, The New Testament and the People o f God(Minneapolis: Fortressis quite correct to critique Wredes overly complex explanation of a relatively simple

phenomenon..21-23,6Wrede,Messianic Secret

7Wrede, Messianic Secret, 14-15, draws a distinction between Marks intent and

his consciousness of the theme.8For helpful discussion of the tradition history of the messianic secret, see Heikki

(.1990,Messianic Secret" in Mark(Edinburgh: T&T ClarkRisnen, The9Although without unduly dismissing tensions that arise from the juxtaposition of

-36,in MarkMessianic Secretcontrasting materials and/or motifs, Risnen, The37,insists that a synchronic reading that discovers disunity or unevenness in the text

must necessarily turn to redaction criticism a point on which this paper will differ

7/28/2019 At La 0001904593

3/18

STEELE/THEOLOGY OF HIDDENNESS IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK 171

The reading strategy that I will employ is sequential in that it gives

particular attention to the original audiences experience of the text.10 Thus

instead of presenting the whole text as a flat, monolithic entity and grouping

the material thematically, this reading will take account of the text in ap-

proximately the way the original audience did: by following the narrativefrom beginning to end, noticing along the way recurrent themes in the evan-

gelists presentation.

Theology

The first instance o f Jesus hidden identity comes in the exorcism in Mark

1:21-8. Although this silencing originally referred to the act of overpowering

the demon,11the evangelist makes the silencing of demons a regular part of

Jesus work of healing/exorcism in the first of the books summaries (1:32-

34).12 According to the evangelist, the silencing occurs because they [thedemons] knew him (v. 34).13

The next occurrence of the theme o f hiddenness takes the idea in a dif-

ferent direction. In 1:40-45 Jesus attempts to keep his healing work under

wraps (w . 43-44) and even keeps his location secret (v. 45). Here is also the

first place in which the evangelist introduces points of tension with the theme

of secrecy.14 Even though Jesus wants to keep his location hidden, he is

unable to do so (1:45). Also, in spite of Jesus command to the contrary, the

healed man goes out and spreads the word of Jesus healing power (also v.

45).

10These first auditors heard the text read aloud from beginning to end, rather thanreading it to themselves from beginning to end and then rereading with the end inmind, or taking an eclectic approach (i.e., skipping around) as the modem readermight.

11Ulrich Luz, The Secrecy Motif and the Marcan Christology, in The MessianicSecret (ed. Christopher Tuckett; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983), 81, rightly affirms that

the spirits recognition of the exorcist (Jesus) and the exorcists silencing of the spiritare normal parts of most exorcism narratives. Mark has actually transformed the apo-tropaic silencing by interpreting it to be a direct response to the articulation of Jesusidentity by the spirit (cf. 1:34; 3:11-12). On this basis, William C. Robinson Jr., TheQuest for Wredes Secret Messiah, in The Messianic Secret, 105, is able to assert thatthe secrecy motif here belongs to Mark since he has transformed the silencingcommand in 1:25 into an attempt at secrecy via the summary in 3:14.

12 Cf. 3:7-12; 6:54-56.

13 Wrede, Messianic Secret, 24-26, emphasizes that Jesus here protests againstthe proclamation of his identity. Although in the cases of the other (non-demoniac)

healings Jesus prohibits the publication of his miracles, he silences the demonsbecause they know him (that is, they know who he really is). Perhaps this knowledge

7/28/2019 At La 0001904593

4/18


In another summary statement (3:11-12), Mark essentially recapitulates

the prior summary (1:3215.(34 Despite the presence of the titular opening sen-

tence16and the voice from heaven in 1:11, the narrative leaves Jesus identity

hidden from everyone in the narrative;17he is known only to the supernatural

spirits.In chapter 4 Mark begins to expand the theology of hiddenness. The

evangelist highlights Jesus tendency for parabolic discourse (already men-

tioned in 3:23-29) in order to depict Jesus teaching as in some way myste-

rious.18 Marks construction of the discourse reveals how he conceives of

Jesus secretiveness in the prior episodes.19As such, chapter 4 serves as an

interpretive index for other sections of the book.20

The chapter opens with the parable of the sower (4:3-9), a parable about

the reception of the word, essentially equivalent with the kingdom in

Marks linguistic habits.21 While the parable is not o f itself related to the mes-sianic secret, Mark contextualizes the parable in a way that connects the

reception o f the kingdom o f God with the nature of that kingdom by using his

15We may note that the evangelist introduces this summary by placing Jesus inprivate with his disciples (3:7).

16 The titular phrase may or may not have originally identified Jesus as Son ofGod.

17 Ironically, neither the proclamations of the demons (1:24,34; 3:11) nor those of

the divine voice (1:11; 9:7) have any effect whatsoever on the characters within thestory. In every instance, those standing by give no indication that they have heard orunderstood the articulation of Jesus identity. In this general direction, see Risnen,The Messianic Secret in Mark.

18 Risnen, The Messianic Secret in Mark, 132, is correct to point out that it is

the not the content of Jesus teaching that the evangelist wishes to highlight. The

teaching itself can be quite clear; the evangelist simply wishes to underline the fact ofJesus secret teaching; John R. Donahue, The Gospel o f Mark(SP 2; Collegeville, MN:Liturgical Press, 2002), 140.

On the other hand, it is advisable to connect the parable theory with the messianicsecret quite apart from any considerations of the chapters construction. Wrede,Messi-anic Secret, 64-65, does so despite detaching the theory entirely from its context (orindeed from any of the actual parables).

19 Adela Yarbro Collins, Mark (Hermeneia 41; Minneapolis: Fortress, 2007),

240-41, gives a similar view of the construction of the chapter. She notes how rabbinicchains ofmeshalim (the idea behind the wordparabole in Marks usage), use several

parables with similar narrative outlooks to transport the reader from the point of origin(often a biblical text) to the conclusion (also often a biblical text). Yarbro Collins

t th t 4 2 20 b d i thi

7/28/2019 At La 0001904593

5/18


typical literary structure (i.e., the Markan sandwich).22 The parable of the

sower (4:3-9) is separated from the explanation of the parable (4:14-20) by

Jesus theory of parables (4:11-12),23 The theory thus serves as the crux of

the meaning for the entire parable unit.24 The parable itself ends with the

admonition Whoever has ears, let them hear (v. 9), forming an ideologically consistent transition into the following verses (w . 10-12),25 which explicate

the reception of Jesus parables.26

The parable, framed by Jesus insistence to listen (vv. 3, 9), lays out a

framework for the varying responses to the gospel evident in the world of the

author(s) and recipients o f the text. The parable of the sower allegorizes that

ministry in an attempt to illustrate the existence of varying responses to the

gospel and to affirm the import of the gospel.

The disciples ask for an explanation in 4:10. Before explaining the

allegory, however, Jesus addresses the actual significance of the parable,interpreting the parable in a specific light and identifying the nature of the

parable in general as a form of discourse 27

22 The Markan sandwich is a literary device whereby the evangelist breaks up alarge block of material by inserting a smaller passage into the middle of the longer

passage in order to explain the outer framework.Scholars have suggested various structures for ch. 4. Donahue, The Gospel o f

Mark, 143, suggests a chiasm that actually separates the parable of the sower (vv. 3-9)

from its explanation (4:14-20), even though he readily admits that the two may havebeen closely united and even describes the parable theory as an interposed saying,as though assuming that the two belong together but have been separated by theinsertion of 4:10-12.

23 As Yarbro Collins, Mark, 251, notes, this arrangement creates some tensionbetween vv. 11-12 and v. 13, for the dialogue does not fit together. In w. 11-12, Jesusresponds to the disciples question as though it pertained to all the parables, but then inv. 13 he gives another response to their question as though it applied only to the

parable of the sower.24Risnen, The Messianic Secret" in Mark, 85, confesses that the majority

scholarly view credits the parable theory in particular to Marks own theology.Risnen offers a partial critique of this view, accomplished mostly on redaction-critical grounds (see p. 92), but his critique of the centrality of the parable theoryequates inconsistency in Marks presentation with unimportance, although it is notmanifestly obvious that such should be the case. What are we to make of the frequentrecurrence of these related themes if they are not central to Marks theology? How canany redactor, let alone the final redactor, have included so many similar comments forno reason, especially given that in some instances (4:10-12 is a perfect example) thecomments are presented with a load of theological freight attached to them?

25 Donahue, The Gospel o fMark, 139.

26 The injunction also recurs in v. 23.27 Georg Strecker, Theory of the Messianic Secret in Marks Gospel, in The

7/28/2019 At La 0001904593

6/18


Here is where Marks construction comes to the fore. In isolation, the

theory of parables deals only with Jesus use of parables as a didactic

device. In context, however, Mark has placed the logion here between the

parable of the sower and its explanation. The consequent effect is different

from the effect achieved by the logion in isolation.28 In context, the parabletheory highlights the distinction between insiders, or those who receive the

word, and outsiders, or those who reject the word,29 a distinction that is the

crux of the parable (4:3-9).30 Those on the inside receive the secret/mystery

of the kingdom of God (v. II),31 which is the hermeneutical answer to the

failure of those outside to understand the meaning of the parable, as well as

28 Risnens is basically consistent with mine, although this paper will broadenwhat Risnen calls missionary failure to include the persecution of Christians as

well as the rejection o f the gospel.29 The import of the distinction is of course different for Mark than for Matt.

13:13-15, where the author takes Jesus logion to mean that Jesus speaks in parablesbecause the people are unable to understand his teaching (the exact opposite of Mark4:12). Luke agrees with Marks interpretation in Luke 8:10, though the quotation ofthe text (ostensibly by Paul) in Acts 28:26 addresses merely the refusal of the people tohear the word of God, not Pauls utilization of obtuse teaching techniques (cf. Rom11:8).

30 Donahue, The Gospel o f Mark, 141-42, affirms that the repeated failure to hear(and inculcate) the word illustrates the parable theory.

31 What exactly is meant by the secret of the kingdom of God? On the analogyof several texts from Qumran (4Q417 frg. 2 1:10-11; lQphab 7:4-5) that use the word

raz (a loanword from Persian), Yarbro Collins, Mark, 248-49, understands thesecret/mystery to refer to the eschaton, stating that the eschatological dimensionexpresses both the fulfillment of the divine plan and the fact that only at the end willthe plan become evident to all. Yarbro Collinss proposal has the advantage of fittingJesus (i.e., Marks) meaning of the phrase kingdom of God, which indicates theeschatological reign of God. While Yarbro Collins does not affirm as much, thisreading essentially treats the kingdom of God as an epexegetical genitive, with thesense the secret, which is the kingdom of God.

It is also possible to find a referent for the secret in the parables themselves,specifically the parable of the sower (4:3-9). Marcus,Mark I S , 302-3, suggests thatthe secret is the advent of the eschaton without the complete destruction of the

current age. In this regard, it will be important to note the parables of the growing seed(4:26-29) and the mustard seed (4:30-32), which make points that are corollaries ofthis mystery/secret.

We may also cite evidence from the Dead Sea Scrolls (CD 3:18; 1QH 5:36) andthe NT (2 Thess 2:7; Rom 11:25-26), where the word refers to Godsunexpected and unpredictable behavior toward humans. Although Marcus does not cite

them, Pauls use in Ephesians (1:9; 3:3, 4, 9; 5:32; 6:19) and Colossians (1:26, 27; 2:2;4:3) is very similar. For further work along these lines, refer to Schweizer, The

Question of the Messianic Secret in Mark, 65-66. Schweizer explicates the idea of

7/28/2019 At La 0001904593

7/18


the driving mechanism behind the reception of the gospel (or kingdom) by

those on the inside.32 The theory implies that, according to Mark, Jesus uses

parables both to conceal and to reveal the kingdom.33 Jesus speaks in riddles

in order to create a distinction between those on the inside and those on the

outside.34While, according to Mark, Jesus himself speaks in parables in order to

prevent repentance by those outside (4:12), Mark does not follow up on the

idea, and the parable theory itself does not account for Marks inclusion of it

or the motif of hiddenness. Jesus sometimes speaks quite clearly in public, in

the hearing of all (6:2, 34; 7:14-6; 8:1; 12:1-12). It is then altogether likely

that the theory represents an explanation for the manifest failure of Jesus

mission, both in the cross and in the experience of the Markan community.35

Furthermore, it becomes clear that verse 9, although also corresponding

to verse 3, sets the parameters for the parable theory in the following verses. Itis not, as some have understood,36 an injunction to the crowds at large to

32 Dahl, The Purpose of Marks Gospel, in The Messianic Secret, 30, furtherasserts that the juxtaposition of parables spoken to those outside with the revelationof the secret of the kingdom to the insiders (kat idian) demarcates the character of theentire book as a secret(-ive) revelation. Though this is probably a case of stretching theevidence too far (Dahls article is brief, and as such includes no evidence for such an

expansive interpretation), it seems to me that Dahl hits the mark in attributing the46parable theory to the force that creates the distinction between insiders and outsiders.We may now find a parallel for the hard predestinarianism and sectarianism in the

Qumran community; David Aune, Problem of the Messianic Secret,NovT1 (1969):

15-16.33 Wrede, Messianic Secret, 56-57, emphasizes the aspect of concealment, as is

proper and consistent with the emphasis in the text; Risnen, The Messianic Secretin Mark.

34 Donahue, The Gospel o f Mark, 140, points out that those outside may refer tothose physically absent from this private scene (spatially outside) or to those who do

not accept the message (those spiritually outside).35 Risnen, The "Messianic Secret" in Mark, 114. For Risnen this literary

mechanism is essentially a fusion of Marks own world with the world of the story,which is in Risnens view the occasion of disruption in the continuity of the storyworld (21). See also 119-21, where Risnen carries through his fusion theory in hisdiscussion of Jesus interpretation o f the parable of the sower (4:14-20).

36 I am unable to follow most commentators in taking 4:33 as a statementindicating the openness of Jesus teaching. The phrase as they were able to hear it(kaths dunanto akouein) is a modifier; Jesus spoke the word to them, at least asmuch as they were able to hear it. The longer injunction to listen in vv. 9,23 is similar.

Whoever has ears to hear is a modifier; thus these two injunctions are not parallel tothe short injunction in 4:3 (akouete). Even the shifting of the imperative from a second

i l (4 3) t thi d i l (4 9 23) i di t diff i

7/28/2019 At La 0001904593

8/18


understand the parable (otherwise what can the parable theory immediately

following mean?).37 It is rather an indication of the nature of Jesus parabolic

speech as both concealing and revealing, the very theme that verses 10-12

will bring to the forefront. Whoever has ears to hear does not signify

everyone present, but only those to whom the secret of the kingdom of Godhas been given (v. 11). Contrarily, verse 13 inserts a logion that brings the

dullness of the disciples (presumably insiders) into sharp relief, especially in

light of the immediately preceding parable theory in 4:11-12. The insiders

have been given the secret o f the kingdom, but the disciples still do not

understand (cf. 4:38-41).

The parable theory also acts as a control for the explanation o f the parable

of the sower in verses 14-20. The reason that there are a variety of responses

to the word, including rejection, is that the word is a secret, the very secret of

the kingdom of God. Why do some reject the gospel? For Mark, they do sobecause God has hidden the kingdom from them.38

Following the explanation of the parable o f the sower, Mark inserts a pair

of logia (apparently unrelated to each other) that he probably considers

parables. The first logion, the parable of the lamp (v. 21), continues on the

theme of the revelation of the hidden kingdom initially sounded in verses 11-

12. In this parable, Mark inverts Jesus I have come statements by using the

figure o f the lamp instead of a simple pronoun or circumlocution such as the

Son o f Man.39 The explanation of the parable of the lamp (v. 22) interprets

meaning; to those whose ears were dulled to the note of divine authority the parablegave no light.

37 Yarbro Collins, Mark, 246, picks up on the same point. The translation ofDonahue, The Gospel o f Mark, 137, 139, is particularly fitting: You who can hearwhat I said, pay attention.

38 Yarbro Collins, Mark, 249, gives a similar reading on the basis of seeminglyanalogous occasions for Isa 6:9-10 (the text quoted) and Mark 4:11-12. The most

pivotal word of the passage may be . It seems unavoidable that it does here meanin order that. The consecutive usage of is rare, and with a subjunctive

would be a more likely formulation if the author intended to indicate result. Thus wewill assume that oti here indicates purpose. Commentators have offered variousexplanations for the affirmation that parables are a deliberate cloaking device; perhapsthese words reflect a historical reappraisal of the failure of Jesus5 mission (YarbroCollins, Mark, 249). As Marcus, Mark 1-8, 299-300, rightly points out, though, theconfluence of (the typical usage of) and demand that the reader understandv. 12 as a purpose clause.

39 The verb is a simple present active indicative third person singular.The phrase reads simply Does the lamp come. Attempts by translators to convert theverb to a passive voice (e.g., Is the lamp brought) are inaccurate and unconvincing,especially when we consider that the phrase is followed by v. 22, which depends onunderstood subjects, and v. 24, which utilizes a triple wordplay that juxtaposes a

7/28/2019 At La 0001904593

9/18


the parable in light o f the revelation of the kingdom. The true purpose of the

implied subject in this verse, as of the lamp in the prior verse, is revelation.

Although initially hidden, it is hidden only in order that it may come to light.40

The parable of the lamp also introduces an idea that the evangelist will

take up again in 9:9, namely that the hiddenness o f Jesus identity and missionwill have an end point.41 There will be a time when Jesus and his kingdom

will be revealed before all.42 The parable closes with an echo of verse 9, indi-

eating both concealment and revelation.

The parable of the measures (4:24-25) stands in some relation to the

parable of the lamp. Once again, the parable draws a sharp line between

insiders and outsiders. At the revelation of the lamp (that is, Jesus), those on

the inside will be given more, while those on the outside will lose even what

they have. Thus the author draws out the theme of revelation and procla-

mation (4:21-22) as well as the theme of secrecy (4:11-12) by weaving the

themes together here.43

had intended the phrase to be understood passively, such a construction would have fit

the context far better than does the given text. The fact that this phrase is the onlystraightforward construction in the paragraph indicates that Mark intended it to beunderstood as it is written, that is, as an active verb. More immediately to the point,

Mark uses two passive verbs to refer to the lamp within the same verse. Surely thechoice of the active represents a choice in view of the distinction the textappears to draw between the appearance of the lamp and its positioning. Lane, Mark,164-65, agrees with an active translation, speculating that Jesus uses the lamp to

refer to himself.40 William L. Lane, The Gospel according to Mark (NICNT 2; Grand Rapids:

Eerdmans, 1974), 166-67. If Mark intends to connect this logion (or pair of logia) tothe preceding verse (v. 21), then that verse must refer to Jesus and his mission, eitherdirectly (the lamp = Jesus) or indirectly (the place of the lamp as a figure for the

character of Jesus mission). On 166 Lane notes how the juxtaposition of these two

verses underlines the contrast between hiddenness and revelation; Yarbro Collins,Mark, 253.

41 Georg Strecker, Theory of the Messianic Secret in Marks Gospel, in TheMessianic Secret, 60. Although the foregoing parables deal with the hiddenness of thekingdom, the parable of the lamp insists that such hiddenness will not last forever, fornothing is hidden, except in order that it might be revealed (4:21). Here is the firstintimation of the necessary corollary of the idea of a messianic secret: its eventualdisclosure or revelation.

42 R. T. France, The Gospel o f Mark: A Commentary on the Greek Text(NIGTC2; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002), 31; Wrede,Messianic Secret, 70-71 connects this

passage with the Transfiguration account (Mk 9:2-13) and understands the time ofrevelation to refer to the resurrection.

7/28/2019 At La 0001904593

10/18


Mark 4:26-29, 30-32 contains two parables that strike at the heart of the

hiddenness of Jesus and may provide a bit of an explanation as to the purpose

of the secret. Mark returns to horticultural metaphors (picking up from the

parable of the sower) in two parables about the kingdom. These parables also

continue the bent of chapter 4 in using figures to describe conceptual corol-laries o f the messianic identity o f Jesus.44

The parable of the growing seed (4:26-29) emphasizes the vitality of the

kingdom completely apart from human effort or ability45 as well as its hidden

nature. The kingdom, like a seed, grows by itself (automatically, 4:28),

although the farmer does not know how.46 Like the parable of the lamp,

there is an interminable period of time at the end of which (the harvest time)

the mystery will become known.47 Furthermore, the parable utilizes the theol-

ogy of hiddenness to upbraid those living in the shadow of Gods hidden

kingdom.48 The community for which the Gospel is intended likely lived inthe (frankly eschatological) tension between the current status of the kingdom

as hidden and the knowledge that the kingdom will be revealed to all at some

time.49

Here we may differ with Yarbro Collins, Mark, 253. While Yarbro Collins isquite right to note the element of revelation present in the parable of the lamp, itstretches the shape of the text to apply the idea of proclamation to w . 24-25 as well.

44E.g., the word in the parable of the sower, the secret of the kingdom of God

in the parable theory, the revelation of the eschatological kingdom in the parable of thelamp, and the sociology arising from the secret in the parable of the measures.

45Yarbro Collins, Mark, 254, who suggests that the parables thus serves as anencouragement in the face of missionary failure and/or eschatological impatience.

46The word here seems to mean that the man is unaware of the process ofs growth or the cause of that growth.the seed

47See Joel 4:13, where the harvest refers to the day of the Lo r d or a similaridea. The sickle seems to be more of a weapon in that context than here. In any event,

it refers to the end of the age; perhaps Jesus intends something similar.48Yarbro Collins,Mark, 241, is quite helpful in noting how 4:21-25, 30-32 carry

-14,2-9.forward the theme of encouraging those who are sowing the word from vv20,although she leaves the parable of the growing seed out of account.

49For such an audience, the parable of the growing seed proclaims that thekingdom will not remain hidden forever. Despite the apparent failure of the mission ofJesus (at the cross) and of the community in spreading his message (for which the

parable of the sower is a figure), the church has been given the secret, which is thekingdom of God, and the knowledge that the secret will be revealed. Along these lines,see Lane, Mark, 170, although he does not carry his interpretation through to the Sitzim Leben of the audience.

The evangelist here returns to the same idea field evoked by the word in v. 11 ; Lane,Mark, 157, asserts the eschatological overtones of the word, particularlyin the LXX (Dan. 2:27, 28, 29, 30, 47; 4:9Q ; Wis. 2:22). See also Donahue, The

7/28/2019 At La 0001904593

11/18


The parable of the mustard seed (4:30-32) stretches the agricultural

metaphor yet further. Again the accent falls not on the (human) process of

farming but on the divine causation of growth.50 The growth of the kingdom is

like the growth of the mustard plant in that it begins small but ends up much

larger.51The mustard seed represents the idea of divinely motivated growththat is inexplicable from a human perspective.52 While the use of trees as

metaphors for kingdoms is a well-attested move in the biblical texts current in

Marks world, the author of the Second Gospel inverts these images by

playing a mere garden shrub or weed off against the more royal foliage of

the HBs political landscape.53 The kingdom of God is not a kingdom because

of its size or magnificence, but because of the supernatural character of its

growth.54

The capstone of the section is 4:33-34. In reiterating the assertion that

parables represent Jesus characteristic mode of speech (cf. 4:11-12), theevangelist further articulates the mechanics of the parable as a mode of

discourse. The parable both reveals and conceals because through it Jesus

speaks to the audience as they [are] able to hear (4:33). Jesus still reveals

the secret of the kingdom, however, when he is alone with those on the inside.

These two juxtaposed phrases form Marks summary of the whole issue of

Jesus parabolic discourse.55

Risnen makes his assertion in the midst of his discussion on the parable of the lamp(4:21-23, although he includes the parable of the measures [w. 24-25] along with it)is doubly curious. The parable of the lamp seems to articulate an eschatology quite theopposite of Risnens proposed use of . His central evidence comes fromthe usage in Colossians, which I consider to be consistent with the general tone of theword sketched here (see above, n. 34).

50 Yarbro Collinss comments noted above in n. 47 pertain here as well.51Donahue, The Gospel o fMark, 153-54.52 Ps 103:12 (104:12 Eng,) also emphasizes that natural processes are in fact the

work of God. In vv. 10-13 the gushing o f the springs provides a habitat for the birds.

The point seems to correlate to Marks intention, especially with the parable followingon the parable of the growing seed. Like that parable, the mustard seed grows becauseGod makes it grow (even though it is the smallest seed).

53 Ezek 17:23 refers to animals and birds resting in the shade of a tree that Godwill plant in Israel. Like the mustard seed, this cedar will come from a young sprig,

because God brings low the high tree . . . [and] makes high the low tree (v. 24). Ezek31:6 uses similar language o f Assyria; cf. Dan 4:12, 21 (LXX), where the tree is

Nebuchadnezzar. Whether the author actually intends to parody overblown messianic

expectations (as Yarbro Collins,Mark, 256, argues), the choice of the mustard plant ishardly an accident.

54 From a mere seed, the mustard plant sprouts up into a large shrub. In the sameway, the kingdom grows rapidly and dramatically, in ways that seem unlikely given

the size of the original manifestation of the kingdom; Donahue The Gospel of Mark

7/28/2019 At La 0001904593

12/18


The next block of text (4:35-6:6) contains several pericopae relating

mighty revelations of Jesus (in word and deed) with tangential relationships to

the mysterious identity of Jesus and/or the theme of hiddenness. At the

conclusion of the story of Jesus calming of the storm (4:35-41), the disciples

wonder just who Jesus is (4:41). In the following pericope (5:1-20), Jesusgives his only injunction in the entire Gospel to go home to your friends and

tell them how much the Lord has done for you (5:19), introducing a point of

conflict with the prohibitions against publication of Jesus miracles. In the

healing of Jairuss daughter (5:21-24, 35-43), Mark once again records Jesus

prohibition of those present from proclaiming the result of his mighty deed

(5:43), even though in this instance the prohibition is impossible to observe,

practically speaking.57

In the next section (6:6b-8:26), the messianic secret as such fades into the

background, although the motif of secrecy does occur at several points. At6:11, Jesus already makes a contingency plan to account for the rejection of

the gospel during the disciples missionary activity. At 6:31-32, Jesus and his

disciples withdraw into private. Later, in the midst of a controversy, Jesus

withdraws, and his disciples ask for an explanation of his teaching once more

(7:17-19).58 Mark again allows tension to develop between the opposing

themes of hiddenness and openness in 7:24. Even though Jesus wants to keep

himself hidden, he is unable to do so.59 In 7:31-37, Jesus heals a man in pri-

vate,60 then commands them [sic] not to say anything about it.61 Jesus is,

dependent on revelation of the mystery of the kingdom in order for those who witnessthe miracles to perceive their true significance.

56 We may note, however, that Jesus sends the man home to his friends (in otherpassages, Mark puts Jesus in a house [oikov] or in private [ ] when hegives secret teachings or explanations). The mans proclamation in the Decapolis (v.20) may in fact form a contrast with Jesus command; Wrede, The Messianic Secret,140-41, reads the text along these lines, although he admits that his is not the generallyaccepted reading.

57 Hooker, St. Mark, 67; France,Mark, 240, notes the obvious incongruity of the

nature of the miracle with Jesus command to keep it hidden. What might Jesus orMark mean by the command to keep the healing secret? Surely the command functionsat least in part as a rhetorical device (since it cannot have been literally obeyed).

58 It is notable that here the disciples ask Jesus to explain this parabole to them,even though the preceding logion is neither a metaphor nor an allegory. Two pointsbear mentioning: first, the evangelist probably intends the word parabole to carry thesemantic range of the Hebrew term msl> which could mean anything from a riddle to afigure of speech. Second, the evangelist here introduces yet another point ofinconsistency, yet as always does so in service of his greater story. Risnen, The,4Messianic Secret in Mark, 132, says it best: thefact of esoteric teaching seems

more important to him [Mark] than its content.59 Note esp. the phrase , here translated he could not be hid.

7/28/2019 At La 0001904593

13/18


however, unable to maintain secrecy, as his prohibition has rather the effect of

encouraging the crowd to acclaim him all the more (v. 36).62 In the healing of

the blind man in Bethsaida, Jesus takes the man out of town (v. 23), heals

(.26.him, and then sends him away, but warns him not to go into the town (v

s confessionContrary to several interpretations that try to find in Peter(8:27-30)the turning point from the lack of understanding exhibited by the

4:11)to this)disciples to the revelation of the secret of the kingdom of God

privileged group o f insiders,63 we must note that even directly after the central

confession,64 Peter is unable to understand the destiny of the Son of Man

66.(8:31-33,)65incurring rebuke from Jesus

62 Thus Yarbro Collins,Mark, 374, theorizes that the commands to silence in the

miracle stories are not perceived to protect the identity of Jesus, but rather function asa rhetorical device to demonstrate that Jesus supernatural power cannot be hidden.63 This pericope stands in the middle of Marks narrative, and the reader must

recognize its significance. While Wrede and others are correct to note that this passagedoes not inaugurate a new era in the narrative wherein the disciples now understand

Jesus messianic identity, it is a turning point in the narrative. The passage is a hingewhere the narrative pivots from emphasizing Jesus mighty deeds to emphasizing hisdestiny (to suffer, die, and rise again); see Lane,Mark, 288-89. The central position ofthe confession indicates not that the disciples thereafter understand but that thenarrative thereafter turns toward explaining what Peters confession entails. Wrede,

Messianic Secret, 115-20, argues persuasively against viewing Peters confession asthe point after which the disciples understand who Jesus is.

64 It is difficult to pin down what exactly Mark intends by placing these words inPeters mouth. The following pericope (8:31-33) demonstrates that Peter specificallystill does not understand that the Son of Man must suffer and die. Either Mark isattempting to report that Peter did not understand that the Son of Man was the Messiah(or did not understand the Isaianic literature as the later Christian community did) or

Mark is using the character Peter in two contrasting ways in as many successivepericopes in order to contrast the revelation of Jesus identity and destiny with thecontinued failure (by the disciples, the Jewish leaders, and the crowd) to understand

precisely these aspects of who they say that he is (w . 27, 29). Mark simply usescharacters and character groups in whatever way suits his purposes at the moment.When he wishes to emphasize the privileged position of those within the community,

he can put a confession of Jesus identity in Peters mouth. When he wants to highlightthe hiddenness of Jesus mission, however, he can also have the same character attest alack of understanding. These comments fall generally within the scheme outlined byseveral wherein one way to resolve the tensions between hiddenness and openness inthe Gospel is to read the text synchronically (that is, to read it as though Mark held

both ideas in mind, apparently without considering them to be mutually exclusive inany absolute sense, although contradictoiy at some points, wherein he [Mark] gives

evidence of some confusion). See Hooker, St. Mark, 68.65 Peter, in 8:27-33, provides an excellent example of a character who fulfills

7/28/2019 At La 0001904593

14/18


Soon after, Jesus reveals his glory to Peter, James, and John in his

transfiguration (9:2-9).67 After the event is past, Jesus sternly commands68 his

disciples not to proclaim what they had seen.69 In Mark 9:9 we may discern

something of the meaning that the evangelist assigns to the whole theme of

hiddenness. Here Mark records Jesus5 warning to the disciples not to tellanyone what they have seen until the Son of Man has risen from the dead

(9:9). Wrede thought that the best understanding of this modicum of evidence

was to simply give the text a straightforward reading and suppose that the

resurrection is the hinge o f the theme of secrecy in Marks thought.70 We must

ask, however, to what extent 9:9 is determinative for the rest of the text.71 The

application of 9:9 to the entirety of the book first of all must explain how the

original auditors were supposed to connect a theme that Mark only introduces

in the second half of the book with all the various motifs in the first half of the

book.72 Concurrently, those who defend the theory must also account for whyMark makes no mention of this terminal point anywhere in the narrative after

9:9. For a sequential, synchronic reading such as the one proposed here,

Wredes theory is, in the final evaluation, untenable: Marks audience prob-

ably did not (or was not able to) read back-to-front or eclectically. There-

fore, the evangelist probably did not imbed the key to his theme of secrecy

more than halfway into the book and expect the auditors to instantaneously

apply it to all previous occurrences of the theme.73

Mark then proceeds to relate Jesus healing of a boy with an evil spirit, a

healing that perhaps takes place in order to avoid creating a scene (9:25).74

of the Son of Man (that being, to suffer and die at the hands of the Jewish leaders andthen to rise again, vv. 32-33).

The verb occurs in Marks narrative already in 1:25; 3:12 (both in response todemons/demoniacs revealing his identity); 4:39. The latter instance is not related to theothers. Based on the other two occasions when Mark uses the word to describe Jesusprohibition against the revelation o f his identity, we may understand the verb the same

way here. Thus the theory that Jesus rejected Peters confession is inconsistent with theprior evidence, although 8:32, 33 do seem to support such a meaning for the verb. At

other points, it seems to be the word for Jesus exercising of miraculous power (1:25may fit here; cf. 4:39; 9:25). The final usage in Mark (10:48) returns once again to theveiling of Jesus identity, although only indirectly.

67 Here again, the character of Peter displays startling ignorance (9:6, cf. 9:10-13).

68 occurs several times as Jesus prohibition against the proclama-tion of his identity. See above, n. 62.

69 Risnen, The Messianic Secret in Mark, 185, esp. n. 149.70 Wrede, The Messianic Secret, 67-68.71 Risnen, The Messianic Secret in Mark, 188-89.

72 Even if the parable of the lamp (4:21-23) and perhaps the surrounding parablesprefigure the eventual eschatological revelation of Jesus, the theme is still not brought

7/28/2019 At La 0001904593

15/18


Jesus then once more heads indoors, where his disciples ask him questions in

private (9:28). The pericope is followed by a passion prediction (9:30-32) that

highlights Jesus desire to travel incognito (v. 30).

The question of Jesus identity features prominently in the buildup to the

passion narrative, beginning in the controversy story located in ll:27-33.75The identity of the Christ then recurs once more in 12:35^40, Jesus exposi-

tion on Ps 110.76Mark later provides an expected setting for Jesus escha-

tological discourse in chapter 13: Jesus sits alone with the four fishermen

(13:3-4).77 During the apocalyptic discourse (13:28), Mark also records Jesus

exhortation to the disciples to learn from the fig tree its parabole.78

Within the passion sequence, Jesus yet again removes himself from

others (14:33). Mark breaks from the messianic secret at 14:62-63, where he

records Jesus articulation of his identity and destiny in decidedly messianic

terms before the Sanhdrin.79 Again in 15:2 Jesus affirms to Pilate that he isKing of the Jews. The centurion at the cross makes an ironic confession of

the identity of Jesus (15:31-32), even at the nadir of Jesus rejection by both

the people and the authorities.

While the ending of the Gospel has justly received a great deal of text-

critical attention, it will do to note that, if we accept the shortest ending (v, 8)

as original, the ending of the story is still shrouded in mystery. Although the

man at the tomb proclaims the resurrection of Jesus, Mark gives no descrip-

tion of what that might mean (cf. 9:10). To the very end, all those around

Jesus remain unable to penetrate the mystery o f Gods work through him, andeven his followers flee the tomb in fear and trembling (16:8).80

Conclusion

The various parts of the theology of secrecy are connected by a common

purpose.81 Although it is correct to separate the various elements from one

another, the moniker messianic secret is still useful as a descriptor for the

several and various lines of thought that all point toward a central leitmotif in

Marks presentation: the ideology and theology of hiddenness. The prohibitions

75 The pericope introduces another parablethe parable of the tenants (12:1-12).76 On the connection of 12:35-40 with Bartimaeuss acclamation of Jesus as Son

of David (10:47,48), see Risnen, The Messianic Secret in Mark.77 13:3 says the disciples questioned Jesus , a pet phrase of Marks,

which I have elsewhere translated as 4in private.

7s Syntax altered. Again, the following teaching is not a parable per se. Marksimply wants the auditor to get the impression that Jesus spoke in riddles, whether thespecific teaching is ambiguous or unclear.

79 Ironically, although Jesus articulates his identity here for the first time in thenarrative, the authorities reject him, and as such his identity remains hidden.

7/28/2019 At La 0001904593

16/18


directed to demons represent an attempt to hide Jesus identity.82 While the

characters in the narrative are in large part unaware of Jesus status as

messiah, the spirits have a supernatural awareness o f Jesus dignity, despite

which the very identity brought into question remains hidden. The prohib-

tions to the disciples function similarly: they are not to reveal the identity ofJesus, at least not right now.83

A close corollary of these themes is the miracle secret, wherein the

theme of secrecy often functions as a sort of foil for the contrasting theme of

revelation.84 Jesus commands those whom he heals not to make his healing

capabilities known, but he is unsuccessful. Although Jesus wishes to keep his

glory hidden, people cannot keep silent about his miraculous power.85

Mark also wishes to emphasize in his presentation of Jesus teaching that

Jesus taught in riddles {parabola!). Even when Jesus teaching is quite intel-

ligible, Mark insists that Jesus teaching was mysterious. Jesus cryptic speechhighlights and perpetuates the distinction between insiders and outsiders.

While Jesus reveals the secret of the kingdom of God to the insiders, hespeaks in riddles in order to prevent outsiders from understanding his identity

or the nature of the kingdom.

The evangelist also presents Jesus at times attempting to hide his pres-

enee from the public eye. He often withdraws from the crowds and explains

things to his disciples in the house or in private, where a number of his

miracles also occur. Here again, Mark sometimes utilizes the motif of secrecy

in order to bring out the opposite point, namely, that he could not be hid(7:24).86

All of these lines o f reasoning point to the same general motif, a motif

that runs throughout Marks narrative. The messianic identity and dignity of

Jesus was hidden during his lifetime. The kingdom of God, or the action of

82 France, The Gospel o fMark, 31.83 France, The Gospel o f Mark, 31.84 Though he refers not to the healing miracles but to other dramatic turning

points in the narrative, N. T. Wright, People o f God, 395, emphasizes that theevangelist uses the theme of secrecy to invite insiders to discover the inner secret

behind the strange outer story.85 Marcus,Mark 1-8, 480, makes this point with reference to the healing in 7:31-

37; similarly Luz, The Secrecy Motif and the Marcan Christology, 79. Dunn, TheMessianic Secret in Mark, 121-22, delivers a solid rebuttal to Wredes proposedimpetus for the creation of the secret on precisely this point; if the secret were intendedto revamp an originally unmessianic life of Jesus, what on earth might Mark havemeant by including alongside of it the repeated emphases on openness? As such, wecannot assign the creation of the secret to a Christologizing tendency; for in the text of

the Gospel as we have it, the theme of secrecy frequently occurs side by side with theopposing theme of revelation.

86 In fact Luz The Secrecy Motif and the Marcan Christology 77 is correct

7/28/2019 At La 0001904593

17/18


God in the world, is present in Jesus in mysterious ways.87 Jesus and his

message experience rejection (both in his life and in the life of the Markan

community), but rejection does not negate the validity of the mission.88

Furthermore, in spite of Jesus best attempts to hide his identity, his glory

breaks through. People proclaim Jesus miraculous power because it simplycannot remain concealed. While Jesus and his message were at one time

hidden, they are even now (in the audiences present time) in the process of

being revealed, first in his resurrection (9:9) and eventually in his glorious

appearing (14:62).

The Markan community likewise lived in the eschatological mystery, tom

between the evident hiddenness of the message (as evidenced by the mis-

sionary failure by the church and persecution of the church by the state)89 and

the revelation of the secret to the insiders (as evidenced by Jesus secret

teaching delivered to the disciples, which is seen as the foundation of theteaching inherited by the Markan community). The theme of secrecy both

affirms them in the midst of apparent failure and reframes their self-image as

the people to whom God has given the secret of the kingdom.

7/28/2019 At La 0001904593

18/18

Copyright and Use:

As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use

according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as

otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement.

No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the

copyright holder(sV express written permission. Any use, decompiling,

reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a

violation of copyright law.

This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permission

from the copyright holder( s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of ajournai

typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However,for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article.

Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific

work for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or coveredby your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the

copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available,or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).

About ATLAS:

The ATLA Serials (ATLAS) collection contains electronic versions of previously

published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAScollection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association

(ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc.

The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the AmericanTheological Library Association.

at la 0001904593

Documents