The Gospel Prologues and Their Function

Return to Index or return to Mark Exegetical Notes

[This was published as "Mark 1,1-15, Matthew 1,1-4,16, Luke 1,1-4,30, John 1,1-51: The Gospel Prologues and their Function", Studia Evangelica VI, ed. by E. A. Livingstone (Akademie Verlag, Berlin, 1973), pp. 154-188.  As of 2008 I stand by the conclusions for the prologues of Mark, Matthew and Luke.  I am not so sure about John.  I am reasonably convinced that John 1.1-14, with the reading  peuma instead of sarx, was the prologue for the first (?) edition of John that ended with John 19, but after that I am not clear.]

Contents:
    I. Some other first-century prologues
                A Structural Analysis of I Thessalonians
   II. Determining the end of each prologue
        A. Mission to all men
        B. Locality at the end: Galilee and Rome
        C. Presence of Jesus
        D. The End of the Prologues
               Motifs of John 1 recurring in John 20 and 21
  III. Smaller patterns and the overall pattern
  IV. Structural relationship of the gospels to their prologues
        A. Mark
                A provisional triadic outline of Mark 1.16-8.26
                Markan Prologue: An Overall Chiasmus?
        B. Matthew
                The Temptation Narrative (Matt. 3.1-11) and its Themes
                The Drama (Matt. 4.17-28.2) and its Themes
        C. Luke-Acts
                Outline of Luke 4.31-Acts 28.31
                The Lukan Prologue (Luke 1.1-4.40 and some of its Apparent Counterparts
        D. John
   V. Three Hypotheses  
2004: A Postcript             
Notes

        The thesis of this essay is that each of the canonical gospels begins with a section, either brief or extended, which precedes the main gospel narrative.  The apparent function of this prologue we may summarize in three statements.  (1) The prologue functions as a précis of the remainder of the gospel, and thus it includes a guide to the structure of the gospel.  (2) It provides the setting or frame of reference in terms of which the whole of each gospel is to be understood.  (3) It is also, so to speak, a table of contents which indicates, either explicitly or implicitly, the major themes and motifs of each gospel.

I.  Some other first-century prologues

        If we look for examples of this type of prologue in other literature of the first century A.D., then Livy's Preface to his History of Rome is one such example.  In it Livy indicates both the scope of his work (which is the history of Rome from the beginning to the present) and his intention in writing it (which is to show Rome's past glories and later degeneration).  But this example from Livy is not fully comparable to the gospel prologues inasmuch as it is very obviously a preface and it is set apart as such, while the gospel prologues are not explicitly set apart.
        However, we find implicit examples of prologues in those Christian writings which precede the gospels, namely, in the thanksgiving sections of the Pauline epistles, as Paul Schubert demonstrated over thirty years ago¹.  Schubert showed that the Pauline thanksgiving sections indicate the subjects about which Paul intended to write.
        I Thessalonians^1b furnishes a good example of how such a thanksgiving section is in effect a guide to both subject matter and structure in the remainder of the epistle.  Here we find in the thanksgiving (1.2-10) a threefold subject which is repeated approximately twelve times in the remainder of the epistle in a basically cyclical structure.  We may note that the subject appears to be announced succinctly at least once, if not quite twice, with 1.2-3 before being introduced at greater length in 1.4-10.  This multiple announcement is a phenomenon which probably also occurs within the gospel prologues as we shall see subsequently.
        Below is a provisional analysis of I Thessalonians along the lines just indicated.

A Structural Analysis of I Thessalonians

        The above analysis of I Thessalonians indicates how clearly the epistle is structured around the subjects announced in the opening thanksgiving.  This detailed example and Livy's preface are enough to indicate that prologues of the type posited in this essay were being used in the first century A.D. apart from and prior to the writing of the gospels.

II.  Determining the end of each prologue

        If the gospel prologues are indeed a paradigm of all that is to follow, then we have what appears to be an easy way of determining the length of each prologue.  We only need to look at the end of each gospel and then see how far we have to go from the beginning of that gospel in order to reach something which corresponds to its end.  We must therefore begin with the ends of the gospels, and our first question is, what is the subject of the end of each gospel?

A.  Mission to all men

        1.  John.  Let us begin with the Fourth Gospel and work back to Mark.  John 21 may well be an epilogue added to the autograph, but let us take it, at least for the time being, as the intended end of the Fourth Gospel.
        Aileen Guilding² has shown very good grounds for believing that John 21 is built upon the lections and themes of the feast of Pentecost.  In the first century A.D. this feast had as a dominant theme, the making of proselytes.  This outward-looking missionary theme may be seen explicitly in the three commands given to Peter at his restoration.  If he loves the Lord, then he will "feed my lambs" (21.15), "feed my sheep" (21.16), and "feed my little sheep" (21.17).  Thus those who love Jesus are to participate in the fulfilment of the prediction of John 10.s fold are to be brought in so that there may be one flock under one shepherd.  Hence the close of our canonical Fourth Gospel is concerned with the mission to all men.
        2.  Luke-Acts.  The Third Gospel, Luke-Acts, ends with Paul in Rome, the heart of the Gentile world³, and the very last words of the second volume are concerned with the continuing mission to all men (Acts 28.28-31), as we may note when we begin with the closing words of Paul to the Jews at Rome:

        Thus Luke-Acts ends with the ongoing mission to Jews and Gentiles alike.
        3.  Matthew.  Matthew's Gospel originally ended with the words, "Go make disciples of all nations in my name, teaching them to hold fast all that I have taught you, and lo, I am with you all the days until the completion of the age" (Matt. 28.19-20)⁴.  Once more, it is the mission to all men that is the closing subject of this gospel.
        4.  Mark.  The Gospel according to Mark ends with the necessity for the disciples to follow Jesus into Galilee if they would see him (Mark 16.7).  I would suggest that this necessity of following Jesus into Galilee of the Gentile, as it is called in Isa. 9.1, is what fills the women with fear.  It is the same fear that the disciples felt in following Jesus to Jerusalem in the way of the cross (Mark 10.32).  It is the same fear which the disciples felt twice before as they moved across the Sea of Galilee into the Gentile mission: once (Mark 4.41) when the storm was stilled on their way to the Decapolis and the Gerasene demoniac⁵, and again (Mark 6.50) when Jesus walked on the water as they struggled in rowing toward the wilderness feeding of about 4,000 mixed Jews and Gentiles.  Therefore it seems that we have good grounds for concluding that Mark ends with the demand that the Church go in the way of the cross into the mission to the Gentiles.  If we hark back to the Fourth Gospel, we may note the same dual thrust at the end, for not only is Peter (as the typical disciple?) given the command to feed and tend the sheep, but he is also told, "What is that to thee? Follow me!" (John 21.22; cf. 21.18 f.), which we may take as the demand to follow Jesus in the way of the cross no matter what happens.

B.  Locality at the end: Galilee and Rome

        Let us look for the moment at locality.  Mark ends with a saying about the necessity of going into Galilee (Mark 16.7; cf. 14.28).  Matthew ends on a mountain in Galilee (Matt. 28.16).  John ends by the Sea of Tiberius in Galilee (John 21.1), and Luke-Acts ends in Rome, the very heart of Gentile territory.  Therefore, for at least Mark, Matthew and John, we may also look for a mention of Galilee at the end of the prologue.

C.  Presence of Jesus

        Our third and last common motif concerns the presence of Jesus.  If Jesus is with the disciples at the end of the age in Matthew (Matt. 28.20), he is also with the disciples as he goes before them in Mark (Mark 16.7).  In the Fourth Gospel it is the risen and ascended Jesus (cf. John 20.17) who appears to the disciples, and although he is said to come to them (John 20.19, 26; cf. 21.4, 23) he is never said to leave them, neither in John 20 nor John 21.
        At the beginning of Acts the evangelist says, "In the former book ... I told you all that Jesus began to do and to say" (Acts 1.1), which implies that thus second volume will continue the story of what Jesus does and says.  This is confirmed by the answer given to Paul's question on the road to Damascus: "Who are you, Lord?"  "I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting" (Acts 9.5).  The Church in its ministry is Jesus in action; he is no absentee Lord.  It is also to be seen in Philip's preaching to the Ethiopian eunuch.  He does not preach to the eunuch about Jesus; he instead, in the Greek, preaches to him "Jesus" (Acts 8.35).
        Thus in all four gospels Jesus is present to the disciples and active in the Church as his disciples carry on the work of Jesus in his mission of bringing the demand, the grace, and the promise of the Gospel of God to all men.

D.  The End of the Prologues

        Now we are ready to try to ascertain where each prologue ends.  What we are looking for concerns Jesus, the Gentiles, and the proclaiming of the gospel.  In the case of Mark, Matthew and John, we are also looking for a mention of Galilee.  Therefore, what we want in Mark, Matthew and John is something like Jesus entering Galilee proclaiming the gospel, and in the case of Luke, we may encounter a speech about Gentiles addressed to recalcitrant Jews.
        1.  Mark.  In Mark we find what we are looking for in 1.14-15:

             We may therefore take the Markan prologue to be 1.1-15.
        2.  Matthew.  In Matthew the relevant passage is 4.12-16:

             Therefore we shall take as our Matthaean prologue 1.1-4.16.  This is the same result as that of Edgar Krentz⁶ who arrived at it by a different method.
            You may well wonder why we do not also include in the prologue the next verse, 4.17, which reads: ' From then on Jesus began to preach, and to say, "Repent ye; for the kingdom of heaven is at hand."'
        Briefly, the reason is that this verse begins with the phrase ἀπὸ τότε, "from then on", and in each of its three Matthaean occurrences the evangelist uses it to mark the onset of a major section of the main gospel narrative.  We shall see this later when we look at the structure of the whole of Matthew's gospel.
        3.  Luke-Acts.  Let us begin by looking more closely at the final section of Acts 28.  We see that Paul is in Rome speaking to Jews.  He says that their reaction fulfils a prophecy of Isaiah, and then he speaks bout the salvation of God being sent to the Gentiles.  Finally, at the very end Paul is preaching unhindered to all who come to him.  Therefore, what we are looking for at the end of the prologue is Jesus speaking to Jews about the fulfilment of Isaiah, and also speaking to them about salvation coming to the Gentiles, probably in their own territory.  The final motif should be that of Jesus not being hindered.
        All this we find in Luke 4.16-30, where Jesus reads and preaches in the synagogue at Nazareth.  Jesus receives the scroll of the prophet Isaiah.  He finds Isa. 61 and reads the first verse and only part of the second verse.  He ends with the words, "To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord".  The very next phrase is, "and the day of vengeance of our God".  Jesus does not simply omit this phrase; he effectively shuts it off by rolling up the scroll, handing it back, and sitting down to preach.  There is to be no note of vengeance against the Gentiles.
        When Jesus begins to tell the assembly, "Today this scripture has been fulfilled in your ears" (Luke 4.21), the assembly is amazed at his words and then begin to reject him by questioning his status, saying, "Is not this Joseph's son?" (4.22).  Jesus replies with what we may take to be a passion motif, for he says, "Doubtless you will say to me this parable: Physician, heal thyself!" (4.23), and this same motif is repeated to Jesus on the cross in Luke 23.35 in the words, "He saved others; let him save himself," and in Luke 23.39 in the words, "Save thyself!"
        After this passion motif  Jesus goes on to say, "Amen, I say to you that no prophet is acceptable in his own country."  Here I believe we may see the (at least temporary) rejection of the gospel by most of the Jews, a theme which occurs repeatedly throughout the second volume, as well as at the very end of Acts.  Jesus immediately tells of Elijah being sent to a Gentile widow in her own land of Sidon, and of Naaman the Syrian being cleansed in the days of Elisha, Naaman being a Gentile who comes from a Gentile land and returns to it.
        In the last three verses of the story we see the motif of Jesus being ultimately unhindered (Luke 4.28-30):

        In the words of the subtitle of the Torch commentary on Acts by R. R. Williams⁷, "Nothing can stop the Gospel!" - either here in the prologue or at the end of Acts.
        The significance which we attributed to the omission of vengeance in Jesus' reading from Isaiah is borne out in the whole of Luke-Acts by the evangelist's frequent and distinctive use of the phrase "signs and wonders."  When we look at the Old Testament, the phrase "signs and wonders" invariably denotes God's judgements and actions against the oppressors of Israel⁸, but in Luke-Acts they are always "signs and wonders" of God's mercy and favour toward all men in whom he is pleased.  This perhaps will enable us to be somewhat more confident about concluding that in Luke 4.16-30 we have the last section of the Lukan prologue.
        4.  John.  When we look for the first mention of Galilee in John, we do not find it until we reach John 1.43 in which it says that Jesus was minded to go forth into Galilee.  Jesus then finds Philip and says to him, "Follow me" (John 1.44).  Philip actively evangelizes by finding Nathaniel, preaching to him,, and bringing him to Jesus.  In John 21.1 Nathaniel is specified as belonging to Cana of Galilee, so that in the eyes of the author of John 21 we are apparently already in Galilee or at least dealing with a Galilean at this point in John 1.  The discussion with Nathanael ends with the passion motif of verse 51: "Amen, Amen, I say to you, you will see heaven opened and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of man."  This refers to Jesus on his glory on the cross as the means of access to God for men.  This double theme of the the glory and the access on the cross is already to be found in the Gospel according to Mark⁹, but John intensifies it, as can be seen in John 12.20 ff. when it is to Philip once again that the Greeks come, wishing to see Jesus.  And Jesus' reply to this information is that, "Now is the hour for the Son of man to be glorified."  John's message is that, if you would see Jesus in his glory, you must know him as the crucified one, and it is as the one lifted up upon the cross that Jesus draws all men to him (John 12.32).  Furthermore, in John 20.19-23 the gifts of peace, Holy Spirit, and forgiveness of sins - that is, the new genesis - come from the one who bears the marks of the passion in his hands and side.  For all these reasons John 1.51 is an appropriate conclusion to the prologue.
        In John 2.1, the phrase "on the third day," which looks like a resurrection motif, might lead us to think that the wedding in Cana should also be included in the prologue.  But this is highly unlikely in view of the apparent relationship of John 1 to John 29 and 21.  As can be seen from the table below, both John 20 and John 21 appear to be carefully structured against John 1.  Thus, whether or not one accepts John 21 as integral to the intended scheme of the Fourth Gospel, we nevertheless have a reasonable warrant for concluding that the Johannine prologue is the whole of the first chapter of John.^9b 

III.  Smaller patterns and the overall pattern

        We have arrived at our simple prologues, simple in the sense of entire, but it would appear that there are smaller units within each of these prologues.   In Luke, for instance, there are at least two explicit Gentile motifs an possibly four more implicit ones before we reach the synagogue at Nazareth.  The explicit ones are "a light for revelation to the Gentiles" in the Nunc Dimittis (Luke 2.32), and "Adam, the son of God" at the end of he genealogy (Luke 3.38)¹¹.  The possibly implicit ones occur at the end of the Magnificat with its mention of Abraham's seed (Luke 1.55), at the end of the Benedictus where the morning sun will shine on those that sit in darkness (Luke 1.79), in the song of the heavenly host with its promise of peace on earth for men of good will (Luke 2.14), and finally at the end of the quotation from Isaiah in Luke 3, namely, that "all flesh shall see  the salvation of God" (Luke 3.6).  
        Within John 1 some apparent miniature paradigms within the overall paradigm of the prologue may be seen, for example, in vv. 1-5, vv. 10-14, and vv. 15-18.
        In Matthew three people pose threats to Jesus' course before the temptation narrative is reached, viz., Joseph (Matt. 1.19), Herod (2.13), and John (3.14).  of these three at least the story of the wise men, Herod, the flight, and the coming up out of Egypt is a passion prefigurement.  The elements in this sequence are based on Jewish Passover traditions as has been indicated by Cyril Cave¹².  In these same infancy stories we find the same Davidic "King of the Jews" theme which is later stressed in the passion narrative.
        We shall be in a better position to look at subdivisions within the Matthaean prologue later in this essay.
        In general these smaller patterns within a prologue appear to be repetitions of the larger pattern of the whole of each prologue.  Despite their differing emphases all four gospel prologues (and many, if not all, smaller units within them) seem to have a common overall pattern, which we may roughly outline as follows¹³.
                    A.    A Genesis motif (i.e. a concern with creation).
                    B.    Israel and the promise of the scriptures.
                    C.    John the forerunner.
                    D.    Jesus and the cross (with Passover/Exodus motifs, and elements of Isaac typology in at      least Mark, Matthew and John).
                    E.    The Holy Spirit and the good news for all men.
        This appears to be a building upon, and extension of the final development of the confessional pattern in the Old Testament as presented in Nehemiah 9.6-37¹⁴.
        Thus far we have argued that there is a definite prologue to each gospel and that these prologues have a skeletal outline in common.  Let us now see how each prologue may be related structurally to the remainder of the gospel.

IV.  Structural relationship of the gospels to their prologues
A.  Mark

        If Mark was written ca. A.D. 60-65, then it was intended to meet the needs of Christians of the second generation.  Perhaps it was written at Rome after the fire and the trouble with Nero.  Therefore it was written for a situation in which many apparently were saying, "If only I could walk and talk with the Lord, how easy it would be to be strong enough to persevere now in obeying his voice and in following in his steps."
        Mark's answer to them is that they are wrong.  Jesus is the only man who has been truly strong, and his strength as God's Son lay in his total dependence upon his Father in prayer¹⁵.  You can hear Jesus to heed him and see him to follow him only by grace, for those who heard him and saw him in the flesh all fell away when they tried to obey him or follow him in their own strength¹⁶.  And if you would follow him to see and know him, you must follow him in the way of the cross (Mark 8.34)¹⁷.  If you would know him now as your Lord, God's Son, who is present to sustain you, then you must confess him as Lord in your life, and you must confess him at three levels.  (1) You must have a personal relationship with him in terms of taking up your cross and following him (Mark 8.34-38).  (2) You must live out that relationship with your brothers and sisters in the Church, which is the Temple made without hands (Mark 9.36 f.; cf. 14.58).  And (3) you must live out that relationship with all men in the mission to the Gentiles (Mark 10.42-45).
        As you do this, the crucified Son of God is present to you, for his parousia was in his passion¹⁸, and you are already in the new life of the End-time, although the final consummation will not come until the gospel has been preached to all the nations (Mark 13.10).
        When we look to see what controls the structure of the gospel, it appears to be the triadic concern for the relationship of one-to-one, of one to the Church, and of one to all men (by way of the cross)^18b.  Let us look at two major triads and then at two minor ones.
        The first major triad consists of (1) God's witness to Jesus alone at his baptism that he is God's Son (1.11), (2) God's witness to the disciples, that is, to the Church, at the transfiguration that Jesus is his Son who is to be obeyed (9.7), and (3) the Centurion's witness to all men at the cross on the basis of how Jesus died: "Truly, this man was God's Son" (15.39).
        The second major triad is exactly parallel to the first one, and it consists of the witness of the unclean spirits.  (1) In mark 1.24 a single unclean spirit calls Jesus "the Holy One of God."  (2) In 3.111 unclean spirits (plural) say that Jesus is "the Son of God."  And (3) in 5.7, at Gerasa in the Decapolis, a legion of unclean spirits cry out in the vocative, and hence without definite articles, "Jesus, Son of God Most High!"  This is in Gentile territory, it is anarthrous, and it uses a predominantly Hellenistic designation for God: "God Most High."  Thus it corresponds precisely to the Centurion's confession in 15.39.
        Our examples of two smaller triads concern Judas and Peter.  Judas denies Jesus three times in a reversal of the usual order: (1) before the chief priests of all the people (14.10 f.), (2) by guilty silence in the midst of the Church's fellowship at the last supper (14.20), and (3) in his direct relationship with Jesus when he kisses him (14.44 f.).  Peter's denials are similar but in the more common order.  (1) He first denies Jesus in a direct confrontation with the maid of the high priest (14.67), (2) next he denies him when she speaks to the bystanders (14.69), and (3) finally he denies him    when the bystanders accost him as a Galilean (14.70 f.).  This last denial parallels the Centurion's confession, for the bystanders say, "Truly of them you are," and Peter says, "I do not know this man."  In 15.39 the Centurion says, "Truly, this man God's Son was," and these are the only two occurrences in Mark of ἀληθῶς, "truly," and of the phrase οὗτος ὁ ἄνθρωπος, "this man."
        It is our contention that the whole of the gospel according to Mark is a continuous repetition of the triadic pattern of concern with the individual, with the Church, and with all men.  The concern for all men comes only through the Son of man on the cross (cf. Mark 10.45), so that it is not surprising  if passion motifs often form the third member of any particular triad.  Below is an outline which attempts to work out this structure for the first half of the gospel after the prologue (Mark 1.16-8.26).  We shall return to the prologue subsequently.

        The foregoing outline can be continued to the end of  Mark in the same basically triadic fashion.  However, assuming that the outline carries conviction, we have seen enough of the Markan structure and concerns to provide sufficient support for what we are now about to suggest concerning the prologue.
        If our argument up to now has been essentially correct, then the beginning of the prologue, Mark 1.1., presents us with an intentional triad in the phrase "Jesus Christ God's Son."  "Jesus" is the one; "Christ" is Peter's confession of him in the midst of the disciples as the Messiah of Israel, and "God's Son2 is what the Gentile centurion confesses him as having been to all and sundry.  This same pattern appears to be discernible throughout much of the remainder of the prologue, and the following table attempts to show some of these patterns.

        The repeated coupling together of John and Jesus in the prologue is an indication at the beginning of the gospel that their ways are linked, and it appears to be the case that everything which is narrated about John has its exact counterpart in what is narrated about Jesus.  This can be seen most readily by referring back to Mark 6.14-28 in our outline of Mark 1.16-8.26.  Thus we may conclude that John's betrayal in Mark 1.14 stands for Jesus' betrayal and passion, so that in 1.14-15 we have good warrant for seeing the sequence of the passion and mission to all men.⁴²
        By now we have seen most of the major motifs of Mark's gospel which are to be found explicitly in the prologue.  The ones which are implicit in the prologue seem to lie in the OT quotations.  It is now widely recognized that the NT writers often used the scriptures allusively, so that a citation may be a pointer to a longer portion of an OT book than merely the words which are quoted.
        In Mark 1.2 the passage cited is from Mal. 3.1.  The following are significant Markan themes which are to be found in Mal. 3.1-4:

        The temple theme runs through the gospel, but Jesus' coming to the temple is to be found at its most obvious level in Mark 11.11, 15-18.  Mal. 3.3-4 find their immediate explication in the work of John in Mark 1.4-5.
        In Mark 1.3 we have a modified quotation of Isa. 40.3.  From Isa. 40.3-11 we may gather the following elements which are significant for Mark:

        For the glory as being revealed in the cross see Mark 10.37, 40; 15.27.  For "Behold, your God!" (Isa. 40.9) see, for example, the stilling of the storm (Mark 4.39-41) and the walking on the water (Mark 6.50).  The shepherd theme is to be found explicitly in Mark 6.34 and 14.27 f.  It is to be found implicitly in such passages as Mark 1.36 and 16.7.  To the motif of taking a lamb "in his arm" we may compare Mark 9.36 in which Jesus takes a little child in his arms.  The motif of Jesus as the strong one we have examined earlier.⁴³
        If we look at the many missionary elements of the prologue (e.g. 1.2, 3, 12, 14 f.), then it seems reasonable to conclude that a very major concern of the leadership of the Markan community was to prevent the Church from turning defensively in upon itself in the face of probably external harassment.⁴⁴  This may very well explain why Mark used a repeated triadic structure which always ends up with the mission to all men.
         The last thing we shall note about the Markan prologue is its own internal structure which appears to be that of an overall chiasmus.  That the chiasmus does not work perfectly may perhaps indicate that interpolations have been made in an earlier and more cohesive unit.

        We have intentionally dealt with Mark at some length, for if our argument has carried conviction in the case of our earliest gospel, then similar contentions about the structural unity of each of the later gospels should be easier to take seriously.

B. Matthew

        Matthew basically seems to have felt one worry and one anger far more intensively than Mark (even though Mark was not unaware of them), and Matthew appears to have proposed one basic solution for both of them.  He was worried about the influence of Hellenistic syncretism within the Church which might make Jesus into a mere Hellenistic wonder-worker, a θεῖος ἀνήρ to whom one might sit lightly.⁴⁶  And he was angry, according to Krister Stendahl,⁴⁷ about the Pharisaic leaders of the synagogue across the street who were keeping all those good Jews from coming to Jesus and the Christian fellowship.
        His solution is to anchor Jesus securely to Israel, the Covenant and the Scriptures by proclaiming that Jesus is the enfleshing of the Torah in word, in will, and in deed.⁴⁸
        Before we look at this further, we may note that Matthew also handles the problem of incipient syncretism by omitting the strange exorcist (Mark 9.38-41),⁴⁹ for one must follow Jesus.  In Matthew Jesus' name and the power that comes through it are consistently connected with the demand for discipleship.  He also removes the δύναμις, the power, that goes forth from Jesus to heal the haemorrhaging woman (Mark 5.30), and she is not healed until Jesus overtly wills it.⁵⁰  In a similar vein, no one is healed in Matthew unless Jesus expressly wills it (cp. Matt. 12.15b to Mark 3.10).  And note also how the phrase "Son of God" does not occur in Matthew (2.15, quoting Hos. 11.1) until it has been strongly anchored tomthe calling oif Israel in the Covenant (Exod. 4.22 f.).⁵¹  It is not to be used loosely as though it were simply one more title for a Hellenistic wonder-worker or a Roman emperor.
        Let us now return to Matthew's solution of presenting Jesus as the Torah incarnate.  The paradigm of word, testing of the will, and deed is to be found in Jesus' three answers (Matt. 4.4, 7, 10) from Deuteronomy (Deut. 8.3; 6.16; 6.13) to the temptations of the devil.  Man shall live by the Word of God; he shall not put God o the test, and he shall worship and serve God alone.  Word, testing, deed: these denote the three major divisions of the remainder of the gospel.
        The onset of these divisions is indicated by the phrase ἀπὸ τότε, "from then."  Matthew uses ἀπό 113 times and τότε 90 times, but only three times does he use the phrase ἀπὸ τότε.⁵²  The first occurrence of the phrase is in 4.17: "From then Jesus began to preach ..."  Here is the Word of God.  The second use of it is in 16.21: "From then Jesus began to show that he must suffer."  Here is the willing of the Word.  The third and last time is in 26.16: "From then Judas sought opportunity to betray him."  Here is the beginning of the deed.
        Matthew also indicates when each division closes by an indication of height from which Jesus is said to descend, using the verb καταβαίνειν.  If the first temptation took place at ground level (4.3 f.), then Jesus is said to descend (singular aorist participle) from a higher height, from the mountain  at the end of the Sermon on the Mount (8.1).  If the second temptation is raised to the pinnacle of the temple (4.5-7), then after casting the die at the Transfiguration, Jesus and the disciples are said to be descending (plural present indicative participle) from an even greater height, a high mountain (17.1).  If the third temptation occurs on a very high mountain (4.8-10), then Jesus' surrogate, the ἄγγελος κυρίου, the angel of the Lord, is said to descend (singular aorist participle) at the end of the whole passion-entombment-resurrection event from the only place that is higher: from heaven itself (28.2).  The Word and Deed are Jesus' alone, but the disciples are joined to him in his Sonship in willing it.  The three progressive heights of the temptations are surmounted by the progressively greater heights of their overcoming.
      All this, along with apparent parallels in the Lord's Prayer (which in its Matthaean form is the prayer of the way of the cross, since the Matthaean additions recur in the passion narrative) and in the crucifixion itself, is set out in the two tables below.

        We shall close this section with a very brief outline of Matthew:

   C. Luke-Acts

        Luke-Acts differs from mark, Matthew and even John in a number of ways which bear on how we are to discern the relationship of the prologue, Luke 1.1-4.30, to the remainder of the gospel.  Four of these differences are especially pertinent to us.  
        1) Luke-Acts appears to be addressed to those outside the Church ("Most excellent Theophilus," (Luke 1.3) as well as those within, while the other three gospels are, in my estimation, addressed almost exclusively to those within the Church.  Luke-Acts appears to be addressed to Gentiles as potential converts (cf. Luke 4.24-27; Acts 28.28.  These passages seem to be for Gentile ears as well as Jewish ones).  It also gives evidence of being addressed to Roman officials and citizens to convince them that they should not view the Christians as a seditious group, inasmuch as Christians are part of tolerated Judaism and have always been exonerated by Roman officials (usually two of them) when charges have been looked into.  This probably helps to explain the emphasis upon the cities of Jerusalem and Rome, the respective centres of Judaism and the Empire.
        2) The Third Gospel is in two volumes, not one, and the first volume is concerned primarily (although by no means exclusively) with Jesus' course, while the second volume is concerned with the Church's course, a course which follows in large measure that already laid out by Jesus.  In the other gospels the ongoing life of the Church in the way of the cross and the mission to all men is superimposed on, and fused with, the narrative concerning Jesus.  This difference between the gospels means that in Luke-Acts we may expect to find that at least some parts of the prologue appear to be related both to the remainder of Luke and to Acts.
        3) The other gospels do much of their cross-referencing by exact repetition of vocabulary and phrases as well as by parallel structuring of narratives.  While the third evangelist uses a great number of repeated structures,⁵⁴ he is much more inclined to use similar vocabulary and phrases than identical ones.  For example, the description of Joseph who takes the body of Jesus for burial (Luke 23.50 f.) is very similar in content to the description of Simeon in the prologue who takes the baby Jesus into his arms (Luke 2.25-28), although the vocabulary used is not the same.
        4) Far more than the other gospels, Luke-Acts appears to have a predominantly positive approach to the continuing non-believing (Pharisaic)⁵⁵ Jews of post-70 A.D., attempting at the least to further relative peace with them as fellow-members of Israel, and if possible to rehabilitate the appeal of the gospel to them.⁵⁶  This probably lies behind, for example, the setting of the beginning of the prologue and a great deal of Acts 1-5 in th temple in Jerusalem.  It probably bears on why the seat of apostolic authority in Acts, to which even Paul keeps returning, is solidly located in Jerusalem (cf. Acts 8.1, where it is said that the apostles remain in Jerusalem even when the rest of the Church is scattered).
        Acts has often been described as "the tale of two cities," namely Jerusalem and Rome, which we may take to be the seats of the Jews and the Gentiles.  But there is more theological geography to be seen in Luke-Acts than this, and the key passage appears to be Acts 1.8, in which Jesus commissions the disciples to be his witnesses in:

        On the basis of this passage we may outline Luke 4.31-Acts 28.31 as follows:

        From this outline it would appear that Galilee is still for Luke "Galilee of the Gentiles" in at least some measure, so that the fact that the prologue begins in the temple and ends in Galilee on a Gentile note is probably no accident.
        What follows is a very incomplete set of apparent parallels between parts of the Lukan prologue and the remainder of the gospel.  The reader is invited to build upon it if he finds it convincing.

D.  John

        We shall do nothing further with the Fourth Gospel beyond suggesting how the gospel may be related to its prologue, that is, to John 1.  The almost tedious repetition of vocabulary and phrases in John is well known.  The cyclical structure of writing in the Johannine literature is likewise widely recognized.  We have also seen a structural relationship between John 1 and John 20 and 21.  This suggests that it would be worthwhile to see if each section of the gospel is related in its entirety to John 1. taken as a whole, either on the basis of inclusio or chiasmus.
        I personally would go one step further and define the sections of the gospel that one might attempt to relate to John 1 by following Aileen Guilding's divisions of of the gospel in terms of Jewish feasts,⁶¹ or at least one might well begin here.  Dr. Guilding's thesis, simply stated, is (1) that John goes through the feasts in sequence three times; (2) that he shows each time that Jesus is the fulfilment of the scriptures associated with each feast, and (30 that these scriptures are those to be found either in the lessons read on the feasts themselves or in the lessons read about the same time on Sabbath from a three-year lectionary which appears to have been used in all or some of the Palestinian synagogues in the first century A.D.  If this is the case, then it helps us to explain and to justify in first century terms the otherwise almost monotonous repetitiveness of the Johannine narrative and dialogues.

V.  Three hypotheses

        We shall close with three tentative hypotheses.  The first one is as follows.  If our canonical gospels are as carefully structures as this essay has tried to suggest, then perhaps they are four of the best products of a long process of gospel development, even if some of that development took place in an oral stage using mnemonic devices.  This would increase the likelihood that Mark is our earliest extant gospel rather than simply the first gospel that was ever written.
        Our second hypothesis is not a new one, but what we have seen seems to reinforce it.  If we may liken each gospel to a pearl, then the core of the pearl is the passion narrative, which was apparently the first part of the Jesus-tradition to attain a relatively fixed form.  We would suggest that layers were added to it.  Some layers were a retrojection back into the ministry and other layers were a projection forward towards the mission to all men.  But if our suggestions regarding the structure of the four gospels bear up under analysis, then it would appear that every layer which was added was centred on Christ crucified, vindicated exalted, and working in and through the Church.  In Paul's words,  "I would know nothing among you save Christ and him crucified" (1 Cor. 2.2.).
        The last hypothesis is related to the previous one.  It is that the four gospels give evidence of a concern which overrides all questions of historicity.  It is a concern to proclaim that "Christ our Passover has been crucified for us" (1 Cor. 5.7).  The evangelists draw on narratives of the Exodus and they draw on observances connected with the Feast of Passover and on first century traditions connected with the feast so profusely and so profoundly as to leave little if any reliable data for answering such vexing questions as, what was the last supper?  I believe that the evangelists and their communities would have found much of our questing for historicity to be quite irrelevant to what they conceived to be the task of the Church, and, indeed, rather silly and pointless, at least from their point of view, for they seem to be quite convinced that the only way of knowing Jesus is to follow him.

        This has been an essay in redaction criticism, and as yet the work of redaction critics cannot claim to have reached that perhaps overly optimistic state of having, or claiming to have,  broad area of "assured results."  The data which we have presented is objective data, but in order to handle the data we must face up to certain questions.  What data is one to select and how?  How much data does it take to convince one?  What value is one to place on the various data?  What interpretation or range of interpretations is one prepared to use not only to explain the data arrived at but also to aid the search for further data?  When we turn to these and allied questions, then our answers are dependent upon our own criteria, and these in turn are based on our individual experience and understanding.  Therefore I am quite happy to say that this has been an essay in subjective redaction criticism, which has been offered for your inevitably subjective consideration.

2004: A Postscript  regarding Johannine Prologue

    Work on the Fourth Gospel (especially in terms of relating it to Jewish lectionar6y usage) in the years that followed this article have convinced me that John went through at least four editions, viz.: 1.1-19.end; 1.1-20.23; 1.1-20.end; 1-21.  An article by J. C. Meagher on the structure of John 1.1-14 convinced me that John 1.14 originally read  πνεῦμα, not σάρξ.  On this basis the original prologue  would indeed be 1.1-14,  matching Jesus' handing over the Spirit in 19.30 (παρέδωκεν τὸ πνεῦμα).
    I fully stand by the conclusions regarding Mark, Matthew, and Luke-Acts, but I am much less sure about drawing solid conclusions about a Johannine prologue after the first edition of John 1-19.

NOTES
  ¹ P. Schubert, The Form and Function of the Pauline Thanksgivings (Beihefte zur ZNW, Beiheft XX; Berlin, 1939).  (Back to text)
  ^1b [2004: By the time this essay was published in 1973, I no longer took Paul to be the author of 1 Thessalonians, but the argument still stands for the purposes of the present essay.  The parallel structure of 1 Thessalonians argues against it being by Paul, as Paul's own epistles are chiastically structured.  See on this site  Pauline Authorship.] (Back)
  ² A. Guilding, The Fourth Gospel and Jewish Worship (Oxford, 1960), pp. 220-228.  (Back)
  ³ But there is a nucleus of believing Jews even at Rome (Acts 28.24), so that at the end of his two-volumed gospel the third evangelist still maintains the strong linking of the Christian gospel and community with (Pharisaic) Judaism.  (Back)
  ⁴ For the primacy of the Eusebian form of Matt. 28.19 see Ernst Lohmeyer, "Mir ist gegeben alle Gewalt." in: In Memoriam Ernst Lohmeyer (ed. W. Schmauch), Stuttgart, 1951, pp. 22 ff., especially 28 ff., and H. B. Green, "The Command to Baptize and Other Matthaean Interpolations," Studia Evangelica IV (ed. F. L. Cross), Berlin, 1968, pp. 60 ff.  To their arguments we might add that the phrase "in my name" is central to Matthew's theology and is always concerned with obedience to Jesus and Jesus' presence, so that Matt. 28.19b-20 is the spelling out of this content.  (Back)
  ⁵ See R. H. Lightfoot, History and Interpretation in the Gospels (London, 1935), pp. 89 f. for evidence that the Gentile mission is involved here.  (Back)
  ⁶ E. Krentz, "The Extent of Matthew's Prologue", Jour. Bib. Lit. 83 (1964), pp. 409-414.  The present writer initially arrived at the length of the prologue by a third method which was as follows.  The subjects of the three temptations as defined by Jesus' replies in the Matthaean temptation narrative, 4.1-11, are taken up in turn by the three passages which begin with ἀπὸ τότε (4.17; 16.21; 26.16).  On this basis 4.17 marks the beginning of the main narrative, and therefore what precedes it must be prologue.  For further details see below.  (Back)
  ⁷ London, 2nd ed., 1965.  (Back)
  ⁸ The one seeming exception is Isa. 8.18, for here the "signs and wonders" are directed against Israel.  But this is actually no exception, since Isaiah and those given to him by God are the righteous Israelites who stand as "signs and wonders" over against an apostate Israel.
     "Signs and wonders" is employed in its OT sense in its single occurrence in John (4.48) where it is addressed to the (probably) Gentile official at Capernaum.  The feast involved is Purim when Esther is read (cf. LXX Est. 10.3).  (Back)
  ⁹ The desire to be with Jesus in his glory as voiced by the sons of Zebedee (Mark 10.35 ff.) is cross-referenced to the cross by the phrases "left hand and right hand" (Mark 10.37, 40; 15.27).  That the rending of the veil stands for access may be seen by comparing Mark 15.38 with 1.10, the only occurrences of  σχίζειν.  That Mark 15.38 also refers to loss of the Shekinah from the temple is indicated by Mark 2.21 where σχίσμα is used.  These are the only Markan occurrences of either σχίζειν or  σχίσμα.
  ^9b [2004: While I still think a case can be made for  John 1 to be the prologue of the gospel as it now stands, I have long since detected what I am convinced are four different endings to John.  The first "edition" ended with John 19 and the cross and entombment (with the handing over of the Spirit at the cross, in 19.30); this was then extended to John 20.23. Next the rest of John 20 was added, and finally John 21 was appended.  If one admits the cogency (as I do) of J. C. Meagher's arguments [see note 13] that John 1.14 originally read πνεῦμα rather than σάρξ, then John 1.1-14 would indeed be the Prologue.  This would fit both of the first two endings.]  (Back)
  ¹⁰ Has this been placed here at 20.17 instead of after 20.22 because Jesus ascending is opposite of Spirit descending?  (Back)
  ¹¹ Luke 3.23-4.12 is apparently written as the antithesis of Ezra 7.1-10.  Ezra 7.1-5: genealogy of Ezra back to "Eleazar, the son of Aaron the chief priest"; cp. Lk. 3.23-38: genealogy of Jesus back to "Adam, the son of God".  Ezra 7.6-9: Ezra's confident progress to Jerusalem with "the hand of his God" upon him (vv. 6 and 9); cp. Lk. 4.1 f.: the Spirit leads Jesus into the wilderness to be tested.  Ezra 7.10: "For Ezra had set his heart to seek the law of the LORD, and to do it, and to teach in Israel statutes and judgements"; cp. Lk. 4.3-12: the temptations are in the same order, with the devil in the third one attempting to teach Jesus (vv. 10 f.).  Ezra comes to set clear limits to who may belong to Israel; Jesus comes to break down these limits. (Back)
  ¹² C. H. Cave, "St. Matthew's Infancy Narrative", N.T.S. 9 (1962/3), pp. 382-390.  (Back)
  ¹³ Most of these items are self-evident in each prologue, but not all of them are.  A. Genesis motif: Mk. 1.1: ἀρχή; Mt. 1.1: βίβλος γενέσεως (Gen. 5.1, LXX); Lk. 11.1: ἀπ᾿ ἀρξῆς; Jn. 1.1: ἐν ἀρχῇ.
        That Lk. 1.2 is an allusion to Genesis and creation (and even perhaps Johannine in tone) appears more probable when we compare it to 1 Jn. 1.1.  L:k. 1.2: "... us, who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the Logos."  1 Jn. 1.1: "That which was from the beginning, that which we have heard, that which we have seen with our eyes, that which we beheld, and our hands handled, concerning the Logos of life ..."
        That ἀρχή in Mk. 1.1 is intended to be a reference to Gen. 1.1 and creation is indicated by the fact that the word is consistently used with these connotations elsewhere in Mark (10.6; 13.8, 9).
        On Isaac typology in the prologues and its relation to Jesus' sacrifice see J. E. Wood, "Isaac Typology in the new Testament", N.T.S. 14 (1967/8), pp. 583-589.
        On the Holy Spirit, see J. C. Meagher, "John 1, 14 and the New Temple", J.B.L. 88 (1969), pp. 57-58.  Meagher argues cogently that Jn. 1.14a originally read "And the Word became spirit" before it was changed to "flesh" as part of an anti-docetic redaction.  Two of his arguments are (1) that 1.14 is similar to passages in other works which are concerned with the Shekinah in the temple, and (2) that "flesh" in a positive sense in 1.14a is difficult to understand immediately after it has been used pejoratively in 1.13.  (Back)
  ¹⁴ On the OT confessional pattern see G. von Rad, Old Testament Theology, Vol. 1 (Edinburgh and London, 1962), pp. 121-128.  A full discussion of its development has been given by R. Wayrider, The Origins and Development of the Apostolic Preaching (unpublished M.A. dissertation, University of Bristol, 1963).  (Back)
  ¹⁵ This can be seen by examining all the passages using ἰσχυρός (Mk. 1.7; 3.27 [bis]) and ἰσχύειν (Mk. 2.17; 5.4; 9.18; 14.37).  John speaks of the one stronger than he (1.7) who will baptize with Holy Spirit (1.8).  In a context that concerns Satan, kingdom and house (3.23--26) Jesus speaks of binding the strong man, entering his house and plundering his goods (3.27).  The sequels to this would appear to be the proleptic ravaging of the temple (11.15-19) which was intended to be a house of prayer for all the Gentiles (11.17) and its fulfilment when the veil of the temple is rent (15.38).  In 9.14-29, which I take to be a paradigm of the passion-death-resurrection sequence, the disciples are not strong enough (9.18) to call out the unclean spirit, and Jesus specifies that this kind comes out only by prayer (9.29).  This, I am sure, points to Jesus' prayer in Gethsemane (14.32-42).
        The lack of strength in mere men is pointed up in 2.17; 5.4 and 14.37.
       Passages using δύνασθαι are sometimes significant in Mark, but not always.  There seem to be a number of pairs of words in Mark of which the evangelist will use only one significantly and the other word in a less controlled fashion.  Another such pair is "unclean spirits" (significant) and "demons" (variable in significance).  (Back)
  ¹⁶ That the disciples by themselves are unable to hear in the sense of obey and to see in the sense of confessing and following is the meaning of Jesus' charge against them in Mk. 8.18: "Having eyes do you not see, and having ears do you not hear?"  It is widely recognized that Mark applies certain of the miracles to the needs of the disciples as such.  Mark employs this technique to show Jesus as the one who provides them with true hearing and sight in the following fashion.
        There are two healings in Mark which involve spitting, that of a deaf-mute (7.32-37) and that of a blind man (8.22-26).  These two narratives closely parallel one another, as can be seen in Vincent Taylor's St. Mark (London, 1952), pp. 368 f.
        The incident with the deaf-mute who, when healed, hears and speaks "correctly" (7.35), falls between the feeding of the five thousand (6.30-44) and the feeding of the four thousand (8.1-10).  In the earlier feeding Jesus is compassionate (6.34), but the disciples want to be rid of the problem as being no concern of theirs and as being apparently beyond Jesus' capacity to handle (6.35: "Send them away!").  Jesus has to use three imperatives before they begin to respond (6.37 f.: "You give them ..."; "Go! See!).  Immediately after the feeding Jesus forces the disciples to enter the boat and head for Bethsaida (6.45).  This is the only time that Jesus is ever said to force the disciples to do anything, so that we are probably correct if we take Mark to be implying here that merely to have commanded them at this point would have been useless.  But in the second feeding (8.1-10) Jesus has only to say, "I have compassion on the  crowd" (8.2); the disciples confess their own impotence (8.4: "How can one feed ...?"), but they are prepared to answer unhesitatingly Jesus' question about how many loaves they have (8.5).  That is, the disciples can now "hear" in the sense of obeying Jesus' will.
        The blind man is healed in two stages at Bethsaida (8.22-26), and then Peter's confession at Caesarea Philippi follows immediately.  But Peter goes only as far as confessing Jesus as the Christ (8.29), for as soon as Jesus says that the Sonof man must suffer (8.31), Peter stops short and objects (8.32 f.).  But as Jesus goes up to Jerusalem we have the healing of blind Bartiamaeus (10..46-52).  Bartimaeus hails Jesus with the messianic title, "Son of David" (10.48); that is, he starts out from where Peter left off.  Then this blind man, having called for mercy (10.48), that is, knowing that he needs God's grace, springs up and comes to Jesus unaided when called (10.50).  And when he sees again, he follows Jesus in the way (10.52), the way to the cross.
        If we follow Wellhausen's suggestion as taken up by D. E. Nineham in his Pelican commentary on St Mark (Harmondsworth, Middx., 1963, p. 203), that "Sidon" in 7.31 is a mis-rendering of "Saidan", a variant form of Bethsaida, then both of the spitting healings take place at Bethsaida, which appears to mean "House oif the Provider".  If we take it as "House of the Fisher" instead, then it may relate to 1.17: "fishers of men".  Bethsaida is the place toward which Jesus forced the disciples in 6.45 and the place where he provides for their hearing and sight.  It is a providing that comes from Jesus and not from men, for he is not only the one to be heard and followed, but he is also the one who enables men to hear and follow him.
        Against the half-healed blind man's seeing "men like trees walking" (Mk. 8.24) we may place Jotham's parable, the only OT passage in which trees travel (Judg. 9.8-15).  The trees, seeking a king, approach three non-candidates before reaching the bramble bush.  In Mk. 8.27 f. men have three wrong views of Jesus, and in 8.33 Peter is placed again on the side of men rather than of God.  (Back)
  ¹⁷ All this and more is superbly brought out by Eduard Schweizer in "Mark's Contribution to the Quest for the Historical Jesus", N.T.S. 10 (1963-64), pp. 421-432.  (Back)
  ¹⁸ This is the obvious conclusion to be drawn from R. H. Lightfoot's demonstration that the apocalyptic traditions reproduced iin Mk. 13 have been anchored by the evangelist to his passion narrative.  See The Gospel Message of St. Mark (London: Oxford University Pres, 1950), pp. 48-59.  (Back)
  ^18b [2004: This is also related to the wise-powerful-wellborn pattern: 1:1- well-being  (faith); 1:some - wisdom (mercy/love); 1:all - power (hope/justice).  See on this site Wisdom, Power and Well-being.] (Back)
  ¹⁹ All passages employing ἄνθρωποι (plural) are concerned with contrasting men's ways with God and God's ways (Mk. 1.17; 7.8, 21; 8.24, 27, 33; 9.31; 10.27; 11.30, 32; 12.14.  If the foregoing passages are viewed first, then the remaining two passages using "men" gain in meaning: Mk. 3.28 and 11.2).  (Back)
  ²⁰  The verb ἐκπλήσσομαι  is concerned with the reaction to Jesus' teaching about the way of the cross (Mk. 1.22; 6.2; 7.37; 10.26; 11.18).  On Jesus' teaching in Mark as being about the way of the cross, see E. Schweizer, op.cit., pp. 422-425, 427 f.  (Back)
  ²¹ All occurrences of ὁράω and οἶδα (except 12.15, the one time that Jesus is the subject of οἶδα) are concerned with seeing Jesus as the Son of God in the cross and in his mission to all men.  We have seen that the disciples' eyes are opened with regard to the way of the cross (see above n. 16).  (Back)
  ²² Mark contrasts those who are "in a/the house," i.e., followers of Jesus, to those who are "outside," i.e. non-followers of Jesus.  See J. C. Fenton, "Paul and Mark," in Studies in the Gospels ed. by D. E. Nineham (Oxford, 1957), p. 99 and n. 1.  (Back)
  ²³ See above, n. 15.  (Back)
  ²⁴ Cf. Mk. 2.26 and all  passages, especially Mk. 15.31 f.  (Back)
  ²⁵ This is parallel to Jesus before the Sanhedrin and the High Priest, Mk 14.53-72.  (Back)
  ²⁶ Cf. 1.5; cp. 1.38: "Let us go in-another-direction () to the [places] having village-towns."  (Back)
  ²⁷ "End," τέλος, is used in 3.26; 13.7, 13.  13.7: "When you hear of wars, etc. be not troubled.  It must come to pass, but the end is not yet."  (The motif of "be not troubled2 is probably parallel to the water-walking, 6.50; cf. also 4.39 f.)  13.13: "And you shall be hated by all men for my name's sake, buthe that endures to the end, the same shall be saved."  (Cp. Peter's avowal, 14.39, and his denial of the name, 14.66-72.)
        The end of Satan, his kingdom and house, should be seen in contrast to the uses of ἀρχή, 1.1, etc., and
 ἤγγικεν, 1.15b, all of which are (new or renewed) creation ideas connected with the Kingdom of God and the spiritual Temple, the "house of prayer for all nations/Gentiles," 11.17.  (Back)
  ²⁸ For indications that the Gentile mission is involved see R. H. Lightfoot, History and Interpretation in the Gospels (London, 1935), pp. 89 f.  (Back)
  ²⁹ Mk. 4.35 f.: He says to them, "Let us go ..." They take him ...; cp. Mk 10.49: Jesus: "You call him" (i.e. Bartimaeus); Disciples: "He calls you."  The apparent inversions in each passage serve to indicate that the disciples' mission is the continuation of Jesus' mission.  (Back)
  ³⁰ As John's passion is preceded by a woman dancing (6.22), so Jesus' betrayal by Judas (14.10) is immediately preceded by the anointing of Jesus by a woman at Bethany (14.3-9).  Note also that the widow casting her mites into the Temple treasury (12.41-44) is immediately followed by Jesus' pronouncement of the Temple's coming destruction (13.1 f. - cf. 15.38).
        We may also note that in the only two occurrences of ἡδέως Herod hears John "gladly" (6.20) and the large crowd hears Jesus "gladly" (12.27).   (Back)
  ³¹ Gen. 47.2: five men represent all Israel; Gen. 49.28: twelve tribes; Gen. 46.27: seventy total Israelites go to Egypt.  Thus the numbers 5, 12 and 70 are symbolic numbers for Israel and 'true Jews.'  See the "five brothers" of Lk. 16.28 in the story of the rich man and Lazarus.  (Back)
  ³² See above, note 6, for the significance of the forcing and of Bethsaida.  (Back)
  ³³ For Saida, a variant form of Bethsaida, as the location see Nineham, St Mark, p. 203. (Back)
  ³⁴ See above, note 6.  (Back)
  ³⁵ See above, note 6.  (Back)
  ³⁶ It is our contention that 1.2 and 1.3 are each intende to be taken in more than one sense.  With 1.2 we may also compare 13.27: He will send the  to gather the elect from everywhere.  (Back)
  ³⁷ The wilderness here and elsewher3 in Mark is a theological motif, not a geographical one.  See W. Marxsen, Mark the Evangelist (Nashville, Eng. tr. 1969), p. 37, and U. W. Mauser, Christ in the Wilderness (S.B.T. No. 39; London, 1963).  (Back)
  ³⁸ Mk. 1.6 appears to be an interpolation added to identify John as Elijah returned; cf. 9.11-13. (Back)
  ³⁹ Targum Jerushalmi taught that there were four Passovers of special significance; o0n the fourth Messiah would come on the clouds with Moses from the wilderness.  This same tradition was known to the Samaritans (cf. Memar Marqa).  See J. Bowman, The Gospel of Mark: The New Christian Jewish Passover Haggadah (Leiden, 1965), p. 52.  (Back)
  ⁴⁰ For Mk. 15.21, the laying of the cross on Simon the father of Alexander (= 'striving man' = Jacob) and Rufus (= 'red' = Edom = Esau) as Isaac typology, see G. W. Lampe and K. J. Woollcombe, Essays on Typology (S.B.T. No. 22; London, 1957), p. 40 and n. 1.  This is the only time that Mark uses his epiphany-indicating verb παράγειν, "to pass by," without Jesus as its subject, so that Simon is to be seen either as a symbol for Jesus or, as I think more likely, for Simon Peter in his ultimate crucifixion as attested by the tradition of Jn. 21.18 f.  On "passing by" as an epiphanous motif see E. Lohmeyer, "Und Jesus ging vorüber," Nieuw Theologisch Tidjschrift (Haarlem, 1934), pp. 206-224.  (Back)
  ⁴¹ Note that the parallel to Mk. 1.11 is the cry of the unclean spirit in Mk. 1.24: "I know thee who thou art, the Holy One of God."  In the Servant Songs God is Israel's Holy One (Isa. 43.15, also 41.20; 43.3); thus this may be coupled in Mk. 1.24 with Israel's calling to be holy as God is holy (Lev. 11.44; etc.). (Back)
  ⁴² This is further confirmed by Mk. 9.11-13 with its semi-cryptic linking of John as Elijah with Jesus as Son of man.  (Back)
  ⁴³ See above n. 5.  (Back)
  ⁴⁴ That this was a major problem as time passed by, and increasingly so, is probably to be seen in the shifts from the strongly missionary thrust of Paul's view of the Church's function to the apparent need to have missionary endings to the gospels (including Jn. 21), and finally to the shift to a blunting of the missionary drive in such ,ate writings as the pastoral epistles and 1 and 2 Peter.  On this final shift see F. Hahn, Mission in the New Testament (Eng. tr., London, 1965) pp. 140 ff. (German: 122 ff.).  (Back)
  ⁴⁵ See the   forcing of 'Isaac' in 12.8 and 15.21, and the forcing of the disciples in 6.45.  Do these perhaps indicate that the way of the cross is not to be viewed as desirable but rather to be accepted when necessity demands it?  Perhaps Ignatius of Antioch was not the only early Christian to desire martyrdom.  (Back)
  ⁴⁶ For an excellent study of the Hellenistic background see A. D. Nock, "Studies in the Graeco-Roman Beliefs of the Empire," Journal of Hellenic Studies, 45 (1925), pp. 84-101.  (Back)
  ⁴⁷ K. Stendahl, "The Place of the Matthaean Gospel in the Development of Early Christianity," a lecture delivered on 14 September, 1965, at Oxford to the Third International Congress of New Testament Studies (I know nothing of its subsequent publication).  (Back)
  ⁴⁸ For a more detailed exposition of this see my earlier articles, "The Son of God as the Torah Incarnate in Matthew," Studia Evangelica IV (Berlin, 1968), pp. 38-46, and "Purpose and Pattern in Matthew's Use of the title 'Son of David,'" N.T.S. 10 (1963-64), pp. 446-464.
        A characteristic shift from Mark is that the Markan triad of "Jesus, Christ, God's son" (Mk. 1.1) is changed to "Jesus, Son of David, Son of Abraham (Mt. 1.1). [2004:  I erred in this.  Matthew's real triad in 1.1. is "Jesus: Christ, Son of David, Son of Abraham.  See Wisdom, Power and Well-being.]  Equivalents are used which maintain the triad of the One, the Messiah of the Jews, and the promise for all men (Abraham's seed, Gen. 12.3; 22.18; Gal. 3.8, 16-19), but, unlike the terms they replace, these can have no meaning apart from Israel and the scriptures.  If we accept that Mt. 1.1 is a conscious re-writing of Mk. 1.1, then Matthew must have read "God's Son" in his copy of Mk. 1.1.  (Back)
  ⁴⁹ In Mark this incident is concerned with keeping the Church from becoming a tightly closed community that is unwilling to work with all men of good will.  Matthew also omits Mk. 9.40: "For he that is not against us is for us." See Matt. 10.33 on the necessity of confessing Jesus before men if one would not be denied by Jesus before his Father. (Back)
  ⁵⁰ In Mark this is one of a number of incidents in which Jewish expectations are turned upside down.  Instead of uncleanness passing from the woman to Jesus as a Jew would expect, healing power passes from him to her and she herself becomes clean.  (Back)
  ⁵¹ In the words of J. L. McKenzie, "It is the history of Israel that sets Jesus apart from all culture heroes, king-saviors, cosmic men, and mythological bearers of life; or, in more modern terms, from political saviors, economic prophets, scientific sages, military heroes, psychotherapist bearers of life.  It is remarkable, it is even sharply surprising, when one reflects that only as the Savior of Israel can Jesus be recognized as none of these other things.  If this be mythology, make the most of it!" in "The Significance of the Old Testament for Christian Faith in Roman Catholicism," in The Old Testament and Christian Faith ed. by B. W. Anderson (New York, 1963), p. 109.  (Back)
  ⁵² Cf. Lk. 16.16 where the phrase marks the shift from promissory Torah to inaugurated Kingdom.   (Back)
  ⁵³ The 'earthly' Jesus is confessed by men in Matthew as:
        (a) "Son of David" according to the flesh, i.e. confessed by "natural" man (by Gentiles: Magi, 2.1-12; Canaanite, 15.21-28; by the blind: 9.27-31; 20.29-34; by crowd of Jews: 21.8 f.; by children: 20.15);
        (b) "Son of God" according to the Spirit, i.e. by disciples under the pressure of the praeternatural (14.33; 16.16 f.; 27.54);
        (c) "The Christ" only "before the time" (8.29; cp. 1.16 f. where "Christ" is the fourteenth generation; cf. 16.20 silence that "this is the Christ", 17.9 silence about the vision of glory);
        (d) "The King of the Jews" meek and lowly on the cross (cp. Mk. 10.40 to Mt. 22.21: for Mark Jesus is in his glory on the cross, but for Matthew he is in his Kingdom).  (Back)
  ⁵⁴ An important pair of paralleled narratives consists of the two disciples on the road to Emmaus (Lk. 24.13-33) and the story of the Ethiopian eunuch (Ac. 8.26-39).  See Luke 24.13-33 and Acts 8.26-39: Emmaus Incident and Eunuch's Baptism.  (Back)
  ⁵⁵ After A.D. 70 the Herodians, Sadducees, and priests (with their scribes) were no longer a force to be reckoned with.  The Pharisees and their scribes were now dominant, and Luke-Acts exonerates them of complicity ij Jesus' death while laying the blame on the Herodians, Sadducees, the priests and priestly scribes.  Like Israel murmuring in the wilderness, the Pharisees and their scribes murmur against Jesus (Lk. 15.2; cf. 19.7), but they warn him of Herod's murderous intention (Lk. 13.31).  Paul remains a Pharisee in Luke-Acts )Ac. 23.6) and Pharisaic scribes are said to find no evil in him (Ac. 23.9).  (Back)
  ⁵⁶ See J. van Goudoever, "The Place of  Israel in Luke's Gospel," Nov. Test. 8 (1966), pp. 111-123. (Back)
  ⁵⁷ The so-called "Lucan Greater Omission" (Mk 6.45-8.26) is chiefly about the Gentile mission, and its components are shifted to Acts.  Mk. 7.1-23: all foods are clean (i.e. Jews may eat with Gentiles); cf. Ac. 10.9-16: Peter's vision.  Mk. 7.24-30: conditions of Gentile admission (Syro-Phoenician woman); cf. Ac. 15.1-30: the "apostolic decree",  Mk. 8.1-10: feeding 4,000 (Jews eat with Gentiles); cf. Ac. 10.48-11.15: Peter and Cornelius.  In keeping with this, Jesus never goes to clearly Gentile territory (e.g. Tyre) or into Samaria.  (Back)
  ⁵⁸ The Exodus pattern as found in Dt. 26.5-9 appears to control the whole of the Jesus narrative and to occur repeatedly in the life of the Church and the work of the apostles in Acts.  The pattern in Dt. 26.5-98 is (1) initial success, (2) oppression, (3) vindication, and (4) greater success.  In Jesus' way (1) is the ministry with "many thousands" flocking to him (Lk. 12.1, a Lukan addition), (2) is the passion, (3) is the resurrection, an (4) is the ascension and the Church's expanding witness by the power of the Holy Spirit.  This may help to explain why the ascension is so clearly a separate event in Luke-acts.
        It lies beyond our present purposes to see how this pattern is repeated many times in Acts, but it was obviously germane to the evangelist for the purpose of encouraging Christians to persevere indefinitely, trusting the Holy Spirit in the face of all odds.  (Back)
  ⁵⁹ Each of these new stages, which are inaugurated by the Spirit, is subsequently ratified by the apostles at Jerusalem. (Back)
 ⁶⁰ Isaac's sacifice as expiatory: IV Macc. 7.14; 13.12; 16.20; 18.11; Philo on Balaam Deborah and Jephthah 18.6; 22.2-4; Josephus, J. ant., I, xiii,1-4; cf. Test. Levi 18.6, 7.  See J. E. Wood, op. cit. (see above note 13); H. J. Schoeps, "The Sacrifice of Isaac in Paul's Theology," Jour. Bib. Lit. 65 (1946), pp. 141-149; G. Vermes, Scripture and Tradition in Judaism (Leiden, 1961), pp. 193-225; S. Spiegel, The Alexander Marx Jubilee Volume (New York, 1950), pp. 471-547.  (Back)
  ⁶¹ The Fourth Gospel and Jewish Worship (Oxford, 1960).  (Back)