ection>
Travels with St. Mark
GPS for the Journey
A Pedagogical Aid
Eugene E. Lemcio
TRAVELS WITH ST. MARK: GPS FOR THE JOURNEY
A Pedagogical Aid
Copyright © 2012 Eugene E. Lemcio. All rights reserved. Except for brief quotations in critical publications or reviews, no part of this book may be reproduced in any manner without prior written permission from the publisher. Write: Permissions, Wipf and Stock Publishers, 199 W. 8th Ave., Suite 3, Eugene, OR 97401.
Wipf & Stock
An imprint of Wipf and Stock Publishers
199 W. 8th Ave., Suite 3
Eugene, OR 97401
www.wipfandstock.com
isbn 13: 978-1-62032-331-1
eisbn 13: 978-1-62189-965-5
Manufactured in the U.S.A.
Abbreviations
AV Authorized Version
BCE Before the Common Era
BR Biblical Research
C & D Cartlidge & Dungan
CE Common Era
ET English Translation
HB Hebrew Bible
JB Jerusalem Bible
JTS Journal of Theological Studies
KJV King James Version
LXX Septuagint of the Greek Old Testament (=OG)
MT Masoretic Text of the Hebrew Bible
NEB New English Bible
NETS New English Translation of the Septuagint
NRSV New Revised Standard Version
NT New Testament
NTS New Testament Studies
OG Old Greek (=LXX)
OGI Orientis Graeci Inscriptiones Selectae
OSB Orthodox Study Bible
OT Old Testament
RSV Revised Standard Version
SNTSMS Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series
TB Tyndale Bulletin
Definitions
Apocrypha Lit. “hidden” (either because special or suspect—depending on the user)
Deuterocanon Lit. “second canon”—a term devised in the sixteenth century, and used largely by Protestant reformers to distinguish documents originally composed (it was thought) in Greek and therefore not (as) authoritative as the “protocanonicals,” the sixty-six books then corresponding to the Hebrew canon finally delimited by Jews during the early centuries CE.
Gentile from the Latin Gentes (“nations”); i.e., all the nations besides Israel, non-Jews
Protocanon See “Deuterocanon,” above.
Pseudepigrapha Lit. “false ascription,” a derogatory term applied to literature which, on other grounds, was regarded as falsely attributed to an ancient worthy
Synoptic a “seeing together,” the term being applied to the first three gospels whose authors, despite their differences, are distinct from the Gospel of John in content and manner of presentation
Preface
The use of “GPS” (Global Positioning System) in the title is deliberate for at least two reasons. First, it alludes to a modern means of guidance by satellites and thereby becomes immediately recognizable in a technological age. Second, “maps” might inadvertently imply that I am providing a topographical guide to the places which Jesus visited and the routes that he took in getting from “A” to “B.”
Nevertheless, “maps” (which I shall retain for internal use) will be helpful in a practical capacity since consulting them should lead to the primary way of relating to Jesus: “following after” rather than “believing in” (as is characteristic of the Fourth Gospel, but not the others). It may well be that the latter phrase was for the first three (Synoptic) evangelists more mental and/or stationary than active and behavioral.
As before (in Navigating Revelation: Charts for the Voyage), I invite the teacher and student-learner (the ancient meaning of the Greek and Latin behind “disciple”) to join me in traversing the terrain of the text—this time narrative rather than visionary apocalyptic. The following maps are to be understood primarily as guides to teaching and studying—as means, not as ends. They are not the same as the journey itself, nor the purpose of it (just as the menu should not be confused with the meal). Neither do the maps traverse each section of the terrain. There is plenty of opportunity for the serious inquirer to draw the results of his/her own as exploration along main roads, side streets, and alternate routes continues. Put another way, the selection of passages and themes is meant to be illustrative and paradigmatic so that all, beginners and those more advanced, can use them as models in expanding the range of their individual itineraries.
Rather than providing a rigid structure for indoctrination and memorization, such tables (accompanied by statements and questions) should foster orderly and disciplined instruction and study. The displays are of two kinds: the majority provides data in categories that can be inferred because of their frequency or strategic character (the subjective nature of this judgment being reduced by evidence and argument).
Interspersed among these are charts that demonstrate systematic analysis (a taking apart) and synthesis (a putting together) by posing “investigative” questions long used in literature and journalism classes: Who? (Agent: initiator or recipient), What? (Action/Event), When? (Time), Where? (Place), How? (Means/Manner/Method/Instrument), How Far/Many/Much? (Scope/Quantity), What Kind? (Quality), Why? (Purpose/Cause), So What? (Significance), etc.
Using these categories enables analysis and synthesis to be comprehensive in that many aspects of a selected narrative can be covered. At the same time, they make it possible for one to detect that which integrates the parts. Approaching literature in this way assists students to develop skills in comparison (noting similarities) and contrast (seeing differences). Furthermore, applying such neutral classification helps to increase objectivity and to limit imposing agendas foreign to a text. No rigid sequence need be followed when employing the above. They can be freely reordered to achieve the greatest pedagogical effect.
However, it is generally good practice to get an idea of the entire context, to see the forest within which individual trees grow, and to survey the lay of the land. Besides providing a sense of the whole, from which to interpret the parts, the bird’s-eye view enables one to get a feel for proportion—where the emphases lie, what weight is attributed to certain themes. As the narrative journey progresses, one can more easily determine where a turning point or parting of the ways occurs. The importance of this practice cannot be overrated—as the display and discussion in map 5 will show.
In addition to leading the reader in comparing and contrasting categories within the text itself (thereby allowing the Evangelist to speak on his own terms and in his own way—the main objective), I provide opportunities for readers to compare and contrast the Gospel with external sources—both canonical and extrabiblical. Examples of the former are of three kinds: (a) the Old Testament of the Jewish Scriptures acknowledged by Protestant Christians since the Reformation, (b) the Old Testament of the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox communions, containing Deuterocanonical writings integrated within Christian Bibles since earliest times, and (c) the New Testament. “Extrabiblical sources,”