1. What a good post. Glad to be included.

    My paper, which is linked in with the post on my site, is an apologetic paper that uses a critical approach to the miracle claims of Jesus. Within it I reference the anti-Imperial rhetoric of GMark on page 14, note 54 that is discussed in Evan’s piece for the text “Hearing the Old Testament in the New Testament.”

    Anyways, I’m not a NT scholar nor the son of one. There does appear to be anti-Imperial rhetoric in GMark and I think that is a point which can be used to place the miracle accounts in apposition to secular/pagan miracles. Vespasian proves to be a good example of a contemporary pagan claim that is highly cited, just like Jesus’ miracles. Using GMark to view Jesus’ miracles is part of my overall methodology just like limiting the miracles considered to those affirmed by the Jesus Seminar is a second step to that method.

    To be honest, I don’t think Mark as Vespasian in frame at all as he wrote, or took the dictation, for his Gospel. Vespasian’s miracles didn’t occur until CE 68/9 and GMark appears to have been written in the early 60s.

    As for Winn’s article, it is intriguing to see how he develops this thesis to a rather good point. Given the oppressive Roman presence in Palestine between CE 20-70 and the many acts of blasphemy they perpetrated against the Jews, it wouldn’t be surprising if Mark is targeting his criticism against the Roman in general. There might be quite a bit to be done for apologetic purposes in seeing GMark as anti-Imperial.


Leave a Reply, Please!