The Gospel of Mark
In Ched Myers' commentary, the preface and acknowledgments indicate an ideology shared by a network of cliques, gangs, action sets, and factions in various parts of the world, all committed to "liberation reading of scripture." His commentary is "pitched half way between the deeply alienated camps of professional biblical scholarship and 'lay' Bible study" (Myers 1988: xxv). Free from a commitment to write according to the guidelines either of a corporate group or a particular action set, Myers presents a case for composition of the Gospel between June 68 and April 70 by an author who reflects the ideology of a group of early Christians who were unwilling to ally themselves with any of the groups who were fighting over the leadership of the Jerusalem temple. This group of early Christians understood Jesus as enacting nonviolent resistance. Jesus, a rurally based Messiah, engages in a direct action campaign first throughout synagogues in Galilee then in Jerusalem. Myers' reading of the scene with the women at the cross and the tomb is very similar to Tolbert's (or hers is similar to his, which was earlier). In addition to focusing on the women, he calls attention to various social and political issues in the story. Only in a description of Barabbas, Myers observes, does Markan discourse use "the explicit language of revolution." Markan discourse "dramatize[s] the choice" between Jesus and Barabbas by describing Barabbas as "a Sicarius terrorist" (Myers 1988: 380). When Simon the Cyrenian is "pressed into service" as he is coming in "from the fields," the discourse reminds the reader "once more of the spatial (geopolitical) tension between city/country and center/periphery" (Myers 1988: 385). Myers observes that Markan discourse distinguishes between "the 'revolutionary' Barabbas" and the "social bandits" between whom Jesus is crucified. For Myers, "Mark is making a very important ideological statement here." The discourse in Mark 13, according to Myers, "dissociate[s] Jesus from the means and ends of the rebel cause. Yet he shares their fate, as a common opponent to both Rome and the socio-economic status quo. Jesus is traded for a Sicarius, taken for a social bandit; of all the factions in Palestine, Mark situates Jesus alongside these" (Myers 1988: 387). Following this mode of interpretation, Myers perceives the centurion at the foot of the cross to remain in character as a Roman oppressor, rather than to be a converted Christian who confesses the true nature of Jesus. For Myers, the centurion's statement that Jesus was "son of God" has the resonance of the statements of demons and political opponents previously in the discourse (3:11; 5:7; 6:3; 14:71). "In other words, the title does not represent a 'confession' at all, but more often the hostile response of those struggling to gain power over Jesus by 'naming' him.... Rome has triumphed over the Nazarene, he has been "named" by the executioner who pronounces him "dead" (15:44f.)" (Myers 1988: 394). It is not that the centurion is right in the context of taunting, ironic speech, like the chief priests and scribes who sneer at Jesus with the title "Messiah, King of Israel" (15:32). Rather, the centurion, along with demons, the high priest, and Pilate, "'know who Jesus is,' and are out to destroy him, whereas those who follow him are often unsure who he is, but struggle to trust him nevertheless" (Myers 1988: 394). Since, as observed above, the women fail to tell the message about Jesus after his death, "the only reliable postexecution 'witness' to Jesus will be a "young man," who tells the women that Jesus is alive and that the discipleship adventure will continue" (Myers 1988: 394).
From V. K. Robbins, Exploring the Texture of Texts, (Valley Forge, PA: Trinity Press International, 1996), pp. 104-5.
Back to index of Markan examples
For other examples of ideological texture, click here.
Textures Index | Text Index | Discourse Index | Oppositional Rhetoric Index