observe that New Testament writers created what they call new midrashim on older texts. They argue that Mark did not simply interpret the Old Testament midrashically. Mark created a new midrash — that is, new Scripture in typical Jewish fashion. This is another way of seeing the importance of creativity in Mark’s Gospel. It also supports my argument.
We have already noticed that Mark did not hesitate to use the Old Testament out of context, and that it is probable that he did the same with the tradition he received. This simply underscores our notion that he retold tradition for his own purposes. By doing this Mark created a new text from other texts, traces of which can be seen in his text.
The relationship between the final text of the Gospel of Mark and precursor and other texts is an intertextual relationship. There is no causal relationship between this new text and the texts out of which Mark made his text. Mark quoted other texts, and his story alludes to other texts and absorbed other texts. This is how his story becomes meaningful and different from other stories with the same theme when the reader interprets Mark’s texts in the light of other texts known to him/her.
There is a total difference between an attempt where the Gospel of Mark is understood from the perspective of its production, and an attempt where it is understood from the perspective of its growth. The first approach seriously considers that any allusion or quotation from another text forms an integral part of the new text, even when it seems to be out of context. The latter regards the final text, which has relationships with precursor texts, as the result of a causal process.
Botha, P J J 1989. Die dissipels in die Markusevangelie. DD-proefskrif, Universiteit van Pretoria.
Brandenburger, E 1984. Markus 13 und die Apokaliptik. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck.
Breytenbach, C 1992. MNHMONEYEIN: Das ‘sich-erinnern in der urchristlichen Überlieferung: Die Bethanienepisode (Mk 14:3-9/Jn 12:1-8) als Beispiel, in Denaux, A (ed), John and the synoptics, 548–557. Leuven: Peeters.
Crossan, J D 1988. The cross that spoke: The origins of the passion narrative. San Francisco: Harper & Row.
Dibelius, M 1971. Die Formgeschichte des Evangeliums. 6.Aufl. Tübingen: Mohr.
Draisma, S (ed) 1989. Intertextuality in biblical writings: Essays in honour of Bas van Iersel. Kampen: Kok.
