Not a Summary of Mark’s Christology

Mike Bird posted this on his blog, offering it as a summary of Mark’s Christology:

The Marcan Jesus participates in the kyricentricity of Israel’s God. He is identified as a pre-existent heavenly figure who has come to earth, who carries divine authority, who embodies royal and priestly roles; and in his person, words, and deeds he manifests the holy presence, the redemptive purposes, and the cosmic power of the Lord of Israel.

Very little of that comes explicitly from Mark, and the statement that Mark identifies Jesus as a pre-existent heavenly figure who has come to earth is simply false.

I hope that Mike will offer some explanation of why he reads Mark the way that he does.

"“Inerrancy is all about paying lip-service to the Bible, while actually working hard against it, ..."

The Bible Was Made For Humans
"Phil said: "And this is where Jesus as rabbinical commentator is very useful. He seems ..."

The Bible Was Made For Humans
"The example of the humane-ness of the Sabbath is a really good one.Coming up in ..."

The Bible Was Made For Humans
"What do you think of the apparent contradictions pointed out by The Skeptic's Annotated Bible ..."

The Bible Was Made For Humans

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • I also want to know the meaning of the term “kyricentricity.”

    • Jon-Michael Ivey

      It obviously means the central status of the “Kyrios,” which is Greek for “Lord”.

      Such mixing of Greek and Latin roots in the same word is typically considered crass by true classicists though.

      Edit: Oops. I seem to have overlooked the fact that the Latin word “centrum” derives from the Greek “kentron,” and “centricus” from “kentrikos.” Changing the kappa to a c confused me, but the term is in fact just Greek in origin.

      • No_one_significant

        geocentric?
        theocentric?
        ethnocentric?
        anthropocentric?

  • Holy moly…That reads like a mix of the Gospel of John, Hebrews and a dash of NT Wright.

  • Phil Ledgerwood

    Maybe he meant to say John and got autocorrected.

  • Andrew Dowling

    It seems a lot of conservative “scholarship” is simply the result of very active imaginations.