BEN: Long ago, Charlie Moule stressed that the persistent use of the definite article before the phrase ‘Son of Man’ must be interpreted to refer to ‘the aforementioned (or well known) Son of Man (i.e. the famous one in Dan. 7). In other words, it’s unlikely to be an attempt at a modest self-reference, and Mk. 14.62 in particular was seen as making this finally quite clear with the reference to coming on the clouds. Given the eschatological and even... Read more

BEN: On p. 128 you quite rightly comment on the lack of use of the title Son of David to characterize who Jesus was in Mark. I wondered if you had considered that in that era the title ‘son of David’ if used in conjunction with a request for healing or some miracle was assumed to refer to someone who was like Solomon, who in the wisdom tradition was believed to have the wisdom for cures. Indeed, even for exorcisms... Read more

BEN: Your discussion of the structure of Mark in Chapter 3, especially at the smaller unit level is quite helpful, but I was surprised there was no discussion of the theological structuring Mark uses (unless the passing remark at the bottom of p. 104 counts), namely Who and Why questions are raised about Jesus and his disciples and their behavior in Mk. 1-8. The who question about Jesus is answered at Caesarea Philippi in Mk. 8, in terms deliberately reiterating... Read more

A BARRISTER’S BRIEF BRIEF ON PENTECOST The filigree flame of fire fell on the fellowship Pursuant to the prayer and praise and paeans of the plaintiffs Such that there was no room in the upper room, And they fled like men fleeing a burning building. But even the Temple courts could not contain the ebullience and effervescence And so they were deemed drunk, tipplers before their time. Yet all that they had imbibed was Spirit, Which was so like fire... Read more

BEN: One of the more interesting monographs about Mark in the last few decades is Maurice Casey’s monograph which shows or attempts to show that large portions of Mark’s Gospel is translation Greek from a Semitic language. Rather than having a few stray Aramaisms or Semitisms, the Greek in Mark involves considerable translation. Have you read Casey’s work, and if so, what would you say about it? It might support the report of Papias that Mark translated Peter’s materials which... Read more

BEN: I agree with you that Mark, at most reflects an elementary use of rhetoric, but one thing that gave me pause in reading Teresa Morgan’s work is that our thinking about levels of educations, perhaps even in different social locations with different teachers is much too stratified for the actual situation on the ground in most places in the Empire. Indeed, all three levels could be taught by one instructor in one local, with younger students bunched together with... Read more

BEN: On p. 80 you suggest that it doesn’t much matter whether ‘the reader’ in Mark 13 is the audience or a lector. It seems clear to me from Rev. 1.3-4 that a distinction was made between the reader, and those who heard the text, the former being a literate person, who could even decipher the continuous flow of letters in an ancient text. I think it does matter in Mark 13 that when Mark says ‘let the reader understand’... Read more

BEN: One of the questions Chapter 3 raises for me at least, is whether any of these ancient bioi are seeking to present a novum, in this case a new sort of conversionist religion in an evangelistic way, a religion that was likely to be viewed as a ‘superstitio’ by many in the pagan world, or just plain absurd (see the famous catacomb graffito of a crucified man being worshipped, and the man on the cross has the head of... Read more

BEN: On p. 52 you make a helpful distinction between an interest in personality and an interest in character on the part of ancient biographers. Can you unpack this idea a bit for the readers? HELEN: Yes, this comes from the Classicist Christopher Gill but has been taken up by Christopher Pelling too (who has worked so much on Plutarch). The basic idea is that ‘personality’ involves all the quirkiness and idiosyncrasies that make us the unique humans that we... Read more

BEN: In Chapter 3 we really get down to brass tacks, as my mother used to say, and one of the more intriguing things about studying ancient bioi is that the ancients were totally innocent of Freud and Jung, and mostly didn’t adopt or adapt developmental models of human personality. No Citizen Kane stories for them about early childhood trauma shaping one’s life. No, they largely believed people were born with a certain character and stuck with it. Gender, generation,... Read more