Gospel of Mark, The

Trinity Journal, Fall 2003 by Williams, Joel F

R. T. France. The Gospel of Mark. NIGTC. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002. xxxvii 719 pp. $55.00.

R. T. France starts off his introduction by stating, "I have tried to write the sort of commentary I like to use" (p. 1). For him, this means most of all that he has written a commentary on Mark, not a commentary on commentaries on Mark. Since his focus is on the exegesis of Mark's text, he does not feel obliged to draw attention to all the concerns of other commentators. One result is that France spends little time with the prehistory of Mark's gospel or the process of its composition. He does not sort out the elements in a given passage that belong to an earlier tradition from those that represent Mark's own contribution. The text of Mark's gospel, however it may have come about, stands at the center of his attention. France hopes that enough people share his expectations about a commentary on Mark to make his efforts worthwhile. I would belong to that group of people.

The rest of the introduction sets out France's basic understanding of Mark's gospel as a foundation for his exegetical work in the commentary itself (p. 4). With regard to literary genre, Mark's gospel is a biography, similar to other lives of famous people written in the ancient Greco-Roman world. In other words, it tells the story of a recent historical figure in a way that commends the man and his message (p. 10). Mark was a worthy storyteller. His use of descriptive detail, "sandwiching" of one scene within another, and presentation of thought-provoking paradoxes, all contribute to the impact of his story (pp. 15-20). Mark did not write his work with a narrow purpose in mind. His aim was to write a book about Jesus, drawing on the information available to him, although in the process he undoubtedly addressed many of his own personal concerns and gave guidance to the church within which he served (p. 23). The two most central areas in Mark's theological message are Christology and discipleship, addressing the questions of who Jesus is and what it means to follow him (pp. 23-29). The widespread circulation of Mark's gospel was not an accident of history but was the intention from the start. Mark was not only speaking to a particular local church context. Therefore, France does not seek out the exact circumstances in which Mark wrote as a guide for his interpretation of the text (p. 36). In addition, France does not consciously base his exegetical work on any specific theory of authorship, date, and location (p. 41). However, he evaluates positively the tradition of the early church that Mark wrote his gospel in Rome as a record of Peter's teaching, probably while Peter was still alive and therefore not later than the early sixties of the first century (p. 38). With regard to the Synoptic Problem, France maintains Markan priority. Mark wrote the first gospel, and Matthew and Luke depended on his work. However, simple literary dependence cannot explain the complex relationship between the Synoptic Gospels; allowance must be made for the rich variety and cross-fertilization of traditions about Jesus (pp. 43-48).

The commentary section itself excels in a number of ways. France has a sense for the narrative as a whole and for how each unit fits within the flow of the story. For example, he details how the parables discourse in Mark 4:1-34 serves to explain the variety of responses to Jesus in the preceding chapters, while also picking up the theme of the kingdom of God, a topic not touched since the announcement of the kingdom in 1:14-15 (p. 182). In dealing with interpretive problems, France presents the views of others fairly but also carefully explains the reasons for his own position. He is clear about when he is dependent on the research of others, and he frequently directs readers to resources where they can find extended discussions of important issues. France knows when to stop interpreting, refusing to speculate on matters that Mark's text does not address. What happened when four men tore apart a roof to bring a paralyzed man to Jesus (Mark 2:4)? Did Jesus continue to teach and the crowd to listen while the noisy and dangerous activity went on over their heads? What was the owner of the house thinking? Since Mark himself refused to satisfy our curiosity on such matters, France also declines to speculate on them (p. 123). France comments, at times, on the relevance of Mark's gospel to current pastoral concerns and theological debates. For example, he has a helpful paragraph on the relevance of Jesus' stern teaching in Mark 3:28-29 about the blasphemy that receives no forgiveness. "It is a warning to those who adopt a position of deliberate rejection and antagonism, not an attempt to frighten those of tender conscience" (p. 177).

France's exegetical treatment of Mark's text is consistently reliable, partly because he is so willing to follow traditional interpretations. In his comments on Mark 12:41-44, France notes a few recent interpreters who argue that Jesus was not commending the sacrificial gift of the widow but rather lamenting the exploitation of this poor woman by the religious establishment. France explains why he does not follow this approach and then comments: "As with many attempts to overturn accepted exegesis, one wonders why no one thought of reading the text this way before!" (p. 490). That statement exemplifies his willingness to follow interpretations that have been tested by time.