In Search of a Context: The Function of Scripture in Mark's Narrative

Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, Dec 2003 by Herron, Robert

In Search of a Context: The Function of Scripture in Mark's Narrative. By Thomas R. Hatina. JSNTSup 232. Studies in Scripture in Early Judaism and Christianity 8. London: Sheffield Academic Press, 2002, xii 428 pp., $125.00.

As the subtitle suggests, Hatina is attempting to assess properly the function of Scripture in Mark's narrative. As the fore-title suggests, he finds the contexts usually proposed inadequate, or at least incomplete. The first objective of this revised University of Bristol Ph.D. dissertation is to provide "an evaluation of the various contexts that have been proposed by historical critics for reading Mark's quotations and allusions" (p. 1). Not surprisingly, he concludes that the inadequacy of each of the approaches (from Sitz im, Leben to Leben Jesu to redaction criticism, and others) is "the lack of consideration given to the narrative of Mark's Gospel as the primary context within which the quotations and allusions are embedded" (p. 2). "The second objective of this study is to propose a model for reading scriptural quotations and allusions that is sensitive to both the narrative of Mark's Gospel and the historical setting within which it is written" (p. 3). His answer is to focus on "the context of the story world," a la the arena of literary criticism and narrative criticism (p. 1).

I agree with the author about the importance of the primacy of the biblical text. I, too, have been influenced and persuaded by literary and narrative criticism. I agree that "an approach that primarily considers the story world, with its plot and ideological points of view, preserves the creativity and concerns of the evangelist along with the genuineness and uniqueness of the story" (p. 375). However, one possible criticism of using the narrative of the story world as the starting point in determining the function of Scripture is determining with accuracy and precision "the cohesive feature within the story" (p. 3). Hatina argues that "the hermeneutical key is found in the ideological point of view, shared by Jesus and the narrator, that the kingdom of God has come in and through Jesus" (p. 3).

Yet is it not clear that another reader might identify another equally valid hermeneutical key? While Hatina agrees that using an external context such as Sitz im Leben or Leben Jesu or any historical-critical method to discern Mark's use of Scripture can be instructive, he nevertheless insists that "the narrative as context often takes a subordinate position in the exegetical task" (p. 2). "Both contexts are important," he admits, "but the order of enquiry should begin with the latter [i.e. the narrative context] if at all possible" (p. 2). However, in the end one cannot escape the subjective nature of reconstructing even the narrative and that elusive "cohesive feature within the story." Hatina's identification of the hermeneutical key as "the ideological point of view, shared by Jesus and the narrator, that the kingdom of God has come in and through Jesus" (p. 93) is subjective. It may also be correct.

I think Hatina is right to say that the narrative context should be considered first and strongly before looking to any external context. However, I also think he has not fully grappled with the perennial challenge of all readers of Scripture, namely, the subjectivity of the reader. The only way I can think to mollify the strictures of any one approach is to remain in dialogue with others and to submit one's conclusions to the criticism and conclusions and questions of other approaches and methodologies. A multidisciplinary approach continues to be the best safeguard against error, and the spirit of Hatina's book indicates his willingness to do this.

The reader must know that this is a revised Ph.D. dissertation. Most of us have written them, and all of us have read them. This is graduate level research, and it is quite specific and detailed. Most of the ancient texts are quoted in Hebrew and Greek, although always translated, and he refers to a plethora of modern sources in their original language.

I would recommend this book for a graduate level seminar in Mark or in biblical criticism or for a similar context. The author's high view of Scripture also commends his work.

Robert Herron

Southeastern College, Lakeland, FL