richard2

Here's is a really in-depth article about Psalm 110 from a Jewish perspective:

http://www.messiahtruth.com/ps110.html

Vorkosigan

My structural analysis suggests, to start off, that this pericope is probably a later addition by a redactor, and is not evidence of anything.

Actually, there are some hidden allusions to Jesus' kingly role. His family members have Maccabee names, for example, an allusion to the previous Jewish dynasty. The allusions to Jesus as high priest scattered throughout Mark 1-6 are secondarily allusions to a kingly role, since the two roles were fused in the last Jewish state.

As I pointed out earlier, this could well be sarcasm or irony on the part of Jesus.

The writer of Mark does not deny that Jesus is the descendent of David. That is merely one interpretation of Jesus' words and not the only possible one. Note that the passage has a chreia-like pattern that suggests Jesus is being ironic: The Messiah is David's son? But how can that be, when David himself calls him Lord?

More importantly, the writer of Mark has a program of presenting Jesus as King, priest, and messiah. When the writer alludes to a passage, he wants you to go back and look -- not only does Ps 110 contain a descent-ascent motif, but in the entire Torah it is the only place where the king is explicitly spoken of as a high priest (Fletcher-Louis 2003). The Psalm refers to Simon Maccabaeus and entered Torah after his times. Simon united the offices of King and High Priest. The writer is giving us a wink and nudge here. Q: How David's son be his lord? A: When he's the King, High Priest and Messiah all in one!

Finally, "nowhere else in the gospel, the author commented otherwise" might well be wrong. Consider Mk 4:21

• 21: And he said to them, "Is a lamp brought in to be put under a bushel, or under a bed, and not on a stand?(RSV)

The lamp reference is a Davidic one, found in 2 Kings 8:19 and elsewhere.

• Nevertheless, for the sake of his servant David, the LORD was not willing to destroy Judah. He had promised to maintain a lamp for David and his descendants forever. (NIV)

To anyone familiar with Judaism listening to the Gospel of Mark, the lamp reference would have had a Davidic undertone.

There is a strong King reference in the opening line of Mark -- recall that the title "Son of God" was worn by Kings throughout the Hellenistic world -- Roman Emperors, Romulus, etc. Mark 1:11 contains another king reference. Price points out that Mk 1:11 is cobbled together from 3 OT texts, including Psalm 2, Isaiah 42:1, and Gen 22:12 (LXX):

• "The theological point of this rich mosaic of conflated texts is to combine in Jesus Christ the roles of king, servant, and sacrifice. It is both clever and profound. But it is not historical, unless one wishes to imagine God sitting with his Hebrew Psalter, Greek Septaugint, and Aramaic Targum open in front of him, deciding what to crib." (2003, p 120-1).

Helms (1988, 47) points out that for the ancient Hebrews the anointed King was understood as the "Son of God." Not only does Psalm 2:7, a coronation psalm, imply this, but it is also found in 2 Sam 7:14, where the Lord promises to David:

• I will be his father, and he will be my son. (NIV)

Note how in that context "son of god" function as another Davidic reference.

Mark is a very rich tapestry, and Bernard's reading of it does not capture it very robustly.

Vorkosigan

TedM

Interesting comments. Thanks Vork.

ted