Which of Mark’s episodes were resequenced, on the assumption that Mark had Matthew’s Gospel available to him? For this exercise, I am excluding some of the teaching events, such as the parables, as Jesus may well have taught things at multiple times. Plus, the narrative summary statements are also excluded.
Bernard Orchard offers a helpful synopsis, which not only assumes Matthean priority, but also aligns the other Synoptics by use of diagonal lines, rather than by shuffling the Gospel episodes out of their natural order to make them align with each other, as is the practice with many synopses.1 Accordingly, the resequenced passages that are of the most interest are as follows:
Healing and Exorcism Stories (Mark 1:21–1:34). Three healing and exorcism stories, beginning in Mark 1:23, have been grouped together to form a series of episodes which begin on the Sabbath and then continue on into the evening. These include (1) the casting out of an unclean spirit in the Capernaum synagogue (1:23–28), which does not have a counterpart in Matthew; (2) the healing of Simon’s mother-in-law (Mark 1:29–31), for which a slightly shorter account is found in Matthew (8:14–15); and (3) the evening healings of the sick and of those oppressed by demons (Mark 1:32–34), which is also reported in Matthew (8:16–17). After the events at the synagogue, Mark reports that the people are amazed at not only Jesus’s authoritative teaching, but also the authority which he has over unclean spirits, such that his fame immediately spreads “throughout all the surrounding region of Galilee” (Mark 1:27–28).
Conflict Stories (2:1–3:7a). Following the cleansing of the Leper, Mark now collects and expands on stories which demonstrate the building conflict with the religious leaders. These includes three episodes from Matthew 9—the healing of the paralytic (and the blasphemous forgiveness of sins), the calling of Levi (and the scandalous meal with tax collectors and sinners), and the questions about fasting (with the patch and wineskin parables challenging the old ways). To these are added two episodes from Matthew 12—the plucking of grain (on the Sabbath) and the healing of a hand (on the Sabbath).
Jesus’s True Family Stories (3:20–35). Just after Jesus names the twelve, Mark creates a literary structure commonly called a sandwich. As the first bread slice, Mark begins with a report which is not found in the other Gospels, that Jesus’s family “went out to seize him,” convinced that He was “out of his mind” (Mark 3:20–21). Then, Mark incorporates three episodes from Matthew 12—the Pharisaic charge that Jesus was casting out demons by the power of Beelzebul (Matt. 12:24–30; Mark 3:22–27), the corresponding teaching on blaspheming the Holy Spirit (Matt. 12:31–32; Mark 3:28–30), and finally, the report that His family was outside, along with the teaching that His true family consists of those who do God’s will (Matt. 12:46–50; Mark 3:31–35), as the final slice of bread.
Fig Tree Cursing and Temple Clearing (11:12–21). Of all the sequential differences between Matthew and Mark, it is the disparate sequences of the fig tree cursing and temple clearing which appear to most distress biblical scholars. In Matthew 21, the narrative reports (1) the triumphal entry and (2) the temple clearing, followed by (3) a trip to Bethany for the night, and then, (4) “in the morning, as he was returning to the city,” Jesus curses a fig tree, causing it to wither “at once (παραχρῆμα)” (Matt. 21:1–19). This causes (5) the disciples to marvel and remark at its immediate withering, which is followed by (6) a teaching on faith and prayer (Matt. 21:20–22). While in Mark, after the triumphal entry, the temple clearing is delayed until after an overnight trip to Bethany and a “following day” cursing of the fig tree (Mark 11:1–19). Then, the morning after the temple clearing, the disciples observe the withered tree, which is followed by the teaching on faith and prayer (Mark 11:20–25). Hence, at a surface level, Matthew appears to present the events from the triumphal entry to the final teaching as though spanning two days, whereas Mark’s narrative not only rearranges events by splitting the fig tree encounter but also appears to present the events as though spanning three days.
I am presently finalizing a paper for a class, which I hope to then have published, which addresses all of the above resequenced passages, demonstrating not only that Mark has not created chronological issues by resequencing these passages, but also that there is exegetical significance to Mark’s resequencing.
(The withered fig tree episode has already been addressed on this website in an earlier pair of blog posts.)
- Bernard Orchard, Matthew, Luke, and Mark (Manchester, England: Koinonia, 1976). ↩︎
NOTE: Comments and dialog are welcome. The “Leave a Reply” field will be accessible below for 10 days after this post was published. Afterwards, please feel free to continue to comment via the contact page. (This is my attempt to manage the spam bots.)
