The Passion According To Mark
From the New Jerome Biblical Commentary
The Anointing and the Last Supper
Jesus’ Death in Jerusalem (14:1— 16:20)
The Gospel of Mark has been described as a passion narrative with a long introduction. This observation throws into relief how important the final part of the Gospel is to the whole. Jesus knows beforehand what awaits him. Throughout, he behaves as the Suffering Servant and shows himself to be the king of the Jews despite the mocking and blindness of his opponents. The disciples, however, reach the bottom of their descent in Judas’s betrayal and Peter’s denial.
(Dormeyer, D., Die Passion Jesu als Verhaltensmodel [ 11; Münster, 1974]. Kelber, W. H. (ed), The Passion in Mark [1976]. Schenk, W., Der Passionsbericht [ 1974].)
The Anointing and the Last Supper (14:1—31)
The initial section of the Marcan passion narrative identifies Jesus as the Messiah (14:1—11), places his death in the context of the Jewish Passover (14:12— 16), and highlights Jesus’ self—sacrifice (14:17—31). Jesus knows what is happening to him and compares well with the characters who are contrasted with him.
PLOTTING AND ANOINTING (14:1—11)
The center of this introduction to the passion story is the account of how an unnamed woman anoints Jesus (14:3— 9), thereby pointing to his dignity as Messiah, “the anointed one,” and forward to his burial. Her spiritual insight and generosity are contrasted with the spiritual blindness of the high priests and scribes (14:1—2) and Judas (14:10—11). At the heart of the story is the christological saying in 14:7 that marks Jesus’ time as special. Passover and Unleavened Bread: The spring agricultural festival of Unleavened Bread had been combined with the celebration of ancient Israel’s release from bondage in Egypt (see Exod 12:15—20; 34:18—20). It began on the 15th of Nisan (March—April) and lasted for eight days. the chief priests and the scribes: Some of these may have been Sadducees, since they were represented among those in charge of the Temple. The plot by the chief priests and scribes was already under way in 11:18 and 12:12. 2. not during the feast: Since Passover was a pilgrimage feast drawing large crowds to Jerusalem, the public execution of Jesus might spark a riot. The question remains, Did the priests hope to arrest Jesus before or after the feast? The latter seems more likely. Judas’s willingness to betray Jesus led them to execute him during the feast (according to Mark) or before it (as seems more likely on the historical level). in Bethany in the house of Simon the leper: So unusual is such precision about places and names in Mark that the details must have been part of the original story. The alabaster vessel was a round perfume flask containing unguent made from a rare Indian plant. The estimate of its worth in 14:5 at 300 denarii makes it very expensive indeed (see Matt 20:2). poured it over his head: Cf. Luke 7:38 and John 12:3, where the woman anoints the feet of Jesus. Anointing Jesus’ head was an acknowledgment of his messianic dignity (see 2 Kgs 9:6). you do not always have me: The saying explains Jesus’ tolerant attitude of 14:6 and his description of the woman’s act as a good deed. The focus is the presence of Jesus, not the assertion that poverty is a permanent social problem. The woman’s anointing of Jesus’ head has marked him as the Messiah; she alone in contrast to the chief priest and scribes and even Judas has correctly perceived his identity and the special significance that his physical presence had, it is a christological saying like the bridegroom saying in Mark 2:19, not a social commentary. she has anointed beforehand my body for burial: A secondary interpretation placed on the woman’s action relates it directly to his death and burial: the Messiah is anointed for burial at the very beginning of the passion story. The verse is sometimes explained as an addition to the story that aimed at covering the disciples’ embarrassment over not having anointed Jesus’ body before burial (see 16:1). it will be told in memory of her: The story of her deed will be part of the story of Jesus’ passion, death, and resurrection. The woman remains nameless (cf. John 12:3, where she is Mary, the sister of Martha and Lazarus). Judas Iscariot: His betrayal is contrasted with the fidelity of the woman. His initiative allowed the chief priests and scribes to carry out their plot. they promised to give him money: The other evangelists make Judas’s motives explicit: greed (Matt 26:15), Satan (Luke 22:3), and Satan plus a habit of stealing (John 13:2; 12:6).
ARRANGEMENTS FOR THE PASSOVER MEAL (14:12—16)
This passage identifies the Last Supper as a Passover meal in the strict sense that it took place on the 15th of Nisan; the other Synoptic evangelists followed Mark’s chronology. John 19:14, however, places Jesus’ death on the afternoon of the 14th of Nisan and thus makes the Last Supper a pre—Passover meal. John’s chronology is more likely correct, since it is dubious that the chief priests and scribes would have acted as they did on the first day of Passover. The effect of Mark’s making the Last Supper a Passover meal was to draw Jesus’ death more closely into the great Passover themes of sacrifice and liberation. on the first day of Unleavened Bread, when they sacrificed the Passover lamb: The sacrifice took place on the afternoon of the 14th of Nisan before the first day began at sunset. Thus the disciples were sent out to make preparations for the Passover meal celebrated at the beginning of the 15th of Nisan. a man carrying ajar of water: Is this an example of Jesus’ extraordinary foreknowledge, or was it the result of prearrangement See 11:1—6 for a similar problem. an upper room, furnished and ready: Jesus and the Twelve are going to use a guest room in an upper story of a house in Jerusalem. The lack of amazement on the disciples’ part in 14:16 is an indication of prearrangement between Jesus and the man carrying the jar of water.
THE LAST SUPPER (14:17—31)
The account as a whole sandwiches Jesus’ words and deeds at the Last Supper (14:22—25) between the predictions of Judas’s treachery (14:17—21) and Peter’s betrayal (14:26—31). The technique highlights Jesus’ self—sacrifice in contrast to the behavior of Judas and Peter.
Prediction of Judas’s treachery (14:17—21)
The first incident in the Last Supper account stresses Jesus’ foreknowledge regarding Judas’s plot to betray him and Jesus’ willing submission to God’s will in his suffering and death. when it was evening he came with the twelve: In the light of 14:12—16, it is the beginning of the 15th of Nisan (since Jewish days were reckoned to begin at Sunset). The two disciples are already at the appointed site according to 14:12—16, but here they are in the party coming to it. one of you will betray me, he who eats with me: The second part of the prediction may allude to Ps 41:10 (cf. John 13:18). The prediction shows that Judas’s betrayal did not catch Jesus by surprise; the detail about eating together (see 14:20) highlights the enormity of the treachery. the Son of Man goes as it is written about him: Although fulfillment of the OT is a major theme in the Marcan passion story, there is no OT passage that speaks of the sufferings of the Son of Man. The second part of the verse emphasizes that just because God’s plan is at work in Jesus’ death, it does not mean that Judas had no responsibility.
The Supper (14:22—25)
The Marcan version of the Last Supper (see Matt 26:26—29; cf. I Cor 11:23—25; Luke 22:15—20) connects the bread and wine of Jesus’ final meal with his disciples with his imminent death, and interprets them in the light of OT sacrificial traditions (see Exod 24:8; Isa 53:12) and the hope for the messianic banquet in God’s kingdom. take, this is my body: The disciples are invited to share in Jesus’ sacrificial death. Translations such as “represents” or “symbolizes” fail to do justice to the realism of the words. taking the cup: At a Passover meal the bread would be shared toward the beginning and the cup (actually three cups) in the course of it. Here the cup follows after the bread (cf I Cor 11:25; Luke 22:20), which suggests that it was not an official Passover meal. this is my blood of the covenant, poured out for many: The “blood of the covenant” alludes to Exod 24:8, where Moses seals the covenant by sprinkling the blood of sacrificial animals on Israel. The “poured out for many” alludes to Isa 53:12 (one of the Suffering Servant passages) and gives the action a sacrificial dimension. The two OT allusions serve to characterize the death of Jesus as .a sacrifice for others. The phrase hyper poll “for many,” is based on the Hebrew of Isa 53:12; it means for all, not just for one or a few. until I drink it again in the kingdom of God: The concluding saying places the Last Supper in the context of the messianic banquet (see 6:35—44; 8:1—10). Rather than seeing the Last Supper (and the eucharist) as an isolated event, it is important to connect it with Jesus’ earlier meals with tax collectors and sinners (see 2:16) and to the future eschatological banquet.
Prediction of Peter’s denial (14:26—31)
The third incident goes back to the first in the series (14:17—21). It is hard to imagine early Christians inventing so damning a story as that about Peter’s denial. when they sang a hymn: The hymn is usually identified as Pss 113—18. 27. I will strike the shepherd: For this identification of Jesus, see 6:34. Zech 13:7 predicts both the death of Jesus and the flight of the disciples. I will go before you into Galilee: This saying points forward to Mark 16:7, where it seems to assume the occurrence of resurrection appearances in Galilee. Some interpreters take it as an unfulfilled plan made by the earthly Jesus or as a prediction of the parousia (see 13:24—2 7). before the cock crows twice, you will deny me three times: The prediction points forward to Peter’s triple denial in 14:66—72, in the face of his claim that he will be the exception among the flock (14:29) and his protestation (14:3 1).
Jesus’ Prayer and Arrest (14:32—52)
The two incidents move Jesus closer to the cross, showing how he faced death alone, apart from his friends. What sustains him is his unique relationship to God and his conviction that God’s will revealed in the Scriptures is being fulfilled.
GETHSEMANE (14:32—42)
The Marcan version of the agony in the garden presents Jesus as the obedient Son of God who struggles to accept God’s will in his passion. It portrays the disciples as hopelessly unaware of what is going on, thus as an example to be avoided. Gethsemane: The place was a small garden outside the E wall of the city of Jerusalem on the Mt. of Olives. The name means “oil press.” began to be greatly disturbed and troubled: The Gk vbs. ekthambeisthai and ademonein vividly express the agitation that Jesus experiences. The text expresses his deep emotional plight in the face of his impending death. This emphasis does not necessarily contradict the stress on Jesus’ foreknowledge and acceptance of God’s will in the preceding passages, since one can be terrified of what awaits one (e.g., a cancer patient). my soul is sorrowful, even unto death: In his address to the three disciples, Jesus uses the language of Ps 42:6,12. 36. Abba, Father.. . remove the cup from me: This prayer and the instruction that follows in 14:38 (“lest you enter into temptation”) bear some relationship to the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9—13; Luke 11:2—4). The cup is the “cup of suffering” (10:3 9). a theme that also has a eucharistic dimension (14:24). not what I will but what you will: The statement indicates that Jesus had to school himself to accept his sufferings (see Matt 6:10). the temptation: As in Matt 6:13, the temptation is preeminently the period of eschatological testing that will precede the coming of God’s kingdom (see 13:9—13). This kind of language underlines the eschatological significance of Jesus’ own passion. the hour has come; behold the Son of Man is handed over: Jesus had come to the disciples three times and found them sleeping (14:37, 40,41). Even Peter, who claimed that he would die with Jesus (14:31), is asleep. The “hour” of Jesus’ betrayal by Judas is to be the climax of his ministry. The three passion predictions are being fulfilled (see 8:31; 9:31; 10:33—34).
ARREST (14:43—52)
This passage consists of several short episodes: the capture (14:43—46), the cutting off of an ear or earlobe (14:47), Jesus’ assessment (14:48—49), and the disciples’ flight (14:50—52). It develops several familiar themes: the treachery of Judas, Jesus’ foreknowledge, the fulfillment of the Scriptures, and the disciples’ faithlessness to Jesus. 43. a crowd: The arrest is carried out by a kind of mob, rather than the Temple police (see Luke 22:52) or the Roman soldiers (see John 18:3,12). For the groups responsible for the arrest, see 14:1,53. the one I shall kiss: During the pilgrimage festival of Passover, Jerusalem would be crowded. Moreover, those sent to arrest Jesus would not have known him by sight. Judas’s signal to them used the traditional greeting given to the teacher — a device that increases the horror of Judas’s action. a certain one of the bystanders drew his sword: According to John 18:10, Peter cut off the ear of a slave named Maichus. According to Luke 22:50—51, Jesus healed the man’s ear. The diminutive ötarion suggests that perhaps only part of the ear or just the lobe was struck. as against a brigand: By describing the manner of Jesus’ arrest in this way and emphasizing its inappropriateness, the saying makes clear that in fact Jesus was no brigand (lestës) — a term that may also have carried the connotation of revolutionary against the Roman government. day after day: This statement about Jesus’ teaching in the Temple appears to conflict with Mark’s chronology, according to which Jesus had only been in the city for three days (unless this is what Mark understood by kath’ hemeran). let the Scriptures be fulfilled: The saying apparently refers to 14:27 (where Zech 13:7 had been quoted), though it may have been meant in a more general sense as in 14:21 (“the Son of Man goes as it is written about him”). a certain young man followed him: The identity of the young disciple who flees away naked has attracted many guesses through the centuries. Whoever or whatever he was, in the present context he is the individuation of 14:50, “And all left him and fled.”
Mark presents two trials—one before the Jewish leaders, the other before Pilate. He regarded the Jewish trial as the more decisive one, though from a legal perspective the Roman trial was more important. Throughout the trials, Jesus the innocent sufferer remains almost entirely silent (see Isa 53:7).
TRIAL BEFORE THE HIGH PRIEST; PETER’S DENIAL
(14:53—72)
Mark again uses the sandwich technique to place side-by-side the faithfulness of Jesus and the cowardice of Peter. I- presents the hearing at the high priest’s house on the first evening of Passover as a full—scale trial (though there are serious historical problems connected with this portrayal). The two charges raised during the trial are that Jesus threatened to destroy the Jerusalem Temple and that he committed blasphemy. they led Jesus to the high priest: The Jewish trial is situated at the house of the high priest. Could the whole Sanhedrin meet there (see 14:64)? Would they have met there on the first night of Passover? These problems suggest that Jesus underwent a preliminary hearing at the house of the high priest on the evening before the first evening of Passover (see 14:12—16). The preliminary hearing was conducted by a small group or committee of Jewish leaders. Peter: The reference to Peter at this point makes the story into a “sandwich” contrasting the noble silence of Jesus with the cowardly denials of Peter (see 14:66—72). the chief priests and all the Sanhedrin: Mark is intent on presenting the hearing as a full—scale trial before the whole Sanhedrin. This tendency was probably part of the general Christian effort to play down Roman involvement and to play up Jewish involvement in Jesus’ death. their testimonies were not in agreement: For the Jewish legal principle regarding the need for at least two witnesses to a crime, see Deut 19:15—a principle dramatized in the Susanna story, which is part of the Gk version of Dan. 58. we heard him saying that I will destroy this Temple: Jesus may have contrasted Temple worship in the present with the kind of worship that will prevail when God’s kingdom comes. The “I” may have been God, or perhaps even Jesus speaking in God’s name. The saying probably had some relation to the cleansing of the Temple (see 11:15—19). Later NT writers tended to spiritualize it (see Matt 26:61;John 2:21; Acts 6:14) in the light of the fact that the Romans rather than Jesus destroyed the Jerusalem Temple in AD 70. he was silent and answered nothing: The silence of Jesus (see also 15:5) fulfilled Isa 53:7 and Ps 38:13—15. The high priest’s question whether Jesus was the Christ the Son of the Blessed One combines identifications already made in 8:29 and 1:11; 9:7. I am, and you will see the Son of Man: you have heard the blasphemy: The charge of blasphemy is used loosely, for according to Lev 24:10—23 blasphemy involved the divine name and was punished by stoning. all condemned him to be deserving of death: Jesus was probably viewed as a Jewish political—religious agitator (see Josephus, Ant. 17.10.4—88 § 269—85; 18.4.1 § 85—87; 20.8.6 § 167—72) who threatened the power of both the Romans and the Jewish leaders. Mark presents the condemnation as the legal decision of the whole Sanhedrin. Does the “all” include Joseph of Arimathea (see 15:43)? See Matt 27:57; Luke 23:50—51 for alter native solutions to the problem. prophesy: The request accompanying the cruel treatment of Jesus carries the irony that the treatment fulfills the OT prophecies about the Suffering Servant (see Isa 50:4—6; 53:3—5). It may also allude to popular perceptions about Jesus as a prophet (see Mark 6:15; 8:28). as Peter was below in the courtyard: The story begun in 14:54 is resumed so as to contrast Jesus’ faithfulness and Peter’s faithlessness. Peter’s denial appears in all four Gospels (see Matt 26:69—75; Luke 22:56—62; John 18:17,25—27). Note the progression in the audiences for Peter’s denials: one maid (14:66), the maid plus some bystanders (14:69), and the bystanders (14:70). but he denied it: There seems to be an inverse relationship between the three charges (“You were with Jesus the Nazarene” in 14:67; “He is one of them” in 14:69; “Certainly you are one of them, for you are a Galilean” in 14:70) and the vehemence of Peter’s denials (failure to understand in 14:68; simple denial in 14:70; an oath in 14:71). a second time a cock crowed: With Peter’s third denial of Jesus, the prediction made in Mark 14:30 comes to fulfillment.
(Donahue, J. R., Are You the Christ? The Trial Narrative in the Gospel of Mark [ 10; Missoula, 1973]. Juel, D., Messiah and Temple: The Trial of Jesus in the Gospel of Mark [ 31; Missoula, 1977].)
THE TRIAL BEFORE PILATE (15:1—15)
The Roman governor Pontius Pilate was legally responsible for Jesus’ death by crucifixion. The charge that led to the crucifixion was the claim that Jesus was “king of the Jews”—a title that carried revolutionary overtones for the Romans. Mark and the other evangelists present the Jewish authorities as the prime movers and Pilate as merely acceding to their pressure tactics; this portrayal probably reflects the early Christian tendency to play down Roman involvement and to play up Jewish responsibility in Jesus’ death. The Marcan account of the trial before Pilate actually passes over the verdict. Jesus acts as the silent Suffering Servant of Isa 53:7. as soon as it was morning: This verse seems to assume the occurrence of a second official meeting of the Sanhedrin in the morning (cf. Matt 26:66; 27:1). The result is the handing over of Jesus to the Roman authorities (see 9:3 1; 10:33). Pilate: Pontius Pilate was the prefect of Judea from AD 26 to 36 (-+ History, 75:168). The Gospels’ portrayals of Pilate as indecisive and concerned for justice contradict other ancient descriptions of his cruelty and obstinacy. Pilate’s headquarters were at Caesarea Maritima; he came to Jerusalem to oversee the Passover pilgrimage, lest trouble break out. are you the king of the Jews?: Pilate’s question is a political translation of the titles Messiah and Son of God. It shows that the strategy against Jesus was to connect him with political-messianic movements of the time and to condemn him as a revolutionary. you have said so: Jesus’ answer to Pilate is noncommittal, not denying the ultimate truth of the title “King of the Jews” as applied to him but not accepting the political framework implied in Pilate’s use of it (F. J. Matera, The Kingship of Jesus [ 66; Chico, 1982]). The chief priests accused him of many things: Mark presents the Jewish officials as the prime movers in raising charges against Jesus, while assuming that these men must convince Pilate to have Jesus crucified. Their repeated accusations contrast with the silence of Jesus (see Isa 53:7; Ps 38:13—15). he used to release to them a single prisoner: There is no extrabiblical evidence for the annual custom of releasing a prisoner at Passover. Perhaps the occasional practice of amnesty has been made into a custom by the evangelists or their sources. Barabbas: The name is a transliteration of the Aram bar ‘abba “son of the father.” The prisoner was a revolutionary and a murderer, just the kind of person that the Romans should fear most. to release to you the king of the Jews?: The account passes over the fact that there must already have been a trial before Pilate in which Jesus had been declared guilty. Pilate is now presenting the crowd with a choice between two condemned prisoners. crucify him: Crucifixion was a Roman punishment to be administered by Roman soldiers. The account indicates that Pilate had Jesus crucified not because he was guilty but because the high priests through the crowd put pressure on him (“wishing to satisfy the crowd’ according to 15:15). having scourged Jesus: The scourging inflicted as preparation for crucifixion was done with leather whips containing pieces of bone or metal applied to the victim bound to a pillar.
The Crucifixion and Death (15:16—47)
The four incidents in this climactic part of the passion story and of the entire Gospel tell of Jesus’ death as king of the Jews in accordance with the OT.
THE MOCKERY (15:16—20)
Before the actual crucifixion, a group of soldiers mocks Jesus on the basis of the title “king of the Jews.” The irony is that the soldiers are correct in identifying Jesus as the king of the Jews. the soldiers: These men were natives of Palestine and Syria, recruited by the Romans. The phrase “the whole battalion” is probably used in a loose way, since a speira consisted of anywhere from 200 to 600 soldiers. the praetorium: Praetorium was originally the general’s tent in a camp and came to designate his headquarters. There is a debate over whether this praetorium was at Herod’s palace or the Fortress Antonia in the city of Jerusalem (—cf Biblical Archaeology, 74:151). plaiting a thorny crown: The crown of thorns is part of the mockery. hail, king of the Jews: The soldiers’ greeting is based on the charge on which Jesus was condemned (see 15:2,9,12) and parodies the greeting to the Roman emperor Ave Caesar, victor, imperator.
THE CRUCIFIXION (15:21—32)
The story of the crucifixion is told simply and without dwelling on the physical details of Jesus’ suffering (though these are certainly part of the passage). The account emphasizes that Jesus’ death took place in accordance with the OT, without playing down the implacable hatred displayed by Jesus’ adversaries (see 14:21). Simon the Cyrenian: Simon was a Jew born in Cyrene (in north Africa); whether he was in Jerusalem as a pilgrim or as a permanent resident is unclear. The reference to his sons Alexander and Rufus (see Rom 16:13) suggests that they were known to the early Christians. Simon was forced to carry the crossbeam for Jesus. The description of him as “coming from the field” could refer to his working on a farm or simply his visiting there. Golgotha: The Gk place—name is the transliteration of the Aram ‘gulgulta’, “skull,” which refers either to its shape or use. In Jesus’ time this place was outside the city walls of Jerusalem. The traditional name “Calvary” comes from the Lat word for “skull” (calvaria). wine mingled with myrrh: On the basis of Prov 3 1:6—7, the phrase is usually interpreted as a narcotic to ease the pain of the dying person. they crucified him: The crucifixion is described in the briefest and starkest terms possible. The garments of Jesus became the property of the soldiers who carried out the execution. In the light of the prominence of Ps 22 in the Marcan passion narrative, their action must also have been viewed as the fulfillment of Ps 22:19. the third hour: The third hour was 9:00 A.M. The Marcan chronology conflicts with John 19:14, according to which Jesus was condemned “about the sixth hour” (i.e., noon). the King of the Jews: This official charge had already been raised in the trial before Pilate (see 15:2, 9,13) in contrast to the two charges raised in the trial before the high priest (see 14:58,61). The official charge very likely reflects the historical situation that Jesus was executed by the Romans on the charge of claiming king ship. As in 15:16—20, the irony is that from Mark’s perspective Jesus is the king of the Jews. two brigands: These men may have been social revolutionaries like Barabbas, and as Jesus was supposed by the Romans to have been. the passers-by: The first group of mockers repeats the charge raised in 14:58 about threatening to destroy the Temple. the high priests: The second group of mockers echoes the charge in 14:61 that Jesus claimed to be the Messiah. those crucified along with him: The third group that also mocked Jesus. Cf. Luke 23:39—43, where one of the criminals acknowledges Jesus’ innocence and asks to be remembered when he comes into his kingdom.
THE DEATH OF JESUS (15:33—39)
Jesus’ death took place according to God’s will made known in the OT. The tearing of the Temple veil and the centurion’s confession give to Jesus’ death a depth dimension with respect to the old Israel and the Gentile mission. darkness over the whole land: The “land” is most likely Judea. The darkness from the sixth hour (noon) to the ninth hour (3:00 P.M.) has been variously interpreted as a sandstorm, an eclipse of the sun (see Luke 23:45), or the fulfillment of Amos 8:9. 34. Elöi, Elöi, lema sabach thani: Jesus’ cry is an Arameic version of the opening words of Ps 22, the prayer of the righteous sufferer that ends with an act of trust in God. The use of Ps 22 does not rule out an emotional experience of abandonment on Jesus’ part (see 14:32—42). behold he is calling Elijah: The call to God (Elöi, Eloi) is mistaken (perhaps with malice) as a call to Elijah. For Elijah as forerunner of the kingdom, see Mark 1:6; 9:11—13. a sponge full of vinegar: Perhaps the intention was to ease Jesus’ pain (see 15:23). At any rate, the action fulfilled Ps 69:22, “for my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink.” Jesus uttered a loud cry and breathed his last: A sudden, violent death is indicated; there is no dwelling on its details. We are not told what the content of Jesus’ final cry was (cf. Luke 23:46; John 19:30). the curtain of the Temple was torn: The curtain divided the holy place from the holy of holies (see Exod 26:33). Its rending at Jesus’ death suggests the end of the old covenant with Israel. truly this man was the Son of God: The centurion’s confession echoes the opening words of the Gospel (1:1). The juxtaposition of this Gentile’s confession with the torn veil in 15:38 imbues it with symbolic significance for the Gentile mission.
THE BURIAL (15:40—47)
The burial is the necessary preparation for the empty tomb story. Mary Magdalene: Mary Magdalene is the principle of continuity insofar as she saw Jesus die (15:40), knew where he was buried (15:47), and went to the tomb on Easter (16:1). The other Mary (not the mother of Jesus; see 6:3) appears again in 15:47, and Salome is mentioned in 16:1 only. There has been no preparation in Mark (cf. Luke 8:1—3) for the description of the women’s service to Jesus and their role as disciples. the day before the sabbath: The sabbath would begin at sunset on Friday afternoon, thus demanding that the burial take place before the day of rest began. Joseph of Arimathea: Arimathea is probably derived from Ramathaim-zophim (1 Sam 1:1). Mark does not specify that he was a follower of Jesus (cf. Matt 27:57) and assumes that he was part of the sanhedrin that condemned Jesus (cf. Luke 23:50—51). learning from the centurion: Pilate’s investigation provides official confirmation that Jesus was really dead; there can be no question of a coma or shock. laid him in a tomb: The area around Jerusalem in Jesus’ time has been described as a gigantic cemetery. The tomb of Joseph was a cave like structure cut Out of limestone and sealed with a large, circular rock. The corpse would be laid out on a shelf cut out of the rock and allowed to decompose for a year. Then the bones would be gathered and placed in a bone—box (“ossuary”).