…Lohmeyer himself or even Adela Yarbro Collins, one of his fellow followers, who both date the gospel to sometime after the outbreak of the Judean war against Rome but before the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem.

I’m suspicious of claims that the gospel is being written in the heat of the action. Wordsworth famously defined poetry as “emotion recollected in tranquility”, acknowledging the thinking and reflection required to shape powerful feelings into poetry. The gospel of Mark is such a subtle piece of work that it’s hard to imagine it being written while bullets were whizzing past. But who knows? Maybe Joel Marcus is right and Mark was sitting up in Syria and that distance was enough. (But close enough to be getting regular reports from the “front”.)

As a card carrying Bibliomaniac I am obsessed with the lexicon of my malady. Today I learned some new words.

A Librocubicularist is someone who likes to read in bed.

In 1805 Sir Walter Scott wrote a poem wherein he apparently first coined the lovely word, Book-Bosomed, meaning “to carry a book at all times”.

A Biblioklept, of course, one who steals books. I cannot remember ever stealing a book. Really though the lowest form of life is he who would borrow a book and never return it.

A Bibliotaph is one who hoards books. This interesting word comes from Greek through French (bibliotaphe). A Greek tomb is known as a Taphos. Is a library a temple or a tomb?

More French; a Bouquiniste is a dealer in secondhand books. Oh noble profession!

My paternal grandfather was a carpenter who also built furniture. When he died his surviving creations had been divided among relatives and friends. I wound up with a waist-high standalone bookcase. I repainted it and use it for books which I secure but have not yet read. It usually remains full since books removed are invariably replaced. This bookcase, sitting empty in a room, is one of the signs of the apocalypse. It is an awesome thought that my reading habits might be all that stands between us and utter annihilation. Fortunately I take my duties very seriously.

Back for a bit to James R Edwards and his commentary for PNTC (The Pillar New Testament Commentary) and his conservative evangelical outlook. Occasionally strange to read a commentary that mostly accepts the critical/historical approach yet is written from a definite previously assumed faith position.

There is a note where he quotes Origen about some matter and then indicates that Origen was “wrong”. Odd reading a scholar pointing out Origen’s views and then feeling the need to “correct” them.

Even with his sophisticated views – he’s clearly not a fundamentalist – Edwards is still writing from the assumption that the events depicted in Mark’s gospel are historically accurate. This makes his discussion of the so-called “Markan Sandwich” odd because it is obviously a literary technique, yet he treats the detailed events as if they are sequential history. This approach also results in a long discussion where he tries to formulate a scenario where the Roman Centurion at the crucifixion (15:39) can actually pronounce a Christian affirmation of Jesus’ status as Son of God. Assuming this episode must be historical removes Edwards’ ability to arrive at what is the simplest solution, that this is a Markan invention to make a theological point about Jesus’ relationship with gentile believers.

His being a conservative evangelical makes Edwards’ view of a “lost” ending even more fascinating because it raises all kinds of theological questions as well as historical ones. Edwards’ never addresses them interestingly enough. Namely, how can God’s inspired scripture be lost?