Is Jesus God in the Gospel of Mark?

Recently Michael Jones and scholar Mike Licona had a discussion about the Gospel of Mark, if it teaches that Jesus is God or not.^[1] As both accept the scholarly consensus that Mark was written first before the other Gospels, this makes Mark all the more important theologically. They also both accept the affirmative, that Mark presents Jesus as God, whom they call Yahweh.^[2]

What follows is my review of how the discussion went.

At about the 4-minute mark Michael Jones stated about Mark:

It doesn’t say Jesus is God with such explicit statements like you see in like John 8:15 or John 8:58 I believe it is.^[3] So, is Mark in his biography painting Jesus as God and how would he go about doing that in the ancient cultural context?

With that not-so-smooth introduction, let us see how their conversation played out. Was good evidence presented? The discussion opened with Mark 1:2-4, with a quotation of Isaiah 40:3 where John the Baptist prepares the way of the Lord Jesus instead of Yahweh in Isaiah 40:3. Thus Jesus replaces Yahweh. However, a solution that is not considered, and that will continue to haunt the rest of their discussion, is that Jesus represents Yahweh but is not Yahweh.

Then the following Marcan texts were considered:

Mark 2:7, with them both siding with the Pharisees against Jesus that only God can forgive sins. Dr. Licona even read verse 10 where it’s explained that Jesus had the authority from his God to forgive sins, but all Dr. Licona said to that was “well that’s interesting.” Christians should be careful to not side with Christ’s enemies.

Mark 3:26-27, where Jesus said he is binding Satan, which appears to make him stronger than Michael the archangel who only rebukes Satan over Moses’ body (Jude 9). However, not considered is Revelation 12:7-9 where Michael does more than verbally rebuke Satan, but bodily displaces him. So, Michael rebuked Satan in the past, Jesus bound Satan in the Gospels, and Michael displaces Satan in Revelation. Thus, it could be said that like in Mark 2:10, Jesus has been given the authority to bind Satan just like Michael was given authority to defeat and displace Satan. It’s a moot point.

Mark 4:39, where Jesus calms the storm. This was compared to Psalm 89:9, 107:28-29 and Ecclesiastes 8:8 where God does that. Not considered was the solution that that Jesus represents Yahweh but is not Yahweh.

Mark 5:41-42, where Jesus resurrected Jairus’ daughter. Again, this was compared to Ecclesiastes 8:8 where only God has power over death. Also, it was pointed out that Jesus didn’t pray beforehand like Elijah, Elisha, and Peter did with their resurrections. (1 Kings 17:21; 2 Kings 4:33; Acts 9:40) However, Jesus has been given the authority to do that in Mark 2:10 for he represents Yahweh but is not Yahweh.

Mark 6:48, where Jesus is walking on the sea and is about to walk by his friends. This is compared to Job 9:8, 11, where similar language is used of God walking on water and passing by. Again, Jesus has been given the authority to do what has been previously ascribed only to God in Mark 2:10 for he represents Yahweh but is not Yahweh.

Then to change things up, some objections were raised:

Mark 10:18, where Jesus responded to the praise of being called “good” but “only God is good.” Dr. Licona responded: “I think there are two ways of looking at that.” It could mean he’s not God, or, Jesus could mean “I’m not rebuking you, but by calling me good you’re calling me God.” This response is also seen in the NET Bible footnote, which says Jesus was making his interlocutor “stop and think for a moment about who Jesus really was.” However, not considered is another possibility, that Jesus was asking a Repellent Question indicating an objection. Jesus was no stranger to Repellent Questions, as he used one on his own mother in John 2:4, “Woman, what does that have to do with us? My hour has not yet come.” Meaning, “Don't tell me what to do, it’s not time yet.” Thus, as applied to this question, Jesus said: “Don’t call me good, for only God is good (and I’m not God)!”^[4]

The objection that none of these examples clearly teach that Jesus is God was then presented. In response, it was pointed out that Jesus is cryptic about being the Messiah. But he’s clear through his deeds who he is. I agree, and remind them of Mark 2:10 again.

Then the discussion became a little deeper:

Mark 14:61-63 was presented, where Jesus is not only the Messiah (not blasphemy), but the Son of Man in Daniel 7:13, 14 and the Similitudes of 1 Enoch who’s worshipped like only God is, which is blasphemy. However, while the Son of Man is worshipped in Daniel 7:14 and the Intertestamental Similitudes of 1 Enoch, subordination is still unmistakably included. In Daniel he is worshipped before the superior “Ancient of Days,” and in 1 Enoch he is placed on his throne by the superior Lord of Spirits. (1 Enoch 48:5, 10; 51:3; 61:8 62:1-2; 69:27^[5]) So this point does nothing to make Jesus God.

Then, at the end of minute mark 17 to the start of 18, Michael Jones summarized: “We’re not saying it proves Jesus is God, what we’re trying to demonstrate is at least the author of Mark thought Jesus was Yahweh in some sense.” Well, yes, I think all can agree to that. Jesus represented God and was the closest one could get to God. So he was “God” in that sense. But the point of this discussion was indeed to prove that Mark teaches that Jesus is God!

At minute mark 18:43 Dr. Licona concluded that Paul in his letters, which he believes predate Mark’s composition, “is really clear that Jesus is God.” He wrapped up with a statement that I agree with that “there’s no [theological] evolution here, it’s the same from the earliest to the latest.” However, all the Pauline texts he may be referring to are obviously debatable, and we can ask if they are being treated as fairly as the Marcan texts were? As can be seen thus far, Mark was not treated very fairly at all, and neither was 1 Enoch.

Lastly, I am very surprised that they missed Mark 13:32! This passage, which is parallel to Matthew 24:36, makes it very hard to suggest that Mark was teaching that Jesus is God. There Jesus says: “But as for that day or hour no one knows it—neither the angels in heaven, nor the Son—except the Father.” Indeed, the NET Bible footnote admits that “The phrase nor the Son has caused a great deal of theological debate because on the surface it appears to conflict with the concept of Jesus’ deity. … The best option for understanding Mark 13:32 and similar passages is to hold the two concepts in tension: The Son in his earthly life and ministry had limited knowledge of certain things, yet he was still deity.” Thus, one must appeal to nonsensical “dual nature” dogma that he was speaking as a man, and thus misleading his audience, doing them and us a grave disservice. This is unacceptable, and it is really devastating to their presentation that they missed Mark 13:32. Another thing inexcusably omitted is the Passion Narratives as exemplified in Mark 8:31-33, where Jesus condemned as a satanic lie that he would not be completely dead then resurrected. (Mark 9:31-32; 10:32-34) (See: A Lesson from Jesus’ Rebuke jimspace3000.blogspot.com/2013/10/a-lesson-from-jesus-rebuke-in-order-for.html) If Jesus was God, then how did he die in order to be resurrected? This problem is far too serious to leave unaddressed. Moreover, hot on the heels of the last Passion Narrative is Mark 10:40, where “James and John asked for positions of honor and rulership in the kingdom” (NET Bible footnote), and to which Jesus replied: “to sit at my right or at my left is not mine to give.” If Jesus is God, then why was it above his paygrade to choose who ‘sits at his right or at his left’? We may see why by returning to chapter 1, in Mark 1:13. There, Jesus was “enduring temptations from Satan … and angels were ministering to his needs.” The reason should be clear now. God cannot be tempted or be in need of help. This is true even if Jesus had a divine nature as God on earth. Choosing his co-rulers would not be above his paygrade, he would not be tempted, and he would not need help from angels. These all needed to be addressed.

Missed Mark scriptures:

1. Mark 13:32, Jesus is ignorant of what only his Father knows.
2. Mark 8:31-33 and Mark 9:31-32; 10:32-34, the Passion Narratives.
3. Mark 10:40, choosing co-rulers is above Jesus’ paygrade.
4. Mark 1:13, Jesus is tempted by Satan and is helped by angels.

With the problems discussed above, together with these obvious restrictions on the available data, their discussion is entirely unpersuasive and massively missed the mark.

Footnotes:
^[1] In this video: Is Jesus God in the Gospel of Mark? youtu.be/wDjh47C6TiI
^[2] About Yahweh, see: The reason for the name jimspace3000.blogspot.com/2021/06/the-reason-for-name.html
^[3] Regarding John 8:58, Hugh J. Schonfield translated it as “Jesus told them, ‘I tell you for a positive fact, I existed before Abraham was born.’” Kenneth McKay translated it as “I have been in existence since before Abraham was born.” McKay adds that it would be translated this way “if it were not for the obsession with the simple words ‘I am.’” (See: The Authentic New Testament
jimspace3000.blogspot.com/2020/01/the-authentic-new-testament.html) Indeed, nor does the text align in the way they would like you to believe, as revealed here: A case of smoke and mirrors jimspace3000.blogspot.com/2018/02/a-case-of-smoke-and-mirrors.html. Lastly, previous printings of the NASB had “Or ‘I have been’” as a variant reading in the margin. (See: Identifying Jesus
jimspace3000.blogspot.com/2016/08/identifying-jesus.html) So, it is clear that ones who employ John 8:58 as an “explicit statement” to Jesus being God must divorce themselves from scholarship and be inexcusably delusional.
^[4] See: “When Jesus said “No one is good except God alone”?” (Y!A) jimspace3000-ya.blogspot.com/2014/06/when-jesus-said-no-one-is-good-except.html
^[5] These passages read:
48:5, 10: “All who dwell on earth shall fall down and worship before him [the Son of Man], And will praise and bless and celebrate with song the Lord of Spirits.” 10. …“And there shall be no one to take them with his hands and raise them: For they have denied the Lord of Spirits and His Anointed. The name of the Lord of Spirits be blessed.”
51:3: “And the Elect One shall in those days sit on My throne, And his mouth shall pour forth all the secrets of wisdom and counsel: For the Lord of Spirits hath given (them) to him and hath glorified him.”
61:8: “And the Lord of Spirits placed the Elect one on the throne of glory. And he shall judge all the works of the holy above in the heaven, And in the balance shall their deeds be weighed.”
62:1-2: “And thus the Lord commanded the kings and the mighty and the exalted, and those who dwell on the earth, and said: ‘Open your eyes and lift up your horns if ye are able to recognize the Elect One.’ 2. And the Lord of Spirits seated him on the throne of His glory, And the spirit of righteousness was poured out upon him, And the word of his mouth slays all the sinners, And all the unrighteous are destroyed from before his face.”
69:27: “And he sat on the throne of his glory, And the sum of judgement was given unto the Son of Man, And he caused the sinners to pass away and be destroyed from off the face of the earth, And those who have led the world astray.”

Appendix

1. From the NLT Study Bible

From the NLT Study Bible

The NLT Study Bible gives this footnote for Mark 13:32:
“In the miracle of the incarnation, Jesus experienced limitation (10:40; 13:32).”

Yes, thus as a limited person he obviously was not God.

For Mark 10:40 it gives this footnote:
“Jesus did not have the authority to grant their request. Only God the Father could (see also 13:32).” (emphasis original)

Thus, Jesus was not God.

Lastly, it gives this notable footnote for John 8:58:
“before Abraham was even born, I AM! (Or before Abraham was even born, I have always been alive; Greek reads before Abraham was, I am.) Jesus’ life spans the past from before creation (1:1-2) and sweeps beyond the present into eternity. *I AM: This title is reminiscent of God’s name given on Mount Sinai (Exod 3:14; cp. John 4:26; Isa 43:11-13; 12).”

Thus, referring to his pre-human existence and is only “reminiscent” of Exodus 3:14, not a direct identification. See also footnote 3 above.

Trinitarians: Please stop hijacking Mark and John 8:58. At this point it looks dishonest.Thank you for listening!

Blog Index

If you enjoyed this, please consider donating: