What do you think?
Rate this book
A Myth of Innocence: Mark & Christian Origins
Preface
Introduction: Christian Origins and the Imaginations
Part I: Christian Beginnings
The Temple and the Land of Palestine Jesus in Galilee The Followers of Jesus The Congregations of the Christ The Patterns of Social Conflict
Part II: Stories in the Gospel Tradition
The Parables of Jesus The Pronouncement Stories The Miracle Stories
/li>
Part III: Narratives of the Passion
The Entanglements of History and Myth The Narrative Designs The Compositional Process
Part IV: The Gospel According to Mark
The Gospel as Myth The Gospel as Apocalypse The Gospel as Parable The Gospel as Paradigm
Conclusion: Imagination and the Myth of Innocence
Apendices
I. The Pronouncement Stories in Mark
II. Linnemann: The Traditions of the Passion
III. Dormeyer: The Acts of the Martyr
IV. The Gospel of Mark: An Overview
Bibliography
Indices
I. Subjects
II. Ancient Authors and Writings
III. Modern Authors
Introduction: Christian Origins and the Imaginations
Part I: Christian Beginnings
The Temple and the Land of Palestine Jesus in Galilee The Followers of Jesus The Congregations of the Christ The Patterns of Social Conflict
Part II: Stories in the Gospel Tradition
The Parables of Jesus The Pronouncement Stories The Miracle Stories
/li>
Part III: Narratives of the Passion
The Entanglements of History and Myth The Narrative Designs The Compositional Process
Part IV: The Gospel According to Mark
The Gospel as Myth The Gospel as Apocalypse The Gospel as Parable The Gospel as Paradigm
Conclusion: Imagination and the Myth of Innocence
Apendices
I. The Pronouncement Stories in Mark
II. Linnemann: The Traditions of the Passion
III. Dormeyer: The Acts of the Martyr
IV. The Gospel of Mark: An Overview
Bibliography
Indices
I. Subjects
II. Ancient Authors and Writings
III. Modern Authors
456 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1988
3 people are currently reading
98 people want to read
About the author
Burton L. Mack
18 books11 followersJohn Wesley Professor of the New Testament at the school of Theology at Claremont
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews
August 21, 2021
Breaking news from 1988: Man writes 375 page book about Gospel of Mark, concludes with the assessment that the gospel is, and I am quoting here, "remarkably pitiful." More at 11.
January 22, 2026
A PROPOSAL FOR A REINTERPRETATION OF THE CONTEXT OF MARK AND “Q”
Burton L. Mack (1931-2022) was Professor emeritus in early Christianity at the Claremont School of Theology in California, as well as formerly a prominent member of the Jesus Seminar. He has written other books, such as 'Lost Gospel the Book of Q.'
He wrote in the Preface to this 1988 book, “This book was written to show how the picture of Christian origins might change with a single shift in perspective on the social history documented by the early texts. What if one acknowledged that the gospel story was Christianity’s charter document and regarded its formation as an essential moment in the ‘laying of the foundations’? Then the focus would not fall solely on the life of Jesus as the stratum within which all of the crucial, originary events are to be found. Instead it would be the later occasions for imagining Jesus that way which one should want to understand… If the social circumstances of that later time were regarded as the ‘foundational’ stratum, and the composition of the gospel taken as the ‘originary’ moment of significance for Christian origins, the fantastic events depicted in the gospels might actually begin to make sense.” (Pg. xii)
He suggests, “What if the notion of a single, miraculous point of origin was acknowledged … [as] an article of faith derived from Christian mythology? Then… the social and intellectual occasions of their being imagined would be the thing to understand. To ask when, where, and why early followers of Jesus dared to think such audacious thoughts, that would be to learn something…. one would look for historical circumstances, intellectual resources, and social motivations for early Christians to have imagined such a cosmic drama… What if the formation of the gospel were regarded as the origin of the Christian notion of dramatic origins? Then the ‘later’ texts would be just as interesting as the earlier ones, perhaps even more interesting because of their greater degree of fantasy… It might even be possible to say something about the persistence of such a fantasy in modern times, a fantasy that, apparently, modernity has not been able to challenge.” (Pg. 8-9)
He explains, “The present study is neither strictly sociological, not primarily literary critical, but an attempt to combine both perspectives in order to redescribe a certain set of entangled textual and social histories of importance for the composition of the Gospel of Mark… It is therefore a sociological study in the sense that texts will be construed consistently as reflections of and upon social experience.” (Pg. 20-21) He continues, “[This book] addresses the entire history of the early period of Christianity and attempts to make sense of a privileged text by filling in the social space between the time of Jesus… and the time when the story was written… This book is about the plotting of that myth of origins and its designs upon the social histories, both of those who first produced it, and of those who still accept its charter.” (Pg. 23-24)
He notes, “Jesus’ critical insights would be called a social critique. Jesus’ social critique… did not include polemic against specific institutions… He did not take the Romans to task, nor inveigh against the temple establishment. He did not suggest withdrawal from strife and ungodliness to form a convent… He did not suggest a people’s revolt to storm the palace in Tiberias, or raise a guerilla band to march on Jerusalem. He proposed no political program. He did not organize a church.” (Pg. 64)
He asserts, “Early Jesus movements did see themselves in the light of an ideal order of things designated by the term kingdom of God. That they used it to position themselves within a history that started with Jesus, suffered delay in realizing full potential, this making it necessary to project an even more momentous manifestation, agrees with the way in which rationalizations occurred… within apocalyptic sects. This indicates… that the technical usage of the term kingdom of God is most probably a construction of some Jesus movement, not a derivation from a pregiven Jewish conceptuality.” (Pg. 71)
He proposes, “What Jesus set in motion was… a social experiment… The new arrangement … [can be] described as an order of things created and sustained by a new, effective spirit. Fascination with the power to change people… was certainly one of the ways in which some Jesus people and many Christ cult people responded to the spirit experienced in the movements stemming from Jesus. Jesus was held to be the source of the spirit of transformation, and miracle stories were one way to imagine transformations at the beginning.” (Pg. 76-77)
He argues, “The exigencies of social experience and the failure to resolve certain conflicts both within and without the Jesus movements eventually produced a series of withdrawals from the fray. The sayings tradition was domesticated by settled sectarians on the one hand, gnosticized by those who composed the Gospel of Thomas on the other. The pillars fled from Jerusalem, and the family of Jesus withdrew to the Transjordan… Mark defined his group apocalyptically by severing the ties with Judaism, as well as with… other competitive forms of early Jesus-Christ movements… But the history of the synoptic tradition and the history of the Christian church are evidence that Mark’s story eventually won the day. It was Mark’s solution to the question of conflict.” (Pg. 130-131)
He states, “Mark manipulated the aphoristic quality of the sayings tradition to account for two ways in which Jesus’ message had been taken. He described a single occasion in the life of Jesus when ‘teaching’ in parables worked both ways at the same time, i.e., ‘mystified’ as well as ‘instructed.’ The question is whether the mystery of these parables was really all that mysterious.” (Pg. 158-159)
Later, he adds, “Mark’s approach … was sectarian and conservative. Part of the answer was… to imagine that all that had transpired as planned, as part of the design from the beginning. The gospel was written with these rationalizations in mind… Mark’s apocalyptic imagination was generated in the seventies as a reaction and response to contemporary social history… Those who are to be instructed by Jesus’ teaching are not those to whom he speaks in the story, but those who read the story in Mark’s time. Mark addressed his readers by attributing his message to Jesus and letting them overhear Jesus’ instruction to others.” (Pg. 166, 169)
He summarizes, “Mark’s myth of origins was written to vindicate the synagogue reform movement after its execution from the synagogue. He did that by imagining the authority of Jesus … to have been from God. He demonstrated Jesus’ divine authority by using the miracle myth form the congregation of Israel. By using it, Mark could picture Jesus’ purposes and power as part of God’s design for Israel’s cleansing and perfection… Unfortunately for the Jesus people, the cost of vindication included becoming an apocalyptic sect. The fault of the myth was that the destruction of the temple was an inappropriate way to imagine God getting even with the synagogue…. Apocalyptic judgments on those who reject Jesus would be the only way to imagine vindication.” (Pg. 244-245)
He asserts, “Mark composed the passion account on the model of the story of wisdom’s child, the persecuted, innocent one. A simple demonstration of this thesis cannot, unfortunately, be given. That is because attempts to correlate the wisdom story with the passion narrative on a function-by-function basis runs into two unmanageable problems. One is that the story Mark told is about Jesus, not about ‘the’ Righteous One… A second problem … [it that] the passion narrative does not seem to fit the story of the persecuted Righteous One.” (Pg. 269-270) Later, he adds, “Mark used the pattern of the wisdom story to conjoin myths of origin stemming from the Jesus movements on the one hand, with the moth of origin stemming from the Christ cult on the other… The wisdom tale was the narrative device used to merge them. The gospel is the product of that accommodation.” (Pg. 276)
He concludes, “Mark appropriated the Christ myth and linked it with the Jesus traditions. By doing that he radicalized the appearance of the man of authority and power… By locating the Christ myth precisely as an originary event complete with social historical motivation and consequence, Mark created the story that was to give to Christian imagination its sense of a radical and dramatic origin in time.” (Pg. 355) He adds, “The Markan legacy is a myth of innocence that separates those who belong to the righteous kingdom from those without. The boundaries, however… shift as conflicts arise both within and without… If all else fails, both martyrdom and the destruction of the wicked can be imagined as the means of vindicating the cause and trusting in the power of God to resurrect a new creation from the ashes.” (Pg. 372)
This book will be of great interest to those studying critical perspectives on Jesus and the early Church.
Burton L. Mack (1931-2022) was Professor emeritus in early Christianity at the Claremont School of Theology in California, as well as formerly a prominent member of the Jesus Seminar. He has written other books, such as 'Lost Gospel the Book of Q.'
He wrote in the Preface to this 1988 book, “This book was written to show how the picture of Christian origins might change with a single shift in perspective on the social history documented by the early texts. What if one acknowledged that the gospel story was Christianity’s charter document and regarded its formation as an essential moment in the ‘laying of the foundations’? Then the focus would not fall solely on the life of Jesus as the stratum within which all of the crucial, originary events are to be found. Instead it would be the later occasions for imagining Jesus that way which one should want to understand… If the social circumstances of that later time were regarded as the ‘foundational’ stratum, and the composition of the gospel taken as the ‘originary’ moment of significance for Christian origins, the fantastic events depicted in the gospels might actually begin to make sense.” (Pg. xii)
He suggests, “What if the notion of a single, miraculous point of origin was acknowledged … [as] an article of faith derived from Christian mythology? Then… the social and intellectual occasions of their being imagined would be the thing to understand. To ask when, where, and why early followers of Jesus dared to think such audacious thoughts, that would be to learn something…. one would look for historical circumstances, intellectual resources, and social motivations for early Christians to have imagined such a cosmic drama… What if the formation of the gospel were regarded as the origin of the Christian notion of dramatic origins? Then the ‘later’ texts would be just as interesting as the earlier ones, perhaps even more interesting because of their greater degree of fantasy… It might even be possible to say something about the persistence of such a fantasy in modern times, a fantasy that, apparently, modernity has not been able to challenge.” (Pg. 8-9)
He explains, “The present study is neither strictly sociological, not primarily literary critical, but an attempt to combine both perspectives in order to redescribe a certain set of entangled textual and social histories of importance for the composition of the Gospel of Mark… It is therefore a sociological study in the sense that texts will be construed consistently as reflections of and upon social experience.” (Pg. 20-21) He continues, “[This book] addresses the entire history of the early period of Christianity and attempts to make sense of a privileged text by filling in the social space between the time of Jesus… and the time when the story was written… This book is about the plotting of that myth of origins and its designs upon the social histories, both of those who first produced it, and of those who still accept its charter.” (Pg. 23-24)
He notes, “Jesus’ critical insights would be called a social critique. Jesus’ social critique… did not include polemic against specific institutions… He did not take the Romans to task, nor inveigh against the temple establishment. He did not suggest withdrawal from strife and ungodliness to form a convent… He did not suggest a people’s revolt to storm the palace in Tiberias, or raise a guerilla band to march on Jerusalem. He proposed no political program. He did not organize a church.” (Pg. 64)
He asserts, “Early Jesus movements did see themselves in the light of an ideal order of things designated by the term kingdom of God. That they used it to position themselves within a history that started with Jesus, suffered delay in realizing full potential, this making it necessary to project an even more momentous manifestation, agrees with the way in which rationalizations occurred… within apocalyptic sects. This indicates… that the technical usage of the term kingdom of God is most probably a construction of some Jesus movement, not a derivation from a pregiven Jewish conceptuality.” (Pg. 71)
He proposes, “What Jesus set in motion was… a social experiment… The new arrangement … [can be] described as an order of things created and sustained by a new, effective spirit. Fascination with the power to change people… was certainly one of the ways in which some Jesus people and many Christ cult people responded to the spirit experienced in the movements stemming from Jesus. Jesus was held to be the source of the spirit of transformation, and miracle stories were one way to imagine transformations at the beginning.” (Pg. 76-77)
He argues, “The exigencies of social experience and the failure to resolve certain conflicts both within and without the Jesus movements eventually produced a series of withdrawals from the fray. The sayings tradition was domesticated by settled sectarians on the one hand, gnosticized by those who composed the Gospel of Thomas on the other. The pillars fled from Jerusalem, and the family of Jesus withdrew to the Transjordan… Mark defined his group apocalyptically by severing the ties with Judaism, as well as with… other competitive forms of early Jesus-Christ movements… But the history of the synoptic tradition and the history of the Christian church are evidence that Mark’s story eventually won the day. It was Mark’s solution to the question of conflict.” (Pg. 130-131)
He states, “Mark manipulated the aphoristic quality of the sayings tradition to account for two ways in which Jesus’ message had been taken. He described a single occasion in the life of Jesus when ‘teaching’ in parables worked both ways at the same time, i.e., ‘mystified’ as well as ‘instructed.’ The question is whether the mystery of these parables was really all that mysterious.” (Pg. 158-159)
Later, he adds, “Mark’s approach … was sectarian and conservative. Part of the answer was… to imagine that all that had transpired as planned, as part of the design from the beginning. The gospel was written with these rationalizations in mind… Mark’s apocalyptic imagination was generated in the seventies as a reaction and response to contemporary social history… Those who are to be instructed by Jesus’ teaching are not those to whom he speaks in the story, but those who read the story in Mark’s time. Mark addressed his readers by attributing his message to Jesus and letting them overhear Jesus’ instruction to others.” (Pg. 166, 169)
He summarizes, “Mark’s myth of origins was written to vindicate the synagogue reform movement after its execution from the synagogue. He did that by imagining the authority of Jesus … to have been from God. He demonstrated Jesus’ divine authority by using the miracle myth form the congregation of Israel. By using it, Mark could picture Jesus’ purposes and power as part of God’s design for Israel’s cleansing and perfection… Unfortunately for the Jesus people, the cost of vindication included becoming an apocalyptic sect. The fault of the myth was that the destruction of the temple was an inappropriate way to imagine God getting even with the synagogue…. Apocalyptic judgments on those who reject Jesus would be the only way to imagine vindication.” (Pg. 244-245)
He asserts, “Mark composed the passion account on the model of the story of wisdom’s child, the persecuted, innocent one. A simple demonstration of this thesis cannot, unfortunately, be given. That is because attempts to correlate the wisdom story with the passion narrative on a function-by-function basis runs into two unmanageable problems. One is that the story Mark told is about Jesus, not about ‘the’ Righteous One… A second problem … [it that] the passion narrative does not seem to fit the story of the persecuted Righteous One.” (Pg. 269-270) Later, he adds, “Mark used the pattern of the wisdom story to conjoin myths of origin stemming from the Jesus movements on the one hand, with the moth of origin stemming from the Christ cult on the other… The wisdom tale was the narrative device used to merge them. The gospel is the product of that accommodation.” (Pg. 276)
He concludes, “Mark appropriated the Christ myth and linked it with the Jesus traditions. By doing that he radicalized the appearance of the man of authority and power… By locating the Christ myth precisely as an originary event complete with social historical motivation and consequence, Mark created the story that was to give to Christian imagination its sense of a radical and dramatic origin in time.” (Pg. 355) He adds, “The Markan legacy is a myth of innocence that separates those who belong to the righteous kingdom from those without. The boundaries, however… shift as conflicts arise both within and without… If all else fails, both martyrdom and the destruction of the wicked can be imagined as the means of vindicating the cause and trusting in the power of God to resurrect a new creation from the ashes.” (Pg. 372)
This book will be of great interest to those studying critical perspectives on Jesus and the early Church.
February 26, 2018
Excellent detailed critical analysis of the Gospel of Mark in its historical context.
Extensive historical analysis of the academic literature on Mark and related biblical literature.
Makes sense of Mark as an etiological myth for the Markan community that historicizes a mythic Jesus as a response to the aftermath of the Roman-Jewish War.
Extensive historical analysis of the academic literature on Mark and related biblical literature.
Makes sense of Mark as an etiological myth for the Markan community that historicizes a mythic Jesus as a response to the aftermath of the Roman-Jewish War.
September 7, 2023
Literally the best book on the New Testament I’ve ever read (BA w/ Religion major from an Xian college). Looks at both Mark and Q to analyze various literary forms in each, hypothesizing that each is a redactional gloss representing an independent tradition about the tenor / romantic lead of the story.
If you print the hypothetical “1st layer of Q” it is a 3 page series of instructions against worry, status, property accumulation, hypocrisy & dishesty with a short parable illustrating the pitfalls of each with a prayer at the center encapsulating each theme. “Daily bread” is illustrated by the grain silo owner who upgraded the night before he died, for example. It reads like a complete text, mostly of things attributed to Jesus which non-Christians have called noble (if impractical) ideas throughout time.
Mack assumes a wandering Galilean troupe of mendicant sages like the cynics following this rule (their mission—keeping no purse, eating what is given—is described in the 1st layer as well) who at some point are rejected by their audience. After this, an appeal to the authority of tradition, elevation of the founder & eventually judgment against all who reject the message are added, as is the connection with John the Baptiser, the “Son of Man” character & eventually a temptation story all in the 2nd & 3rd layers of the Q source.
Turning to Mark, Mack shows how miracle stories rhyming with the Northern heroes of Elijah & Moses, arguments with the Rabbis & passion narrative (all from different traditions) are merged into a story climaxing in an affirmation of the Pauline kerygma & Eucharist. This gives Mark’s readers something to hope for after the 2nd Temple is destroyed, explains why it happens (sowing the seeds of Xian anti-Semitism), and explains why so many in the various traditions didn’t realize the Pauline groups were right about he founder all along—because he told people to keep it a secret (according to Mark)!
Ends with a sweeping refutation of everything pitiful, vindictive & self-righteous about believing in victimized saviors at all. Truly, the best book I’ve ever read about the New Testament (out of like 20-30).
If you print the hypothetical “1st layer of Q” it is a 3 page series of instructions against worry, status, property accumulation, hypocrisy & dishesty with a short parable illustrating the pitfalls of each with a prayer at the center encapsulating each theme. “Daily bread” is illustrated by the grain silo owner who upgraded the night before he died, for example. It reads like a complete text, mostly of things attributed to Jesus which non-Christians have called noble (if impractical) ideas throughout time.
Mack assumes a wandering Galilean troupe of mendicant sages like the cynics following this rule (their mission—keeping no purse, eating what is given—is described in the 1st layer as well) who at some point are rejected by their audience. After this, an appeal to the authority of tradition, elevation of the founder & eventually judgment against all who reject the message are added, as is the connection with John the Baptiser, the “Son of Man” character & eventually a temptation story all in the 2nd & 3rd layers of the Q source.
Turning to Mark, Mack shows how miracle stories rhyming with the Northern heroes of Elijah & Moses, arguments with the Rabbis & passion narrative (all from different traditions) are merged into a story climaxing in an affirmation of the Pauline kerygma & Eucharist. This gives Mark’s readers something to hope for after the 2nd Temple is destroyed, explains why it happens (sowing the seeds of Xian anti-Semitism), and explains why so many in the various traditions didn’t realize the Pauline groups were right about he founder all along—because he told people to keep it a secret (according to Mark)!
Ends with a sweeping refutation of everything pitiful, vindictive & self-righteous about believing in victimized saviors at all. Truly, the best book I’ve ever read about the New Testament (out of like 20-30).
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
June 29, 2025
Burton Mack deconstructs the Gospel of Mark like a detective at a crime scene. Challenging but thrilling for theology geeks who enjoy myth-busting.
November 23, 2015
In "A Myth of Innocence" Burton L. Mack builds off of past scholarship to demonstrate how Mark developed his gospel by use of intertexuality, elements from the Jesus movement, Christ cult and other Hellenistic influences. Mack's style can come off dry at times and he certainly writes in an academic style akin to other scholars within the umbrella of biblical criticism. I would not say this book is necessarily written for lay persons, but it by no means is an arduous read. It is thoroughly researched and cited, but has enough meat on the bone to keep the reader interested throughout.
I found myself agreeing with Mack's overarching points, but I do consider myself a Q skeptic. If you have not read Mack's book on Q, it may be of some interest prior to taking on this book. For the most Q was unnecessary and unrelated to Mack's overall points, much like the source itself. "A Myth of Innocence" is good enough to force me to hear Mack out on this point of departure. Any skepticism of Q should be handled prior to the book, or ignored all together, because it is presupposed here. Mack ceases to mention Q communities in the latter half of the book and I think his best work is there. By the end of the book he effectively deconstructs the entire gospel, leaving no sign of anything historical. Mack capitalizes on his methodical deconstruction with a hard hitting conclusion that is worth the investment.
I found myself agreeing with Mack's overarching points, but I do consider myself a Q skeptic. If you have not read Mack's book on Q, it may be of some interest prior to taking on this book. For the most Q was unnecessary and unrelated to Mack's overall points, much like the source itself. "A Myth of Innocence" is good enough to force me to hear Mack out on this point of departure. Any skepticism of Q should be handled prior to the book, or ignored all together, because it is presupposed here. Mack ceases to mention Q communities in the latter half of the book and I think his best work is there. By the end of the book he effectively deconstructs the entire gospel, leaving no sign of anything historical. Mack capitalizes on his methodical deconstruction with a hard hitting conclusion that is worth the investment.
June 16, 2015
This is the most difficult book I've ever read. It covers so much that it takes short reading-sessions to consume everything. The author does not shy away from indulging in overkill. The footnotes are incredibly lengthy and in some cases even ridiculously long. Furthermore, Mack burns over 150 pages just to shape the context and setting of Mark. This could have been done more briefly for the sake of the reader and it would have made reading it more fun.
The book is full of references for further studies, making it useful for the omnivorous Bible-geek. I noticed that I needed to read several paragraphs over and over again until i fully understood the point that Mack was making and what the arguments really entailed. In other words; this book is not that user-friendly. Mack also provides illustrated models on the gospel of Mark which help to show the way its composed and how well its crafted by the original author(s). That was a big plus for me, because I had never seen it done so well before. All-in-all I think that there are most likely books on Mark that make the same points as this one, but presented in a better way. I still consider this book a treasure trove of information nonetheless.
The book is full of references for further studies, making it useful for the omnivorous Bible-geek. I noticed that I needed to read several paragraphs over and over again until i fully understood the point that Mack was making and what the arguments really entailed. In other words; this book is not that user-friendly. Mack also provides illustrated models on the gospel of Mark which help to show the way its composed and how well its crafted by the original author(s). That was a big plus for me, because I had never seen it done so well before. All-in-all I think that there are most likely books on Mark that make the same points as this one, but presented in a better way. I still consider this book a treasure trove of information nonetheless.
March 7, 2015
I came to this book because I was highly impressed by one of Mack's later works, 'Who Wrote the New Testament?' and was impressed by the quality of Mack's prose. In 'A Myth of Innocence', Mack lays out a model of nascent Christianity, stripped of 2,000 years of devotional tradition and magical presupposition, through a deep analysis of the Gospel of Mark. As such, the book is both extremely rare in its treatment and valuable for its historical insight. I'm yet to find a book about how Christianity got started that I think puts all the pieces of the jigsaw together correctly, but Mack deserves credit for the best attempt I've read so far.
'A Myth of Innocence' is not for the popular market, and some parts of it are particularly heavy going. I feel I'll have to return to it in a couple of years and re-read it to get the most out of it. If there is one criticism, it is in the concluding pages, where he strays into a discourse on Reagan's America; all in context, but perhaps a bit dated now.
'A Myth of Innocence' is not for the popular market, and some parts of it are particularly heavy going. I feel I'll have to return to it in a couple of years and re-read it to get the most out of it. If there is one criticism, it is in the concluding pages, where he strays into a discourse on Reagan's America; all in context, but perhaps a bit dated now.
April 21, 2011
Mack is a little academic in this book. However, it did a wonderful job of opening my mind to what the Gospel of Mark is really about. I gained a deeper understanding of many of the disparate communities that made up the nascent Christian faith.
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews