What do you think?
Rate this book
The Gospel of Saint Mark
Nineham's comment remains true: "That many readers should be as surprised as they probably will be [at the historical critical content of commentaries] is a sad reflection on the extent to which all denominations do so little to keep an increasingly educated laity informed about the progress of biblical study."
One might date the passage by its use of the word "progress" in connection with "biblical study." Few really believe that any more. However, it reflects Nineham's purpose in writing an introduction for educated, intellectually curious readers coming to the bible from other fields. This goal also dates the book. Few expect people to be intellectually curious any more. He assumes readers will be attracted to the book's erudition & by their interest in the subject, rather than seeking entertainment.
In this regard, Nineham's introduction is a quite useful tour of basic issues in the critical study of the New Testament, focused on the gospel acribed to Mark.
One might date the passage by its use of the word "progress" in connection with "biblical study." Few really believe that any more. However, it reflects Nineham's purpose in writing an introduction for educated, intellectually curious readers coming to the bible from other fields. This goal also dates the book. Few expect people to be intellectually curious any more. He assumes readers will be attracted to the book's erudition & by their interest in the subject, rather than seeking entertainment.
In this regard, Nineham's introduction is a quite useful tour of basic issues in the critical study of the New Testament, focused on the gospel acribed to Mark.
480 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 70
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
March 3, 2013
THE DECLINE OF RELIGION IN POST-WAR BRITAIN
I've probably told you this anecdote before but hey, why invent something new when you can just repeat yourself? Anyway, this was overheard in a Nottingham jewellers some time in the 1980s. A young girl asks the shop assistant if she can look at some of the crucifixes. "Which one would you like to look at first?" asks the shop assistant. The girl says "Can I have a look at the one with the little man on it?"
I've probably told you this anecdote before but hey, why invent something new when you can just repeat yourself? Anyway, this was overheard in a Nottingham jewellers some time in the 1980s. A young girl asks the shop assistant if she can look at some of the crucifixes. "Which one would you like to look at first?" asks the shop assistant. The girl says "Can I have a look at the one with the little man on it?"
November 7, 2011
We were assigned this as one of the texts for Walter Wink's course on "Mark's" gospel at Union Theological Seminary in New York. As stated in the book's description, Nineham's commentary was a good one, not too sophisticated for the nonspecialist.
Wink's course was an exercise in what he termed "communal exegesis." Rather than the usual lecture and discussion format, the class was taught as a roundtable, everyone being encouraged to contribute, the professor speaking no more than anyone else. A diverse group, ranging in age from a few, like myself, in their early twenties to the sixty-ish Superior of the Jesuit Order in the region; from want-to-be biblical scholars to practicing clergy, our discussions were rather far-reaching. My own particular contribution came from my having a non-Christian perspective whereby I approached the text in the context of its time and in reference to similar ancient writings from a variety of traditions, particularly the Greco-Roman classics. For a change, I did not long feel self-conscious about such an impious approach.
Wink's course was an exercise in what he termed "communal exegesis." Rather than the usual lecture and discussion format, the class was taught as a roundtable, everyone being encouraged to contribute, the professor speaking no more than anyone else. A diverse group, ranging in age from a few, like myself, in their early twenties to the sixty-ish Superior of the Jesuit Order in the region; from want-to-be biblical scholars to practicing clergy, our discussions were rather far-reaching. My own particular contribution came from my having a non-Christian perspective whereby I approached the text in the context of its time and in reference to similar ancient writings from a variety of traditions, particularly the Greco-Roman classics. For a change, I did not long feel self-conscious about such an impious approach.
March 24, 2021
I actually stopped reading before I was finished.
This was a book I purchased back in 1981. It was first published in 1963. Biblical scholarship has changed a lot since the 1960's! And I've changed a lot in what I'm wanting from a commentary. I think it was in the 1980s that Walter Wink declared "the form critical method of biblical interpretation is dead." He could see the truth before most of the rest of us. Form Criticism was like taking an electron microscope to a passage of scripture and trying to see into the secret depths of a passage. That was an exciting prospect for awhile, but then one realizes that to study something under an electron microscope you have to kill the object you're studying; and that means the subject is not in its natural living state. Form criticism dissects, analyzes, and parses Scripture to the nth degree. The result is an interpretation that is intellectually fascinating ... but has little or no practical application to one's life as a disciple. This atomizing of Scripture has been hard for me to read. Much of the book I put into the TBU category (true, but useless for my ongoing walk with God.) So the book was less helpful than some of my newer commentaries.
This was a book I purchased back in 1981. It was first published in 1963. Biblical scholarship has changed a lot since the 1960's! And I've changed a lot in what I'm wanting from a commentary. I think it was in the 1980s that Walter Wink declared "the form critical method of biblical interpretation is dead." He could see the truth before most of the rest of us. Form Criticism was like taking an electron microscope to a passage of scripture and trying to see into the secret depths of a passage. That was an exciting prospect for awhile, but then one realizes that to study something under an electron microscope you have to kill the object you're studying; and that means the subject is not in its natural living state. Form criticism dissects, analyzes, and parses Scripture to the nth degree. The result is an interpretation that is intellectually fascinating ... but has little or no practical application to one's life as a disciple. This atomizing of Scripture has been hard for me to read. Much of the book I put into the TBU category (true, but useless for my ongoing walk with God.) So the book was less helpful than some of my newer commentaries.
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews