Reading the Gospels Together

The Death and Burial of Jesus – Part 5

Luke’s story is significantly different from Mark’s – so different that it is difficult to hear them together. They clash with one another. This is one of those challenging places where it is not helpful to pretend that Mark and Luke are “on the same page” telling the same story. To be sure the “grist” of the story is the same but their meaning and understanding of the events is quite different. We do violence to both Mark and Luke if we make them say the same thing and not acknowledge their disagreement. Why has Luke changed Mark’s story so radically? The likely reason is that Luke did not appreciate what Mark had done with the story. We have noted all along that Luke, and to some extent also Matthew, has softened Mark’s harsh and unforgiving appraisal of the disciples – especially the Twelve. By the time of the crucifixion Mark has removed the male disciples completely from his story – they have all fled and failed. And Mark will not bring the Twelve back with a story of how they finally got it all together and understood. Mark’s story ends badly for the Twelve – in fact for every human being. From a strictly historical point of view we all know that eventually the Twelve and many other followers of Jesus did in fact return to follow Jesus in faith. Historically, there is a “happy ending” for them. Mark chooses not to tell us that story – for reasons we will discuss later. Luke knows that “better ending” and so the Twelve and the others are not abandoned by Luke in the telling of his story. The Twelve will play a significant role in Luke’s second volume, the book of Acts, and he cannot bear to have them portrayed so harshly. Mark has abandoned Jerusalem and the Temple with the understanding that the Temple must be destroyed. Jerusalem and the Temple will have a prominent place in Luke’s Acts. And maybe most tellingly of all, how can the Messiah cry out to God accusing God of abandoning him? Mark’s words are just too harsh for Luke – a confusing harshness that still plagues readers of Mark’s gospel, including most of us. And so Luke tells the story differently. He makes the changes he does because what Mark has said does not help him in proclaiming the gospel to his own community and in his own way.

Of course we are tempted at this point to ask, “Who is right?” What is the real story? But, as we have said before, that is the wrong question – a historical question we finally cannot answer. A better question to ask is, “Why did Mark tell the story in the way he did?” “Why did Luke tell the story in a different way?” To get at the answer to those questions another question is needed: “What does Mark’s story do to Mark’s readers?” And, “What does Luke’s story do to his?” Mark has written a powerful story that is beginning to grab ahold of his readers and pull them into the story. We will see that more clearly as we get to the very end of Mark’s story. By portraying the crucifixion in the way he does, in fact by telling the whole story in the way he does, Mark has put all of humanity on trial and brought all of humanity to its knees. Mark’s skillful and brilliant story is pulling us in and will propel us forward as witnesses for Jesus or leave us mired in bewilderment. So Mark has told the story in the way he has for the effect he want to generate. Mark’s is a brilliant story – a brilliant proclamation that preaches the Word of God to us as hearers. Mark is not much concerned about historical accuracy but rather that we are moved by his story – moved to become a faithful witness for Jesus. Luke has something of the same purpose in mind. But Luke is more interested in the bigger picture of the church in the days following the death and resurrection of Jesus. And so he tells a story that leads forward to the book of Acts. Both are effective in their proclamation. Both proclaim the Word of God to their hearers. And that’s what is really important.

Before we leave Luke’s gospel we have one more event to consider – the burial of Jesus. At this point Luke is more in line with Mark’s story. Luke has made a few minor adjustments to Mark’s story but it is essentially the same. Luke elaborates a bit regarding Joseph of Arimathea by telling his readers that, though he was a respected member of the council, Joseph had not agreed with their plan of action – his motive was in sympathy of Jesus so Luke has eliminated one possible motive that Mark left with his readers – Joseph does not bury Jesus in a tomb to make sure his body will stay there. Luke has also eliminated Pilate’s surprise that Jesus is already dead and simply tells his readers of Joseph’s request for the body and Pilate’s granting of it. Luke adds the information that the tomb in which Jesus was laid had never been used before. Luke gives no reason why this might be important and likely it is just a fragment of data he gathered among the traditions which underlie all the gospels. We have noted that Luke does not name the women who witnessed the burial as Mark had but he does tell his readers that they have witnessed where Jesus was buried. Luke also adds to his story that they have prepared spices and ointment – apparently to be used at a later time to give Jesus a more proper burial. And then Luke concludes his story by telling his readers that the women rested on the Sabbath according to the commandment – they are good and faithful Jews. Luke refuses to abandon those Jewish people who were awaiting the coming of God’s kingdom. He has spoken of Joseph of Arimathea in much the same way and he and the women stand in the long line of faithful watchers beginning with Elizabeth and Zechariah who have welcomed the visitation of God to his people.