Honorary Research Fellow, Murdoch University
Revisiting the “Cup Saying” Debate from a Narrative Perspective
The disparity between the cup sayings as recorded by Mark/Matthew and Paul/Luke has long been debated and continues to evoke division among scholars. Conveniently, the conference theme’s focus on “narrative“ offers the means of investigating the issue in an alternative way. In this study, the verses in Mark that relate to substitutionary atonement — 10:45 and 14:24 — are regarded as introducing a foreign element into the Gospel story, which is properly viewed in terms of repentance, release, hospitality, and commensality. It will be demonstrated that what Jesus achieves in his ministry is not dependent on his subsequent death, and that his references to the commandments indicate his commitment to the Mosaic covenant. Eligibility for the kingdom and for entry to the eschatological banquet, with God as the generous host, are shown to accord with laws of hospitality, and associated reversal motifs of humbled/exalted, and first/last. Repentance features also as a key component in the exploration of Jeremiah 31:31–34, which is ascertained as relevant to covenant renewal rather than to a new covenant. Discussion of the concept of the “interpretive life” of texts centres initially on Exodus 32–34 and 2 Corinthians 3:1–18, and affirms the significance of repentance, as well as showing that the Pauline passage is not supersessionist. Commentary on the findings includes the assessment that developments of Paul’s theology are discernible in both Mark 10:45 and 14:24. The conclusion considers the “interpretive life” of the parable of the Wicked Tenant Farmers (Gos. Thom. 65:1–7), and the allegorised, supersessionist versions in the Synoptics. While both Mark and Luke apparently altered the traditions they inherited, it is asserted that Luke’s cup saying (22:20), and his parallel to Mark 10:45 (Luke 22:27c), are closer to authentic words of Jesus, than are Mark’s versions with their overlay of atonement theology.