Formal citation introduced 'as it is written': 'This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.' Mark follows the LXX, whose 'teaching as doctrines the commandments of men' supplies the polemical hinge against human tradition that the Hebrew lacks. Maximal volume, recurrence, and thematic coherence; this is the load-bearing OT text of the pericope.

The Lord said, “Because this people draws near with their mouth and with their lips to honor me, but they have removed their heart far from me, and their fear of me is a commandment of men which has been taught;

And the Lord has said, This people draw nigh to me with their mouth, and they honour me with their lips, but their heart is far from me: but in vain do they worship me, teaching the commandments and doctrines of men.


Jesus cites the Decalogue commandment 'Honor your father and your mother' (attributed to Moses) as the divine command that Corban casuistry nullifies. Direct verbal quotation; the antithesis between this commandment and the tradition is the argument's spine.

“Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long in the land which Yahweh your God gives you.


The Deuteronomic form of the honor-parents commandment is an equally valid source for 'Honor your father and your mother,' since Mark's citation could draw on either Decalogue. Listed as a parallel availability alongside Exodus 20:12; the verbal match is exact in both.

“Honor your father and your mother, as Yahweh your God commanded you; that your days may be long, and that it may go well with you, in the land which Yahweh your God gives you.


The paired citation 'He who speaks evil of father or mother, let him be put to death' quotes the capital statute of Exodus 21:17, reinforcing the gravity of the command being voided. Mark's wording tracks the LXX (kakologon). High volume and direct verbal correspondence.

“Anyone who curses his father or his mother shall surely be put to death.


Leviticus 20:9 ('everyone who curses his father or mother shall be put to death') is a near-identical alternate source for the death-penalty clause and may stand behind Mark alongside Exodus 21:17. Strong availability; offered as parallel attestation.

“‘For everyone who curses his father or his mother shall surely be put to death: he has cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him.


The Corban dispute turns on the binding force of a vow dedicating property to God; Numbers 30 is the Torah's law of vows ('he shall not break his word, he shall do according to all that proceeds out of his mouth'). Jesus' charge is that scribal handling of such irrevocable vows is used to override the prior duty to parents, so the vow legislation is the legal substrate of the controversy. Thematic coherence high; verbal volume moderate.

When a man vows a vow to Yahweh, or swears an oath to bind his soul with a bond, he shall not break his word. He shall do according to all that proceeds out of his mouth.


Deuteronomy's vow law ('when you make a vow to the LORD your God, you shall not delay to pay it... that which has gone out of your lips you shall keep') reinforces the irrevocability that makes Corban exploitable. A secondary witness to the vow background behind 7:11-12.

When you vow a vow to Yahweh your God, you shall not be slack to pay it; for Yahweh your God will surely require it of you; and it would be sin in you. But if you refrain from making a vow, it shall be no sin in you. You shall observe and do that which has gone out of your lips. Whatever you have vowed to Yahweh your God as a freewill offering, which you have promised with your mouth, you must do.


Leviticus 27 governs things devoted/dedicated to the LORD (cherem and votive gifts), the legal category 'Corban, that is, given to God' invokes. Mark's transliterated technical term presupposes this dedication law; the abuse is treating a thing as devoted to bar a creditor-parent. Availability genuine, volume faint.

“‘If it is an animal, of which men offer an offering to Yahweh, all that any man gives of such to Yahweh becomes holy. He shall not alter it, nor change it, a good for a bad, or a bad for a good: and if he shall at all change animal for animal, then both it and that for which it is changed shall be holy. If it is any unclean animal, of which they do not offer as an offering to Yahweh, then he shall set the animal before the priest; and the priest shall […]


Jesus relocates defilement to the heart: 'from within, out of the hearts of men, proceed evil thoughts.' Genesis 6:5 ('every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually') is the foundational OT diagnosis of the heart as the source of evil intent. Strong thematic coherence; the vice-list in 7:21-22 unpacks this anthropology.

Yahweh saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of man’s heart was continually only evil.


The post-flood verdict that 'the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth' parallels Mark's claim that evil proceeds from within the heart. Together with Genesis 6:5 it supplies the Torah's most explicit teaching that defilement is interior and inborn, cohering with Jesus' redefinition of purity.

Yahweh smelled the pleasant aroma. Yahweh said in his heart, “I will not again curse the ground any more for man’s sake because the imagination of man’s heart is evil from his youth; neither will I ever again strike every living thing, as I have done.


Jeremiah's 'the heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately corrupt' is the prophetic locus classicus for the heart as the seat of hidden defilement, matching Jesus' catalogue of deceit, covetousness, and wickedness emerging from within. High thematic coherence with the heart/exterior antithesis driving the pericope.

The heart is deceitful above all things, and it is exceedingly corrupt: who can know it?


Mark's editorial gloss 'thus he declared all foods clean' (7:19) directly engages the dietary code of Leviticus 11 distinguishing clean from unclean animals. Jesus' saying that nothing entering from outside can defile reframes and relativizes precisely this food legislation; the food laws are the explicit object of the controversy. Volume and coherence both high.

Yahweh spoke to Moses and to Aaron, saying to them, “Speak to the children of Israel, saying, ‘These are the living things which you may eat among all the animals that are on the earth. Whatever parts the hoof, and is cloven-footed, and chews the cud among the animals, that you may eat. “‘Nevertheless these you shall not eat of those that chew the cud, or of those who part the hoof: the camel, because he chews the cud but doesn’t have a parted hoof, he is […]


Deuteronomy 14 is the parallel statute of clean and unclean foods that, with Leviticus 11, constitutes the dietary law Jesus' pronouncement on foods addresses. Equally available as the OT food-purity background to 'purifying all foods.'

You shall not eat any abominable thing. These are the animals which you may eat: the ox, the sheep, the goat, the deer, the gazelle, the roebuck, the wild goat, the ibex, the antelope, and the chamois. Every animal that parts the hoof, and has the hoof cloven in two and chews the cud, among the animals, that may you eat. Nevertheless these you shall not eat of them that chew the cud, or of those who have the hoof cloven: the camel, the hare, and the […]


Leviticus 17's blood and carcass prohibitions extend the ingestion-as-defilement logic Jesus overturns. A secondary witness to the food-purity system at stake; fainter than Leviticus 11 / Deuteronomy 14.

“‘Any man of the house of Israel, or of the strangers who live as foreigners among them, who eats any kind of blood, I will set my face against that soul who eats blood, and will cut him off from among his people. For the life of the flesh is in the blood; and I have given it to you on the altar to make atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that makes atonement by reason of the life. Therefore I have said to the children of Israel, “No person […]


Duplicate-domain note: the 'evil from youth' verdict also undergirds the comprehensiveness of the vice-list (adulteries, murders, thefts, covetings), framing human sin as welling up from the heart rather than contracted from without. Retained as a low echo on the catalog itself.


'Keep your heart with all diligence, for out of it are the issues of life' anticipates Mark's image of what 'proceeds out of' the person from the heart. Wisdom availability; verbal contact ('proceeds out') is suggestive but faint.

Keep your heart with all diligence, for out of it is the wellspring of life.


Ben Sira repeatedly contrasts outward show with the heart and warns against hypocrisy ('exalt not yourself... the Lord will reveal your secrets'), part of the Second-Temple wisdom milieu locating defilement in interior disposition. Deuterocanonical availability supporting the heart-purity theme; contested and faint.

Exalt not yourself, lest you fall, And bring dishonor upon your soul; And so the Lord will reveal your secrets, And will cast you down in the midst of the congregation; Because you came not to the fear of the Lord, And your heart was full of deceit.


Mark's vice 'an evil eye' (ophthalmos poneros) is a Semitic idiom for stinginess/grudging that appears in Deuteronomy 15:9 ('your eye be evil against your poor brother'). The phrase in the vice-list plausibly draws on this OT idiom for ungenerous malice. Idiomatic availability; volume faint.

Beware that there not be a base thought in your heart, saying, “The seventh year, the year of release, is at hand”; and your eye be evil against your poor brother, and you give him nothing; and he cry to Yahweh against you, and it be sin to you.


Jesus' withdrawal to the region of Tyre and Sidon and his healing of a Gentile woman's child recalls Elijah's sojourn with the Sidonian widow of Zarephath, whose son he restored, the paradigm of an Israelite prophet bringing life to a Gentile woman of that very coastland. Geographic and typological coherence is strong; the Sidonian-widow precedent frames the boundary-crossing mercy.

Yahweh’s word came to him, saying, “Arise, go to Zarephath, which belongs to Sidon, and stay there. Behold, I have commanded a widow there to sustain you.” So he arose and went to Zarephath; and when he came to the gate of the city, behold, a widow was there gathering sticks: and he called to her, and said, “Please get me a little water in a vessel, that I may drink.” As she was going to get it, he called to her, and said, “Please bring me a morsel of […]


The 'children first... then the dogs' logic enacts the order of salvation in which blessing comes to Israel first and through Israel to the nations ('in you all families of the earth shall be blessed'). The Syrophoenician's faith anticipates the Abrahamic extension of blessing beyond Israel. Figural and contested, but thematically coherent with election-then-overflow.

I will bless those who bless you, and I will curse him who curses you. All of the families of the earth will be blessed in you.”


The servant's mission to be 'a light to the nations' so that salvation reaches the ends of the earth resonates with the children's bread overflowing to a Gentile. Mark's narrative geography (Tyre, Decapolis) participates in the prophetic vision of the nations drawn in; faint figural availability.

yes, he says, “It is too light a thing that you should be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give you for a light to the nations, that you may be my salvation to the end of the earth.”


Jesus' priority 'let the children be filled first' presupposes Israel's status as God's chosen children/people set apart from the nations (Deuteronomy 7's election language). The exchange negotiates that elect-Israel-first economy; availability strong, verbal volume faint.

For you are a holy people to Yahweh your God. Yahweh your God has chosen you to be a people for his own possession, above all peoples who are on the face of the earth.


The 'dogs' metaphor for Gentiles draws on a stock OT pejorative (e.g., 'dogs have surrounded me'), here softened to household pups under the table. The idiom's OT background gives the insult-and-reversal its bite. Lexical availability; contested and faint.

For dogs have surrounded me. A company of evildoers have enclosed me. They have pierced my hands and feet.


The healing of a deaf man with a speech impediment, climaxing in 'he makes even the deaf hear and the mute speak,' enacts Isaiah's eschatological promise: 'then the ears of the deaf shall be unstopped... and the tongue of the mute shall sing.' Mark signals the messianic age dawning; volume, recurrence (cf. Isa 29:18; 42:18), and thematic coherence are all high.

Then the eyes of the blind will be opened, and the ears of the deaf will be unstopped. Then the lame man will leap like a deer, and the tongue of the mute will sing; for waters will break out in the wilderness, and streams in the desert.


The crowd's acclamation 'he has done all things well' (panta kalos pepoieken) echoes the creation refrain that God saw all he had made and it was 'very good' (LXX kala lian), casting Jesus' restorative work as a new creation. The verbal contact (kalos / kala) and theme of God making/doing all things well give the allusion real volume.

God saw everything that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. There was evening and there was morning, a sixth day.


'In that day the deaf shall hear the words of a book, and the eyes of the blind shall see' reinforces the deaf-hearing motif of Isaiah 35 and ties back to the chapter's earlier Isaiah 29:13 citation, giving recurrence within the same prophetic source. The opening of ears is the visible sign of the promise.

In that day, the deaf will hear the words of the book, and the eyes of the blind will see out of obscurity and out of darkness. The humble also will increase their joy in Yahweh, and the poor among men will rejoice in the Holy One of Israel.


'Who makes a man mute, or deaf... Is it not I, the LORD?' grounds the claim that making the deaf hear and the mute speak is a divine prerogative. The crowd's wonder implicitly attributes to Jesus a work Yahweh claims as his own. Thematic coherence high; specific verbal volume moderate.

Yahweh said to him, “Who made man’s mouth? Or who makes one mute, or deaf, or seeing, or blind? Isn’t it I, Yahweh?


'Hear, you deaf, and look, you blind, that you may see' belongs to the cluster of Isaianic deaf/mute imagery animating this healing. A secondary witness reinforcing recurrence within Isaiah; fainter than 35:5-6.

“Hear, you deaf, and look, you blind, that you may see.


'Wisdom opened the mouth of the mute, and made the tongues of infants speak clearly' (of the Exodus deliverance) is a Second-Temple text pairing divine wisdom with the loosing of mute tongues, resonant with Jesus loosing the tongue so the man 'spoke clearly.' Deuterocanonical availability; contested and faint.

Because wisdom opened the mouth of the dumb, And made the tongues of babes to speak clearly.


'For then I will restore to the peoples a pure speech' offers an eschatological loosing-of-tongues motif consonant with the man speaking plainly in the Gentile Decapolis. Geographic-thematic resonance; very faint and contested.

For then I will purify the lips of the peoples, that they may all call on Yahweh’s name, to serve him shoulder to shoulder.


The feeding of the four thousand in a 'deserted place' (v.4) reprises the manna narrative: God satisfies a hungry multitude with bread in the wilderness. Volume is high via the desert setting and the disciples' incredulous 'from where' question, which echoes Israel's manna astonishment ('What is it?'). Mark's wilderness feedings deliberately retell the Exodus provision in messianic key.

They took their journey from Elim, and all the congregation of the children of Israel came to the wilderness of Sin, which is between Elim and Sinai, on the fifteenth day of the second month after their departing out of the land of Egypt. The whole congregation of the children of Israel murmured against Moses and against Aaron in the wilderness; and the children of Israel said to them, “We wish that we had died by the hand of Yahweh in the land of Egypt, […]


The disciples' 'From where could one satisfy these people with bread here in a deserted place?' answers, in the negative, Israel's taunt 'Can God prepare a table in the wilderness?' (Ps 78:19), which the psalm then resolves with manna ('bread of the mighty', v.25). Coherence with Mark's wilderness-feeding theology is strong, and the verbal frame of doubting provision in the desert is close.

Yes, they spoke against God. They said, “Can God prepare a table in the wilderness? Behold, he struck the rock, so that waters gushed out, and streams overflowed. Can he give bread also? Will he provide flesh for his people?” Therefore Yahweh heard, and was angry. A fire was kindled against Jacob, anger also went up against Israel, because they didn’t believe in God, and didn’t trust in his salvation. Yet he commanded the skies above, and opened the doors […]


Elisha's feeding of a hundred men from limited loaves, with leftovers remaining 'according to the word of the LORD,' is the closest prophetic prototype: insufficient bread, a doubting attendant ('How can I set this before a hundred?'), miraculous satiety, and surplus. Mark frames Jesus as the prophet-greater-than-Elisha, and the surplus motif (seven baskets) recalls the same pattern.

A man from Baal Shalishah came, and brought the man of God bread of the first fruits, twenty loaves of barley, and fresh ears of grain in his sack. He said, “Give to the people, that they may eat.” His servant said, “What, should I set this before a hundred men?” But he said, “Give the people, that they may eat; for thus says Yahweh, ‘They will eat, and will have some left over.’” So he set it before them, and they ate, and left some of it, according to […]


Moses' protest 'Where am I to get meat to give to all this people?' (Num 11:13) and the doubt that flesh could be found in the wilderness underlies the disciples' helpless question in v.4. Coherence with the wilderness-provision frame is high; this is a recurrent grumbling-and-provision pattern Mark draws upon.

Where could I get meat to give to all this people? For they weep to me, saying, ‘Give us meat, that we may eat.’ I am not able to bear all this people alone, because it is too heavy for me. If you treat me this way, please kill me right now, if I have found favor in your sight; and don’t let me see my wretchedness.” Yahweh said to Moses, “Gather to me seventy men of the elders of Israel, whom you know to be the elders of the people, and officers over […]


The eschatological banquet on the mountain where God 'makes for all peoples a feast of rich food' may color Mark's second feeding, traditionally read as extending to Gentile territory (the Decapolis). The volume is faint but coherent with Mark's movement of the bread to outsiders.

In this mountain, Yahweh of Armies will make all peoples a feast of fat things, a feast of choice wines, of fat things full of marrow, of well refined choice wines. He will destroy in this mountain the surface of the covering that covers all peoples, and the veil that is spread over all nations. He has swallowed up death forever! The Lord Yahweh will wipe away tears from off all faces. He will take the reproach of his people away from off all the earth, […]


The psalm describes the hungry and faint wandering 'in a desert waste' whom the LORD 'satisfies' and 'fills with good things.' The verbal cluster of wilderness, fainting, hunger, and satisfaction overlaps the scene (note v.3 'faint on the way'), though without distinctive enough wording to rise above echo.

They wandered in the wilderness in a desert way. They found no city to live in. Hungry and thirsty, their soul fainted in them. Then they cried to Yahweh in their trouble, and he delivered them out of their distresses, he led them also by a straight way, that they might go to a city to live in. Let them praise Yahweh for his loving kindness, for his wonderful works to the children of men! For he satisfies the longing soul. He fills the hungry soul with […]


The Pharisees 'testing' Jesus by demanding a sign from heaven inverts Massah/Meribah, where Israel 'tested the LORD' by demanding proof ('Is the LORD among us or not?'). Mark casts the sign-seekers as the new wilderness generation that puts God to the test; the testing-in-the-desert motif coheres with the feeding context just preceding.

All the congregation of the children of Israel traveled from the wilderness of Sin, by their journeys, according to Yahweh’s commandment, and encamped in Rephidim; but there was no water for the people to drink. Therefore the people quarreled with Moses, and said, “Give us water to drink.” Moses said to them, “Why do you quarrel with me? Why do you test Yahweh?” The people were thirsty for water there; and the people murmured against Moses, and said, “Why […]


'You shall not put the LORD your God to the test, as you tested him at Massah' provides the legal-theological frame for Jesus' refusal: the sign-demand is itself the forbidden testing. Coherence is strong with v.11's language of peirazo (testing).

You shall not tempt Yahweh your God, as you tempted him in Massah.


Jesus' deep sigh and verdict that 'no sign will be given to this generation' echoes the psalm's oracle against the wilderness generation: 'Harden not your hearts as at Meribah... For forty years I loathed that generation.' The 'this generation' rebuke and divine grief/loathing are tightly coherent, and Mark develops the hardened-heart theme in v.17.

Don’t harden your heart, as at Meribah, as in the day of Massah in the wilderness, when your fathers tempted me, tested me, and saw my work. Forty long years I was grieved with that generation, and said, “It is a people that errs in their heart. They have not known my ways.” Therefore I swore in my wrath, “They won’t enter into my rest.”


The Song of Moses brands Israel 'a perverse and crooked generation' whose corruption is 'no longer his children's.' Jesus' indictment of 'this generation' draws on this prophetic vocabulary for a faithless cohort that demands proof yet will not believe.

They have dealt corruptly with him. They are not his children, because of their defect. They are a perverse and crooked generation.


'They are a perverse generation, children in whom is no faithfulness'—God hides his face from them. The motif of a faithless 'generation' from which God withholds himself directly parallels Jesus withholding the sign and departing (v.13).

He said, “I will hide my face from them. I will see what their end will be; for they are a very perverse generation, children in whom is no faithfulness.


'How long will this people despise me? And how long will they not believe in me, for all the signs which I have done?' frames the wilderness generation that, despite signs, refuses faith—precisely the dynamic Jesus laments before the sign-seekers.

Yahweh said to Moses, “How long will this people despise me? and how long will they not believe in me, for all the signs which I have worked among them?


The warning to 'beware of the yeast/leaven of the Pharisees and of Herod' trades on the Passover prohibition of leaven, where leaven symbolizes corruption to be purged. The figural valence of leaven as pervasive moral contamination is rooted in the unleavened-bread legislation.

This day shall be to you for a memorial, and you shall keep it a feast to Yahweh: throughout your generations you shall keep it a feast by an ordinance forever. “‘Seven days you shall eat unleavened bread; even the first day you shall put away yeast out of your houses, for whoever eats leavened bread from the first day until the seventh day, that soul shall be cut off from Israel. In the first day there shall be to you a holy convocation, and in the […]


Jesus' rebuke 'Having eyes, don't you see? Having ears, don't you hear?' directly applies Isaiah's commission oracle of a people who see but do not perceive and hear but do not understand. Mark already cited this text at 4:12; recurrence and verbal closeness make this a strong, deliberate appropriation now turned on the disciples themselves.

He said, “Go, and tell this people, ‘You hear indeed, but don’t understand; and you see indeed, but don’t perceive.’ Make the heart of this people fat. Make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and turn again, and be healed.”


'Hear this, O foolish and senseless people, who have eyes but do not see, who have ears but do not hear'—the near-exact phrasing of Jesus' double question. Jeremiah's indictment of a hardened, uncomprehending people supplies the prophetic template; the verbal volume is very high.

‘Hear now this, foolish people, and without understanding; who have eyes, and don’t see; who have ears, and don’t hear:


'Son of man, you dwell in the midst of a rebellious house, who have eyes to see but do not see, ears to hear but do not hear, for they are a rebellious house.' This is the other classic seeing-not/hearing-not oracle, paired with hardness; its conjunction with rebellion coheres with Mark's hardened-heart charge in v.17.

Son of man, you dwell in the midst of the rebellious house, who have eyes to see, and don’t see, who have ears to hear, and don’t hear; for they are a rebellious house.


Moses tells Israel they saw the signs in Egypt 'yet to this day the LORD has not given you a heart to understand, or eyes to see, or ears to hear.' This explicitly links failure to perceive God's mighty works (the feedings) with an ungiven heart—exactly Jesus' point that the disciples fail to remember the loaves.

Moses called to all Israel, and said to them: Your eyes have seen all that Yahweh did in the land of Egypt to Pharaoh, and to all his servants, and to all his land; the great trials which your eyes saw, the signs, and those great wonders. But Yahweh has not given you a heart to know, eyes to see, and ears to hear, to this day.


'Why do you harden our hearts so that we do not fear you?' supplies the hardened-heart vocabulary that Jesus levels at the disciples ('Is your heart still hardened?'). The motif is recurrent in Mark (6:52), grounding the charge in prophetic lament over insensate Israel.

O Yahweh, why do you make us to err from your ways, and harden our heart from your fear? Return for your servants’ sake, the tribes of your inheritance.


'Harden not your hearts' carries forward from the sign-seeking pericope; the disciples' hardened hearts place them within the same warned-against wilderness generation that fails to read God's provision (the manna/loaves).

Don’t harden your heart, as at Meribah, as in the day of Massah in the wilderness,


'Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened'—the healing of the blind man at Bethsaida enacts Isaiah's promise of eschatological restoration. Mark positions this sign as a figural opening of eyes that frames the disciples' partial sight; volume and coherence with the surrounding seeing/not-seeing motif are high.

Then the eyes of the blind will be opened, and the ears of the deaf will be unstopped.


'In that day...out of their gloom and darkness the eyes of the blind shall see'—paired in Isaiah with the deaf hearing, this restoration oracle undergirds the staged healing. The Isaianic blindness/sight complex is the controlling intertext for the whole pericope's placement.

In that day, the deaf will hear the words of the book, and the eyes of the blind will see out of obscurity and out of darkness.


The Servant is given 'to open the eyes that are blind,' a commissioning that Mark sees fulfilled in Jesus' physical opening of blind eyes as a sign of his servant-messiahship—coherent with the suffering Son of Man developed just after (v.31).

“I, Yahweh, have called you in righteousness, and will hold your hand, and will keep you, and make you a covenant for the people, as a light for the nations; to open the blind eyes, to bring the prisoners out of the dungeon, and those who sit in darkness out of the prison.


The two-stage cure—first blurred ('men like trees walking'), then clear sight—dramatizes the half-perceiving condition diagnosed by Isaiah's seeing-but-not-perceiving oracle. Mark figures the disciples' gradual, incomplete recognition of Jesus through the man's gradual healing; the structural coherence is strong even without verbal quotation.


'The eyes of those who see will not be closed, and the ears of those who hear will listen' belongs to the cluster of restoration-of-sight oracles that Mark's healing actualizes. Faint but within the recurrent Isaianic field.

The eyes of those who see will not be dim, and the ears of those who hear will listen.


The popular guess that Jesus is 'Elijah' draws directly on Malachi's promise to send Elijah before the great day of the LORD; the expectation of Elijah redivivus frames the crowd's christological speculation. Mark develops Elijah typology around John the Baptizer.

Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the great and terrible day of Yahweh comes.


The opinion that Jesus is 'one of the prophets' resonates with the promise of a prophet 'like Moses' whom God would raise up; the prophet-like-Moses expectation is part of the matrix the crowd's answers reflect, sharpened by Mark's Moses/wilderness typology in the feedings.

Yahweh your God will raise up to you a prophet from your midst, of your brothers, like me. You shall listen to him.


Peter's confession 'You are the Christ' (the Anointed) actualizes the royal vocabulary of Psalm 2, where the nations rage against 'the LORD and his Anointed.' Mark's Christ-title carries the Davidic-king freight of this enthronement psalm, which surfaces explicitly at Jesus' trial and baptism.

The kings of the earth take a stand, and the rulers take counsel together, against Yahweh, and against his Anointed, saying,


The title 'Christ' invokes the Davidic covenant promise of an anointed son whose throne is established forever. Coherence with Mark's Son-of-David theme (10:47) supports reading the confession against the Nathan oracle, though the link here is conceptual rather than verbal.

When your days are fulfilled, and you shall sleep with your fathers, I will set up your seed after you, who shall proceed out of your bowels, and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build a house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son. If he commits iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men;


That 'the Son of Man must suffer many things... and be killed' draws on the Servant who was 'despised and rejected,' 'a man of sorrows,' who bore suffering and was 'cut off.' The necessity (dei) of redemptive suffering coheres with Isaiah 53's vicarious death; this is the foundational suffering-text behind Mark's passion predictions.

He was despised, and rejected by men; a man of suffering, and acquainted with disease. He was despised as one from whom men hide their face; and we didn’t respect him. Surely he has borne our sickness, and carried our suffering; yet we considered him plagued, struck by God, and afflicted. But he was pierced for our transgressions. He was crushed for our iniquities. The punishment that brought our peace was on him; and by his wounds we are healed. All we […]


'Be rejected by the elders, the chief priests, and the scribes' anticipates the rejected-stone of Psalm 118, which Mark quotes explicitly at 12:10 ('the stone the builders rejected'). The specific language of rejection by the leadership maps onto the builders' rejection, making this a deliberate, recurrent intertext.

The stone which the builders rejected has become the head of the corner.


The self-designation 'Son of Man' derives from Daniel's vision of 'one like a son of man' who comes with the clouds and receives dominion. Mark's title is recurrent and load-bearing; though here paired paradoxically with suffering, the Danielic figure of vindicated dominion underlies the whole Son-of-Man complex.

I saw in the night visions, and behold, there came with the clouds of the sky one like a son of man, and he came even to the ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. There was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all the peoples, nations, and languages should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.


The motif of the righteous one despised and rejected ('a worm and not a man, scorned by mankind') feeds the suffering-Son-of-Man pattern; Mark draws heavily on Psalm 22 for the passion (15:34, 15:24), so its presence behind the first prediction is coherent and recurrent.

But I am a worm, and no man; a reproach of men, and despised by the people. All those who see me mock me. They insult me with their lips. They shake their heads, saying, “He trusts in Yahweh; let him deliver him. Let him rescue him, since he delights in him.”


'After three days rise again' may echo Hosea's 'after two days he will revive us; on the third day he will raise us up.' The third-day-resurrection language is plausibly drawn from this oracle of restoration, a connection later interpreters made explicit.

After two days he will revive us. On the third day he will raise us up, and we will live before him.


'Get behind me, Satan!' resonates with Zechariah's vision where 'the LORD rebuke you, O Satan' is spoken against the accuser. The act of rebuking the satan/adversary who opposes God's purpose coheres verbally and conceptually with Jesus' rebuke of Peter as voicing 'the things of men.'

He showed me Joshua the high priest standing before Yahweh’s angel, and Satan standing at his right hand to be his adversary. Yahweh said to Satan, “Yahweh rebuke you, Satan! Yes, Yahweh who has chosen Jerusalem rebuke you! Isn’t this a burning stick plucked out of the fire?”


'When he comes in the glory of his Father with the holy angels' renders the Son of Man's coming in Daniel's vision, where the one like a son of man comes with the clouds before the Ancient of Days to receive glory and an everlasting kingdom. The conjunction of Son of Man, coming, and glory is a direct appropriation.


'The LORD my God will come, and all the holy ones with him' supplies the entourage of 'holy angels/holy ones' accompanying the divine advent. Mark's coming Son of Man 'with the holy angels' draws on this theophany of God arriving with his holy retinue for judgment.

You shall flee by the valley of my mountains; for the valley of the mountains shall reach to Azel; yes, you shall flee, just like you fled from before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah. Yahweh my God will come, and all the holy ones with you./f + Septuagint reads “him” instead of “you”./f*


The throne-and-myriads scene—'thousand thousands served him'—reinforces the angelic-attendant imagery of the Son of Man's glorious advent in v.38. Coherent with the Danielic court of judgment that frames being 'ashamed' before the coming one.

I saw until thrones were placed, and one who was ancient of days sat: his clothing was white as snow, and the hair of his head like pure wool; his throne was fiery flames, and its wheels burning fire. A fiery stream issued and came out from before him: thousands of thousands ministered to him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him: the judgment was set, and the books were opened.


'For what will a man give in exchange for his life?' closely parallels the psalm's reflection that no one can 'give to God a ransom for his life... for the redemption of their soul is costly.' The wisdom logic that life cannot be bought back with wealth underlies vv.36-37.

none of them can by any means redeem his brother, nor give God a ransom for him. For the redemption of their life is costly, no payment is ever enough, That he should live on forever, that he should not see corruption.


'What does it profit a man, to gain the whole world?' echoes Qoheleth's recurring 'What profit (yitron) has a man of all his toil?'—the wisdom idiom of weighing profit against the vanity of worldly gain. Faint but coherent with the saying's sapiential cast.

What does man gain from all his labor in which he labors under the sun?


'This adulterous and sinful generation' reprises the Song of Moses' 'perverse and crooked generation,' tying the audience of Jesus' words to the faithless wilderness cohort already invoked in the sign-seeking pericope. The recurrence of the 'generation' label within Mark 8 strengthens the link.

They have dealt corruptly with him. They are not his children, because of their defect. They are a perverse and crooked generation.


The charge 'adulterous... generation' draws on the prophetic figure of Israel as an unfaithful, adulterous spouse (Hosea's central metaphor), framing the present generation's unbelief as covenant infidelity. Faint, but within the prophetic adultery-as-apostasy tradition.

Contend with your mother! Contend, for she is not my wife, neither am I her husband; and let her put away her prostitution from her face, and her adulteries from between her breasts;


Jesus' promise that some standing here will see 'the Kingdom of God come with power' draws on Daniel's vision of dominion, glory, and an everlasting kingdom given to the one like a son of man. The conjunction of kingdom and divine power coheres with Daniel's eschatological enthronement scene. Recurrence of Danielic son-of-man and kingdom language throughout Mark strengthens the allusion.

There was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all the peoples, nations, and languages should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.


The God of heaven setting up a kingdom that shall never be destroyed and that breaks all others supplies the apocalyptic backdrop for a kingdom arriving 'with power.' The volume is faint and the verbal overlap general, but the coherence with Mark's kingdom proclamation is real.

In the days of those kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed, nor shall its sovereignty be left to another people; but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever.


The good news that 'your God reigns' lies behind Markan kingdom-arrival language. The link to 9:1 specifically is faint and rests on the shared royal-reign theme rather than verbal contact.

How beautiful on the mountains are the feet of him who brings good news, who publishes peace, who brings good news of good, who publishes salvation, who says to Zion, “Your God reigns!”


The Sinai theophany supplies Mark's frame: the glory of the LORD settled on the mountain, the cloud covered it six days, and on the seventh day God called to Moses out of the cloud. Mark's 'after six days,' the high mountain, the overshadowing cloud, and the voice from the cloud reproduce this cluster with high volume and tight coherence. The Transfiguration is staged as a new Sinai.

Yahweh’s glory settled on Mount Sinai, and the cloud covered it six days. The seventh day he called to Moses out of the midst of the cloud.


Moses goes up the mountain and the cloud covers it, the immediate setting for the giving of the covenant. Mark's ascent of three named companions onto a high mountain into a cloud reactivates this Sinai ascent. The recurrence of mountain-and-cloud theophany makes the availability and coherence criteria strong.

Moses went up on the mountain, and the cloud covered the mountain.


When Moses came down from Sinai the skin of his face shone because he had talked with God, so that the people were afraid. Jesus' garments becoming dazzling white and the disciples' fear echo the transfigured radiance of Moses, while transposing the glory from reflected to inherent. The Moses-glory pattern is reinforced by Moses' actual presence on the mountain.

When Moses came down from Mount Sinai with the two tablets of the testimony in Moses’ hand, when he came down from the mountain, Moses didn’t know that the skin of his face shone by reason of his speaking with him.


The LORD descended in the cloud and stood with Moses and proclaimed his name. The descending cloud and the divine voice in Mark cohere with this Sinai descent, reinforcing the Moses typology already active through Moses' appearance.

Yahweh descended in the cloud, and stood with him there, and proclaimed Yahweh’s name.


The heavenly voice 'This is my beloved Son' draws on the royal-enthronement decree 'You are my Son.' The divine sonship language frames Jesus as the messianic king. Recurrence of Psalm 2 at the baptism (Mark 1:11) and here establishes a Markan inclusio of divine attestation.

I will tell of the decree. Yahweh said to me, “You are my son. Today I have become your father.


Moses promises a prophet like himself whom God will raise up, and commands 'to him you shall listen.' The heavenly 'Listen to him' verbally echoes this command, and the presence of Moses on the mountain makes the prophet-like-Moses identification pointed. Volume and coherence are both strong.

Yahweh your God will raise up to you a prophet from your midst, of your brothers, like me. You shall listen to him.


'Behold my servant, my chosen, in whom my soul delights' stands behind the beloved-Son acclamation, blending servant election with sonship. The Markan voice fuses Psalm 2 royal sonship with Isaianic servant language. The servant motif coheres with the suffering Son of Man that immediately follows.

“Behold, my servant, whom I uphold; my chosen, in whom my soul delights— I have put my Spirit on him. He will bring justice to the nations.


God's command to Abraham regarding 'your son, your only son, whom you love' supplies the Aqedah resonance behind 'my beloved Son.' The Greek agapetos echoes the Septuagint of Isaac, linking divine sonship to sacrificial offering, which coheres with Mark's passion theme. The connection is suggestive rather than verbally exact.

He said, “Now take your son, your only son, whom you love, even Isaac, and go into the land of Moriah. Offer him there for a burnt offering on one of the mountains which I will tell you of.”


Elijah's appearance on the mountain activates the expectation that Elijah will come before the day of the LORD, made explicit in 9:11-13. His presence beside Moses pairs Law and Prophets as witnesses to Jesus. The motif is developed verbally in the following pericope.

Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the great and terrible day of Yahweh comes.


The messenger sent to prepare the way contributes to the Elijah-forerunner complex evoked by Elijah's presence. The link here is indirect, mediated through Mark's broader Elijah typology.

“Behold, I send my messenger, and he will prepare the way before me; and the Lord, whom you seek, will suddenly come to his temple; and the messenger of the covenant, whom you desire, behold, he comes!” says Yahweh of Armies.


Elijah's being taken up to heaven by chariot explains why he, like Moses (whose death and burial were hidden), is available to appear on the mountain rather than being among the dead. The translation traditions of both figures underwrite their eschatological reappearance. Coherence with Jewish expectation is strong though the verbal contact is nil.

As they still went on, and talked, behold, a chariot of fire and horses of fire separated them; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven.


Moses' death on Mount Nebo with no known grave fed traditions of his assumption, making his appearance alongside Elijah intelligible. The faint link supports the availability of Moses as a heavenly witness. It rests on later interpretive tradition rather than the text alone.

So Moses the servant of Yahweh died there in the land of Moab, according to Yahweh’s word.


The clothing white as snow in Daniel's vision of the Ancient of Days lies behind Mark's description of garments dazzling white beyond any launderer's whitening. The apocalyptic-glory vocabulary transfers heavenly radiance onto Jesus. Volume is moderate and coheres with Mark's son-of-man Christology.

I saw until thrones were placed, and one who was ancient of days sat: his clothing was white as snow, and the hair of his head like pure wool; his throne was fiery flames, and its wheels burning fire.


The glory of the LORD appearing in the cloud in the wilderness contributes to the cloud-glory motif overshadowing the disciples. The general theophanic cloud is shared, though Exodus 24 is the primary source. A faint reinforcing echo.

As Aaron spoke to the whole congregation of the children of Israel, they looked toward the wilderness, and behold, Yahweh’s glory appeared in the cloud.


Peter's proposal to make three booths (skenai) may draw on the Feast of Booths command to dwell in temporary shelters, evoking eschatological feast and divine dwelling. The link is contested and may be incidental to Peter's confusion. If intended, it ties the theophany to Sukkot's hope of God's tabernacling presence.

You shall dwell in booths seven days. All who are native-born in Israel shall dwell in booths,


Zechariah's vision of all nations keeping the Feast of Booths when the LORD becomes king supplies a possible eschatological-Sukkot backdrop to Peter's tents. The connection is faint and depends on reading the booths motif eschatologically. It coheres with the kingdom-with-power saying of 9:1.

It will happen that everyone who is left of all the nations that came against Jerusalem will go up from year to year to worship the King, Yahweh of Armies, and to keep the feast of tents.


The scribal teaching that 'Elijah must come first' directly reflects Malachi's promise to send Elijah before the great and terrible day of the LORD. Jesus affirms and reinterprets this expectation, identifying the returned Elijah with John the Baptist. Verbal and thematic volume is high.


Elijah's task to 'turn the hearts' and so restore relationships underlies Jesus' phrase that Elijah 'restores all things.' The restoration motif is drawn directly from Malachi's commission. Coherence with the forerunner role is exact.

He will turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the hearts of the children to their fathers, lest I come and strike the earth with a curse.”


Sirach interprets Malachi, saying Elijah is ready to calm wrath, turn the heart of the father to the son, and restore the tribes of Jacob. Jesus' wording that Elijah 'restores all things' tracks Sirach's restorationist gloss more closely than Malachi alone, demonstrating Second-Temple availability. This is a key deuterocanonical witness to the expectation Mark engages.

Who was recorded for reproofs in their seasons, To pacify anger, before it brake forth into wrath; To turn the heart of the father to the son, And to restore the tribes of Jacob.


Jesus' question 'how is it written about the Son of Man, that he should suffer many things and be despised' draws on the servant who is despised and rejected by men. The suffering-and-despised pairing matches Isaiah's fourth servant song closely. Mark grounds the passion in this Scripture as 'written.'

He was despised, and rejected by men; a man of suffering, and acquainted with disease. He was despised as one from whom men hide their face; and we didn’t respect him.


The servant who bears griefs and is esteemed stricken reinforces the 'suffer many things' clause. The vicarious-suffering theme coheres with Mark's repeated passion predictions. Volume is moderate alongside the stronger 53:3 contact.

Surely he has borne our sickness, and carried our suffering; yet we considered him plagued, struck by God, and afflicted.


The sufferer 'despised by the people' supplies a scriptural template for the Son of Man being 'despised.' Mark's passion narrative repeatedly draws on Psalm 22, making its recurrence a strong coherence indicator. The verbal contact on contempt strengthens the echo.

But I am a worm, and no man; a reproach of men, and despised by the people.


Jezebel's threat to kill Elijah, who flees for his life, stands behind 'they have also done to him whatever they wanted,' applied to John the Baptist's persecution and death. The historical Elijah's suffering at royal hands prefigures the returned Elijah's fate. Coherence with the rejected-prophet pattern is strong.

Then Jezebel sent a messenger to Elijah, saying, “So let the gods do to me, and more also, if I don’t make your life as the life of one of them by tomorrow about this time!”


Elijah's lament that the Israelites have killed the prophets and seek his life reinforces the pattern that the forerunner suffers as the prophets did. The link to 'done to him whatever they wanted' is thematic. It supports reading John's death through an Elijah lens.

He said, “I have been very jealous for Yahweh, the God of Armies; for the children of Israel have forsaken your covenant, thrown down your altars, and slain your prophets with the sword. I, even I only, am left; and they seek my life, to take it away.”


The title 'Son of Man,' twice used in this pericope, derives from Daniel's heavenly figure, here paradoxically joined to suffering. Mark fuses Danielic exaltation with Isaianic suffering. The recurrence of the title throughout Mark anchors the Danielic source.

I saw in the night visions, and behold, there came with the clouds of the sky one like a son of man, and he came even to the ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.


The rejected stone supplies a scriptural pattern of the chosen one being despised and rejected, coherent with the Son of Man being 'set at nought.' Mark cites this psalm later (12:10), making its availability and recurrence plausible. The contact here is faint.

The stone which the builders rejected has become the head of the corner.


Jesus descending the mountain to find a disordered crowd and disputing scribes parallels Moses descending Sinai to find Israel corrupted around the golden calf. The 'faithless generation' rebuke echoes the wilderness apostasy. The narrative staging reinforces the Moses-on-the-mountain typology of the preceding scene.

Yahweh spoke to Moses, “Go, get down; for your people, who you brought up out of the land of Egypt, have corrupted themselves!


Jesus' address 'O faithless generation' draws on the Song of Moses, which calls Israel a 'perverse and crooked generation' that has dealt corruptly and is not faithful. The generation-rebuke vocabulary is distinctively Deuteronomic. Mark frames the unbelieving crowd in covenant-lawsuit terms.

They have dealt corruptly with him. They are not his children, because of their defect. They are a perverse and crooked generation.


God hides his face from 'a perverse generation, children in whom is no faithfulness,' precisely the charge of faithlessness Jesus levels. The pairing of 'generation' with unbelief tracks this verse closely. It deepens the Song-of-Moses backdrop to the rebuke.

He said, “I will hide my face from them. I will see what their end will be; for they are a very perverse generation, children in whom is no faithfulness.


God's lament 'how long will this people despise me, and how long will they not believe' matches Jesus' double 'how long shall I be with you... how long shall I bear with you' aimed at unbelief. The wilderness-unbelief motif coheres with the faithless-generation theme. Volume is moderate.

Yahweh said to Moses, “How long will this people despise me? and how long will they not believe in me, for all the signs which I have worked among them?


God's 'how long shall I bear with this evil congregation' supplies the bearing-with-unbelief vocabulary in Jesus' complaint. The wilderness murmuring pattern reinforces the Deuteronomy 32 frame. A faint reinforcing echo.

“How long shall I bear with this evil congregation, that murmur against me? I have heard the murmurings of the children of Israel, which they murmur against me.


The boy 'like one dead' so that bystanders said 'He is dead,' followed by being raised up, faintly evokes the psalm of one poured out like water and brought to the dust of death yet vindicated. The death-to-life movement coheres with the resurrection foreshadowing of the chapter. Contact is thematic and low-volume.

I am poured out like water. All my bones are out of joint. My heart is like wax; it is melted within me.


Elijah raising the widow's apparently dead son, after which the child revived, supplies an Elijah-resurrection template behind Jesus taking the boy by the hand and raising him so that he arose. Given the chapter's Elijah typology, the link has some coherence. Verbal contact is slight.

He stretched himself on the child three times, and cried to Yahweh, and said, “Yahweh my God, please let this child’s soul come into him again.”


Elisha reviving the Shunammite's dead son extends the prophetic resuscitation pattern that frames Jesus' raising of the boy. The motif of a prophet restoring a child reinforces the scene's prophetic resonance. The connection is faint and pattern-based.

He went up, and lay on the child, and put his mouth on his mouth, and his eyes on his eyes, and his hands on his hands. He stretched himself on him; and the flesh of the child grew warm.


The Son of Man being 'handed over to the hands of men' echoes the servant whom the LORD delivered up for iniquity; the Septuagint's language of being given over underlies Mark's passion prediction. The vicarious handing-over coheres with Mark's Isaianic passion theme. Recurrence across the passion predictions strengthens it.

All we like sheep have gone astray. Everyone has turned to his own way; and Yahweh has laid on him the iniquity of us all.


The servant 'poured out his soul to death' and 'was numbered with the transgressors,' having been delivered up. Mark's 'delivered into the hands of men... they will kill him' tracks the servant's being given over to death. The betrayal-and-death sequence aligns with the song's climax.

Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the plunder with the strong; because he poured out his soul to death, and was numbered with the transgressors; yet he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.


'After two days he will revive us; on the third day he will raise us up' is the most likely scriptural source for 'on the third day he will rise again.' The third-day resurrection timing coheres with the formulaic passion predictions. Volume is moderate; the verbal 'third day' contact is notable.

After two days he will revive us. On the third day he will raise us up, and we will live before him.


The title 'Son of Man' carries Danielic weight even when joined to betrayal and death, fusing exaltation with suffering. The recurrence across Mark's passion predictions establishes the Danielic source. Here the paradox of the heavenly figure killed is sharpest.


The dispute about who is greatest and Jesus' reversal that the first must be last and servant of all coheres with wisdom warnings that pride goes before destruction and humility precedes honor. The link is thematic rather than verbal. It situates the teaching in the OT wisdom reversal of status.

Pride goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall.


'Before honor is humility' provides a wisdom backdrop to the last-shall-be-first saying and the embrace of the child. The contact is general and pattern-based. It reinforces the OT roots of Jesus' status reversal.

The fear of Yahweh teaches wisdom. Before honor is humility.


The servant who justifies many through humble service supplies a faint figural backdrop to 'servant of all.' The connection is thematic and depends on Mark's wider servant Christology. Low volume.

After the suffering of his soul, he will see the light and be satisfied. My righteous servant will justify many by the knowledge of himself; and he will bear their iniquities.


John's complaint about an outsider casting out demons in Jesus' name, and the demand to forbid him, closely parallels Joshua's plea that Moses forbid Eldad and Medad from prophesying outside the tent. Jesus' refusal to forbid mirrors Moses' magnanimous reply. The structural and thematic parallel is striking.

A young man ran, and told Moses, and said, “Eldad and Medad are prophesying in the camp!”


Joshua's 'My lord Moses, forbid them' is answered by Moses' wish that all the LORD's people were prophets. Mark casts the disciples as Joshua and Jesus as the larger-hearted Moses who will not restrict the Spirit's work. The parallel reinforces the Moses typology running through the chapter.

Joshua the son of Nun, the servant of Moses, one of his chosen men, answered, “My lord Moses, forbid them!”


Moses' 'Would that all the LORD's people were prophets' anticipates Jesus' inclusive 'whoever is not against us is for us.' The generous expansion of authorized agency is shared. The echo completes the Eldad-and-Medad parallel.

Moses said to him, “Are you jealous for my sake? I wish that all Yahweh’s people were prophets, that Yahweh would put his Spirit on them!”


The thrice-repeated 'where their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched' is a near-verbatim quotation of Isaiah's closing vision of the corpses of rebels, an undying worm and unquenchable fire. This is the strongest OT contact in the chapter and supplies the imagery of Gehenna. The repetition underscores the volume and centrality.

“They shall go out, and look on the dead bodies of the men who have transgressed against me: for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched; and they will be loathsome to all mankind.”


'Every sacrifice will be seasoned with salt' draws directly on the law that every grain offering be salted, never omitting the salt of the covenant. Mark's pairing of fire and salt with sacrifice reflects this cultic prescription. The verbal contact on salting the sacrifice is high.

Every offering of your meal offering you shall season with salt; neither shall you allow the salt of the covenant of your God to be lacking from your meal offering. With all your offerings you shall offer salt.


The 'covenant of salt forever' between the LORD and the priests illuminates 'have salt in yourselves, and be at peace,' linking salt to enduring covenant fidelity. The covenant-of-salt motif undergirds the call to mutual peace. It strengthens the cultic-covenantal reading of the salt sayings.

All the wave offerings of the holy things, which the children of Israel offer to Yahweh, have I given you, and your sons and your daughters with you, as a portion forever. It is a covenant of salt forever before Yahweh to you and to your seed with you.”


The kingship given to David by 'a covenant of salt' reinforces salt as a symbol of permanent covenant, supporting Jesus' exhortation to keep salt and peace. The contact is general and reinforcing. It corroborates the covenant-of-salt background.

Ought you not to know that Yahweh, the God of Israel, gave the kingdom over Israel to David forever, even to him and to his sons by a covenant of salt?


The priests casting salt on the offerings before the LORD adds to the salted-sacrifice background of 9:49. The cultic salting of offerings coheres with Mark's 'every sacrifice salted with salt.' A reinforcing low-volume echo.

You shall bring them near to Yahweh, and the priests shall cast salt on them, and they shall offer them up for a burnt offering to Yahweh.


Topheth prepared with fire and a great pile of wood, kindled by the breath of the LORD, contributes to the fiery-judgment imagery behind Gehenna and 'everyone salted with fire.' The link reinforces the burning-judgment theme. Volume is modest beside Isaiah 66.

For his burning place has long been ready. Yes, for the king it is prepared. He has made its pyre deep and large with fire and much wood. Yahweh’s breath, like a stream of sulfur, kindles it.


The valley of the son of Hinnom (Ge-Hinnom), site of child sacrifice condemned by Jeremiah, is the geographical and historical root of 'Gehenna.' Mark's term presupposes this defiled valley as the image of fiery judgment. The connection is etymological and background rather than a verbal citation.

They have built the high places of Topheth, which is in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to burn their sons and their daughters in the fire; which I didn’t command, nor did it come into my mind.


Jeremiah renames Topheth the 'valley of slaughter,' deepening the Hinnom-valley associations behind Gehenna. The judgment-in-the-valley motif underlies Mark's hell imagery. A reinforcing background echo.

therefore, behold, the days come, says Yahweh, that this place shall no more be called Topheth, nor The valley of the son of Hinnom, but The valley of Slaughter.


The resurrection of some to everlasting contempt provides an apocalyptic frame for the unending punishment evoked by the undying worm and unquenchable fire. The shame-and-punishment of the wicked coheres with Mark's warnings. The contact is thematic and reinforces the Isaiah 66 quotation.

Many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.


Judith's hymn warns that the Lord will give fire and worms to the flesh of the nations, weeping in pain forever, a Second-Temple development of Isaiah 66:24. Its availability shows the worm-and-fire judgment circulating in the period Mark writes. It corroborates the deuterocanonical reception of the Isaiah imagery.

“Woe to the nations who rise up against my race! The Lord Almighty will take vengeance on them in the day of judgement, to put fire and worms in their flesh; and they will weep and feel their pain forever.”


Bringing the remnant through the fire to refine them lies faintly behind 'everyone will be salted with fire,' if the fire is read as purifying rather than only punitive. The refining-fire motif coheres with a disciple-formation reading of the saying. Low volume and contested.

I will bring the third part into the fire, and will refine them as silver is refined, and will test them like gold is tested. They will call on my name, and I will hear them. I will say, ‘It is my people;’ and they will say, ‘Yahweh is my God.’”


Jesus grounds marriage 'from the beginning of the creation' in 'God made them male and female,' a near-verbatim citation of the creation of humanity as male and female. High Volume and explicit appeal to creation order; the phrase functions as a formal scriptural authority over against Deuteronomy's concession. Availability and Coherence are secure within Mark's argument structure.

God created man in his own image. In God’s image he created him; male and female he created them.


The words 'a man will leave his father and mother, and will join to his wife, and the two will become one flesh' reproduce the etiological marriage saying nearly word-for-word. This is the load-bearing prooftext; Jesus stacks it on Genesis 1:27 to argue indissolubility. Maximal Volume and Recurrence in early Jewish marriage discourse.

Therefore a man will leave his father and his mother, and will join with his wife, and they will be one flesh.


The 'certificate of divorce' Moses 'allowed' is a direct invocation of the Mosaic divorce statute, named explicitly as Moses' command. Jesus cites it precisely in order to subordinate it as a concession to 'hardness of heart.' Explicit attribution to Moses makes this an unambiguous, high-Volume citation.

When a man takes a wife and marries her, then it shall be, if she finds no favor in his eyes, because he has found some unseemly thing in her, that he shall write her a bill of divorce, and put it in her hand, and send her out of his house. When she has departed out of his house, she may go and be another man’s wife. If the latter husband hates her, and write her a bill of divorce, and puts it in her hand, and sends her out of his house; or if the latter […]


Malachi rebukes faithless divorce, invokes 'the wife of your covenant,' appeals to the one-flesh creation ('did he not make them one?'), and reports that God 'hates divorce.' Jesus' fusion of one-flesh creation theology with a polemic against divorce coheres strongly with Malachi's distinctive argument. The shared appeal to creation against divorce raises this above generic thematic overlap.

Yet you say, ‘Why?’ Because Yahweh has been witness between you and the wife of your youth, against whom you have dealt treacherously, though she is your companion, and the wife of your covenant. Did he not make you one, although he had the residue of the Spirit? Why one? He sought a godly seed. Therefore take heed to your spirit, and let no one deal treacherously against the wife of his youth. For I hate divorce”, says Yahweh, the God of Israel, “and him […]


The toledot restatement 'male and female he created them, and blessed them' reinforces the male-and-female creation formula Jesus cites. It is a secondary witness to the same tradition behind Genesis 1:27, strengthening Recurrence. Marked contested because Mark most plausibly draws on Genesis 1:27 directly.

He created them male and female, and blessed them. On the day they were created, he named them “Adam”.


The diagnosis 'for your hardness of heart' resonates with the Pentateuch's hardened-heart vocabulary, of which the Exodus Pharaoh cycle is the paradigm. The motif frames Israel's recalcitrance as the reason for the concession. Low confidence and contested: thematic vocabulary rather than a specific citation.

Yahweh said to Moses, “When you go back into Egypt, see that you do before Pharaoh all the wonders which I have put in your hand, but I will harden his heart and he will not let the people go.


Jacob lays his hands on Ephraim and Manasseh and blesses them, the foundational scene of patriarchal blessing by laying on of hands. Jesus 'took them in his arms, and blessed them, laying his hands on them' reenacts this gesture upon children. The verbal and ritual overlap (hands, blessing, children) gives the allusion real Volume.

Israel stretched out his right hand, and laid it on Ephraim’s head, who was the younger, and his left hand on Manasseh’s head, guiding his hands knowingly, for Manasseh was the firstborn. He blessed Joseph, and said, “The God before whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac walked, the God who has fed me all my life long to this day, the angel who has redeemed me from all evil, bless the lads, and let my name be named on them, and the name of my fathers Abraham […]


The laying on of hands to convey authority and blessing (Moses on Joshua) is the OT background for the gesture Jesus performs. It supplies the Availability of the imposition-of-hands motif. Low confidence and contested because Mark's scene is blessing, not commissioning.

Yahweh said to Moses, “Take Joshua the son of Nun, a man in whom is the Spirit, and lay your hand on him.


The psalmist stills his soul 'like a weaned child,' modeling trustful smallness before God, which coheres with receiving the kingdom 'like a little child.' The child as image of humble dependence is the shared note. Contested and low: thematic resonance without verbal contact.

Surely I have stilled and quieted my soul, like a weaned child with his mother, like a weaned child is my soul within me.


Wisdom prizes virtue over many children and the immortality of the righteous, part of a Second-Temple revaluation of childhood and worth. The faint resonance lies in valuing what the world overlooks, as the disciples overlook the children. Contested; included for maximal coverage of deuterocanonical availability.

Better than this is childishness with virtue; For in the memory of virtue is immortality: Because it is recognized both before God and before men.


Jesus recites the second-table Decalogue commandments against murder, adultery, theft, false witness, and to honor father and mother, citing them as 'the commandments' the man knows. The wording follows the Decalogue directly. Highest Volume and explicit appeal to the Ten Words.

“Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long in the land which Yahweh your God gives you. “You shall not murder. “You shall not commit adultery. “You shall not steal. “You shall not give false testimony against your neighbor.


The Deuteronomic recension of the same commandments is an equally valid source for Jesus' list, and the placement of 'Honor your father and mother' after the social prohibitions mirrors a known ordering. Marked as a parallel high-confidence citation alongside Exodus 20. The two Decalogue forms together secure the quotation.

“Honor your father and your mother, as Yahweh your God commanded you; that your days may be long, and that it may go well with you, in the land which Yahweh your God gives you. “You shall not murder. “You shall not commit adultery. “You shall not steal. “You shall not give false testimony against your neighbor.


Jesus' extra commandment 'Do not defraud' (not in the Decalogue) echoes the Deuteronomic prohibition against defrauding or oppressing a hired laborer and withholding wages. Mark's insertion of defrauding into a Decalogue list points to this legal tradition on economic injustice. The targeted addition to a rich landholder gives the allusion coherence.

You shall not oppress a hired servant who is poor and needy, whether he is one of your brothers, or one of the foreigners who are in your land within your gates.


The Holiness Code's 'you shall not defraud your neighbor nor rob him; the wages of a hired servant shall not remain with you overnight' is the strongest single source for Mark's 'Do not defraud.' Its pairing of fraud with withheld wages fits Jesus' demand that this wealthy man divest. Verbal contact on 'defraud' lifts this above generic.

“‘You shall not oppress your neighbor, nor rob him. “‘The wages of a hired servant shall not remain with you all night until the morning.


Jesus' rejoinder 'No one is good except one—God' reflects the Shema's confession of God's oneness and uniqueness, here applied to the predicate of goodness. The 'one' (heis) language coheres with Deuteronomic monotheism. The link is conceptual but anchored in the distinctive 'one God' formula.

Hear, Israel: Yahweh is our God. Yahweh is one.


'Give thanks to the LORD, for he is good' is the recurrent liturgical confession that God alone is good, the conviction behind Jesus' 'No one is good except one—God.' The refrain pervades the Psalter (106, 107, 136). Low and contested: a diffuse liturgical commonplace rather than a citation.

Give thanks to Yahweh, for he is good, for his loving kindness endures forever.


'He who is kind to the poor lends to the LORD, and he will repay him' underwrites Jesus' logic that giving to the poor yields 'treasure in heaven.' The proverb's transaction of almsgiving credited with God grounds the heavenly-treasure promise. Coherence with the divestment command is strong.

He who has pity on the poor lends to Yahweh; he will reward him.


'Lay up your treasure according to the commandments of the Most High, and it will profit you more than gold' is the closest Second-Temple parallel to 'you will have treasure in heaven.' The instruction to convert wealth into a heavenly account, set beside almsgiving, matches Jesus' counsel precisely. Availability and verbal proximity make this a primary deuterocanonical source.

Bestow your treasure according to the commandments of the Most High; And it shall profit you more than gold.


Tobit instructs giving alms from one's possessions, promising that almsgiving 'lays up a good treasure' and delivers from death. The almsgiving-as-stored-treasure theology directly parallels Jesus' 'give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven.' The shared treasure-and-deliverance logic strengthens the allusion.

Give alms from your possessions. When you give alms, don’t let your eye be envious. Don’t turn away your face from any poor man, and the face of God won’t be turned away from you. As your possessions are, give alms of it according to your abundance. If you have little, don’t be afraid to give alms according to that little; for you lay up a good treasure for yourself against the day of necessity; because alms-giving delivers from death, and doesn’t allow […]


Honoring the LORD with one's wealth and firstfruits, with promised reward, lies in the background of redirecting possessions toward God. The wisdom pattern of wealth surrendered and divinely repaid coheres with the pericope. Low and contested: thematic.

Honor Yahweh with your substance, with the first fruits of all your increase: so your barns will be filled with plenty, and your vats will overflow with new wine.


The open-handed command to give freely to the poor brother and not harden the heart frames Israel's duty to the needy, which Jesus presses to its limit. The almsgiving ethic supplies background for 'give to the poor.' Contested; a broad covenantal commonplace.

If a poor man, one of your brothers, is with you within any of your gates in your land which Yahweh your God gives you, you shall not harden your heart, nor shut your hand from your poor brother; but you shall surely open your hand to him, and shall surely lend him sufficient for his need, which he lacks. Beware that there not be a base thought in your heart, saying, “The seventh year, the year of release, is at hand”; and your eye be evil against your […]


'He who trusts in his riches will fall' directly underlies Jesus' qualification 'how hard is it for those who trust in riches to enter the Kingdom.' The verbal target is the verb of trusting in wealth, not merely possessing it. The proverb supplies both diagnosis and outcome, giving solid Volume.

He who trusts in his riches will fall, but the righteous shall flourish as the green leaf.


Those who 'trust in their wealth' cannot by any means ransom a person from death, exactly the impossibility Jesus presses: riches cannot purchase entry or salvation. The psalm's link between trust-in-riches and the limits of ransom coheres with the chapter's later ransom saying. Conceptual overlap is precise and recurrent.

Those who trust in their wealth, and boast in the multitude of their riches— none of them can by any means redeem his brother, nor give God a ransom for him.


'Is anything too hard for the LORD?' is the canonical formula of divine possibility that Jesus restates as 'with men it is impossible, but not with God, for all things are possible with God.' Sarah's promised son against natural impossibility is the paradigm. The verbal and theological match (nothing too hard / all things possible) is strong.

Is anything too hard for Yahweh? At the set time I will return to you, when the season comes round, and Sarah will have a son.”


'I know that you can do all things, and that no purpose of yours can be thwarted' is a near-formulaic source for 'all things are possible with God.' Job's confession of God's unbounded power matches Jesus' answer to 'who then can be saved?' The omnipotence formula recurs and coheres.

“I know that you can do all things, and that no purpose of yours can be restrained.


'If it is marvelous in the eyes of the remnant... should it also be marvelous in my eyes?' contrasts human limits with divine possibility in restoration. The reversal of what seems impossible to people coheres with Jesus' saying. Contested and low: thematic possibility-formula, no verbal lock.

Thus says Yahweh of Armies: “If it is marvelous in the eyes of the remnant of this people in those days, should it also be marvelous in my eyes?” says Yahweh of Armies.


'Nothing is too hard for you' (Jeremiah's prayer) repeats the Genesis 18:14 omnipotence formula and reinforces Recurrence behind 'all things are possible with God.' Marked contested because Genesis 18:14 is the likelier primary source. Included for completeness of the divine-possibility tradition.

Ah Lord Yahweh! Behold, you have made the heavens and the earth by your great power and by your outstretched arm; there is nothing too hard for you,


Hannah's song declares the LORD makes poor and makes rich, raises the poor from the dust, and reverses high and low, undergirding 'many who are first will be last; and the last first.' The eschatological reversal of status and wealth coheres tightly with Jesus' promise and warning. The reversal motif is verbally and thematically apt.

Yahweh makes poor, and makes rich. He brings low, he also lifts up. He raises up the poor out of the dust. He lifts up the needy from the dunghill, To make them sit with princes, and inherit the throne of glory. For the pillars of the earth are Yahweh’s. He has set the world on them.


God 'sets on high those who are lowly,' the wisdom statement of divine reversal that informs the first-last saying. It supports the reversal pattern's Recurrence. Contested and low: general reversal topos.

so that he sets up on high those who are low, those who mourn are exalted to safety.


Covenant blessing promises abundance of children, livestock, and land 'a hundredfold' in plenty, faintly behind the promise of houses, family, and lands 'one hundred times more.' The hundredfold-in-the-land blessing supplies background imagery. Contested; thematic and inexact.

Yahweh will grant you abundant prosperity, in the fruit of your body, in the fruit of your livestock, and in the fruit of your ground, in the land which Yahweh swore to your fathers to give you.


Isaac sows and reaps 'a hundredfold' because the LORD blessed him, a concrete OT instance of the hundredfold blessing language Jesus uses. It supplies Availability for 'one hundred times more.' Contested and low: a single lexical resonance.

Isaac sowed in that land, and reaped in the same year one hundred times what he planted. Yahweh blessed him.


The third Servant Song's 'I gave my back to those who strike, and my cheeks to those who pluck out the hair; I did not hide my face from shame and spitting' supplies the specifics of Jesus' passion forecast: mocking, spitting, and scourging. The catalogue of indignities matches Mark's verbs closely. High Volume and Coherence with Mark's Servant Christology.

I gave my back to the strikers, and my cheeks to those who plucked off the hair; I didn’t hide my face from shame and spitting.


The Servant despised, oppressed, and led to death, then vindicated, frames the rejection-suffering-vindication shape of the passion prediction. Mark's 'condemn him to death... and on the third day he will rise' tracks the Servant's humiliation-and-exaltation arc. Recurrence of Isaiah 53 across the passion narrative strengthens this.

He was despised, and rejected by men; a man of suffering, and acquainted with disease. He was despised as one from whom men hide their face; and we didn’t respect him. Surely he has borne our sickness, and carried our suffering; yet we considered him plagued, struck by God, and afflicted. But he was pierced for our transgressions. He was crushed for our iniquities. The punishment that brought our peace was on him; and by his wounds we are healed. All we […]


'After two days he will revive us; on the third day he will raise us up' is the principal OT source for the 'third day' resurrection formula. The phrase's distinctive temporal marker matches 'on the third day he will rise again.' Second-Temple use of Hosea 6:2 for resurrection timing raises its plausibility.

After two days he will revive us. On the third day he will raise us up, and we will live before him.


'The Son of Man' as Jesus' self-designation derives from the one 'like a son of man' who comes to the Ancient of Days and receives dominion. Mark fuses this exalted figure with the suffering of the Servant. The title's repeated appearance in Mark and its Danielic root make the allusion strong.

I saw in the night visions, and behold, there came with the clouds of the sky one like a son of man, and he came even to the ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.


The scorned and mocked sufferer ('all who see me mock me') anticipates 'they will mock him,' linking the prediction to the passion psalm Mark cites at the cross. The mockery motif coheres with Mark's later use of Psalm 22. Contested here because the contact is anticipatory and thematic.

But I am a worm, and no man; a reproach of men, and despised by the people. All those who see me mock me. They insult me with their lips. They shake their heads, saying,


The Servant who 'pours out his soul to death,' 'bears the sin of many,' and makes his life a guilt offering 'for many' is the controlling source for 'to give his life as a ransom for many.' The distinctive vicarious 'for many' (rabbim) and the substitutionary death match decisively. This is the chapter's major Servant allusion, high in Volume and Coherence.

Yet it pleased Yahweh to bruise him. He has caused him to suffer. When you make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed. He shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of Yahweh shall prosper in his hand. After the suffering of his soul, he will see the light and be satisfied. My righteous servant will justify many by the knowledge of himself; and he will bear their iniquities. Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall […]


Jerusalem has drunk 'the cup of his wrath... the bowl of staggering,' the cup-of-judgment imagery behind 'the cup that I drink.' Jesus takes upon himself the cup of divine wrath the city must drink. The cup as wrath to be consumed coheres with the passion's substitutionary logic.

Awake, awake, stand up, Jerusalem, that have drunk at the hand of Yahweh the cup of his wrath; you have drunken the bowl of the cup of staggering, and drained it.


'In the hand of the LORD there is a cup... and he pours it out; surely all the wicked of the earth shall drain it' establishes the cup as the draught of God's judgment. Jesus' question 'are you able to drink the cup that I drink' draws on this judicial cup. The wrath-cup motif's Recurrence (Jeremiah 25, Isaiah 51) supports it.

For in the hand of Yahweh there is a cup, full of foaming wine mixed with spices. He pours it out. Indeed the wicked of the earth drink and drink it to its very dregs.


The prophet makes the nations drink 'the cup of the wine of wrath,' the most extended OT development of the wrath-cup that Jesus alludes to. It strengthens the Recurrence of the cup-of-judgment tradition behind Mark 10:38. Marked contested only as to which cup-text is primary; Isaiah 51 and Psalm 75 are nearer.

For thus says Yahweh, the God of Israel, to me: take this cup of the wine of wrath at my hand, and cause all the nations, to whom I send you, to drink it. They shall drink, and reel back and forth, and be mad, because of the sword that I will send among them. Then took I the cup at Yahweh’s hand, and made all the nations to drink, to whom Yahweh had sent me: Jerusalem, and the cities of Judah, and its kings, and its princes, to make them a desolation, an […]


James and John request seats 'in your glory,' echoing the dominion and glory given to the son of man, while the right-and-left thrones evoke enthronement in the Danielic kingdom. The petition presupposes the Son of Man's coming glory. Coherence with the Daniel 7 background of Mark's Son of Man title supports the link.

There was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all the peoples, nations, and languages should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.


The request to sit 'at your right hand' draws on the royal enthronement of the king at God's right hand. The right-hand seat of honor is the Psalm 110 image Mark elsewhere applies to Jesus. The single-side request makes the echo partial but apt; marked contested as to directness.

Yahweh says to my Lord, “Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool for your feet.”


The 'anointed one' cut off and atonement made 'for iniquity' resonates faintly with the ransoming death 'for many.' It supplies a Second-Temple frame for a representative figure's atoning death. Low and contested: conceptual, no verbal lock.

Seventy weeks are decreed on your people and on your holy city, to finish disobedience, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most holy. Know therefore and discern, that from the going out of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem to the Anointed One, the prince, shall be seven weeks, and sixty-two weeks: it shall be […]


Dominion is given to the saints, yet the kingdom's authority is from God, against which the Gentile kings who 'lord it over' their nations are contrasted. Jesus' antithesis between Gentile rulers' domination and servanthood draws on this kingdom-of-God-versus-beastly-empires schema. The contrast of empires coheres with Daniel 7.

The kingdom and the dominion, and the greatness of the kingdoms under the whole sky, shall be given to the people of the saints of the Most High: his kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him.


The atonement-money 'ransom for his life' paid at the census supplies cultic background for lytron, 'ransom.' It frames a life-price offered to redeem. Contested and low: Mark's ransom is more directly Isaianic (53:10-12), but the redemption-price vocabulary is available here.

“When you take a census of the children of Israel, according to those who are numbered among them, then each man shall give a ransom for his soul to Yahweh, when you number them; that there be no plague among them when you number them.


The kinsman-redeemer who pays a price to redeem (gaal/lytron) supplies the OT economy of ransom behind 'a ransom for many.' It contributes Availability for the redemption metaphor. Contested; background vocabulary rather than citation.

after he is sold he may be redeemed. One of his brothers may redeem him; or his uncle, or his uncle’s son, may redeem him, or any who is a close relative to him of his family may redeem him; or if he has grown rich, he may redeem himself.


No one can 'ransom' a brother or give God 'the price of his life,' for the ransom of a soul is costly, sharpening the surprise that the Son of Man does give exactly such a ransom 'for many.' The psalm sets up the impossibility Jesus' death answers. Contested and low: an inverted thematic contact.

none of them can by any means redeem his brother, nor give God a ransom for him. For the redemption of their life is costly, no payment is ever enough,


Bartimaeus hails Jesus as 'Son of David,' invoking the Davidic covenant promise of an everlasting throne to David's offspring. The acclamation is messianic, identifying Jesus as the promised royal heir as he approaches Jerusalem. The title's covenantal weight and its placement before the entry give the allusion high Volume.

When your days are fulfilled, and you shall sleep with your fathers, I will set up your seed after you, who shall proceed out of your bowels, and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build a house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son. If he commits iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men; but my loving kindness shall not […]


'Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened' is the prophetic sign of the coming salvation, fulfilled as Bartimaeus 'received his sight.' The opening of blind eyes marks the in-breaking of God's redemptive reign, coherent with Mark's framing of Jesus' mighty works. Strong Volume and a recurrent Isaianic restoration motif.

Then the eyes of the blind will be opened, and the ears of the deaf will be unstopped.


'The LORD opens the eyes of the blind,' a direct attribution to God of the act Jesus performs, framing the healing as divine work. The psalm's catalogue of the LORD's saving deeds for the afflicted coheres with the beggar's restoration. The verbal match on opening blind eyes raises the allusion above generic.

Yahweh opens the eyes of the blind. Yahweh raises up those who are bowed down. Yahweh loves the righteous.


The Servant is given 'to open the eyes that are blind,' tying the sight-giving to the Servant's commission Mark develops in this chapter. The healing thus enacts the Servant program alongside the ransom saying. Coherence with the chapter's Servant theology supports the link.

to open the blind eyes, to bring the prisoners out of the dungeon, and those who sit in darkness out of the prison.


'Have mercy on me, O LORD' is the recurrent psalmic cry for mercy that Bartimaeus repeats ('have mercy on me'). The petition voices the lament-form plea for divine compassion now directed to the Son of David. The Recurrence of 'have mercy on me' across the Psalter (Pss 6, 9, 41, 51) supports the echo; marked contested as a liturgical commonplace.

Have mercy on me, Yahweh, for I am faint. Yahweh, heal me, for my bones are troubled.


'The eyes of the blind shall see out of obscurity and out of darkness' adds to the Isaianic chorus of restored sight behind the healing. It reinforces Recurrence of the opened-eyes promise. Contested and low: secondary to Isaiah 35:5.

In that day, the deaf will hear the words of the book, and the eyes of the blind will see out of obscurity and out of darkness.


'Have mercy on me, O God, according to your steadfast love' is the best-known of the mercy-pleas and shapes the form of Bartimaeus' cry. It supplies the penitential-petition register. Contested and low: the cry is a stock liturgical phrase rather than a citation of this psalm specifically.

Have mercy on me, God, according to your loving kindness. According to the multitude of your tender mercies, blot out my transgressions.


The deliberate procurement and riding of a young donkey into Jerusalem evokes Zechariah's humble king who comes 'lowly and riding on a donkey, on a colt the foal of a donkey.' Mark does not quote it (unlike Matthew/John), but the staged colt-riding has high coherence with the messianic peace-king imagery, and the theme recurs across the entry tradition. Volume is strong despite the missing citation.

Rejoice greatly, daughter of Zion! Shout, daughter of Jerusalem! Behold, your King comes to you! He is righteous, and having salvation; lowly, and riding on a donkey, even on a colt, the foal of a donkey.


Jacob's blessing of Judah, 'binding his foal to the vine and his donkey's colt to the choice vine,' supplies an old messianic-royal association of the bound colt that Second-Temple readers connected to the coming ruler of Judah (Gen 49:10). Mark's emphatically tied, never-ridden colt that is untied coheres with this figural Judahic kingship, though the link is mediated and contested.

Binding his foal to the vine, his donkey’s colt to the choice vine; he has washed his garments in wine, his robes in the blood of grapes.


The crowd's cry 'Hosanna! Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord!' formally cites the Hallel pilgrimage acclamation, where 'Hosanna' (hoshia-na, 'save now') is Ps 118:25 and the blessing is 118:26. This is a verbatim liturgical quotation with maximal volume; the same psalm recurs as the rejected-stone text in Mark 12:10-11, strengthening recurrence.

Save us now, we beg you, Yahweh! Yahweh, we beg you, send prosperity now. Blessed is he who comes in Yahweh’s name! We have blessed you out of Yahweh’s house.


Spreading garments on the road as Jesus rides echoes the acclamation of Jehu, where the people 'took every man his garment, and put it under him... and blew the trumpet, saying, Jehu is king.' The shared royal-enthronement gesture of garments under the new king gives coherence to reading the entry as a kingmaking, though Mark adds the cut branches.

Then they hurried, and took every man his garment, and put it under him on the top of the stairs, and blew the trumpet, saying, “Jehu is king.”


The crowd hails 'the coming kingdom of our father David,' invoking the Davidic covenant promise of an enduring throne and kingdom for David's offspring. The Davidic-dynastic frame of the entry coheres with Nathan's oracle, the foundational text for messianic kingship, though Mark cites no words from it.


The king's approach to Jerusalem and entry into the temple faintly recalls the processional liturgy of the King of glory entering the gates. The coherence is thematic (royal advent into the sanctuary), but there is no verbal contact, so the echo is faint and contested.

Lift up your heads, you gates! Be lifted up, you everlasting doors, and the King of glory will come in. Who is the King of glory? Yahweh strong and mighty, Yahweh mighty in battle. Lift up your heads, you gates; yes, lift them up, you everlasting doors, and the King of glory will come in. Who is this King of glory? Yahweh of Armies is the King of glory! Selah.


Mark situates the entry at the Mount of Olives, the very site where Zechariah says the LORD's feet will stand on the day of his eschatological coming. The geographic note may be loaded with this Day-of-the-LORD coherence, but the topographic detail is also simply realistic, so the allusion is contested.

His feet will stand in that day on the Mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east; and the Mount of Olives will be split in two, from east to west, making a very great valley. Half of the mountain will move toward the north, and half of it toward the south.


Jesus' cursing of the fruitless fig tree enacts Jeremiah's judgment oracle, 'there shall be no grapes on the vine, nor figs on the fig tree, and the leaf shall fade,' where Israel's barrenness brings consuming judgment. The fig-tree-as-Israel symbolism has high coherence and recurs throughout the prophets, framing the act as a prophetic sign against the temple it brackets.

I will utterly consume them, says Yahweh: no grapes shall be on the vine, nor figs on the fig tree, and the leaf shall fade; and the things that I have given them shall pass away from them.


The prophet's lament 'there is no cluster to eat; my soul desired the firstripe fig' supplies the disappointed seeking of early fruit and finding none, a precise match for Jesus hungering and finding only leaves. The coherence is strong with Micah's portrait of a fruitless, faithless people awaiting judgment.

Misery is mine! Indeed, I am like one who gathers the summer fruits, as gleanings of the vineyard: There is no cluster of grapes to eat. My soul desires to eat the early fig.


Hosea recalls finding Israel 'like the firstripe in the fig tree at her first time,' a metaphor of early promise turned to apostasy and barrenness (Hos 9:16, 'their root is dried up, they shall bear no fruit'). The dried-up-root motif coheres tightly with the tree withered from the roots in 11:20, reinforcing the figural reading.

I found Israel like grapes in the wilderness. I saw your fathers as the first ripe in the fig tree at its first season; but they came to Baal Peor, and consecrated themselves to the shameful thing, and became abominable like that which they loved.


Joel's judgment imagery includes the LORD laying waste the vine and barking the fig tree so that its branches are made white, part of a Day-of-the-LORD agricultural desolation. The shared fig-tree-judgment field adds recurrence, though the verbal contact is faint and the theme is widely diffused, so the link is contested.

He has laid my vine waste, and stripped my fig tree. He has stripped its bark, and thrown it away. Its branches are made white.


Jeremiah's vision of good and bad figs sorts Judah for blessing or judgment, supplying a prophetic precedent for figs symbolizing the nation's fate before the LORD. The coherence with Mark's fig sign-act against the temple is thematic rather than verbal, hence faint and contested.

Yahweh showed me, and behold, two baskets of figs set before Yahweh’s temple, after that Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon had carried away captive Jeconiah the son of Jehoiakim, king of Judah, and the princes of Judah, with the craftsmen and smiths, from Jerusalem, and had brought them to Babylon. One basket had very good figs, like the figs that are first-ripe; and the other basket had very bad figs, which could not be eaten, they were so bad. Then Yahweh […]


Jesus' teaching 'My house shall be called a house of prayer for all the nations' is a verbatim citation of Isaiah's oracle gathering foreigners and outcasts to worship at the temple. Mark uniquely preserves 'for all the nations,' heightening the inclusion theme; the formal quotation has maximal volume and frames the cleansing as eschatological restoration.

even them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer: their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted on my altar; for my house shall be called a house of prayer for all peoples.”


The charge 'you have made it a den of robbers' formally quotes Jeremiah's temple sermon, where the people treat the LORD's house as a robbers' hideout while presuming on its protection. The citation imports Jeremiah's threat of the temple's destruction (Jer 7:14), giving the act prophetic-judgment force; high volume and tight coherence.

Has this house, which is called by my name, become a den of robbers in your eyes? Behold, I, even I, have seen it,” says Yahweh.


Zechariah closes with the promise that on the day of the LORD 'there shall be no more the Canaanite (trader/merchant) in the house of the LORD of hosts.' Jesus' expulsion of the buyers, sellers, and money-changers enacts this eschatological purging of commerce from the temple, a strong coherence often noted as the act's interpretive key.

Yes, every pot in Jerusalem and in Judah will be holy to Yahweh of Armies; and all those who sacrifice will come and take of them, and cook in them. In that day there will no longer be a Canaanite in the house of Yahweh of Armies.


Malachi's Lord who 'shall suddenly come to his temple' to purify the sons of Levi and refine worship until offerings are again acceptable supplies the pattern of a sudden temple-cleansing visitation. Jesus' inspecting (11:11) then purging the temple coheres with this messenger-of-the-covenant judgment, though Mark cites no words.

“Behold, I send my messenger, and he will prepare the way before me; and the Lord, whom you seek, will suddenly come to his temple; and the messenger of the covenant, whom you desire, behold, he comes!” says Yahweh of Armies. “But who can endure the day of his coming? And who will stand when he appears? For he is like a refiner’s fire, and like launderer’s soap; and he will sit as a refiner and purifier of silver, and he will purify the sons of Levi, and […]