I. Introduction

The Gospels of the New Testament are not only some of the most unique literary works of their time, but they are some of the most important religious documents produced throughout all of human history. Coupled with the writings of the Old Testament, these works provide the foundational ideologies for religion of Christianity. The writings themselves were produced during the Roman subjugation of Palestine shortly after the destruction of the Second Temple around 70 CE. While there are still disputes over the chronological order of the four canonical Gospels of the New Testament, there exists a much more complex matter to address. Perhaps the greatest issue plaguing those studying the Gospels of the New Testament pertains to determining the genre of the Gospels. Thus, the focus of this paper will be twofold: Firstly, we will focus on the matter of the genre of the Gospels. The discussion will address the significance of determining the genre of these writings, the approaches utilized in categorizing the literature, and what can be inferred from establishing the Gospel genre. Secondly, we will shift our focus from genre to a discussion on one of the four canonical gospels. For the purposes of this paper, we will examine the Gospel of Mark, and attempt to illuminate how Mark presents a unique portrait of Jesus.

A Discussion of the Gospel Genre

The Importance of Establishing a Gospel Genre

While the primary function of a genre is to establish appropriate boundaries that can be utilized to distinguish between different types of literature, another important function that a genre serves is to aid the reader in forming a more comprehensive understanding of the text. Through the categorization of a literary text, such as the Gospels of the New Testament, to a specific genre, much more is unveiled about the significance of the work itself. For instance, certain types of literary works within a genre are written in specific styles and for specific reasons depending on the period during which the piece is composed. The significance of the work will then vary across the historical landscape, and the genre of the work will be 'the vehicle that 'guides both the production and the interpretation of the text"' (Diehl 175; Burridge 104). Thus, the need to ascribe a genre to the New Testament Gospels is not only important for the purposes of distinguishing the literary boundaries of these works, but the genre of the New Testament will provide much more insight to the reader. Such insight includes connections to the explanations pertaining to why these religious texts were written, and how these works can be interpreted. Theological scholars are currently employing two of the different approaches-analogical and derivational-in order to determine the genre of the Gospels.

Approaches to the Genre of the Gospels

Scholars have employed several different approaches to determine the genre of the gospels. Two of the most predominant approaches include the analogical and derivational approaches. The analogical approach assumes that the four canonical Gospels were following the writing conventions of a particular genre during the time for which they were written; therefore, the Gospels are seen as similar to other known literature of that particular period of time. The derivational approach, on the other hand, assumes that the Gospels are completely unique literary works for their historical timeframe, and, as a result, developed a new literary genre (Diehl 176).

The analogical approach is one of the well-regarded approaches scholars use to determine the genre of the New Testament Gospels. Through this approach, scholars have attempted to demonstrate how the gospels are similar to other known forms of ancient literature. Some of the types of ancient literature that draw a significant number of parallels to the writings of the New Testament are the Semitic Literature and the Hellenistic literature. The Semitic literature is a form of Jewish writing that centers is focus on offering a historical perspective; on the other hand, the Hellenistic form of literature is structured on providing a more biographical account of the individual. Some scholars maintain that the authors of the canonical gospels utilized the historical approach of writing as a template for their respective works. Unfortunately, many scholars still feel as though this comparison lacks in its completeness (Diehl 177). The Hellenistic form of ancient literature is seen as having the most parallels to the gospels out of all of the ancient literary forms of writing. Most scholars of this opinion concur that the writings of the gospel are similar to Greco-Roman biographies ( bias), which were written as a means of focusing "on one person and how the reader was to understand that person" (Diehl 185; Burridge 113). Several parallels to this form of ancient literature and the New Testament Gospels arise from the notion that the Gospels, "were not written to relate chronological events as much as to 'eulogize their subjects, to affect political opinion and action or to teach uprightness and usefulness by example"' (Diehl 178; Votaw 7). The focus of the Hellenistic account provides much more insight into the character of the individual being written about, and less emphasis is allocated towards what happened during events throughout the individual's life. Aside from the analogical approach, a second approach-the derivational approach-is another way of determining the genre of the Gospels of the New Testament.

Another form of determining the genre of the New Testament gospels arises in from the derivational approach. Scholars favoring this approach argue that there are simply not enough parallels between the forms of ancient literature and the Gospels to support the claim that the works of the New Testament were modeled after those literary forms. Derivational scholars claim that the evidence that proponents of the analogical approach present are simply "based entirely on inference and speculation, not on hard evidence" (Diehl 180; Aune 40-42).

Inferences

If the prevailing thought is that the New Testament Gospels follow the structure of a Greco­ Roman biography, then we-as the audience-can deduce much more significant information regarding nature of the text. For starters, Greco-Roman biographies were established so that the "deeds and characters of [...] great men may be kept in memory through both spoken and published accounts" (Capes 6). The idea of preserving the character of persons, such as Jesus, provides us with a historical reasoning for the writings of the four canonical gospels. However, knowing that the Greco-Roman biographies were produced in the Hellenistic age, we can expand on this notion, and determine why the characters and deeds of these great men were preserved.

Scholars also theorize that classifying the works of the New Testament as Greco-Roman biography also leads to the interpretation that Jesus was supposed to be imitated. Imitation was an essential component of Jewish literature during the Hellenistic era. Therefore, many of the works during this time, including the Gospels of the New Testament, "utilized the language of imitation to spur readers and hears on to virtuous, pious lives in much the same way as non­ Jewish writers" (9). As many scholars of the New Testament would argue, especially throughout the writings of the Gospel of Mark, the vocabulary and language that is utilized in such a way that the work mimics the 'language of imitation' found in Greco-Roman literature. In fact, the Gospel of Mark depicts Jesus as the "only adequate model of discipleship and provides a script that believers can imitate" (16). Therefore, the use of the Greco-Roman form of literature in the Gospel of Mark further demonstrates an understanding of Jesus as not only a person of good character, but a model that people should follow.

The Gospel of Mark

Background

Of the four canonical gospels of the New Testament, many consider the Gospel of Mark to be the most beautifully written. The Gospel is believed to have been written in Rome after the destruction of the Second Temple of Judaism in 70 CE (Powell 144). In terms of chronology, scholars utilizing the two-source/four-source theory maintain that the Gospel of Mark was written before the other three canonical Gospels of the New Testament. Unfortunately, the author of the religious text is unknown. Speculation surrounding the identity of the author led religious leaders to conclude the author to be the interpreter of Peter, or a man named "John Mark," who is mentioned in the book of Acts (Powell 144-145). While the Gospel of Mark might have no known author, the religious work presents a rather unique portrait of Jesus of Nazareth.

111.b. A Unique Picture of Jesus

Although the author of the Gospel of Mark presents the reader with a portrait of Jesus that is similar to the other gospels, he also illustrates a distinct picture of Jesus that is different from the other three canonical gospels. Even from the beginning of the Gospel, the author of Mark establishes that Jesus is the "Son of God" (Mark 1.1). The notion of being the son of a divine entity is completely unique to the Gospel of Mark. For instance, the Gospel of John presents Jesus as God in the flesh (John 1.1-5). In this sense, Jesus is not just a descendant of God, but he is God. Also, the Gospels of Matthew and Luke do not necessarily consider him as a direct descendant of God. The notion of Jesus being the "Son of God," is very apparent during Mark's Gospel as well. Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus possesses the abilities to: communicate with God (9.4-9); exorcise demons from possessed individuals (e.g., 1.21-28; 5.1-20; 9.38-41); and even resurrect a child from the dead (5.35-43). A person who possesses such abilities is certainly indicates that the individual is a divine entity; however, there exists a human side to Jesus that is illustrated within Gospel of Mark.

Though the other Gospels attempt to portray Jesus as a human, the Gospel of Mark is believed to be the first to do so. The idea that a divine being could even possess human traits would be considered a radical approach for most religions outside of Christianity. Many find this to be one of the unique features of the Gospel of Mark. The author illustrated that, although Jesus is divine, he is human nonetheless. The author also makes certain that the reader understands that Jesus emphasizes that he, himself, is a separate entity from that of God (Mark 10.18).

Furthermore, the author also reveals that Jesus displays a range human emotions: He exhibits anger when he heals the man with a withered hand (3.5); he portrays his love for the rich man who asked Jesus what he could do to enter heaven (10.21); and he also displays a sense of grief when he prays in Gethsemane (10.34). At the same time, the Gospel of Mark truly demonstrates that sometimes Jesus does have internal dilemmas about his fate even though he knows that his fate is God's will. Jesus demonstrates these internal struggles when he prays in Gethsemane (14.34-36). From the Gospel of Mark, the reader, then, is left with the picture that Jesus is a sort of demigod-as he is a direct descendant of the Father, and, yet, he appears to be human.

However, the reader might overlook one of the most important aspects that make the Jesus of the Gospel of Mark unique. While Jesus many might say that Jesus's purpose was to heal the sick and spread the word of God, according to the Gospel of Mark, Jesus actually served a greater purpose. That purpose, however, can only be attributed to Jesus's crucifixion.

The crucifixion of Jesus was one of the central focuses of the conclusion of the Gospel of Mark. Perhaps what makes Jesus's execution in the Gospel of Mark so unique from the all of the other gospels, is the implication that Jesus's death served as a ransom for the freedom of humanity. The Gospel of Mark "implies that [Jesus's] death somehow purchases human freedom" from Satan himself (Powell 152). This is a rather unique fate for Jesus that the reader does not obtain from any of the other gospels. The author's use of imagery through the curtain being split into two upon the death of Jesus, establishes the idea of humanities freedom from Satan (Mark 15.36-38). Through this newly established freedom, humanity is then ushered into a convenient with God as a result of the Jesus’s death.

IV. Conclusion

A discussion was presented throughout this work that was centered around the genre of the New Testament Gospels-the significance of genre, the methods used to determine the genre, and what inferences can be made given the genre-as well as the uniqueness of the Gospel of Mark. The idea behind this work is not to portray any side of any discussion as favorable over the other, but to demonstrate that defining the genre of any one of the New Testament Gospels requires careful consideration. As the debate for the genre of the New Testament continues, one thing is certain: Whatever the outcome, it will certainly effect our perceptions of the New Testament.