53 Markan Christology and the Omission Of υἱοῦ θεοῦ in Mark 1:1 is correct but insufficient. Kingsbury explains, “It is correct because it declares Jesus to be the Anointed One who preaches, teaches, heals, and exorcizes demons on the authority of God (1:14-8:26). It is insufficient be- cause it envisages neither the passion of Jesus nor the secret of his divine sonship”31. Just as the title “Messiah” in 8:29 must be accompanied by the description of Jesus as “suffering Son of Man” in 8:31, so the designation of Jesus as “Christ” in 1:1 demands a further designation of Jesus as “Son of God”. Therefore, we cannot accept the reading of the original hand of Codex Sinaiticus. Interestingly, this same codex contains a longer text for Peter’s confession, “You are the Christ, the Son of God”. Therefore, on two occasions, this codex misrepresents the text and in doing so fails to discern the subtle Christology of Mark. In the other usages of the term “Messiah” by Mark, this title is likewise insufficient to capture the nuances of Mark’s theology of the person of Jesus. The only reason that Jesus responds positively with the declaration “I am” to the question from the high priest, “Are you the Messiah?” is the additional title that is attached, “Son of the Blessed One” (14:61-62)32. The question contains for Mark both the concept of a royal triumphant Messiah and a Son of God who will in 15:39 be associated with the cross. These are exactly the two titles with which Mark prefaces his gospel. The term “Messiah” is deficient when it stands alone. For instance, in Mk. 12:35 the Christ as the royal Son of David is insufficient since the Messiah is also the Lord of David (12:37). The title “this Messiah, this king of Israel” is employed as an expression of mockery in 15:2 since for the Jews the promised one who would powerfully rescue Israel from her enemies would not hang helplessly on a cross. Thus this title is in- sufficient since it denies the necessity of a crucified Messiah. Finally, the false messiahs described in 13:21-22 who will perform mighty signs and wonders fail to perform the function of a suffering servant and are therefore inadequate representations. It should be admitted that Mark chooses the title “Messiah” as a self-designation for Jesus in 9:41, but this title is included in the teaching on discipleship (9:35-50) immediately following the second passion prediction (9:31) and misunderstanding (9:33-34). In the same manner, the title “Christ” in Mk. 1:1 would not be Jack Dean Kingsbury, The Christology of Mark’s Gospel (Philadelphia: Fortress 31 1983) 101. The more primitive oral tradition is likely preserved by Matthew and Luke (“You have 32 said so” (σὺ εἶπας) in Mt. 26:64 and “You say that I am” (ὑμεῖς λέγετε ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι) in Lk. 22:70) so that Mark alters Jesus’ response to conform to his Christology. Further evidence for this thesis comes from the parallel nature of the Jewish and Roman trials where in response to Pilate’s question, “Are you the king of the Jews?” Jesus answers with the similar σὺ λέγεις (Mk. 15:2; Mt. 27:11; Lk. 23:3).