In the early 1980’s I concluded that the pre-Marcan empty tomb story was historical, now I think it has a Roman origin and it is not historical. The pre-Marcan empty tomb story is seen as part of the pre-Marcan Passion narrative and I am going to assume this for this discussion.
I think that the final version of the pre-Marcan Passion Narrative was composed outside of Palestine by Gentile Christians who have very little historical information to work with. I think it is likely that the earliest tradition was along the lines of Acts 2:22c-23, 32-33a
I would like to only consider Mk 14:1 to 16:8 and exclude 14:3-9 to try to discover what is most likely part of the story which came to Mark by trying to identify Marcan redaction, but not that which is unlikely to be historical.“Men! Israelites, hear these words: Jesus the Nazareth, a man shown to you by God with mighty works and miracles and signs which God did through him in your midst, as you yourselves are aware
this person (Jesus) delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, by the hands of Gentiles crucified (and) lifted-up
…
This Jesus God raised up, and of that we all are witnesses.
Being therefore exalted to the right hand of God, …
When considering Mk 16:1-8 Michael Turton writes with regard to verse 2, “although some have argued that there is a contradiction between "very early" and "the sun had risen" that is just typical Markan doubling.”
Also regarding verse 5 Turton has, ‘"amazed" is another instance of the unique verb for amazement found only in Mark, and may be a sign of a redactor's hand. (Koester 1990, p284).’
The duplication in 16:2 can be regarded as Marcan redaction and not part of the pre-Marcan tradition. The emphasis on the size of the stone and who will roll away the stone seems like an embellishment. It has been said that it is unlikely that a round stone would have been used at time and so rolled away could be the editorial work of Mark so it agreed with practices in his day. The idea that they told no one is a Marcan motif.
I think it is widely accepted that “that is, the day before the Sabbath” in Mk 15:42 is Marcan redaction. This is supported by Simon the Cyrenian “coming from the field” (15:21), which implies he was working. If the evening before had been Passover he would not have been working. The lambs are killed on Nisan 14 so they can be cooked once evening has fallen making it Nisan 15, a day when no work can be done and the first day of feast of the Unleavened Bread.[1] And when the sabbath was past, Mary Mag'dalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salo'me, bought spices, so that they might go and anoint him.
[2] And very early on the first day of the week they went to the tomb when the sun had risen.
[3] And they were saying to one another, "Who will roll away the stone for us from the door of the tomb?"
[4] And looking up, they saw that the stone was [moved] rolled back; -- it was very large.
[5] And entering the tomb, they saw a young man sitting on the right side, dressed in a white robe; and they were amazed.
[6] And he said to them, "Do not be amazed; you seek Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified. He has risen, he is not here; see the place where they laid him.
[7] But go, tell his disciples and Peter that he is going before you to Galilee; there you will see him, as he told you."
[8] And they went out and fled from the tomb; for trembling and astonishment had come upon them; and they said nothing to any one, for they were afraid.
I think this leads to the questioning of 14:12. It is possible that 14:12 in the pre-Marcan version was “it is the day before the feast of the Unleavened Bread, when they sacrificed the Passover lamb”, which Mark has amended to “And on the first day of Unleavened Bread, when they sacrificed the Passover lamb”.
Adela Yarbro Collins (http://austingrad.edu/images/SBL/Collins.pdf) suggests that Mark has added Mk 15:34 with its Psalm 22 parallel (v 1), while seeing the other parallels (15:24 to Ps 22:18 and 15:29-32 to Ps 22:7-8 as part of the pre-Markan source). I do not think Colllins presents a strong case. Using the same case she suggests that Mk 15:36 is also Marcan as a parallel to Ps 69:21.
Collins might be on firmer ground when she states that Mark has added “the saying of the centurion to the climatic rending of the veil” (Mk 15:39) and the “saying of the centurion is the climax of Mark’s theme of Jesus as the Son of God”. However she might be making a better case for the rending of the veil (Mk 15:38) to be Marcan when she writes, “The Splitting of the veil also suggests the ascent of Jesus to heaven and the access to God that the death of Jesus makes possible. In its … context as part of Mark as a whole, the rending of the veil creates a contrast with the splitting of the heavens at the baptism of Jesus. … The death of Jesus on the cross is accompanied by a … theophany, which suggests that the will of God is fulfilled in the apparently shameful death of Jesus …”
It has been suggested (according to Turton by Rhoads) that there is a progression in the gospel of Mark. “The first line of the Gospel refers to Jesus as ‘the anointed one, the Son of God.’ At the end of the first half of the story [Peter] acknowledges Jesus as ‘the anointed one.’ At the end of the second half of the story, the centurion identifies Jesus as ‘son of God’”.
Michael Turton presents two reasons why Mk 15:39 might not be Marcan redaction. He states that “Johnson (1987, 2000) … points out … (that) text-critical evidence strongly suggests that the earlier occurrence (Mk 1:1) is an insertion.” And that there is no article in 15:39 which should be translated as “Truly this man was God's son” (Johnson).
Mark as it stands has Jesus “breathed his last” or “expires” (εξεπνευσεν) twice (Mk 15:37 and 15:39). This seems to be strong evidence one is Marcan redaction. If Mark has added the rending of the veil then the Mk 15:37 version is also Marcan redaction.
It is likely that the instances of καὶ εὐθὺς (and immediately) are Marcan redaction – 14:43 and 72 as well as “And as soon as” Mk 15:1.
However a problem for the idea that Mark is using a pre-Marcan text is Mark’s use of και (and). According to Neil Godfrey (http://vridar.org/2010/12/15/meaning-in ... reek-pt-2/) Mark uses και to begin 376 of his 583 sentences. He starts a sentence 73 times in champers 14 and 15 with και including the 3 above. I find it hard to see someone adding all these “ands”, however Neil I think suggests that the “ands” and other Marcan redaction are features that “suggests a Gospel to be read in a rush”.
Please post your suggestions for Marcan redaction based on normal Marcan usage or with reference to motifs in the rest of his gospel (please note at the moment I am not interested in historicity or if a feature was created by the author or early Christian community).