The Big Stone

Mark 16:3 And they were saying to one another, "Who will roll away the stone for us from the entrance of the tomb?" 4 And looking up, they saw that the stone had been rolled back--it was very large.


3 καὶ ἔλεγον πρὸς ἑαυτάς· τίς ἀποκυλίσει ἡμῖν τὸν λίθον ἐκ τῆς θύρας τοῦ μνημείου; 4  καὶ ἀναβλέψασαι θεωροῦσιν ὅτι ἀποκεκύλισται ὁ λίθος· ἦν γὰρ μέγας σφόδρα.

I was thinking about writing on the longer ending of Mark, but I see that I already did that in my first pass through this book.  These two verses jumped out at me because they speak to something that is sometimes overlooked when we read the gospel accounts.  Gospel is a specific genre of literature because it is basically narrative, but is different than the book of 1 Samuel, for example.  The three synoptics combine to create what is sometimes called the "synoptic problem," in that details don't seem to quite match up.  There are ways to deal with that and still maintain inerrancy, but I don't want to get into that here.

My point is that the gospels are still heavy on the narrative.  Little details like this emphasize the reality of the accounts.  We don't really need to read this dialog between the women.  They could have just gone to the tomb and seen that the Lord had been raised.  Instead, Mark gives us this little insight into the reality of the situation.  These two women worried about how they were going to roll away the stone.  This was certainly a legitimate concern for them.

This is similar to how we read in John that John outran Peter.  This is not a necessary detail, but it shows us that the writer was chronicling real events.  If it was just an objective historical account of what happened we likely would not have these things.  But the little things give us a sense that we are reading eyewitness accounts of what happened or, as in the case of Luke, reading the compilation of eyewitness accounts.

In short, you can trust the gospels.  Just be careful about those passages that appear in [[ ]] in your Bibles.

Merry Christmas

Mark 15:24 And they crucified him and divided his garments among them, casting lots for them, to decide what each should take.


24 Καὶ σταυροῦσιν αὐτὸν καὶ διαμερίζονται τὰ ἱμάτια αὐτοῦ, βάλλοντες κλῆρον ἐπ᾽ αὐτὰ τίς τί ἄρῃ.

Here we are on the day after Christmas and I find myself in Mark 15.  This seems a bit macabre given all the sugar we have been consuming to remind us of the sweetness of our Savior.  We exchanged gifts to remind us that Jesus gave us the best gift we could possibly ever receive.  We sing songs like "O Holy Night" and "Silent Night" as we contemplate that first Christmas.

I have always loved Christmas, but now that I am a parent of two small children I love the giving more than the receiving.  I never really understood that until the past few years.  I would still have trouble sleeping on Christmas Eve because of the anticipation.  Now I look forward to seeing how my children react to their gifts.  They rarely disappoint.

But here we see that, in contrast to the sweetness of Christmas, σταυροῦσιν αὐτὸν.  There's nothing fancy about this verb.  It is simply a present active 3rd person indicative.  It means what it looks like it means.  They crucified Him.

My point is that there was a shadow of a cross hanging over the manger where He was laid.  He was born to die as a ransom for mankind.  So while we think about the wonder of Christmas let us be even more amazed as we consider that His death loomed over His whole life.  I don't think that His parents quite understood that, based on how they reacted to His ministry.  As a baby He didn't understand it either.  But as we look back at the gospel accounts we can see how He was born to die as a payment for sin.  What a Savior!

Stay Awake

Mark 13:37 And what I say to you I say to all: Stay awake."



37 ὃ δὲ ὑμῖν λέγω πᾶσιν λέγω, γρηγορεῖτε.

This is the end of the parable about the doorkeeper who must stay awake because he does not know when his master will return.  Jesus is giving a very serious command to His disciples and, I believe, to us.  We are to γρηγορεῖτε.  This is a present active imperative.  Another way of thinking of it is that we are to "remain watchful."

What does this mean?  Well, at a certain level all the parables are an indictment against the Jews.  They did not remain watchful because if they had they would have connected the dots between the Old Testament prophecies and the coming of the Messiah in Jesus.

I think that it also applies to us.  How will you be found when Jesus returns?  Are you active and vigilant in your Christian life?  Or are you napping?  To make a sports comparison, the best players are the ones who never take an at-bat off.  They never take a down off.  They never stop playing defense every time the ball does down the court.  If they are in the game they are playing their hardest.

What about you?  Are you remaining watchful?  Or have you decided to take a nap with grace as your spiritual snuggie?  As with all of the parables, this convicts me because I realize just how much more vigilant I must be.

The Prophet Has Come

Mark 9:13 But I tell you that Elijah has come, and they did to him whatever they pleased, as it is written of him."


13 ἀλλὰ λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι καὶ Ἠλίας ἐλήλυθεν, καὶ ἐποίησαν αὐτῷ ὅσα ἤθελον, καθὼς γέγραπται ἐπ᾽ αὐτόν.

This is something Jesus tells Peter and James after they witnessed His transfiguration.  They didn't know what to make of Elijah and Moses on the mountain with Jesus and they start asking Him questions.  They were trying to understand why it was written that Elijah must come first.  This is how Jesus responded to them.  He tells them that Elijah ἐλήλυθεν, which is in the perfect active indicative.  The most generic understanding of the aspect of the perfect is that it refers to a completed action with present effect.

Why do I quote this verse on a day when I am emerging from a blogging slumber?  I guess I'm in an academic mood, but it makes me think of hermeneutics, which is one of my favorite subjects.  It seems to me that Jesus could be referring to the fact that Elijah was with them at the transfiguration.  Or as is often supposed, it means that Jesus is referring to John the Baptizer.  For what it's worth, the ESV cross-reference points to Mark 6 which recounts why John was beheaded by Herod.

If Jesus does indeed refer to John the Baptizer here then this is something of a hermeneutical oddity for us.  It tells us that there is some sort of non-literal language being used here.  If we take this passage literally we are confused or perhaps we look for Elijah to come before the Messiah as the Jews do.  After all, if we take this passage literally then they are right.  But if we read this with an understanding to the symbolic language we see that not all is as it seems.  In fact, Jesus is explaining this with symbolic rather than literal language.

My point is that we need to be careful about being too literal.  The key is to figure out what should be taken literally and what should be taken symbolically.  It sure helps when the New Testament interprets it clearly for us, doesn't it?

Faith to be Healed

Mark 5:29 And immediately the flow of blood dried up, and she felt in her body that she was healed of her disease.


29 καὶ εὐθὺς ἐξηράνθη ἡ πηγὴ τοῦ αἵματος αὐτῆς καὶ ἔγνω τῷ σώματι ὅτι ἴαται ἀπὸ τῆς μάστιγος.

This is one of the stories that we cannot really grasp in our 21st century Gentile context.  Here was a woman who had some kind of discharge of blood.  Nobody is exactly sure what it was, but many think that it was menstrual.  This would cause both spiritual and physical problems for this woman.  Obviously it is not good if you bleed continually for years and years.  The spiritual problem is that the book of Leviticus makes it very clear that this woman was unclean.  The time of menstruation made a woman ceremonially unclean.  Therefore, she was constantly unclean.

She pressed through the crowd so that she could just touch Jesus' robe.  She did and as we see here the flow dried up εὐθὺς.  She instantly knew that she was better.  I cannot even begin to relate to how elated she must have felt at that time.

This story amazes me on a couple of levels.  First, it makes me wonder a little bit about relics.  Why was it that she had to touch Jesus' robe?  Was there any special power to it?  I don't think so.  I think that it demonstrates a practical outworking of her faith.  She knew that she needed Jesus and this was how she had to express it.  In other words, if we could somehow find that same robe I don't think we could take it to Duke and clear out the pediatric oncology ward.

The other amazing thing is that she could touch Jesus and He would not become unclean.  Anyone else would have become unclean, but not God.  The same goes for when He touches a leper to make him well.  The only time the stain of sin touched Jesus was on the cross.  We'll of course get to that in a week or two, but for now consider this.  Read through Leviticus if you have a few minutes and look at how exacting the laws for purification were.  Then consider that Jesus did not have to go through all those machinations.

We truly worship an amazing Savior.

Unbelievable Mercy

Mark 5:13 So he gave them permission. And the unclean spirits came out, and entered the pigs, and the herd, numbering about two thousand, rushed down the steep bank into the sea and were drowned in the sea.


13 καὶ ἐπέτρεψεν αὐτοῖς. καὶ ἐξελθόντα τὰ πνεύματα τὰ ἀκάθαρτα εἰσῆλθον εἰς τοὺς χοίρους, καὶ ὥρμησεν ἡ ἀγέλη κατὰ τοῦ κρημνοῦ εἰς τὴν θάλασσαν, ὡς δισχίλιοι, καὶ ἐπνίγοντο ἐν τῇ θαλάσσῃ.

This may be my favorite story in all of Mark.  Jesus is dealing with a man possessed with many demons.  He has been relegated to living in a tomb and is not in his right mind.  The demons recognized Jesus immediately upon His arrival and they begged Him not to torment them.  What was the result? ἐπέτρεψεν αὐτοῖς.  There is nothing fancy about the Greek here.  Basically, Jesus permitted the demons to have their request.

I think about my attitude toward those who have harmed me.  If someone were to hurt anyone in my family I would have a hard time showing mercy.  I would want to see that person suffer.  It would be difficult for me to be content with them merely receiving justice.  I would also want revenge.

Jesus certainly had it in His power to make these demons suffer.  In fact, that's what they were worried that He would do.  Instead, He cast the unclean spirits into unclean animals.  We don't really know what happened to the unclean spirits other than that they were not bothering their original host anymore.  I have not given much thought to the doctrine of demonology so I don't really understand everything that happened here.

What I do know is that Jesus even showed mercy to demons.  This was sheer grace because they did not deserve any mercy.  How much more mercy does He show us when He saves us from our sins?  And as we live our lives and seek to be Christlike, how much mercy do we show others?  How much grace do we extend?

My inclination is to be vindictive.  Christ's is to show mercy.  Let's seek the better path, amen?

We Are Family

Mark 3:34 And looking about at those who sat around him, he said, "Here are my mother and my brothers! 35 For whoever does the will of God, he is my brother and sister and mother."


34 καὶ περιβλεψάμενος τοὺς περὶ αὐτὸν κύκλῳ καθημένους λέγει· ἴδε ἡ μήτηρ μου καὶ οἱ ἀδελφοί μου. 35  ὃς [γὰρ] ἂν ποιήσῃ τὸ θέλημα τοῦ θεοῦ, οὗτος ἀδελφός μου καὶ ἀδελφὴ καὶ μήτηρ ἐστίν.

This is Jesus' response to the statement that His mother and brothers were outside and looking for Him.  One would think that a good son would simply go out and see His mother and His family, even if they were trying to have Him committed.  Instead He does something surprising.  He asks a rhetorical question in verse 33 wondering who are His mother and brothers.  Then He answers it here.

This is one of those Greek constructs that does not translate perfectly.  Jesus tells them ὃς [γὰρ] ἂν ποιήσῃ τὸ θέλημα τοῦ θεοῦ.  It would read terribly, but very woodenly this would be, "If there is a person who does the will of God."  The verb ποιήσῃ is in the aorist subjunctive.  The aorist tense gives it an undefined aspect.  Basically, Jesus is saying something to the effect of, "Find me someone who does the will of God and I will call that person family."

This has two applications I can think of right away.  The first is doctrinal.  This passage and its parallels in the synoptics tell us that Jesus' mother and family held no special sway over Him, despite what Roman Catholics teach.  He takes care of His mother at the end of John's gospel and He does obey her in John 2, but otherwise she seems to have no special place in His ministry.  I don't think that having her ear gains us any special favor with Jesus.

The other is that doing God's will is something that we really should be doing.  We do not do God's will to earn favor with the Lord.  Rather, we do God's will as a result of our salvation.  This helps me in the area of assurance.  My salvation is not contingent on doing God's will, but if I am doing God's will I have a deeper sense of assurance.

How do we know God's will?  We read His Word and apply it.  This really is not very complicated.  It's easier to write about at 6:30 in the morning than it will be to live at 2:30 this afternoon, but this is the heart of the matter.  How am I living?  Do I act like part of Jesus' family or don't I?

Devotional Time

Mark 1:35 And rising very early in the morning, while it was still dark, he departed and went out to a desolate place, and there he prayed.


35 Καὶ πρωῒ ἔννυχα λίαν ἀναστὰς ἐξῆλθεν καὶ ἀπῆλθεν εἰς ἔρημον τόπον κἀκεῖ προσηύχετο.

This is a verse that I have had in my email signature because I think that it underscores something that is vital to Christian living.  Today is the first time that I really looked deeply at the Greek.  I think that is because last time I read this I went through it pretty quickly since it is such a familiar verse.

The phrase πρωῒ ἔννυχα λίαν ἀναστὰς does not translate literally into English very well.  The word πρωῒ means "morning," but the word ἔννυχα means "night."  However, it also can be used as a modifier.  The word λίαν means "greatly," so this adds force to a modifier.  The word ἀναστὰς  is an aorist active participle in the nominative case.  The ESV captures the overall sense of this very well.  Basically, what we get is Jesus getting up at what they call "oh-dark-thirty" in the military.  He was awake to see the sky turn from black to deep purple to deep blue to blue.  He heard the first birds chirping.  You get the idea.

This verse starts with Καὶ, so we need to ask what this is tied to.  The previous verse describes His healing and exorcism ministry.  He was extremely busy healing people and casting out demons.  This was His response.  He got up very early in the morning to pray.  He didn't feel like He owed Himself a good lie-in.  He did take some time to Himself, but not to play video games, watch TV, surf porn, or drink Himself into oblivion.  Rather, He sacrificed sleep to spend time with the Father before the pressures of the day started up.

How do we deal with the pressures of life?  Obviously I was making an illustrative point in contrasting Jesus' way with the way that I and so many others have dealt with stress.  He spent time with the Father.  He found that to be refreshing.

This of course should make us question our own practices.  Do we even consider time with the Father to be refreshing?  Do we even think it will be worthwhile to sacrifice some sleep to spend time with Him through prayer and the Word?  Or do we think it is more important to leap out of bed and start the day?  I know that I feel off-kilter if I don't have a little time to myself first-thing every morning.  How about you?

The Time is Fulfilled

Mark 1:14 Now after John was arrested, Jesus came into Galilee, proclaiming the gospel of God, 15 and saying, "The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel."


14 Μετὰ δὲ τὸ παραδοθῆναι τὸν Ἰωάννην ἦλθεν ὁ Ἰησοῦς εἰς τὴν Γαλιλαίαν κηρύσσων τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τοῦ θεοῦ 15  καὶ λέγων ὅτι πεπλήρωται ὁ καιρὸς καὶ ἤγγικεν ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ θεοῦ· μετανοεῖτε καὶ πιστεύετε ἐν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ.

One of the great things about the book of Mark is that it is all about action.  It leaps from one story to the next and there is rarely much time for background material.  Here we see a lot of time condensed into two verses.  We learned about the John the Baptizer's ministry and then we see the transition to Jesus.

Jesus says something pretty striking to His listeners.  He tells them that πεπλήρωται ὁ καιρὸς.  The verb πεπλήρωται is a perfect passive, which means that it would most literally be translated something like, "the time has been fulfilled."  What time is that?  Jesus continues with καὶ ἤγγικεν ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ θεοῦ, which is a perfect active.  Here we see that the kingdom is near.  What does this mean?

It means that everything that the prophets wrote about were coming true in Him.  They predicted His coming and here He was.  They didn't have to keep looking through the prophets and they didn't have to keep watching and waiting.  He arrived to fulfill the prophets.  He emphasized this by explaining that the kingdom of God is near and therefore, they had to repent and believe right then.

What does this mean to us?  I think that it is a key to understanding Old Testament prophecy.  It points forward to Christ.  He is the ultimate fulfillment of prophecy.  This puts our focus on the cross and not anywhere else.  Frankly, I think that is where it should be.

Signs

Mark 16:17-18
(17)  And these signs will accompany those who believe: in my name they will cast out demons; they will speak in new tongues;
(18)  they will pick up serpents with their hands; and if they drink any deadly poison, it will not hurt them; they will lay their hands on the sick, and they will recover."

(17)  σημεῖα δὲ τοῖς πιστεύσασιν ταῦτα παρακολουθήσει· ἐν τῷ ὀνόματί μου δαιμόνια ἐκβαλοῦσιν, γλώσσαις λαλήσουσιν καιναῖς, 

(18)  καὶ ἐν ταῖς χερσὶν ὄφεις ἀροῦσιν, κἂν θανάσιμόν τι πίωσιν οὐ μὴ αὐτοὺς βλάψῃ, ἐπὶ ἀρρώστους χεῖρας ἐπιθήσουσιν καὶ καλῶς ἕξουσιν.

Folks like Bart Ehrman like to use text-critical problems to undermine the authority of the text.  The fact is that the text we have as our New Testament is extremely reliable.  There are some minor discrepancies in some of the manuscripts here and there, but there are only two major chunks that are in dispute.  We'll get to the other one in John, but this is probably the biggest one.

It's hard to imagine folks trying to apply verse 18, but they do.  I'm not sure if my faith is strong enough to try this.  It certainly is not strong enough to try this based on this text.  There is a reason why this passage appears in [[ ]] in most Bibles.  The best manuscript evidence does not contain this passage.  Personally, were I preaching through Mark I don't think I would preach on this passage.  I would, however, explain to my congregation why I'm not.

This is one of the problems with the KJV-only folks.  They don't have any way of dealing with the text-critical problems of this passage.  Therefore, you can end up doing some pretty wild stuff.  I have heard of snake-handling churches before.  Mine is not one of them nor will it be.  I don't plan to go out of my way to drink "deadly poison" either.  

Of course, if I were more charismatic I'd probably latch on to this passage like the snake did on Paul's arm.  But as for me, I think the best thing is to shake it off into the fire.  We should know it's out there and understand it, but I don't think it counts as Bible.

Condemning

Mark 15:2
(2)  And Pilate asked him, "Are you the King of the Jews?" And he answered him, "You have said so."

(2)  καὶ ἐπηρώτησεν αὐτὸν ὁ Πιλᾶτος, Σὺ εἶ ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν Ἰουδαίων; ὁ δὲ ἀποκριθεὶς αὐτῷ λέγει, Σὺ λέγεις.

I think I tend to marvel almost as much as Pilate when I read how Jesus defended Himself before these mock trials.  This was what He came for, so it didn't make sense to fight.  I have enough of a sense of self-preservation that I tend to read the hero's plight in any story with eyes for how he can get out of it.  In this case it would seem that Jesus could have got Himself out of this bind.

The phrase translated "You have said so" is simply Σὺ λέγεις..  With the pronoun it would quite woodenly be "you yourself say."  I'm not sure why it gets translated in the perfect, but that works too.  The point is that Jesus didn't fight.  He was led like a lamb to the slaughter.

What does this do to you?  Do you wonder how this guy could be such a wimp and roll over and die?  That would be a very natural response.  Or do you marvel that this guy could have saved Himself several times and yet chose this path.  It was not an easy one, but it's what He came to do.  I hope that this fills you with deeper love and appreciation for the Savior.

I also hope that this spurs you on to greater action.  What have you come to do?  You haven't come to die for the sins of the world, but what have you come to do?  Are you doing it?  Are you as focused as the Lord was in His mission?  If not, what is distracting you and what can you do to eliminate those distractions?

Blasphemy!

Mark 14:61-64
(61) But he remained silent and made no answer. Again the high priest asked him, "Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?"
(62) And Jesus said, "I am, and you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven."
(63) And the high priest tore his garments and said, "What further witnesses do we need?
(64) You have heard his blasphemy. What is your decision?" And they all condemned him as deserving death.

(61) ὁ δὲ ἐσιώπα καὶ οὐκ ἀπεκρίνατο οὐδέν. πάλιν ὁ ἀρχιερεὺς ἐπηρώτα αὐτὸν καὶ λέγει αὐτῷ, Σὺ εἶ ὁ Χριστὸς ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ εὐλογητοῦ;
(62) ὁ δὲ Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν, Ἐγώ εἰμι, καὶ ὄψεσθε τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐκ δεξιῶν καθήμενον τῆς δυνάμεως καὶ ἐρχόμενον μετὰ τῶν νεφελῶν τοῦ οὐρανοῦ.
(63) ὁ δὲ ἀρχιερεὺς διαρρήξας τοὺς χιτῶνας αὐτοῦ λέγει, Τί ἔτι χρείαν ἔχομεν μαρτύρων;
(64) ἠκούσατε τῆς βλασφημίας· τί ὑμῖν φαίνεται; οἱ δὲ πάντες κατέκριναν αὐτὸν ἔνοχον εἶναι θανάτου.

This is the extent of Mark's recording of Jesus' testimony at the false trial put on by the Jews.  It took two little words for them to condemn Him: Ἐγώ εἰμ.  These are the same words that would get him into hot water in John 8, but we'll get there in a couple of months.  The point is that Jesus' testimony was blasphemous in their ears.

Why?  He was invoking the divine name.  He took them back to Exodus 3:14.  This was inconceivable to them and it gave them ample reason to have Him killed.  To equate oneself with God was certainly blasphemous.  Of course, there is an exception if you actually are God.

You may have noticed that I do not necessarily provide a rich exegetical insight daily.  I didn't think that I would for a couple of reasons.  One is that I am hardly an expert at Greek, though I am getting better.  The other is that the English translations do a very good job and there is not a lot to add in most cases.  However, even this relatively short study over seven weeks or so has shown me time and time again that Jesus indeed claimed to be God.  This is not something that we need to infer.  It is right there in the simple statement Ἐγώ εἰμ.

Keep in mind that there are other words and expressions He could have used.  I have to think that there was purpose to every word recorded in Scripture.  I don't think that the repetition of this phrase was a coincidence.

Living with Deception

Mark 14:18-19
(18)  And as they were reclining at table and eating, Jesus said, "Truly, I say to you, one of you will betray me, one who is eating with me."
(19)  They began to be sorrowful and to say to him one after another, "Is it I?"

(18)  καὶ ἀνακειμένων αὐτῶν καὶ ἐσθιόντων ὁ Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν, Ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι εἷς ἐξ ὑμῶν παραδώσει με, ὁ ἐσθίων μετ' ἐμοῦ. 

(19)  ἤρξαντο λυπεῖσθαι καὶ λέγειν αὐτῷ εἷς κατὰ εἷς, Μήτι ἐγώ;

This is one of those passages where I really try to put myself in the setting.  These twelve men had seen a lot and been through a lot with Jesus.  They had learned to expect the unexpected with Him as His teachings continually turned their worldviews around.  Remember, this is the same guy who touched lepers and spoke to a Samaritan woman.  

Their indignation at his statement comes through much more strongly in the Greek.  When they all say, Μήτι ἐγώ the word μητι indicates that they expect a negative response.  No one thinks that Jesus is referring to him.

Except for Judas Iscariot.  He knew the truth.  We know from a previous verse that he had already plotted with the Jews to betray Jesus.  I can only imagine how his heart must have been racing at Jesus' statement.  He had to know that he was found out.  Then it was confirmed later with Jesus' symbolic dipping of the bread in the bowl.

There are a lot of things we can apply from this passage.  However, the one dear to my heart is unconfessed sin. Are you a professing believer with unconfessed sin in your life?  I'm specifically thinking of sexual sin like porn or homosexuality.  Is this something that you are trying to hide?  When it's talked about at church do you take the stance of Μήτι ἐγώ like Judas did here?  Does it eat away at your heart every time you have to put on the good church face to cover up this secret life of sin?  Do you look at your kids and realize that these naked people after whom you lust are other people's little princesses?  

I don't care if you talk to me, your pastor, or a trusted friend.  Talk to someone.  Have the humility to get help about this.  We have too many people saying Μήτι ἐγώ at church every week.  Please stop being one of them.

Note to the Reader

Mark 13:14
(14)  "But when you see the abomination of desolation standing where he ought not to be (let the reader understand), then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.

(14)  Ὅταν δὲ ἴδητε τὸ βδέλυγμα τῆς ἐρημώσεως ἑστηκότα ὅπου οὐ δεῖ, ὁ ἀναγινώσκων νοείτω, τότε οἱ ἐν τῇ Ἰουδαίᾳ φευγέτωσαν εἰς τὰ ὄρη,

There are a lot of things in Mark 13 that I find to be confusing.  I haven't quite decided where I land with respect to the Olivet Discourse.  What is "this generation?"  What does it mean that the Son does not know the hour that He will return?  These things are a bit confusing.

However, I think that this verse is interesting.  While there are no parentheses in the Greek text, there effectively is one in here.  The phrase ὁ ἀναγινώσκων νοείτω literally translates to "let the one reading understand."  This tells me that we are to understand the Gospels as written works that were meant to be preserved.  This stands in contrast to the way some folks see these works.  They were not just oral tradition that happened to be written some centuries later.  This was meant for our eyes. 

Of course, that still doesn't necessarily clear up what this passage refers to.  I lean toward an idea of partial preterism, but I am not sold on it.  In other words, this discourse was partially fulfilled when Jerusalem was sacked in 70 A.D.  I can't adequately describe all the details, but I do know that taking that interpretation clears some things up when it comes to New Testament prophecy.

God of the Living - Markan Style

Mark 12:26-27
(26)  And as for the dead being raised, have you not read in the book of Moses, in the passage about the bush, how God spoke to him, saying, 'I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'?
(27)  He is not God of the dead, but of the living. You are quite wrong."

(26  περὶ δὲ τῶν νεκρῶν ὅτι ἐγείρονται οὐκ ἀνέγνωτε ἐν τῇ βίβλῳ Μωϋσέως ἐπὶ τοῦ βάτου πῶς εἶπεν αὐτῷ ὁ θεὸς λέγων, Ἐγὼ ὁ θεὸς Ἀβραὰμ καὶ ὁ θεὸς Ἰσαὰκ καὶ ὁ θεὸς Ἰακώβ; 

(27)  οὐκ ἔστιν θεὸς νεκρῶν ἀλλὰ ζώντων· πολὺ πλανᾶσθε.

I have a friend who suggests that it is good to read through the Bible with certain themes in mind.  Thanks to some conversations I've had I am now attuned to some elements of the orthodox Christian faith that I have taken as understood, but have not necessarily thought through.  This post is something of a repeat of an earlier one, but that's OK because that sort of drives the point home.  We'll get here again in Luke too.

This passage ends a conversation Jesus had with the Sadducees.  They didn't believe in eternal life so they came up with what they considered to be an absurd scenario to prove the folly of the idea.  Jesus explains to them that they were thinking too materially in terms of marriage in eternity.  He then defends this idea of eternal life by quoting God's conversation with Moses.  Any good Jew would know this passage as well as he knew his own name.

What I find interesting is the use of the participle in verse 27.  Both are present active participles.  This indicates that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are in some sense alive at the moment that this was spoken.  In other words, there wasn't some future that they had to wait for.  They are alive with God right now.

This gives me great hope, but it also reminds me of the urgency of the gospel.  Where are you going to spend eternity?  Where will your friends and family spend it?

The Power of Prayer

Mark 11:22-25
(22)  And Jesus answered them, "Have faith in God.
(23)  Truly, I say to you, whoever says to this mountain, 'Be taken up and thrown into the sea,' and does not doubt in his heart, but believes that what he says will come to pass, it will be done for him.
(24)  Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours.
(25)  And whenever you stand praying, forgive, if you have anything against anyone, so that your Father also who is in heaven may forgive you your trespasses."

(22)  καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς ὁ Ἰησοῦς λέγει αὐτοῖς, Ἔχετε πίστιν θεοῦ, 

(23)  ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ὃς ἂν εἴπῃ τῷ ὄρει τούτῳ, Ἄρθητι καὶ βλήθητι εἰς τὴν θάλασσαν, καὶ μὴ διακριθῇ ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ αὐτοῦ ἀλλὰ πιστεύῃ ὅτι ὃ λαλεῖ γίνεται, ἔσται αὐτῷ. 

(24)  διὰ τοῦτο λέγω ὑμῖν, πάντα ὅσα προσεύχεσθε καὶ αἰτεῖσθε, πιστεύετε ὅτι ἐλάβετε, καὶ ἔσται ὑμῖν. 

(25)  καὶ ὅταν στήκετε προσευχόμενοι, ἀφίετε εἴ τι ἔχετε κατά τινος, ἵνα καὶ ὁ πατὴρ ὑμῶν ὁ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς ἀφῇ ὑμῖν τὰ παραπτώματα ὑμῶν.

This is Jesus' explanation for the withered fig tree. It is also perhaps one of the more abused passages in Scripture here in America. Is Jesus' advocating a prosperity theology here?  I don't think so, but I'm not entirely sure how to take this.  One thing I am sure of is that prayer does not change God's mind in the way we think of minds being changed.  When I read Ephesians 1:10 I see that God has a plan for the fullness of time.  I don't see how that plan is going to change by my desire to have more stuff or even to see suffering alleviated in the world.

What I do know is that verse 25 has got in the way of many a prayer.  It certainly has interfered with some of mine.  It seems that forgiveness is expected of us as well.  The word ἀφῇ is in the subjunctive.  That is the mood of possibility.  In other words, we must extend grace for this to be possible.

This is a tough post to write and I feel like I should have picked something easier.  However, I do welcome comments.

Dealing with Wealth

Mark 10:25-27
(25)  It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God."
(26)  And they were exceedingly astonished, and said to him, "Then who can be saved?"
(27)  Jesus looked at them and said, "With man it is impossible, but not with God. For all things are possible with God."

(25)  εὐκοπώτερόν ἐστιν κάμηλον διὰ τῆσ τρυμαλιᾶς τῆσ ῥαφίδος διελθεῖν ἢ πλούσιον εἰς τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ θεοῦ εἰσελθεῖν. 

(26)  οἱ δὲ περισσῶς ἐξεπλήσσοντο λέγοντες πρὸς ἑαυτούς, Καὶ τίς δύναται σωθῆναι; 

(27)  ἐμβλέψας αὐτοῖς ὁ Ἰησοῦς λέγει, Παρὰ ἀνθρώποις ἀδύνατον ἀλλ' οὐ παρὰ θεῷ, πάντα γὰρ δυνατὰ παρὰ τῷ θεῷ.

This passage is a fun one to preach to the American church.  This is especially true in light of the excesses that we enjoy in the name of Jesus.  Take a peek at what goes on down in Houston, for example.  So we come up with clever ways around this passage.  One of my favorites is that there was a gate in the wall of Jerusalem called "the eye of the needle."  It was so small that a camel had to be unloaded and then had to kneel down to go through it.  Therefore, Jesus is supposedly telling us that it is not impossible as it seems when we consider putting a real camel through a real needle.

The problem with this is verse 27.  Apparently it was possible for man to shove a camel through that narrow passage.  However, Jesus tells us that a rich man entering heaven is impossible for man to do, but God can do it.  This leads to a couple of points.

The first is that it is impossible for any man to enter the kingdom of God on his own.  Man needs God to save him.  However, I don't think that is the particular emphasis here, though the repeated παρὰ in verse 27 does reinforce how it all works.

I think that this passage must be read with Jesus' other teachings on wealth.  I don't think that Jesus commands all of us to be paupers.  However, He does command us not to be mastered by money.  Most of us in America don't feel like we're mastered by money.  We don't feel like we are because we don't think much about it when we have plenty of it.  It is inconceivable for us to live like the Haitians do.  Yet people do survive that way.

Are we to sell everything like Jesus commanded the Rich Young Ruler?  Maybe, but not necessarily.  I think Jesus knew what stood between this man and truly embracing Christ.  He was not ready to let go of his functional savior that he had in wealth.  Instead, he wanted to have it both ways.  

Are you ready to let go of everything for Jesus?  My daughter is sitting near me playing LEGO Indiana Jones. My son is napping upstairs.  I love them both dearly.  Could I stand to have them taken away?  I don't want to contemplate it, but ultimately God needs to be my source of joy, not them.  The same goes for my wife, my job, my health, etc.  Ultimately God needs to be enough.

Is He enough for you?

More Good

Mark 9:47-48
(47)  And if your eye causes you to sin, tear it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than with two eyes to be thrown into hell,
(48)  'where their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched.'

(47)  καὶ ἐὰν ὁ ὀφθαλμός σου σκανδαλίζῃ σε, ἔκβαλε αὐτόν· καλόν σέ ἐστιν μονόφθαλμον εἰσελθεῖν εἰς τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ θεοῦ ἢ δύο ὀφθαλμοὺς ἔχοντα βληθῆναι εἰς τὴν γέενναν, 

(48)  ὅπου ὁ σκώληξ αὐτῶν οὐ τελευτᾷ καὶ τὸ πῦρ οὐ σβέννυται·

There are a couple of things I'd like to point out in this passage.  The first has to do with the Greek.  These verses come at the end of Jesus' brief discourse about what Setting Captives Free calls "radical amputation."  Jesus is using hyperbole to explain that holiness is worth any price.  I don't think He literally meant that we should dismember ourselves.  After all, blind men can still lust.  His point is that we must be willing to do whatever it takes in our pursuit of holiness.  It is better to enter heaven after living without internet access than it is to have internet access and go to hell.

What is interesting is that the Greek doesn't literally say "it is better."  Instead, it says "it is good."  Greek doesn't use comparative and superlative like English does (better, best).  Instead, it bumps things down a notch.  In this instance, when there are two things set in opposition to each other and there is a modifier like καλόν between them we can take that to mean comparison.  This isn't earth-shattering, but if you're a new student of Greek this can be kind of tricky.

The other point is that this is yet another passage where Jesus speaks of eternal reward contrasted with eternal condemnation.  Those who have been thrown into hell have to deal with eternal worms and unquenchable fire.  That sounds pretty grisly and pretty graphic to me.

The Unforgiveable Sin

Mark 3:28-29
(28)  "Truly, I say to you, all sins will be forgiven the children of man, and whatever blasphemies they utter,
(29)  but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin"--

(28)  Ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι πάντα ἀφεθήσεται τοῖς υἱοῖς τῶν ἀνθρώπων, τὰ ἁμαρτήματα καὶ αἱ βλασφημίαι ὅσα ἐὰν βλασφημήσωσιν· 

(29)  ὃς δ' ἂν βλασφημήσῃ εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον οὐκ ἔχει ἄφεσιν εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα, ἀλλὰ ἔνοχός ἐστιν αἰωνίου ἁμαρτήματος

This passage always creates some controversy. How can there be an unpardonable sin? What does it mean to blaspheme the Holy Spirit? Is this something we as Christians should worry about?

My understanding is that if we are concerned about it then we have nothing to worry about. A Christian is someone who is sealed and indwelled by the Holy Spirit. Therefore, a Christian cannot blaspheme him.

Him? Yes, I wrote Him. Of course, τὸ πνεῦμα is neuter, but that doesn't make the Holy Spirit neuter. The word for "spirit" is τὸ πνεῦμα. In this case, the words τὸ ἅγιον modify the word "spirit." This refers to The Holy Spirit. The articles on both words imply that the two go together.

My take on this is that we cannot blaspheme an impersonal force. We'll get to this more later on when we get to the book of Ephesians. Also, how is it possible to blaspheme anyone but God? I agree that the Trinity is never explicitly spelled out in Scripture other than the spurious addition in 1 John 5, but there is plenty here to understand the triune nature of God. Three persons, one God. Confusing? Yes. Again, I don't want to worship a God that I can completely understand. If God were completely comprehendible by men then He isn't much of a God.

Creation of an Institution?

Mark 8:29-30
(29)  And he asked them, "But who do you say that I am?" Peter answered him, "You are the Christ."
(30)  And he strictly charged them to tell no one about him.

(29)  καὶ αὐτὸς ἐπηρώτα αὐτούς, Ὑμεῖς δὲ τίνα με λέγετε εἶναι; ἀποκριθεὶς ὁ Πέτρος λέγει αὐτῷ, Σὺ εἶ ὁ Χριστός. 

(30)  καὶ ἐπετίμησεν αὐτοῖς ἵνα μηδενὶ λέγωσιν περὶ αὐτοῦ.

I have often heard that Matthew 16:18 is the proof text for the establishment of the papacy.  This is the parallel passage where Jesus has the same conversation with Peter.  However, there is no commentary about how Peter is the "rock" and upon this rock Christ would build His church.  

I don't want to make too strong of an argument from silence, but it has always seemed to me that such an important doctrine would be clearly spelled out if indeed that is what Matthew 16:18 was all about.  Mark is known for his brevity, but I would think that he would have repeated the command to establish Christ's church on earth.

Instead we simply get Peter's confession.  It doesn't take much Greek to appreciate the statement Σὺ εἶ ὁ Χριστός.  Jesus indeed is the Christ.  Incidentally, when I read ἐπετίμησεν I think of the glosses "rebuke" or "warn."  Jesus was serious about them keeping this quiet until the time was right.

Sadly, I'm afraid that many of us operate as if this was still in effect.  Now it is our job to go and make disciples of all nations.  Let's be sure to do that instead of keeping quiet.