Mark - The First Gospel: unit 4

Showing posts with label unit 4. Show all posts

Thursday, June 4, 2015

023-Not One of Us

God gave up control over himself (Jesus)
so that the world might know peace.

When humans are given power over God, what happens? We kill him.

In this section Mark gives us the response of God to any charge that he uses his power to establish and maintain control over his subjects. This is a unequivocal denial of that kind of power.

But it is the kind of power the disciples want and expect. And maybe with present-day disciples (aka, Christians) as well.

Like the disciples, we desire to be in charge, to have the authority, power, recognition, honor, and prestige. We are willing to serve, but only from a position of power. We are willing to minister, as long as we are in charge and serving in our comfort zone.^[1]

The disciples had been arguing about which of them would be the greatest (i.e., have the greatest power of control over others). Jesus’ response to them is that the idea of power over another, hierarchies, and (in my opinion) the concept of leadership should not even be a question that enters the minds of genuine followers of Christ. Jesus uses a child as an illustration of this kind of discipleship.

“If anyone would be first, he must be last of all and servant of all.” (v35b)

This is how many translations render Jesus’ response. But a more proper translation is in the form of a prediction rather than an imperative.

Jesus predicts that those who are now concerned about being first will in the future be the last and the servants of all (9:35). Gundry correctly notes that the Markan Jesus does not say, “Whoever wants to be first must be last,” but rather, “Whoever wants to be first will be last” (Gundry 1993, 509). By casting this formula for greatness as a prediction rather than as an imperative, the evangelist remains consistent with the emphasis on the priority of grace that pervades this Gospel and prepares for the announcement in 10:27 that the salvation human beings cannot achieve is “possible for God.”^[2]

This struggle for power and control is illustrated in the next section, where John comes to Jesus and speaking for all of the disciples he asks Jesus to command an unnamed person from casting out demons in Jesus’ name. This unnamed person doesn’t “belong” to the right group and may know very little of Jesus’ teachings. (Irony: just a little while earlier, these disciples in the “right group” had been unable to cast out demons, while this unnamed person is able to do so.)

Jesus directs their attention to what matters: that another person is helping to bring the kingdom of God into the world. It is not group membership or knowledge (and substitute doctrine here), but kingdom actions, that determine whether one is inside or outside the kingdom.

What is important for true disciples of Jesus is not their pedigree, not their genealogy, not their connections, not even their personal familiarity with Jesus. What is important is their devotion to Jesus’ devotion to God and to their conjoined service to humanity… This passage of Scripture makes it clear that what binds Christians together is not first and foremost our coordinated activities to advance ourselves, such as our congregations or denominations, but rather our service to the world in the name of and at the command of God.^[3]

The section ends with a collection of short sayings tied together by catchwords and phrases. It should be read as hyperbole and metaphor – both the self-mutilation and the “eternal fires of hell”. Jesus using metaphors that are based on people’s understandings of cosmologies of that time does not necessarily make them a literal reality.

The theological challenge for church leaders today concerns the task of separating ancient cosmologies of a literal, physical hell from theological understandings about God and human nature.^[4]

It should also be noted that “sin” in this section is not sin in general, but skandalizo or the causing of one’s self or of another to fall or stumble. In the overall context of this section, it is the narrow-mindedness and the desire for power and control that 1) excludes others who are followers of Christ, and 2) tempts a person to pursue the wrong things in life to obtain peace and security.

When all the impurities in our lives have been removed (burned off or salted), that is, all of the distractions, all of the lies and misplaced priorities, all of the greed and guilty pleasures, have been removed, what remains is peace. That is what Jesus wants for us: peace. The question persists, however: Are we willing to pay the price? Is peace worth the cost? Will we simply settle for a false and ultimately unsatisfying alternative?^[5]

The Christian life is about learning to give up control. The disciples didn’t want to know more, and we don’t either. But Jesus’ words to us is that this is the only path to genuine peace. God gave up control over himself so he could bring peace to the world. Might our call be the same?

^[1] Feasting: Mark, locations 9738-9741.

^[2] Reading Mark, 9:30-10:31.

^[3] Feasting: Mark, locations 9930-9932, 9933-9934.

^[4] Feasting: Mark, locations 10135-10137.

^[5] Feasting: Mark, locations 10297-10300.

Tuesday, May 12, 2015

022-A Botched Exorcism

The presence of Jesus does not resolve all questions, but it allows
the honest admissions of fear and doubt.

“I believe; help my unbelief!” (v.24)

In Christian circles, it is often heard that “Jesus is the answer,” or that “all doubts are erased in the presence of Jesus.” Now these may be partially true in some circumstances. But what the story of the father whose the son suffered from torment of an unclean spirit shows, coming closer to Jesus and being in his presence doesn’t always bring answers and doubts don’t magically disappear.

In fact the opposite seems almost the case in this story. At the beginning, the father likely had confidence that Jesus and his disciples could solve his problem. But the disciples failed and Jesus wasn’t anywhere near. By the time Jesus arrives on the scene, the whole situation had turned into a fiasco with the disciples and the scribes arguing. The father is no longer certain that even Jesus could do anything about his son.

The son is brought to Jesus. Where is the father…? The text doesn’t say. I imagine that the father is close to his son. Violent convulsions hit the son. The father is desperate. He is in the presence of Jesus. He admits to his fears and expresses his honest doubt about, yes, Jesus. Jesus offers words of assurance. A glimmer of faith is restored – just enough for the father to grab and hold, and offer a prayer mixed with hope and fear.

One of the messages of this story is that as we draw closer to Jesus, it’s okay if our questions and uncertainties don’t magically disappear. Maybe it is in the very presence of Jesus where it is safest to express our fears and doubts, about Jesus himself, even.

Tuesday, May 5, 2015

021-The Transfiguration

Jesus is himself the new Tabernacle of divine glory.
His word and deed transcend all past revelation.^[1]

That the Transfiguration event occurred is not the question—it is found in the three Synoptic gospel accounts. The question is: what is its meaning? From the reactions of the three disciples who witnessed it, Peter, James and John, they had no idea what it meant. Or if they did, they thought the kingdom had come in its full glory and Jesus’ work was over. They could build tents (or booths) and simply enjoy the glorious existence.

But that’s not what happened. The glory goes away and they must descend the mountain.

It appears that much later, as the apostles and the first Christians processed the event in light of Jesus’ death and resurrection, they found and gave meaning that they could relate to from the Old Testament accounts. In relating this story, Mark borrows language and imagery from Moses: from the six days of preparation preceding his ascent up Sinai; the glory, the cloud, and the voice on Sinai; Moses’ prophecy of another prophet appearing like him and “to listen to him” (Deut. 18:15).

Isaiah 52:13-15 functions as a prelude before the Suffering Servant account of Isaiah 53:1-12. In a similar manner, Mark’s second half of the gospel account includes the Transfiguration account, the assurance of Jesus’ glory, before moving fully into the Passion narratives.

The two great prophets the Jewish people were expecting as heralds of the new kingdom were Moses and Elijah. In the Transfiguration they explicitly make their appearance, but they are only seen by a select few. Everyone else does not get to see Moses and Elijah… Or do they? Jesus’ explanation of the event as they descend the mountain reveals that John the Baptist takes on the functions of Elijah, and Jesus is the new Moses. This is the new Sinai, the new Moses, and the new revelation.

And what is the new revelation? The voice commands its hearers to “listen to him.”

The exhortation has bearing upon all of Jesus' words, but has particular relevance to the new instruction Jesus had been giving to his followers concerning the necessity of his sufferings and of their participation in his humiliation. There can be no doubt that Mark intended his congregation in Rome to take this word to heart.^[2]

The way to the kingdom must travel through suffering and humiliation. The disciples could not accept it, and Peter tried to rebuke Jesus, because this revelation, to their minds meant a failure of Jesus’ mission. They could also not fathom the idea that there would be time between Jesus’ resurrection and the glory that they had just seen.

What perplexed them was what this rising from the dead of the Son of Man could mean… The disciples' real question is, What have death and resurrection to do with the Son of Man? They possessed no categories by which they could distinguish between Jesus' statements concerning his resurrection and those concerning his parousia, and the relationship between these two distinct events remained obscure… The place of Jesus' passion and death, together with his resurrection, was the unexpected and incomprehensible middle term between the present and the magnificent future assured by the transfiguration. What bothered the disciples specifically, then, was the phrase "from among the dead," together with the implication that time would yet remain before the consummation for the proclamation of what they had seen.^[3]

For nearly two-thousand years now, followers of Jesus have been troubled by these same questions. Why does Christianity (the kind that tries to imitate Jesus’ life and value people as he did) frequently appear weak and disrespected? Where is the power and glory of the risen Christ? Why must there be this lengthy middle period between the resurrection and the parousia? Why must we go through this period? Why must we, at times, suffer hardships and loss?

We would much rather have the miracle-working Jesus: the one who heals diseases, raises the dead, calms the storm, drives out demons, and feeds the multitudes. We’re not really that eager for the Jesus who walks into rejection, humiliation, suffering, and death. And we certainly don’t jump at the chance to follow him into that.

Jesus doesn’t provide answers to these questions: both ours and the disciples’. What Jesus offers is a mystery: both the suffering Jesus and the glorious Jesus are one and the same. This mystery is assurance that whatever we are called to face, Jesus has already walked through it, that he walks through it with us, and that what appears as failure is in fact the path to final glory.

When the Son of Man is raised from the dead, questions will arise that the story of the transfiguration will help answer. As if in response, the young man at the tomb in Mark 16:1-8 speaks for the whole community that declares, “Jesus has been raised. You will not find him in the tomb. If you want to see him, go to Galilee, even as he told you.”
Mark’s readers have no way to “go to Galilee” except to return to the beginning of the story, which begins in Galilee, and then follow Jesus through his journey. This trek takes readers through his baptism into a world where Jesus lives and behaves already as a resurrected one amid all the ills and threats that only those who already have death behind them need not fear. Jesus touches the unclean, but instead of becoming unclean, everything around him becomes clean (e.g., 5:1-43). He walks on water, and just as in Luke’s and John’s postresurrection appearance stories, disciples can look right at Jesus and not recognize him (6:47-56). Where is the risen Jesus? He remains unrecognized and at large, loose with his healing powers in a world overrun with threats against life and wholeness.^[4]

[1] NICNT: Mark, 9:8.

[2] NICNT: Mark, 9:7.

[3] NICNT: Mark, 9:10.

[4] Feasting: Mark, location 9137.

Monday, April 27, 2015

020-The Meaning of the Christ

Seeking stability and security through agencies and powers
of this world is demonic.

Possibly the harshest rebuke that comes out from Jesus’ mouth is directed toward Peter (and implicitly to the rest of the disciples). Just as Jesus has earlier rebuked demons and storms, Jesus rebukes Peter. He calls Peter an agent of Satan. Why is this? Because Peter’s version of the Messiah, the Christ, has no room for rejection by the powers of this world, and humiliation and suffering through them. Peter saw Christ as the means through which he could personally achieve prosperity, stability, and obtain security; and Christ as a means by which the Jewish people and nation could achieve the same.

In other words, Peter had a prosperity gospel of his own, based upon worldly standards, not heavenly ones. He associated righteousness with power and privilege. He believed wealth and social status were synonymous with piety and sanctification. Unfortunately, Peter failed to see the inconsistency between his personal political theology and his personal social situation: if he were a true disciple, why was he poor? This is a very human error even today. Furthermore, Peter was selfish. He focus was on what might accrue to him as a disciple of Jesus when Jesus came into power. Peter possessed an insight about Jesus’ true identity, but he failed to place his own hubris in check.^[1]

In other words, Peter was encouraging Jesus to take another route to messiahship, one that was easier, more comfortable, and possibly less demanding. It is in that spirit that Jesus rebuked Peter, as a public witness to his steady faith in God’s way and will for his life.^[2]

Lest we be too harsh, however, we need to recognize that none of the followers of Jesus could have possibly understood that the Christ would bring about a new kingdom through the means of suffering, humiliation, death, and resurrection. It would be like trying to explain the color blue to someone who is blind from birth. It could only happen after her blindness cured and her brain begin to be wired to recognize sight. It would be like trying to explain music to someone who has never heard harmony and rhythm. It could be learned, but only through experience and repeated hearings of musical elements.

We must understand that in ancient Judaism there was no concept that the Messiah would suffer the sort of horrible fate that Jesus describes in 8:31. Thus Peter's response in 8:32 is in one sense fully understandable.^[3]

Likewise the disciples see and hear; but their blindness and deafness are only partially cured. They recognize now that Jesus is the Christ, but they do not have the language nor the experience to comprehend what that means. For Peter, the language of rejection and suffering meant failure; for Jesus, it meant success.

This formal rejection of Jesus would have meant for Peter and the Twelve that Jesus' mission was a failure. The reason why Peter takes Jesus in hand to rebuke him is Peter's conviction that Jesus is the Christ means that God is with him and that he cannot fail.^[4]

Peter, again representing the disciples as a group, rejects Jesus' reinterpretation of Messiahship. He "rebukes" Jesus as arrogantly as he and his fellows "rebuke" the parents of the children in 10:13… The refusal to accept the necessity of the Messiah's death is the program of Satan, Jesus 'cosmic opponent (1:13; 3:22- 27).^[5]

In Mark’s telling of the gospel, Jesus must be rejected and suffer humiliation, be killed, and then be resurrected before the meaning of the Christ can be fully comprehended by the disciples. And as the ending of the gospel account reveals, even then it was not immediately understood.

[1] Feasting: Mark, location 8551.

[2] Feasting: Mark, location 8598.

[3] UBC: Mark, 8:31-9:1.

[4] UBC: Mark, 8:31-9:1.

[5] Reading Mark, 8:31-9:29.

Pages