Mark chapter sixteen

We are at Mark 9:28. It has been implied that Jesus has just healed a boy from a demon (seizures), but all I see is him helping the kid up after a fit is over. Later, the disciples ask Jesus why they couldn't drive out the demon. He replied that that kind only came out through prayer. Huh? Jesus didn't pray the spirit out, He commanded it. Are demons discriminating as to how they are exorcised?

Jesus and the disciples went on the move. Jesus was again trying to be incognito, supposedly because he was training his disciples. If you ask me, he may have been avoiding people who would know that the people he "healed" had relapsed. I'm having a bit of respect for the author of this book. If it had stayed the only gospel account available, Jesus wouldn't measure up to his current reputation. Told in a spare way, with comparatively few embellishments, and a publicity avoiding Jesus, I can see in this story the unwillingness of the author to completely commit to the notion that Jesus was supernatural. If there was a Jesus of Nazareth, I imagine Mark, as the earliest, has the account that is closest to the reality.

In verse 31 Jesus predicts that the son of man (presumably a reference to himself) will be betrayed and killed and rise after three days. The disciples were afraid to ask him what that meant. Later, they were in a house in Capernaeum, maybe Peter's? Jesus asked the disciples what they had been arguing about on the road. They had been jockeying for hierarchical position in the group. Jesus told them "If anyone wants to be first, he must be the very last, and the servant of all." This is good psychology on Jesus's part. Now they will be trying to outdo each other in acts of service.

Jesus had a little child stand in front of the disciples, and holding the child close, said "whoever welcomes one of these little children in my name welcomes me; and whoever welcomes me does not welcome me but the one who sent me." Wow. What a lesson for today. Christians take note! Children had no authority or power, they often were the household servants, which I think was the point. He was eliminating cultural hierarchy with this statement, telling the disciples that they weren't any greater than a child. If he wasn't a charlatan, I could like this version of Jesus.

Matthew's (18:1-5) version of the story does not include the concept of service or becoming servants. Instead he focuses on humility, which is more abstract. The disciples are told to be humble like children to be the greatest in the kingdom. (Mark's version does not mention the kingdom at all. It was a more earthly discussion.)  The thing about humility is you don't actually have to do anything to be commended for it. It's a negative virtue, all you have to do is refrain from overtly saying or acting like you are better than anyone. You don't necessarily have to actively serve them. Plus, this conversation doesn't eliminate earthly cultural hierarchy. Matthew tries to make up for it by having Jesus put a curse on anyone who would harm a child. We all know how well curses work.

Mark and Matthew have this story happening in a house in Capernaeum, but in Luke there is very little context. Luke has Jesus read the disciple's minds instead of them telling him what they were thinking. Luke 9:46-48 has no discourse on humility or servitude or the kingdom. He just tells them to welcome that child in his name. "For he who is the least among you all--he is the greatest." The way it reads, Jesus could be telling them  that particular child was the greatest among them. In Luke's version Jesus also does not tell the disciples to be like a child/children in any way. I like the Mark version best.

This was fascinating to me because, in all my years as a christian, I never caught that this dialog happened in a private home and not out among the multitudes.

Mark part fifteen

We are now at Mark 9:2. The text tells us that six days (Luke 9:28 says eight days) after Jesus predicted his own death, Jesus, Peter, James, and John, went up a high mountain, in an unspecified location. They were all alone. There were no other witnesses. Jesus was "transfigured" before the others. His clothes became dazzling white, whiter than the whitest white. (Maybe Jesus put a lantern in his robe.) They also saw Moses and Elijah talking with Jesus. How did they know what Moses and Elijah looked like?

Peter, being frightened, said the first thing that came into his head. He thought it might be a good idea to set up three altars, one each for Jesus, Moses, and Elijah. Then a cloud surrounded them and obscured their vision. They heard a voice in the cloud say, "This is my son whom I love, listen to him!" The presumption is that this was the voice of god. If you were on a foggy mountainside and heard a voice speaking from the fog, would that necessarily mean it was a god speaking? It very well could have been Jesus himself, for that matter, if it happened.

After the voice, Peter, James, and John,  couldn't see Elijah and Moses any more. They all went back down the mountain and Jesus told the other three not to tell anyone what they had seen until after the son of man (presumably referring to himself) had risen from the dead. The rising from the dead thing puzzled them. Plus, there Jesus goes being secretive again. He's also hedging his bets. If he never rose from the dead, these disciples would never tell the story, maybe.

The three disciples asked why the teachers of the law say that Elijah must come first. First in relation to what? And why did the teachers of the law say that? It Is from Malachi 4:5-6,  " See I will send you the prophet Elijah before that great and dreadful day of the lord comes. He will turn the hearts of the fathers to their children and the hearts of the children to their fathers ; or else I will come and strike the land with a curse." Jesus then tells the three that Elijah has already come and they (who?) have already done to him everything they wished, just as it was written. Elijah is assumed to be a metaphor for John the baptist, though it doesn't actually say that. Plus, there never was anything written concerning how this "Elijah" would be treated.

My study bible has an interesting note suggesting that John the baptist's life  mirrored Elijah's in that he dealt with a weak king (Ahab/ Herod Antipas) and his wicked Queen (Jezebel/ Herodias). However, John the baptist was imprisoned and beheaded. Elijah rode a chariot of fire up to heaven in a whirlwind.

Now, in verse 14, they are back with the other disciples who were arguing with the teachers of the law. Jesus wanted to know the nature of the argument. A man in the crowd said his son was possessed by a spirit which made him mute and gave him seizures. The disciples hadn't been able to drive out the spirit. (Maybe because it wasn't a spirit?) This news made Jesus exclaim that he was frustrated with that "unbelieving generation." I wonder what he would think of this generation.

The child was brought to Jesus and when "the spirit" saw him, it threw the boy on the ground in a fit. The father informed Jesus that the spirit had been in his son for quite a while and had tried to kill him by throwing him in the fire or in water. Poor kid. If he existed, it is probable that he had a neurological condition like epilepsy. Jesus tells the father, who wants his son cured that every thing is possible for him who believes. (Spoiler:no it's not.) The father says something heart-wrenching, "I do believe, help me overcome my unbelief." To me this shows the father had serious doubts and was trying to overcome them by sheer willpower.

Jesus commanded the evil spirit to come out of the boy and it left with a shriek and violent convulsion. In other words, the boy shrieked and convulsed. Then he lay as still as a corpse and people thought he was dead. (He either passed out or the seizure passed and he was exhausted.) Then Jesus pulled him up to stand. The text never actually  says the child was fully cured or able to speak.
Helping someone up after a seizure does not amount to a cure.

Mark part eight

We are now in Mark chapter five. Jesus and his disciples are still in the boat. " They went across the lake to the region of the Gerasenes. When Jesus got out of the boat, a man with an evil spirit came from the tombs to meet him." This guy had super human strength and couldn't be controlled by anyone. He was also strong enough to break any restraints. "Night and day...he would cry out and cut himself with stones." Frankly, if this person existed, he is more likely to have had a mental illness than a demon. Also, the fact that he is alive means that he is receiving some kind of basic sustenance from somewhere.

When the man saw Jesus, he fell on his knees in front of him. Jesus ordered the evil spirit to come out. The man  yelled, "what do you want with me, Jesus, son of the most high god. Swear to god you won't torture me." So, the evil spirit didn't immediately obey Jesus. First it tried to bargain with him. Jesus ask the spirit what its name was. It said, "Legion, for we are many." Sounds like Schizophrenia.
The demons begged Jesus to allow them to go into some nearby pigs. Jesus "gave them permission." The spirits came out of the man and into a large herd of pigs. About 2,000 pigs ran down a steep bank into the river and drowned.

Interestingly, there actually wasn't any region of the Gerasenes with ten miles of the lake (Sea of Galilee) which Jesus is supposed to have just crossed. It's like the author of Mark doesn't know the region very well. Second, the story suddenly jumps from the lake to a river, possibly the Jordan. Also, this is the east side of the lake, or river, gentile territory, as seen by the herds of pigs. What is Jesus doing here any way? Not to mention, he is now responsible for the death of about 2,000 pigs owned by some sure to be angry pig farmer(s).That's a lot of dead pigs in the river.

The news got out and people came running to see what had happened. They saw the formerly demon possessed man dressed and in his right mind. (This version never says the man started out naked.) The people were told the story and clearly were not happy, because they begged Jesus to leave. Jesus got back in the boat. The cured man wanted to come with him but Jesus ordered the man to go and tell his family how the lord had mercy on him. The man went around the whole region telling what Jesus had done. But there is no extrabiblical record of it.

Next, Jesus goes back to the other side of the lake. Among the large crowd gathered there was a synagogue leader Jairus. This man begged Jesus to come heal his dying daughter. Jesus followed Jairus with the large crowd milling about them. In the crowd was a woman with some kind of ailment that caused her to bleed for twelve years (and she's not dead or an invalid?). It doesn't say what kind of bleeding, presumably it was menstrual. This would have made herself, and everyone who came in contact with her, ritually unclean, including Jesus. She came up behind Jesus and touched his cloak, thinking that just touching Jesus's clothes would give her access to his healing powers, which the story says it did. Jesus felt the power go out of himself and turned around saying, "Who touched me?" The disciples reminded him of the press of the crowd, but Jesus kept looking. Funnily enough, he didn't have the power to know who touched him. The woman confessed, "trembling with fear." Jesus told her that her faith had healed her. Here's the thing about that: this woman's problem was of a hidden/private nature. She could have lied. Jesus could have lied. Even if we were right there, we wouldn't know the truth of the healing without an examination, which of course wouldn't happen. Should we just believe?

Of course we mustn't forget about Jairus's daughter. The story seems to have gotten side tracked. More next time.

Mark part four

We are in the second half of Mark chapter two. Jesus now has five disciples, Simon, Andrew, James, John, and Levi. Levi is a tax collector. In verse 15, we find Jesus at Levi's house eating with many tax collectors and "sinners." Three times sinners are mentioned in this passage and all three times the word is put in quotation marks with no explanation for that. My study bible also says that these sinners were "notoriously evil people" like adulterers and robbers. It is also unclear how that conclusion was arrived at.

The pharisees apparently saw Jesus eating with these social outcasts and criticized it. How did they see that? Was everyone eating outside? Were the Pharisees looking in the windows? Jesus's defense against the pharisees charges was that he was not there to call the righteous, but the sinners.

Next, we are told that John's disciples and the pharisees were fasting, which probably made them cranky. The story doesn't say the occasion of the fast, but it was presumably religious. People wanted to know why Jesus and his disciples were not fasting. Jesus uses a metaphor to say they don't need to fast because he is with them, when he is gone then they will fast. He's special. Then Jesus makes another metaphor about old wine skins and new wine skins, which, to me, makes no sense at all in this context.

The next story takes place on a sabbath. Jesus and his disciples are walking through grain fields and the disciples begin picking heads of grain, presumably to eat. The pharisees, who must have been walking with them, tattle to Jesus, saying what the disciples are doing is unlawful on the sabbath. Jesus then gives an example of David breaking the mosaic law when he was hungry. He says "the sabbath was made for man, not man for the sabbath." Yeah, right. That is why god gave a death penalty for breaking the Sabbath. The story of David breaking the law and getting away with it only proves that no one was willing to kill him for that transgression, if it actually happened. In fact, throughout history, Jews have been reluctant to carry out all the various death penalties mentioned in the law of Moses.

Chapter three tell us that "another time he went into the synagogue and a man with a shriveled hand was there." Jesus was watched carefully to see if he would heal the man on the sabbath. Of course, Jesus bucked convention and healed the man's hand with a great deal of show. Apparently these healings did not impress the pharisees, because they began to plot Jesus's death. I wonder how the pharisees would have told this story. Did they think Jesus was a charlatan? Or were they actually so mean hearted as to prefer Jesus's death over his miraculous healings?

In chapter 3, verses 7-12, Jesus is being followed by crowds of people from all over the region, because of the healings. Demon possessed people are falling down before him and calling him the son of god, but he is adamant that they should not tell anyone.  It does not say he exorcised all those demons. If he did, why would he have to tell them to shut up? Because of all the crowds, Jesus had a boat ready to take him away, at the sea of Galilee.

In verse 13, Jesus decides to take a few select people with him up on a mountainside. There he selects his twelve apostles. We've only read of five up to now. The twelve are Simon, who we are told Jesus names Peter, which means "pebble." Does this say something about Peter's personality? There are also James and John, who Jesus calls "the sons of thunder." Then we have, Andrew, Philip, Thomas, Matthew, another James, Thaddeus, another Simon, and Judas Iscariot, who is said to have betrayed Jesus. There is a little foreshadowing there.

More to come.

Mark part two

We are in Mark chapter one, at verse twelve. Jesus has just been baptized by John the baptist who was said to have been in a desert area. The spirit, which has descended on Jesus sends him "out into the desert," which must have been nearby. Jesus stayed in the desert forty days (magical number) being tempted by Satan.  Mark says he was with wild animals and angels attended him. This story is much shorter than the similar event recorded in other gospels. It includes very few details. Notice that no one else was with him as a witness. So, if this was Jesus's claim, everyone who heard it would have had to take his word that he was telling the truth. Can you think of any reason why he would lie?

From there, the text jumps  to John the baptist being in prison, after which Jesus went into Galilee telling people to repent because the kingdom of god was near, they were to believe the good news (aka gospel). Do you see that? Jesus didn't start preaching till AFTER John was out of the way. John could not publicly contradict Jesus's claims  if he wanted to. Also, the "good news" here was the approaching kingdom of god. It feels like there are so many different gospels in the new testament.

When Jesus was at the Sea of Galilee (which is actually a lake) he recruited Simon  (later called Peter) and his brother Andrew by telling the two fishermen that he would make them "fishers of men." How punny. Naturally, they dropped everything and followed him. In this same way, he also recruited James and John, who were just about to go out to fish in their father's boat. Now there are four disciples. Disciple just means student.

They all went to Capernaum. On the Sabbath (Saturday), Jesus taught in the synagogue. This is not anything special. I'm pretty sure any male Jew was allowed to get up and say something in turn. However, the text claims that what Jesus said impressed everyone, but it does not record his words on the occasion. While he was speaking, a man possessed by an evil spirit starts yelling at Jesus. He accuses Jesus of coming to destroy them and says he knows who Jesus is..."the holy one of god." (What if it was actually just some guy yelling, "Hey, I know who he is."  Then the story got stretched. It could have happened that way.) Jesus commands the spirit to be quiet and come out of the man, which it does with a shriek. Good cinema. In fact, if this actually happened, who's to say Jesus didn't plant the man in the audience. That kind of thing happens today.

The people were so gullible amazed that they began gossiping about this guy who taught like he knew what he was talking about and could exorcise demons. Naturally the news spread quickly. The five of them then went to the home of Simon and Andrew, where Jesus got rid of Peter's mother-in-law's fever. Then she began to wait on them, 'cause that's what women were expected to do after recovering from a fever and they needed someone to wait on them. Jesus did all this stuff on the Sabbath. The mother-in-law also waited on the men on the Sabbath. Was it just men who were not supposed to work on the Sabbath? Or was waiting on men not considered work?

After sunset, when it was no longer the Sabbath, people began to bring all their sick and demon possessed to Jesus to be healed. He apparently healed a lot of people with "various diseases" and exorcised many demons. (I wonder if had the same success rate modern faith healers have.) However, he didn't let any of the demons speak "because they knew who he was." Ha. That's kind of funny if you think about it. People who knew who Jesus was were not allowed to speak and were said to have demons. Hmm. There is definitely more than one way to look at that.

More to come.

Jesus and Gentiles part 2

Let's look at Jesus's actions and words regarding Gentiles in Mark:

*Mark 5 has Jesus crossing the lake (the sea of galilee)  to a region east of the Jordon called the Gerasenes, part of a larger area called the decapolis. This region was Greco-Roman in culture, not Jewish. There Jesus casts a legion of demons out of a mad man into a herd of 2 thousand pigs. The pigs go crazy and run  into the lake, killing themselves, and probably destroying at least one person's livelihood. But remember, pigs were "unclean" to the Jews. The people of that region are disturbed by this and beg that Jesus leave the area. As he is getting into the boat to head back, the man who is no longer possessed begs to go back with him. Jesus says no and encourages him to spread the word about what "the lord" did for him. He supposedly did so, and all the people who heard it were amazed. Of course there is no extrabiblical corroboration. Also the region mentioned is not even next to the Sea of Galilee.

*Jesus's next recorded encounter with a gentile in the book of Mark is in chapter 7. There,  a Greek Syro-Phoenician woman begs him to drive a demon out of her daughter. Jesus replies with, "it is not right to take the children's bread and toss it to the dogs." The implication here is that the Jews are the children of god and non Jews are the metaphorical equivalent of dogs. Well, that's not a very loving statement, is it? The woman appears to take this in stride and says, "even the dogs under the table eat the children's crumbs." Jesus appreciates her logic and heals her child.

*After skimming through the rest of Mark, the only other possible reference to gentiles I can find is at the end of the 16th chapter. There Jesus is said to have given " the great commission," telling the apostles to "go out into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation," presumably gentiles as well as Jews. The problem with this passage is that it may not have been in the original version of the book of Mark.

James- wrap up

*After reading the book of James, I've come to the personal conclusion that it is a book by a Jew, possibly of the Pharisee sect, for Jews, possibly those in jewish communities scattered around the world after the destruction of the temple in 70 A.D. The first verse clearly gives that impression. Succeeding verses are addressed to "brothers" referring back to that first mention of the twelve tribes scattered among the nations. Also, we have no idea who this James is, and it is not likely that he was one of the Jameses mentioned in the gospel accounts. Significantly, his name is actually Jacob, the name of the founder of the 12 Israelite tribes. James does not claim to be writing the words of God or to be inspired by the Holy Spirit.

*There is nothing said in this book which would contradict a Jewish identity, except the two phrases mentioning the lord Jesus Christ, which easily could have been added. There is nothing in this book which would identify it as specifically christian, except those two phrases. There is no mention of Jesus as a person, his birth, life, ministry, words, death, or resurrection. There is no mention of any other New Testament characters. There is a mention of demons, but not Angels. There is a suggestion of eternal reward and punishment, but it is not specific. There is no hint of a trinitarian doctrine. There is a reference to the Jewish Shema that says the lord our God is one. There is a reference to meetings in a synagogue. There are multiple references to Old Testament people and scripture. There is no mention of a gospel or good news of salvation from sins, once and for all by a sacrifice of the life of a man/God. There is a reference about waiting for a messaiah. However, it does not indicate that the messiah has been here already and will return. The Jews of that day were waiting for a messiah. There is no reference to baptism. Sins are forgiven through prayer.

*In chapter 3 of the English NIV translation, the text mentions heaven, hell, and the devil. The phrase in greek translated "from heaven" is literally "from above." The phrase translated "of the devil" literally means "demonic," not referring to a specific being. It has the same root as the demons that shudder in James 2:19. The word hell is translated from gehenna.

*James's focus seemed to be on the Jews in the diaspora maintaining their faith and identity, and especially how they treated each other as a community. He stressed treating the poor among them with respect and dignity, in word and action. This was done by suggesting that the poor have an advantage over the wealthy in the virtue of faith. He stressed good deeds, self control of the tongue, and humility. He denigrated the desire for wealth. He vehemently denied that faith is enough to maintain a right standing with God.

*Next, I think I will tackle the book of Galatians as our introduction to Paul and his letters. We will probably compare and contrast the Paul in the epistles to the one in Acts. The epistles were most likely written before the gospels and the book of Acts. For now, I will leave you with an existential thought from James 4:14--"What is your life? You are a mist that appears for a little while then vanishes."