Sermon for 4/1/12 “Christ for Sinners”
Lord, open our hearts and minds to the great wonder of your death on our behalf, in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, Amen.
We will be very brief today. I hope you will pardon it. Presentation of the benevolence of the month delayed the beginning of the service a bit. Today's Gospel reading is very long. We have yet to receive the Sacrament of communion. The time is short. Yet our worship is centered on Word and Sacraments, both proclamations of the same gospel, Christ for sinners.
What did the people shout to Jesus when he was on the cross? “He saved others, he cannot save himself.” I expect we've all seen a cross with a corpus on it. You have, though you might not have used that term. It's the cross with the representation of Jesus' body hanging on it. He's hanging there and is dead. Some people object to this. Yet we don't need to find it objectionable. Picture one of those crosses with the corpus on it. Is that Jesus alive? No, in those depictions he has died for the sins of the world, for your sins, for my sins. Jesus, dead on the cross, doesn't seem to us a means of salvation. We, like the people who welcomed Jesus into Jerusalem on the Sunday of the Passion, Palm Sunday, would expect Jesus to show himself as a conqueror, a mighty king. Maybe it makes us uncomfortable to realize that Jesus truly dies for us. After all, we expect the person who saves us would not be a person who would die himself.
This very unexpected event, though, is what shows Jesus is able to save us entirely. He acted according to his divine wisdom. As we read in Philippians he did not grasp his own prerogative. He didn't assert his authority to be treated like God. He simply showed that he is God. Yet he does it in unexpected ways. Jesus, called the friend of sinners, has fellowship with Judas, who will later betray him. He gives his body and blood to the one who would deny him three times before the next dawn. He protects those who arrest him from his own followers. He protects his faithless followers from the people who have come to arrest him. He allows false testimony against him. He makes no argument against Pilate. He accepts wrong. He is beaten, stripped, humiliated, and makes no defense. Jesus, in fact, needs no defense. He asserts his deity, but he does not consider it something he needs to defend. He will prove it up in time. By the end of the Gospel passage today he has given us his very life. He saved others. Is he able to save himself? It doesn't look like he is.
As we proceed through Holy Week I'd like us to consider this. The Gospel readings leave Jesus in the tomb. It is the darkest week of the Church calendar. In our midweek services Thursday and Friday we will even go so far as to depart in silence as a sign of mourning. Jesus doesn't save himself. Why is that? It is because Jesus saves us. He does not need to save himself. That isn't important to him. Jesus needs no saving. We need saving. Jesus died, not for himself, but for sinners. Jesus gave himself for us, dying for the sins of the whole world, dying to bring us to God. Jesus needs no savior. We do.
So as we confess the Creed, we remember its focus on Jesus, the one who gave himself for us. As we give in the offering we remember that Jesus gave himself for us. As we pray for the Church around the world we remember that Jesus gave himself for the sins of the world. As we sing the liturgy and receive communion we remember that Jesus has given his very real, very physical, true body and true blood for us to receive, granting forgiveness, life, and salvation. As we receive the blessing at the end of the service we remember that our Lord has send us out into the world to bring his words of grace into our community. Jesus saved others. He did not save himself.
Thanks be to God.
Showing posts with label Mark. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mark. Show all posts
Sunday, April 1, 2012
Friday, February 3, 2012
"Mark's Gospel: Further Considerations"
"Mark's Gospel: Further Considerations" Wenham pp. 173-182
This chapter discusses additional considerations about the dating of Mark's Gospel.
pp. 173-174 "Another possible source of information about the writing of Mark's gospel is the tradition of the Alexandrian church. We have seen that the dismissal of the age-long tradition of the Roman church by nineteenth-century scholars may have been ill judged. Perhaps the same applies to Alexandria."
Wenham goes on to cite early authorities who state that Mark went to Egypt, proclaiming the gospel which he had previously written.
p. 175 "Thus in the fourth century, not only does Alexandria claim Mark as its founder, but this claim is acknowledged in East and West, and it has remained the steadfast tradition of the Coptic church to the present day."
p. 175 "It is a case of putting Eusebius' encyclopedic knowledge of the Eastern church together with the solid tradition of the Copts against conclusions based on what Roberts calls the 'jejune and scrappy references' available to present-day scholars in our extant literary sources."
We then look at the ease of travel for both people and documents in imperial Rome, documenting that it was fairly easy for people to travel throughout the Mediterranean region.
Wenham discusses the fragment 7Q5, which may possibly be asserted to be a fragment of Mark 6:52 and following. pp. 178-179 "If 7Q5 is tentatively identified with Mark 6:52f, some of O'Callaghan's other identifications at once become plausible. 7Q4 fits 1 Timothy 3:16-4:3 (O'Callaghan thinks this certain) and 7Q8 fits James 1:23f. That epistles like 1 Timothy and James, commonly dated round about the end of the century, should have been in the possession of a Christian community in Palestine in 68 is a conclusion almost too shocking to be contemplated! But if the traditional dating of these New Testament documents is in general sounder than the modern dating (as the present book maintains), there is nothing impossible about it. We ought therefore, in spite of the fragmentary nature of the evidence, to keep the possibility in mind."
Finally, Wenham looks at some internal features of Mark, indicating that the vividness of details may indicate a very early authorship, not bearing the marks of a long tradition which could smooth out the physicality of the gospel.
Wenham's conclusion is that Mark's gospel was informed by Peter's preaching and that it was handed down to the church after Peter's death, probably having been written some time before that, possibly as early as the first half of the 40s.
This chapter discusses additional considerations about the dating of Mark's Gospel.
pp. 173-174 "Another possible source of information about the writing of Mark's gospel is the tradition of the Alexandrian church. We have seen that the dismissal of the age-long tradition of the Roman church by nineteenth-century scholars may have been ill judged. Perhaps the same applies to Alexandria."
Wenham goes on to cite early authorities who state that Mark went to Egypt, proclaiming the gospel which he had previously written.
p. 175 "Thus in the fourth century, not only does Alexandria claim Mark as its founder, but this claim is acknowledged in East and West, and it has remained the steadfast tradition of the Coptic church to the present day."
p. 175 "It is a case of putting Eusebius' encyclopedic knowledge of the Eastern church together with the solid tradition of the Copts against conclusions based on what Roberts calls the 'jejune and scrappy references' available to present-day scholars in our extant literary sources."
We then look at the ease of travel for both people and documents in imperial Rome, documenting that it was fairly easy for people to travel throughout the Mediterranean region.
Wenham discusses the fragment 7Q5, which may possibly be asserted to be a fragment of Mark 6:52 and following. pp. 178-179 "If 7Q5 is tentatively identified with Mark 6:52f, some of O'Callaghan's other identifications at once become plausible. 7Q4 fits 1 Timothy 3:16-4:3 (O'Callaghan thinks this certain) and 7Q8 fits James 1:23f. That epistles like 1 Timothy and James, commonly dated round about the end of the century, should have been in the possession of a Christian community in Palestine in 68 is a conclusion almost too shocking to be contemplated! But if the traditional dating of these New Testament documents is in general sounder than the modern dating (as the present book maintains), there is nothing impossible about it. We ought therefore, in spite of the fragmentary nature of the evidence, to keep the possibility in mind."
Finally, Wenham looks at some internal features of Mark, indicating that the vividness of details may indicate a very early authorship, not bearing the marks of a long tradition which could smooth out the physicality of the gospel.
Wenham's conclusion is that Mark's gospel was informed by Peter's preaching and that it was handed down to the church after Peter's death, probably having been written some time before that, possibly as early as the first half of the 40s.
Sunday, January 29, 2012
Sermon for 1/29/12 "Jesus Our Healer" Mark 3:1-6
Sermon “Jesus Our Healer” Mark 3:1-6 Audio Link http://dl.dropbox.com/u/23575548/120129Mark3.mp3
Lord Jesus Christ, our Sabbath-Day's Rest, bring us your healing and grace, in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, Amen.
We have already read today about God raising up another prophet like Moses. And we realize, if we think about it for about half a minute, that the prophet like Moses is Jesus, the one who sees God face to face, who brings God's word without any error, who serves as the true mediator between man and God.
We have also read about how our Lord has proclaimed all things clean, but that we bind ourselves in our consciences, not trusting the Lord. We can deceive ourselves into trusting in the purity of our own flesh, our own consecration to God, rather than trusting in the perfect work of Jesus, who became sin for us so that sin may be condemned and we would not have to bear it any more.
Yet during this time of Epiphany we want to see more. It's still the time of year for realization of our Lord's mercy. It's still the time to see that Jesus is working in his people, that he is accomplishing his purposes, and today, to see that Jesus is in fact the God who comes to heal us.
If you have been keeping up with our Bible reading challenge, you read Mark's Gospel this week and began to read the book of Exodus. In both places you saw our God delivering his people from the bondage of sin. And you saw that ultimately that deliverance from the bondage of sin happens through the work of Jesus who died for you, and it is realized in the context of the people of God assembled together, learning to walk in this forgiveness that Jesus has purchased. This is one of the reasons that we urge people to being faithful in attendance at church. It is in the context of Christ's assembled people, the visible church, that we realize Jesus' work for us. It is in the context of the church gathered together that we see how we are members of one another. And in our readings today we see that it is in the context of the people of God gathered together for worship that we receive the healing and grace that we need.
We already read one of the passages from Mark where Jesus heals a man in the synagogue on a Sabbath day. But I'd like to pull us to another of those passages for our sermon today. We see over and over again in the Scripture that Jesus is doing his healing work, again and again, as far as there is need for healing. He didn't stop with casting out a demon in the synagogue. He went on to heal someone of another ailment at another time. And he keeps coming to his people over and over again until he has healed them all.
Rise with me, if you can, as we read the Gospel from Mark, the third chapter (NIV).
1 Another time he went into the synagogue, and a man with a shriveled hand was there. 2 Some of them were looking for a reason to accuse Jesus, so they watched him closely to see if he would heal him on the Sabbath. 3 Jesus said to the man with the shriveled hand, “Stand up in front of everyone.”
4 Then Jesus asked them, “Which is lawful on the Sabbath: to do good or to do evil, to save life or to kill?” But they remained silent.
5 He looked around at them in anger and, deeply distressed at their stubborn hearts, said to the man, “Stretch out your hand.” He stretched it out, and his hand was completely restored. 6 Then the Pharisees went out and began to plot with the Herodians how they might kill Jesus.
sit
Let us then observe three elements of this Gospel which our Lord has delivered to us. First, that we who are sick, disabled, in bondage are present in the assembly. Second, that as we are assembled together we are in the right place for our Lord to do good, to heal, to deliver. And finally, that our Lord is the one who delivers his people from bondage, no matter what.
The sick man is here in the synagogue. In the first Gospel reading we had today he was bound by a demon. In this second passage he is disabled. Do we realize that the Church is the place for people who are weak, who are broken, who are tormented? Or do we put on a facade of wellness? I wonder just how many of us came in today planning to lie to everyone else and say that we were doing well even though we aren't? Now I don't want to encourage everyone to come to the divine service so as to have a time to dump our frustrations on everyone else who is here. It isn't a good idea to come in and sing a litany of every possible complaint that we have. That isn't going to build anyone up. But are there some of us who are aching, who are tormented with our sin, who are fearful for our families' well-being, for our jobs, for our health, for our futures? Are there some of us who come in weak and sorrowful, heavily burdened, and tell everyone else that everything is wonderful? Should we not rather come into this place, ask someone to pray for us, even without telling many details, and commit ourselves to our Lord's care? It doesn't have to become a complaint session. In fact, it shouldn't become a complaint session. It becomes a prayer time instead.
Let me give you an example. I don't think it will betray any confidences. I had an encounter recently which draws a good picture of what we can all be doing. It happened to me because I was dressed in my pastor uniform. I walked into a nursing home to visit with someone. As is my custom, I greeted those people I saw in the hallways in a friendly manner and asked them how they were. One lady shook her head and said she was terrible. I asked her what was wrong. She said she was in a lot of pain with a back problem and was going for surgery shortly. I laid my hand on her shoulder and prayed that the Lord would bless her and protect her from pain and distress, that he would give her his joy and peace. Enough said. I haven't seen her since, nor do I remember her name, though I think I might remember her face next I see her.
Can we pray for one another in such a way? We don't need a complete history of the situations that are troubling. We don't need to try to give advice and counsel. We are gathered as God's people on Sunday so as to come before his throne and receive from him. Do we do it? Or do we put on a show of wellness and come and go without receiving the healing and grace that we need?
You might notice that on Sunday mornings people tend to come into the nave, the seating area of the church building, and that it is pretty quiet in here. We try to keep the conversations out in the narthex and in the fellowship hall. This is the place for worship and prayer. This is the place we have set aside to look to our Lord in hope, expecting his mercy. But I'd like to encourage you. If you are troubled, gather some others and pray for one another. Fill this room with your prayers, as our Lord fills it with his gracious presence.
We come in here as the sick and troubled. And we see, second, that it is the place to receive God's deliverance. Just as the man with the demon or the man with the shriveled hand came to hear from God's word, just as they received the blessing of Jesus who was there with them, we also gather in this place to hear the life-giving words of the Gospel. We gather together knowing that where we are together in Christ he is also here to bring reconciliation. We gather together knowing that Jesus has promised never to leave us or forsake us, to be with us always. We gather together to sit at the feet of Jesus, the one who teaches us, who encourages us, who exhorts us, who has the words of life for us, who gives himself for our sin, who himself bears all our iniquities, and by whose stripes we are healed. Is there any wonder that we have trouble in our society? We are a people who turn everywhere except our Lord's mercy and grace when we are troubled. Is there any wonder that we raise children who look for a fix for every difficulty in medical treatment when we decide that character issues are best treated with sedatives? Is it any wonder that we have a generation of young people who don't know how to interact with older or younger people when they are sent to age-segregated schools, when they are taken away from the realities of life in an intergenerational church body so they can experience teen togetherness, and who are taught that they are social misfits so should be separated from any sort of larger community? We take on our secular culture's model of how to raise good and compliant citizens and then we're surprised when our culture tries to rule us. And all along we have departed from the view that says God's assembled people can live and work together as the community of Christ's grace. We have departed from looking to the Church as that living entity where people are raised up as citizens for the Lord. We have departed from looking to our Lord as the one who is present to heal us. So we have to turn elsewhere. It won't work. It won't work. Jesus is the one who comes to give us forgiveness, life, and salvation. Let us look to him as the one who is present in the context of this body called the Church. This is exactly the right place.
Finally, we see that Jesus is the one who comes to give that forgiveness, life, and salvation. He is the one who has broken into the lives of those people assembled in the synagogue. He is the one who has broken into the life of the man with the demon, into the life of the man with the shriveled hand. Jesus is the one who has come to bring them healing. And he does it despite the people who are plotting to arrest him and kill him. He does it despite the people who deny that he is who he says he is. He does it despite the hardness of hearts in the people who do not wish the Sabbath to be a time for healing. Jesus is the one who loves us and gives himself for us. Jesus, in fact, is the one who literally loves us to death – his own death. He is the one who loves us and gives himself for us while we are yet sinners. He is the one who hates our sin so much that he will take it upon himself and die under its curse. He is the one who has come to fulfill all the law which became a curse to us since we could not keep it. He is the one who will not stop working his righteousness in us as long as we need it – forever.
What does this tell you about your Savior? Is he not the one we need? Is he not the one we come to in faith? Is he not the one all our friends, all our neighbors, even all our enemies need? And where are we going to receive from our Lord? We will receive from him in the context of the Church, Christ's people assembled, gathering together, as one body, a family, with one Lord, being converted by one faith, one baptism, looking to the one God and Father of us all. This is the message of the Gospel. This is the place to receive from the Gospel. Let us never forget the precious faith which our Lord has given us, as we gather together to receive from our Lord and Savior.
Let us pray. Our Lord, grant that we may see you as the one who is present, present to heal us, to cleanse us, to forgive us, to equip us with all the grace we need to be witnesses to your Gospel. As you show yourself to be the healing God in our midst, reach out through us to this community. Call many to yourself in faith, believing that you are the Lord who saves us, for you ever live to make intercession for us, one God, with the Father and the Holy Spirit. Amen.
Lord Jesus Christ, our Sabbath-Day's Rest, bring us your healing and grace, in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, Amen.
We have already read today about God raising up another prophet like Moses. And we realize, if we think about it for about half a minute, that the prophet like Moses is Jesus, the one who sees God face to face, who brings God's word without any error, who serves as the true mediator between man and God.
We have also read about how our Lord has proclaimed all things clean, but that we bind ourselves in our consciences, not trusting the Lord. We can deceive ourselves into trusting in the purity of our own flesh, our own consecration to God, rather than trusting in the perfect work of Jesus, who became sin for us so that sin may be condemned and we would not have to bear it any more.
Yet during this time of Epiphany we want to see more. It's still the time of year for realization of our Lord's mercy. It's still the time to see that Jesus is working in his people, that he is accomplishing his purposes, and today, to see that Jesus is in fact the God who comes to heal us.
If you have been keeping up with our Bible reading challenge, you read Mark's Gospel this week and began to read the book of Exodus. In both places you saw our God delivering his people from the bondage of sin. And you saw that ultimately that deliverance from the bondage of sin happens through the work of Jesus who died for you, and it is realized in the context of the people of God assembled together, learning to walk in this forgiveness that Jesus has purchased. This is one of the reasons that we urge people to being faithful in attendance at church. It is in the context of Christ's assembled people, the visible church, that we realize Jesus' work for us. It is in the context of the church gathered together that we see how we are members of one another. And in our readings today we see that it is in the context of the people of God gathered together for worship that we receive the healing and grace that we need.
We already read one of the passages from Mark where Jesus heals a man in the synagogue on a Sabbath day. But I'd like to pull us to another of those passages for our sermon today. We see over and over again in the Scripture that Jesus is doing his healing work, again and again, as far as there is need for healing. He didn't stop with casting out a demon in the synagogue. He went on to heal someone of another ailment at another time. And he keeps coming to his people over and over again until he has healed them all.
Rise with me, if you can, as we read the Gospel from Mark, the third chapter (NIV).
1 Another time he went into the synagogue, and a man with a shriveled hand was there. 2 Some of them were looking for a reason to accuse Jesus, so they watched him closely to see if he would heal him on the Sabbath. 3 Jesus said to the man with the shriveled hand, “Stand up in front of everyone.”
4 Then Jesus asked them, “Which is lawful on the Sabbath: to do good or to do evil, to save life or to kill?” But they remained silent.
5 He looked around at them in anger and, deeply distressed at their stubborn hearts, said to the man, “Stretch out your hand.” He stretched it out, and his hand was completely restored. 6 Then the Pharisees went out and began to plot with the Herodians how they might kill Jesus.
sit
Let us then observe three elements of this Gospel which our Lord has delivered to us. First, that we who are sick, disabled, in bondage are present in the assembly. Second, that as we are assembled together we are in the right place for our Lord to do good, to heal, to deliver. And finally, that our Lord is the one who delivers his people from bondage, no matter what.
The sick man is here in the synagogue. In the first Gospel reading we had today he was bound by a demon. In this second passage he is disabled. Do we realize that the Church is the place for people who are weak, who are broken, who are tormented? Or do we put on a facade of wellness? I wonder just how many of us came in today planning to lie to everyone else and say that we were doing well even though we aren't? Now I don't want to encourage everyone to come to the divine service so as to have a time to dump our frustrations on everyone else who is here. It isn't a good idea to come in and sing a litany of every possible complaint that we have. That isn't going to build anyone up. But are there some of us who are aching, who are tormented with our sin, who are fearful for our families' well-being, for our jobs, for our health, for our futures? Are there some of us who come in weak and sorrowful, heavily burdened, and tell everyone else that everything is wonderful? Should we not rather come into this place, ask someone to pray for us, even without telling many details, and commit ourselves to our Lord's care? It doesn't have to become a complaint session. In fact, it shouldn't become a complaint session. It becomes a prayer time instead.
Let me give you an example. I don't think it will betray any confidences. I had an encounter recently which draws a good picture of what we can all be doing. It happened to me because I was dressed in my pastor uniform. I walked into a nursing home to visit with someone. As is my custom, I greeted those people I saw in the hallways in a friendly manner and asked them how they were. One lady shook her head and said she was terrible. I asked her what was wrong. She said she was in a lot of pain with a back problem and was going for surgery shortly. I laid my hand on her shoulder and prayed that the Lord would bless her and protect her from pain and distress, that he would give her his joy and peace. Enough said. I haven't seen her since, nor do I remember her name, though I think I might remember her face next I see her.
Can we pray for one another in such a way? We don't need a complete history of the situations that are troubling. We don't need to try to give advice and counsel. We are gathered as God's people on Sunday so as to come before his throne and receive from him. Do we do it? Or do we put on a show of wellness and come and go without receiving the healing and grace that we need?
You might notice that on Sunday mornings people tend to come into the nave, the seating area of the church building, and that it is pretty quiet in here. We try to keep the conversations out in the narthex and in the fellowship hall. This is the place for worship and prayer. This is the place we have set aside to look to our Lord in hope, expecting his mercy. But I'd like to encourage you. If you are troubled, gather some others and pray for one another. Fill this room with your prayers, as our Lord fills it with his gracious presence.
We come in here as the sick and troubled. And we see, second, that it is the place to receive God's deliverance. Just as the man with the demon or the man with the shriveled hand came to hear from God's word, just as they received the blessing of Jesus who was there with them, we also gather in this place to hear the life-giving words of the Gospel. We gather together knowing that where we are together in Christ he is also here to bring reconciliation. We gather together knowing that Jesus has promised never to leave us or forsake us, to be with us always. We gather together to sit at the feet of Jesus, the one who teaches us, who encourages us, who exhorts us, who has the words of life for us, who gives himself for our sin, who himself bears all our iniquities, and by whose stripes we are healed. Is there any wonder that we have trouble in our society? We are a people who turn everywhere except our Lord's mercy and grace when we are troubled. Is there any wonder that we raise children who look for a fix for every difficulty in medical treatment when we decide that character issues are best treated with sedatives? Is it any wonder that we have a generation of young people who don't know how to interact with older or younger people when they are sent to age-segregated schools, when they are taken away from the realities of life in an intergenerational church body so they can experience teen togetherness, and who are taught that they are social misfits so should be separated from any sort of larger community? We take on our secular culture's model of how to raise good and compliant citizens and then we're surprised when our culture tries to rule us. And all along we have departed from the view that says God's assembled people can live and work together as the community of Christ's grace. We have departed from looking to the Church as that living entity where people are raised up as citizens for the Lord. We have departed from looking to our Lord as the one who is present to heal us. So we have to turn elsewhere. It won't work. It won't work. Jesus is the one who comes to give us forgiveness, life, and salvation. Let us look to him as the one who is present in the context of this body called the Church. This is exactly the right place.
Finally, we see that Jesus is the one who comes to give that forgiveness, life, and salvation. He is the one who has broken into the lives of those people assembled in the synagogue. He is the one who has broken into the life of the man with the demon, into the life of the man with the shriveled hand. Jesus is the one who has come to bring them healing. And he does it despite the people who are plotting to arrest him and kill him. He does it despite the people who deny that he is who he says he is. He does it despite the hardness of hearts in the people who do not wish the Sabbath to be a time for healing. Jesus is the one who loves us and gives himself for us. Jesus, in fact, is the one who literally loves us to death – his own death. He is the one who loves us and gives himself for us while we are yet sinners. He is the one who hates our sin so much that he will take it upon himself and die under its curse. He is the one who has come to fulfill all the law which became a curse to us since we could not keep it. He is the one who will not stop working his righteousness in us as long as we need it – forever.
What does this tell you about your Savior? Is he not the one we need? Is he not the one we come to in faith? Is he not the one all our friends, all our neighbors, even all our enemies need? And where are we going to receive from our Lord? We will receive from him in the context of the Church, Christ's people assembled, gathering together, as one body, a family, with one Lord, being converted by one faith, one baptism, looking to the one God and Father of us all. This is the message of the Gospel. This is the place to receive from the Gospel. Let us never forget the precious faith which our Lord has given us, as we gather together to receive from our Lord and Savior.
Let us pray. Our Lord, grant that we may see you as the one who is present, present to heal us, to cleanse us, to forgive us, to equip us with all the grace we need to be witnesses to your Gospel. As you show yourself to be the healing God in our midst, reach out through us to this community. Call many to yourself in faith, believing that you are the Lord who saves us, for you ever live to make intercession for us, one God, with the Father and the Holy Spirit. Amen.
Tuesday, January 24, 2012
Bible Reading Challenge - Week 4 Day 3 Mark 11-16
Our reading challenge for the day is Mark chapters 11-16. I'll hit a few highlights. You make comments too and fill in the gaps. What strikes you as specially significant?
Mark 11 - Here we begin the Passion Week with Jesus' entry into Jerusalem. See the popular support he has but also see that the opposition will start by the end of chapter 11. Consider how much of Mark's Gospel is spent on this period of time surrounding Jesus' death and resurrection.
Mark 12-13 - Jesus' work of teaching and healing in the temple could easily be seen as an affront to the Jewish leaders. He remains popular with many of the people he interacts with, but continues to push the leaders in a way they do not wish to go. Jesus also begins talking about the end times in terms which we find difficult to understand. He is clear that there is a time of persecution to come and that people should rejoice that they are under God's protection. Yet beyond that it is hard to make out many of the specifics of his message.
Mark 14-16 - In the plots to arrest Jesus we have to ask ourselves if we are those who would sit at the table with him and then deny him later. The fact is that we are very likely to be just that kind of people. Does this negate Jesus' mercy and grace? Not at all, for Jesus died for exactly that kind of sinners. Thanks be to God that the story is not over with Jesus hanging dead on a cross. He comes and delivers his commission to his disciples, restoring them and sending them to bring the Gospel to the whole world.
Mark 11 - Here we begin the Passion Week with Jesus' entry into Jerusalem. See the popular support he has but also see that the opposition will start by the end of chapter 11. Consider how much of Mark's Gospel is spent on this period of time surrounding Jesus' death and resurrection.
Mark 12-13 - Jesus' work of teaching and healing in the temple could easily be seen as an affront to the Jewish leaders. He remains popular with many of the people he interacts with, but continues to push the leaders in a way they do not wish to go. Jesus also begins talking about the end times in terms which we find difficult to understand. He is clear that there is a time of persecution to come and that people should rejoice that they are under God's protection. Yet beyond that it is hard to make out many of the specifics of his message.
Mark 14-16 - In the plots to arrest Jesus we have to ask ourselves if we are those who would sit at the table with him and then deny him later. The fact is that we are very likely to be just that kind of people. Does this negate Jesus' mercy and grace? Not at all, for Jesus died for exactly that kind of sinners. Thanks be to God that the story is not over with Jesus hanging dead on a cross. He comes and delivers his commission to his disciples, restoring them and sending them to bring the Gospel to the whole world.
Monday, January 23, 2012
Bible Reading Challenge - Week 4 Day 2 Mark 6-10
Our reading challenge for the day is Mark chapters 6-10. I'll hit a few highlights. You make comments too and fill in the gaps. What strikes you as specially significant?
In chapter 6 Mark seems to begin stressing Jesus' work with his disciples, teaching them and preparing them for the work which he will leave for them. See how the disciples are involved in healings, in feeding the multitude, and in arriving with Jesus in a new area where he will be flocked by followers. Jesus' work is increasingly opposed, as people either become wholehearted in support of him or in their efforts to hinder him.
Jesus does not always draw our families together. How can we pray for those we know whose families are broken due to refusal of some or all of the members to hear Jesus' words of grace and mercy?
Jesus begins to speak more plainly about his death and resurrection near the end of Mark chapter 8. Notice again how shocking so many of Jesus' words and deeds are. We should never become used to the idea that Jesus is true man and true God, nor that he is able to take our sin upon himself and die in our place, giving us his life.
In chapter 6 Mark seems to begin stressing Jesus' work with his disciples, teaching them and preparing them for the work which he will leave for them. See how the disciples are involved in healings, in feeding the multitude, and in arriving with Jesus in a new area where he will be flocked by followers. Jesus' work is increasingly opposed, as people either become wholehearted in support of him or in their efforts to hinder him.
Jesus does not always draw our families together. How can we pray for those we know whose families are broken due to refusal of some or all of the members to hear Jesus' words of grace and mercy?
Jesus begins to speak more plainly about his death and resurrection near the end of Mark chapter 8. Notice again how shocking so many of Jesus' words and deeds are. We should never become used to the idea that Jesus is true man and true God, nor that he is able to take our sin upon himself and die in our place, giving us his life.
Sunday, January 22, 2012
Bible Reading Challenge - Week 4 Day 1 Mark 1-5
Our reading challenge for the day is Mark chapter 1-5. I'll hit a few highlights. You make comments too and fill in the gaps. What strikes you as specially significant?
Mark's Gospel is action-packed. Look how Mark kicks the action off showing Jesus hard at work - in the very first chapter being the baptizer in the Holy Spirit, the one who is tempted in the wilderness, who comes to preach once John is put into prison, who calls disciples, who goes around healing . . . it makes our head swim as we think how busy Jesus is. A good devotional practice in a quick reading of a short account like Mark's is to write a list of all the many things Jesus is doing, as we realize the Gospel is all about Jesus and his works.
In chapters 4 and 5 Mark has Jesus speaking and performing parables. Yes, it seems that Jesus can not only speak in parables, but he can also do actions which have the significance of a parable. Consider how he casts demons out of a man. The demons leave the man and are still harmful, but Jesus has them bring harm to creatures which are considered unclean. The healed man, on the other hand, is clean and in his right mind. Look at some of the parables and see what Jesus' main point might be.
Mark's Gospel is action-packed. Look how Mark kicks the action off showing Jesus hard at work - in the very first chapter being the baptizer in the Holy Spirit, the one who is tempted in the wilderness, who comes to preach once John is put into prison, who calls disciples, who goes around healing . . . it makes our head swim as we think how busy Jesus is. A good devotional practice in a quick reading of a short account like Mark's is to write a list of all the many things Jesus is doing, as we realize the Gospel is all about Jesus and his works.
In chapters 4 and 5 Mark has Jesus speaking and performing parables. Yes, it seems that Jesus can not only speak in parables, but he can also do actions which have the significance of a parable. Consider how he casts demons out of a man. The demons leave the man and are still harmful, but Jesus has them bring harm to creatures which are considered unclean. The healed man, on the other hand, is clean and in his right mind. Look at some of the parables and see what Jesus' main point might be.
Wednesday, January 18, 2012
Building a Synoptic Theory: (3) The Relation of Matthew to Mark
"Building a Synoptic theory: (3) The Relation of {Matthew to Mark" Wenham, pp. 88-115.
p. 88 "Matthew's relation to Mark can be satisfactorily explained on the lines of patristic tradition."
Wenham suggests, on p. 89, "There are three main possibilities as to the relation of the first two gospels: 1.) They are independent; 2.) Matthew used Mark; 3.) Mark used Matthew." In modern scholarship we typically see a view that favors Mark being written first and Matthew depending upon Mark and one or more other sources. There are numerous objections to the primacy of Matthew, even though until fairly recently it was assumed that Matthew was composed first.
p. 91 "It is difficult to believe that Mark would have omitted so much important Matthean material had he known of its existence. . . If it is supposed that Mark was intended as a replacement of Matthew, it has great weight - we should indeed be much the poorer without the great discourses and all Matthew's unique contributions. But whoever suggested that this was the intention?"
p. 91 "Mark's wealth of detail is a prima facie indication of priority . . . Wealth of detail would make it an acceptable supplement, but in itself it has nothing to do with order of production."
p. 92 "Matthew's account of the death of the Baptist requires a knowledge of Mark's account." Yet this is not necessarily the case. "It is perfectly possible that Herod was torn between great annoyance that John had repeatedly denounced his sexual sin in public, and respect for one he knew to be a good man. There is no need for Matthew to have known Mark's gospel, it is sufficient that he should have known the fuller story."
p. 92 "Matthew 27:15-18 has destroyed the logic of Mark 15:6-10."
p. 93 "The claim is that Mark's 'comparatively clear' sequence 'seems' to have a logic which has been blurred by Matthew, whose account lacks 'clear logic'. This appears to be hypercriticism with no real basis. The point of the statement 'For he knew that it was out of envy that they had delivered him up' may not be immediately obvious - but this applies equally to both gospels. They are both making the point that Pilate knew Jesus to be innocent, and he hoped that the demand of the people would get him out of his predicament."
Judging from the evidence displayed, Wenham is unconvinced that Matthew or Mark was written in dependence on the other. He suggests that it is quite possible that Mark was written with a knowledge of, but not dependence upon, Matthew. He goes on to discuss several reasons this seems to be a valid hypothesis.
p. 94 Matthew looks original. "Whether he assembled recollections and testimonies of his own or whether his work was based on Mark and other sources, all must admit that it was a careful and brilliantly successful operation. It is difficult to see it as the result of making eight thousand alterations to someone else's work. But of course it is not impossible."
p. 95 Matthew looks early and Palestinian. "Matthew's account looks like a vivid record of a terrible clash between Jesus and the religious leaders, rather than a veiled polemic of church against synagogue."
p. 96 "Mark looks like Peter's version of the same Palestinian tradition composed for Jewish and Gentile readers outside Palestine."
p. 97 "It looks as though Mark is omitting Matthean material at certain points."
p. 101 "Matthean priority provides the better rationale for the differences in order between the two gospels."
p. 109 "Matthew looks as though it may have been originally in a Semitic language."
p. 115 "To sum up our investigation of the internal evidence of the symoptic problem thus far: There seems to be a good case for believing that Matthew, possibly in a Semitic language, was the first gospel; that Mark is substantially the teaching of Peter, who knew Matthew's gospel; and that Luke knew and used both matthew and Mark. However, Mark shows a large measure of independence of Matthew, and Luke shows a large measure of independence of both. These conclusions (which have already to some extent anticipated it) will be seen to fit the external evidence remarkably well."
p. 88 "Matthew's relation to Mark can be satisfactorily explained on the lines of patristic tradition."
Wenham suggests, on p. 89, "There are three main possibilities as to the relation of the first two gospels: 1.) They are independent; 2.) Matthew used Mark; 3.) Mark used Matthew." In modern scholarship we typically see a view that favors Mark being written first and Matthew depending upon Mark and one or more other sources. There are numerous objections to the primacy of Matthew, even though until fairly recently it was assumed that Matthew was composed first.
p. 91 "It is difficult to believe that Mark would have omitted so much important Matthean material had he known of its existence. . . If it is supposed that Mark was intended as a replacement of Matthew, it has great weight - we should indeed be much the poorer without the great discourses and all Matthew's unique contributions. But whoever suggested that this was the intention?"
p. 91 "Mark's wealth of detail is a prima facie indication of priority . . . Wealth of detail would make it an acceptable supplement, but in itself it has nothing to do with order of production."
p. 92 "Matthew's account of the death of the Baptist requires a knowledge of Mark's account." Yet this is not necessarily the case. "It is perfectly possible that Herod was torn between great annoyance that John had repeatedly denounced his sexual sin in public, and respect for one he knew to be a good man. There is no need for Matthew to have known Mark's gospel, it is sufficient that he should have known the fuller story."
p. 92 "Matthew 27:15-18 has destroyed the logic of Mark 15:6-10."
p. 93 "The claim is that Mark's 'comparatively clear' sequence 'seems' to have a logic which has been blurred by Matthew, whose account lacks 'clear logic'. This appears to be hypercriticism with no real basis. The point of the statement 'For he knew that it was out of envy that they had delivered him up' may not be immediately obvious - but this applies equally to both gospels. They are both making the point that Pilate knew Jesus to be innocent, and he hoped that the demand of the people would get him out of his predicament."
Judging from the evidence displayed, Wenham is unconvinced that Matthew or Mark was written in dependence on the other. He suggests that it is quite possible that Mark was written with a knowledge of, but not dependence upon, Matthew. He goes on to discuss several reasons this seems to be a valid hypothesis.
p. 94 Matthew looks original. "Whether he assembled recollections and testimonies of his own or whether his work was based on Mark and other sources, all must admit that it was a careful and brilliantly successful operation. It is difficult to see it as the result of making eight thousand alterations to someone else's work. But of course it is not impossible."
p. 95 Matthew looks early and Palestinian. "Matthew's account looks like a vivid record of a terrible clash between Jesus and the religious leaders, rather than a veiled polemic of church against synagogue."
p. 96 "Mark looks like Peter's version of the same Palestinian tradition composed for Jewish and Gentile readers outside Palestine."
p. 97 "It looks as though Mark is omitting Matthean material at certain points."
p. 101 "Matthean priority provides the better rationale for the differences in order between the two gospels."
p. 109 "Matthew looks as though it may have been originally in a Semitic language."
p. 115 "To sum up our investigation of the internal evidence of the symoptic problem thus far: There seems to be a good case for believing that Matthew, possibly in a Semitic language, was the first gospel; that Mark is substantially the teaching of Peter, who knew Matthew's gospel; and that Luke knew and used both matthew and Mark. However, Mark shows a large measure of independence of Matthew, and Luke shows a large measure of independence of both. These conclusions (which have already to some extent anticipated it) will be seen to fit the external evidence remarkably well."
Tuesday, January 3, 2012
"Mark"
"Mark" Carson & Moo, pp. 169-197
CONTENTS
Carson and Moo identify seven basic sections in Mark's Gospel, identified by six transitional paragraphs.
1. Preliminaries to the ministry (1:1-13)
2. First part of the Galilean ministry (1:16-3:6)
3. Second part of the Galilean ministry (3:13-5:43)
4. The concluding phase of the Galilean ministry (6:7-8:26)
5. The way of glory and suffering (8:27-10:52)
6. Final ministry in Jerusalem (11:1-13:37)
7. The passion and empty-tomb narratives (15:1-16:8)
AUTHOR
As with the other gospels Mark does not identify the author by name. The title appears by about A.D. 125. Papias, quoted in Eusebius (translated by Kirsopp Lake in Ecclesiastical History vol. 1, 3.39.15 LCL Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1926) says, "And the presbyter used to say this, 'Mark became Peter's interpreter and wrote accurately all that he remembered, not indeed, in order, of the things said or done by the Lord. For he had not heard the Lord, nor had he followed him, but later on, as I said, followed Peter, who used to give teaching as necessity demanded but not making, as it were, an arrangement of the Lord's oracles, so that Mark did nothing wrong in writing down single points as he remembered them. For to one thing he gave attention, to leave out nothing of what he had heard and to make no false statements in them."
Papias is likely referring to the presbyter John, probably the apostle. If Papias is right, then, Mark as the evangelist is recognized by first generation Christians. The ascription of Mark as the author goes against early church tendencies to "associate apostles with the writing of the New Testament books" (p. 174). Though we can't identify Mark as the author through hard and fast positive evidence, "nothing in the second gospel stands in the way of accepting the earliest tradition that identifies John Mark as its author" (p. 175).
PROVENANCE
There is some evidence that Mark may have written in Rome. It is suggested by several authors in the early church. There are a number of Latinisms in the Gospel. Peter and Mark are identified as being in Rome in the early sixties. Nothing exists to point to any place other than Rome with the exception of Chrysostom, writing about 400, suggesting that Mark may have been in Egypt.
DATE
A Date in the 40s
This early date is suggested by the possibility that Mark's reference in 13:14 to the "abomination that causes desolation" is to an image of Caligula set up in Jerusalem in A.D. 40. But to harmonize this with a Roman provenance requires Peter and Mark to be in Rome earlier than the other documents would suggest.
A Date in the 50s
It is possible that Peter was in Rome as early as the mid 50s. This suggestion of an early date for Mark's Gospel is consistent with the idea that Luke referred to Mark in his preparation of his gospel and that Luke and Acts are dated as early as A.D. 62, consistent with Paul's status in prison at the end of Acts.
A Date in the 60s
Many scholars date Mark in the 60s due to traditions that he wrote after Peter's death and due to Mark's emphasis on persecutions which were very common in Rome around A.D. 65.
A Date in the 70s
The suggestion for a date as late as the 70s is based on the idea that Mark 13 represents the sack of Jerusalem by the Romans. However, the narrative in chapter 13 is not a specific description which would only fit that attack. If Jesus is able to predict events in the future there is no reason to date the composition after 70.
AUDIENCE AND PURPOSE
Audience
Mark seems aimed at a primarily Gentile Christian audience. There are many Latinisms and the translation of Aramaic expressions suggests that Mark is informing people who are not from the Jewish culture. His style is typical of that which could be used in public oration, suggesting an audience of listeners, not readers.
Purpose
Defining the purpose of a gospel is very difficult, as Mark and the other evangelists tend not to tell their purpose. In recent years, Carson and Moo show that critics have focused on four representative areas - eschatology, Christology, apologetics, and politics. None of the arguments is conclusive or all-encompassing.
SOURCES
p. 187 "We must admit that we have no certain knowledge of the written sources, if any, that mark used in putting his gospel together. His material may have come to him in small pieces of tradition, as the classic form critics thought, in both small pieces of tradition and longer oral summaries, or in a combination of these along with some written sources. In any case, if, as we have argued, the traditions about the Petrine origin of Mark are correct, then Peter himself is the immediate source of much of Mark's material."
TEXT
The two biggest textual difficulties in Mark's gospel are the words "Son of God" in 1.1 and the various endings in chapter 16. 1:1 is not a serious difficulty, as even if Mark didn't identify Jesus as the Son of God in chapter 1 verse 1 he does present him that way throughout the rest of the text. The long ending to Mark, including verses 9-20 exists in the bulk of manuscripts and can be found as early as the first half of the second century. Yet the style seems to be different from that of the rest of the gospel. There are alternative endings. None of the possible endings flow naturally from chapter 16 verse 8. Carson and Moo suggest that Mark intended to end the gospel at verse 8 but the additional endings were created at a later date, probably not by Mark. Others have suggested that the long ending was composed earlier than the rest of the gospel, some have suggested it was composed later, either by Mark or by someone else.
MARK IN RECENT STUDY
Mark was largely ignored with commentators throughout history focusing on Matthew instead. In the twentieth century the form critics viewed Mark primarily as a source document for other gospels. In the second half of the twentieth century people gained more interest in Mark in terms of his theology, purposes, and the community for which he was writing. It is only recently that commentators have been looking at Mark as a gospel in his own right.
THE CONTRIBUTION OF MARK
p. 192 "Mark is the creator of the gospel in its literary form - an interweaving of biographical and kerygmatic themes that perfectly conveys the sense of meaning of that unique figure in human history, Jesus of Nazareth, the Son of God."
CONTENTS
Carson and Moo identify seven basic sections in Mark's Gospel, identified by six transitional paragraphs.
1. Preliminaries to the ministry (1:1-13)
2. First part of the Galilean ministry (1:16-3:6)
3. Second part of the Galilean ministry (3:13-5:43)
4. The concluding phase of the Galilean ministry (6:7-8:26)
5. The way of glory and suffering (8:27-10:52)
6. Final ministry in Jerusalem (11:1-13:37)
7. The passion and empty-tomb narratives (15:1-16:8)
AUTHOR
As with the other gospels Mark does not identify the author by name. The title appears by about A.D. 125. Papias, quoted in Eusebius (translated by Kirsopp Lake in Ecclesiastical History vol. 1, 3.39.15 LCL Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1926) says, "And the presbyter used to say this, 'Mark became Peter's interpreter and wrote accurately all that he remembered, not indeed, in order, of the things said or done by the Lord. For he had not heard the Lord, nor had he followed him, but later on, as I said, followed Peter, who used to give teaching as necessity demanded but not making, as it were, an arrangement of the Lord's oracles, so that Mark did nothing wrong in writing down single points as he remembered them. For to one thing he gave attention, to leave out nothing of what he had heard and to make no false statements in them."
Papias is likely referring to the presbyter John, probably the apostle. If Papias is right, then, Mark as the evangelist is recognized by first generation Christians. The ascription of Mark as the author goes against early church tendencies to "associate apostles with the writing of the New Testament books" (p. 174). Though we can't identify Mark as the author through hard and fast positive evidence, "nothing in the second gospel stands in the way of accepting the earliest tradition that identifies John Mark as its author" (p. 175).
PROVENANCE
There is some evidence that Mark may have written in Rome. It is suggested by several authors in the early church. There are a number of Latinisms in the Gospel. Peter and Mark are identified as being in Rome in the early sixties. Nothing exists to point to any place other than Rome with the exception of Chrysostom, writing about 400, suggesting that Mark may have been in Egypt.
DATE
A Date in the 40s
This early date is suggested by the possibility that Mark's reference in 13:14 to the "abomination that causes desolation" is to an image of Caligula set up in Jerusalem in A.D. 40. But to harmonize this with a Roman provenance requires Peter and Mark to be in Rome earlier than the other documents would suggest.
A Date in the 50s
It is possible that Peter was in Rome as early as the mid 50s. This suggestion of an early date for Mark's Gospel is consistent with the idea that Luke referred to Mark in his preparation of his gospel and that Luke and Acts are dated as early as A.D. 62, consistent with Paul's status in prison at the end of Acts.
A Date in the 60s
Many scholars date Mark in the 60s due to traditions that he wrote after Peter's death and due to Mark's emphasis on persecutions which were very common in Rome around A.D. 65.
A Date in the 70s
The suggestion for a date as late as the 70s is based on the idea that Mark 13 represents the sack of Jerusalem by the Romans. However, the narrative in chapter 13 is not a specific description which would only fit that attack. If Jesus is able to predict events in the future there is no reason to date the composition after 70.
AUDIENCE AND PURPOSE
Audience
Mark seems aimed at a primarily Gentile Christian audience. There are many Latinisms and the translation of Aramaic expressions suggests that Mark is informing people who are not from the Jewish culture. His style is typical of that which could be used in public oration, suggesting an audience of listeners, not readers.
Purpose
Defining the purpose of a gospel is very difficult, as Mark and the other evangelists tend not to tell their purpose. In recent years, Carson and Moo show that critics have focused on four representative areas - eschatology, Christology, apologetics, and politics. None of the arguments is conclusive or all-encompassing.
SOURCES
p. 187 "We must admit that we have no certain knowledge of the written sources, if any, that mark used in putting his gospel together. His material may have come to him in small pieces of tradition, as the classic form critics thought, in both small pieces of tradition and longer oral summaries, or in a combination of these along with some written sources. In any case, if, as we have argued, the traditions about the Petrine origin of Mark are correct, then Peter himself is the immediate source of much of Mark's material."
TEXT
The two biggest textual difficulties in Mark's gospel are the words "Son of God" in 1.1 and the various endings in chapter 16. 1:1 is not a serious difficulty, as even if Mark didn't identify Jesus as the Son of God in chapter 1 verse 1 he does present him that way throughout the rest of the text. The long ending to Mark, including verses 9-20 exists in the bulk of manuscripts and can be found as early as the first half of the second century. Yet the style seems to be different from that of the rest of the gospel. There are alternative endings. None of the possible endings flow naturally from chapter 16 verse 8. Carson and Moo suggest that Mark intended to end the gospel at verse 8 but the additional endings were created at a later date, probably not by Mark. Others have suggested that the long ending was composed earlier than the rest of the gospel, some have suggested it was composed later, either by Mark or by someone else.
MARK IN RECENT STUDY
Mark was largely ignored with commentators throughout history focusing on Matthew instead. In the twentieth century the form critics viewed Mark primarily as a source document for other gospels. In the second half of the twentieth century people gained more interest in Mark in terms of his theology, purposes, and the community for which he was writing. It is only recently that commentators have been looking at Mark as a gospel in his own right.
THE CONTRIBUTION OF MARK
p. 192 "Mark is the creator of the gospel in its literary form - an interweaving of biographical and kerygmatic themes that perfectly conveys the sense of meaning of that unique figure in human history, Jesus of Nazareth, the Son of God."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)