Mark 15

vs 41

Jesus did not just have his twelve. He had a whole posse of girls with him too. And they were the ones standing there watching him die. You know why? Probably because no-one cared what women were doing.

vs 42

This verse gives us a reason, then, for what happens next. Something to do with the next day being Sabbath.

vs 43

Why did he do this? I've no idea exactly. Perhaps, since he'd died already, if he was left to hang there for the whole Sabbath too, he'd make a mess.

vs 44

He should be surprised - he was only on the cross a few hours. Centurions know everything. And if they don't, they just whack a soldier in the helm and find out.

vs 45

After all, none of this pretending to be dead early so that your friends can come and save you.

vs 46

As you would do with a corpse. Of someone that had died. And who you were not expecting to return.

vs 47

Which is good, because otherwise they wouldn't have known where to go later in the story.

Mark 15

vs 31

There is a little more mockery, this time about Jesus talk of saving people. Truly ironic.

vs 32

Yes, mock the messiah. That is such a good idea. That will be a good long-term career plan.

vs 33

Whether it was an eclipse (very long eclipse, three hours) or some other supernatural phenomenon, it is definitely not a good sign.

vs 34

And which the author feels no need to mention, but is quite useful for those of us who do not have the Bible memorised, Jesus is quoting Psalm 22:1. That means there is more to this cry than just Jesus being forsaken by God. In fact, the psalm as a whole makes it clear that God has not forsaken Christ - although the first line being quoted is obviously to draw attention to the fact that, for the moment, there is a disconnection.

vs 35

Apparently those standing didn't know either their Bible, or Aramaic. Or he said it so hoarsely and badly that they couldn't understand.

vs 36

I'm going with gaspingly hoarse, since they offer him a drink. After that, they let him be.

vs 37

And then Jesus dies, in a powerfully short verse. One of the good ones by the monks.

vs 38

This is so out of left field. One could perhaps try and state that this is a metaphorical statement, that didn't really happen. But that doesn't fit with how everything else has been stated. I think the curtain really did tear.

vs 39

So to a Roman centurion, apparently dying on a cross and crying out makes you the Son of God? No, but the darkness, the agony and words of the cry, the quickness of the death, and perhaps even the sudden kerfuffle at the temple of people saying, "WTF curtain?" would all lend itself to being quite an impressive situation.

vs 40

We move on now to look at some other spectators. Some women were apparently watching from a distance. Many men whose names you might think of don't get mentioned. We know at least John was there at some point in time. Was Peter watching from the shadows?

Mark 15

vs 16

Because he was about to give a speech, perhaps?

vs 17

No, apparently to torture him. Soldiers were official torturers, it seems - one imagines you had to be probably a little bloodthirsty to take the job back then. If only it were different now - soldiering does funny things to people, even in the most advanced and disciplined armies in the world.

vs 18

For them of course, it was less a religious thing, and more an opportunity for them to assert Roman dominance over what could be seen as a political activist against Rome. Which Jesus never was. Oops. Still, what someone is and what you can make them out to be are two different things, and only the latter really is important for propaganda.

vs 19

It's some serious mockery, and one assumes it was done publicly enough for everyone to see that the 'king of the Jews' was a joke, crushed under the Roman military sandal.

vs 20

Then they led him out to crucify him. See, I think Pilate would have been happy with the mockery and the beating. Those, nasty as they seem to us today, were just a fact of life back then. Sure, you might not have always been guilty, but a quick institutional beating might make everyone happy, and you get to go home. But Jesus doesn't get to go home.

vs 21

And he becomes forever remembered.

vs 22

There are arguments about where this is. There is an awesome cave in Jerusalem somewhere that really does look like a skull (Google it), but it could be somewhere else.

vs 23

This is one of those verses that does not directly correlate with other verses - my understanding is, though, that this is an offering of a painkiller, so that the nailing etc is not so bad, whereas later offers of wine vinegar are different.

vs 24

We sometimes spend a lot of focus on where nails went, how painful it was, how someone died, because for us it's gruesome. But this was a regular occurrence in the ancient world, and so it passes with this simple message - they crucified him. To think that such a death penalty, not used anywhere in the world any more as far I know, would remain well-known for millennia because of its use here.

vs 25

I have no idea how the time works in the ancient world, it always confuses me. I like this translation - I know when 9am is. The oKJV says "the third hour", which is probably more literal, but meaningless to me.

vs 26

Once again, political points-scoring means the Romans put up a sign saying that this man is being killed because he is King of the Jews. That no doubt caused a little consternation.

vs 27-28

Very interestingly, the TNIV drops 27 and 28, but includes some words from 27 in 26. So that's confusing.

vs 29

Because, of course, it is the right of every person to mock someone who is dying. It's just what you do... I guess. Perhaps they felt betrayed - like they had put some hope in Jesus, and now he obviously was not their messiah.

vs 30

This is the classic argument of all people in all things where they do not understand. They base success on some specific model - for example, to be messiah, you have to be victorious at the head of an army - and so therefore any other thing you do will be failure.

Having said that, being put on a cross does look a lot like failure. But we should remember God likes using failure type things to succeed. It makes him more awesome.

Mark 15

vs 1

They allowed Jesus to be beaten up a little while they were making their decision.

vs 2

"You have said so," is not really an admission. This is quite different to the, "It is as you say," of the NASB. Jesus is not making it easy.

vs 3

You know, while they are there. Blasphemy probably was not going to cut it for a Roman governor. They needed a good reason.

vs 4

Of course, Pilate's day would have been a lot easier if Jesus just said, "What they say is false, I can prove it, let me go now," but the point is, even if he said nothing, there was no proof open to charge him with death. Also, Jesus had been beaten a fair bit, remember.

vs 5

And so Jesus did say nothing, keeping his apparently God-given right to silence.

vs 6

This is how the Romans ingratiate themselves to the local populace, by freeing prisoners who they know are probably only partly guilty anyway.

vs 7

Okay, so not all the prisoners are victims of imperialism. Some of them are murderers.

vs 8

The asking was probably all part of the custom. I have nothing to base this statement on except feeling. Perhaps the people were stirred up this year by the priests to ask, because the priests were pre-empting the crowd. That just doesn't feel right to me.

vs 9

Which seems a fair question, if he is their king, after all.

vs 10

And see, Pilate knew why Jesus was on trial here - or had been on trial and found guilty. Pilate didn't want to be involved in this stuff. He probably also knew that Jesus was pretty popular, and might have been appealing to the crowd who he thought loved him. But crowds are fickle - if Jesus' closest disciples fled from him, the average person on the street who loved him when he was free probably feels utterly disenchanted with him when he is arrested and held by the Roman authorities they hoped to watch him tumble.

vs 11

Of course, release the murderer guy! Free Hat!

vs 12

So if they want to release the murderer, what do they want to do with the guy who healed their sick?

vs 13

Oh, yes, of course, crucify him. Mobs are so logical.

vs 14

And this is what happens when you try and reason with a mob. They just shout louder.

vs 15

The thing about mobs is, though, they cause trouble, especially to occupying Roman governors. Pilate couldn't have a riot, it would make him look bad, and he might have to kill a lot of people. That's never good.

Mark 14

vs 61

Well, if you can't incriminate him with lies, perhaps just asking him to incriminate himself will work?

vs 62

What was he going to do, lie? It's funny - for a short gospel, Mark really doesn't mind putting in a pretty potent and full answer from Jesus here.

vs 63

So dramatic. Not just the high priest per se, but the culture. It's great, really. But here, his cunning ruse worked. He just asked Jesus to condemn himself, and he did.

vs 64

As I have said many times before, there's only one person who, if they say they are God, isn't lying. So how do you play the odds? This guy wasn't agreeing with the priests, and yet was calling himself God. Surely he can't be the messiah. Would even the messiah claim Godhood anyway?

vs 65

And so, with a mix of righteous anger, and just regular anger (because I am sure they really were offended by what they thought was blasphemy, but no doubt they were also just regular angry at what they saw was an enemy to them and how they thought life should work, especially how life should work for religious leaders - ie, remaining in power.

vs 66

Now, really, the camera is panning away from the awful beating to focus somewhere else a moment. It is really quite incredible that Peter's story gets as much time as it does.

vs 67

Now, assuming the servant girl wasn't there on the hilltop with a pitchfork, we can probably guess that she saw Jesus around Jerusalem, and so saw Peter with him.

vs 68

Yeah, when someone is saying, "Hey, you're a friend of that known felon, who they are charging with falsehoods," you're probably not thinking you're going to get a biscuit. Peter is scared, but what is more important, he has forgotten what he said.

vs 69

This woman is a real pain in the ass to Peter.

vs 70

Just like when you meet someone from Katoomba you know they're a bogan, Peter has a rustic Galilean accent, and it gives him away. It's probably a similar accent to Jesus, and that is pretty much enough to get him tarred with the same brush by all the city slickers.

vs 71

Oh, ouch. Peter, you are going to eat those words.

vs 72

Did he break down and cry in front of them, I wonder? Or did he run off somewhere and do it in the dark? Regardless, what an awful thing for him, to realise that Jesus, the Son of God, had not only been betrayed by his closest friends, but had known it was going to happen beforehand, told them it was going to happen, and Peter had denied it - denied that Jesus was right - only to realise, again, that he was right and Peter was wrong, and now he probably feels it's too late to do anything about it. Does he rush in and say, "I'm Jesus!" or does he say, "Whatever you do to Christ, do to me"? No. He remains a pussy. For now, at least.

Mark 14

vs 49

They had their plan - to wait till after Passover. That's what they did, and now they're here. But God also had his plan - the last supper has now taken place, and Jesus is ready for this to all go down.

vs 50

Weak. I mean totally weak. Jesus predicted it, and so it happened. This is the start of a time where the Son of God is alone, and no-one will speak up for him.

vs 51-2

These two verses (which could easily be one verse) always stumps me. Some people say that it was Mark, and he writes this to put himself in the story, to show he was there. Others say it relates to an Old Testament verse, but I can't even remember which one. At the very least, it shows that Jesus' disciples would rather run around naked than stand by him clothed.

vs 53

Basically, all those who had set themselves up as enemies of Jesus. They're obviously the best people to hold him to trial.

vs 54

To us it would seem weird that someone might come and stand by the fire of another person's courtyard, especially someone powerful like a high priest. But times were different then, and cultural mores of hospitality would have prevented even a stranger from being turned away in such a situation. I've got to say, good on Peter for turning up. He ran at first, but at least he's here trying to stick relatively close.

vs 55

D'oh. You'd think someone would have put together a brief beforehand. See, they all knew they hated him, and probably just assumed they'd find something eventually.

vs 56

They couldn't even stitch up a fake charge! Talk about bumbling. Even Ahab could organise getting Naboth bumped off.

vs 57

We assume we get this from Peter mostly, who was close and perhaps could hear this all going on. But it's also possible one of the high priests or teachers of the law later became a Christian, and told this story. Anyway, some guy gets up and says something.

vs 58

This is of course not exactly what Jesus said, but it's not far wrong. He at least heard something.

vs 59

But others then seem to have promptly stood up and made some stupid counterclaim, and the bungling continued.

vs 60

Obviously the right to remain silent is one Jesus was quite fond of. But then, what do you say to stupid, obviously false charges? "That's stupid"?

Mark 14

vs 37

In fairness, while to Jesus this is the last few hours before his betrayal and death, to the disciples, it is the night after the Passover feast, they've had a big meal and an emotional time, and probably only half-believe that anything bad is going to happen. So it's hard not to sleep!

vs 38

Ahhh, such a classic line, that gets used so often now in a sexual context. Still, Jesus is keen or their prayer support - he obviously values it.

vs 39

So if you think repetitive prayer is useless, Jesus does it. Of course, he could be doing it for comfort as much as anything.

vs 40

Obviously he woke them up, or else all they would have said was, 'snoooooore'. What do you say when Jesus comes up and finds you sleeping again?

vs 41

A third time, and Jesus tells them that there's no more time for sleep. Now they're going to see why they should have been praying.

vs 42

He had been talking about being betrayed, but now here the betrayer comes in the flesh, and all of them are going to see - including the betrayer.

vs 43

Uh oh. Mob justice. And at the head of the mob comes Judas, whose name forever is linked with betrayal. Mecha ouch. The thing with mob justice is, see, even if it turns out that they shouldn't have done what they did, the person they killed doesn't come back to life.

vs 44

Because obviously, not everyone knew what Jesus looked like. It's not like he was on TV.

vs 45

And there you are, the kiss of death. Bad man, Judas.

vs 46

With an inside man, the mob didn't have to worry about a whole, "I'm Spartacus" type event happening. Best not to crucify all 12 of them.

vs 47

After all, this mob was arresting Jesus! Someone has to do something! I mean, it's a frustrating and tense situation. It's kind of incredible this doesn't just explode into a melee at this point.

vs 48

But Jesus knows that he can open his mouth and bring some order. And so he does. The whole fact of them bringing torches and pitchforks is, as he shows, a picture of just how unjust their actions are. They have stirred up hate against him, and they're going to use that to get rid of someone they don't like. It's terribly unjust.

Mark 14

Stupid exam prep distracting me!

vs 25

"Drink it new" would be a great advertising slogan for communion wine. I assume this is a way for Jesus to tell them that he's not going to be alive much longer - rather than him suggesting he's going to take a lengthy vow of wowserism.

vs 26

They sung a hymn. It's an unnecessary little addition, but it just adds so much flavour to the story.

vs 27

How lovely for them to hear that. I suppose Jesus wants them to be ready for it, to know it's not the end when they do.

vs 28

Again, another reminder of what they should expect - although honestly, how you expect anyone to remember what you said after they say, "You're going to become a traitor."

vs 29

Yeah, Peter, as lovely a sentiment as it is, haven't you learned your lesson about arguing with Jesus yet? This is what faith looks like without brains.

vs 30

I wonder what's more painful, Peter hearing this, or Jesus already knowing it.

vs 31

Note Peter wasn't alone - I just pick on him because he gets named. But they all said the same thing. Judas, of course, knew he was lying. But the rest of them probably honestly believed it. And Jesus stood there, looking at them, knowing it wasn't true. Painful.

vs 32

Jesus prays a lot. It's funny, reading the gospels, I more and more really feel in touch with Jesus's human side. And the more I get to know the Old Testament, the more I think that Jesus really could have come to so many of the conclusions he did basically by just knowing the OT and reading it a certain way. Apart from the miracles, and the occasional voice from heaven, it's possible that Jesus never heard any more from God than we do. I'm not 100% sold on the idea, but it's certainly a sobering thought.

vs 33

Because he knows it's not long now. This is actually a terrible thing he's facing, and he doesn't face it with a British stiff upper lip. Sure, he still follows the path of the martyr, and he does it bravely after a fashion... but this is part of his preparation, this grief.

vs 34

He just wants to let it all out, and he wants his friends there as support.

vs 35

Jesus wanted an out. How many times have you known there is something you need to do for God, and thought, "I really don't want to do this"? I know I've run across it from time to time, although it never involved being killed. Jesus wants to know there is no other way.

vs 36

What a prayer to hear. It is obedient, but strained and awful. I swear, to think God loves us after having to chalk that prayer up on the "My will is different" board... an angry, spiteful, smaller minded God would have just killed all humanity for making him suffer so much.

Mark 14

vs 13

Seriously, I need to remember these sorts of instructions for my D&D games. This is so out there.

vs 14

A lot of people call Jesus 'Teacher', so it's likely the man knows who they're talking about. Still, just saying to some guy with a jar of water is pretty risky.

vs 15

Now, whether Jesus had a guy come up to him earlier in the week and say, "Hey, Jesus, I've got the perfect room for you and your disciples to celebrate passover," or whether Jesus is just getting his disciples to talk to a person with the inferred message, "The Lord needs your passover room, find somewhere else to celebrate," it's still cool. I mean, they're not given a name, and they're told only to look for a guy carrying water - and while I would assume that was mostly women's work, who knows, it would only take two men to confuse them.

vs 16

Unsurprising, since Jesus told them so. And so they make preparations for passover as they would normally, having no idea it's going to become the last supper.

vs 17

So it's not even the Twelve that go and prepare - Jesus arrives with them, and the other disciples... leave? Stay? Sounds like the Twelve get pride of place.

vs 18

Too late... Judas already betrayed Jesus. But now he's calling him out on it. Or is he? Could he be talking about Peter?

vs 19

They all deny it, of course, except that since Judas already has, that makes him a liar. Perhaps he rationalised it saying, "Jesus said it in the future tense, and I've already done it, so he can't mean me."

vs 20

That really gives it away, given the Greek triclinium eating practice. It's whoever is sitting next to him.

vs 21

Yeah, I've heard people try and re-interpret this as if it were not a bad thing. Jesus would not say 'Woe' if it were neutral. It's bad.

vs 22

Now this seems a slightly odd thing to say just out of the blue at passover.

vs 23

Apparently, it is a specific cup. I have had the whole "how the Lord's Supper links with Passover meal" thing explained to me, and no doubt if you want a better explanation, you can ask a Jew for Jesus. Sufficed to say, they all do it - even Judas. I wonder if that counts as "drinking judgment on one's self" a la 1 Corinthians?

vs 24

Here Jesus marks this as the sign of a new covenant. He may or may not have said 'new', but it is a new covenant. That's a big deal. It's a revisioning of the agreement, a restatement of the principles. Epic.

Mark 14

Only three chapters to go, makes it seem so short... except chapter 14 is 72 verses long.

vs 1

Oooh, some 'sly' way. How sneaky, TNIV. The NASB actually uses the word 'stealth', which wins at coolness for me. The KJV uses the term 'take him by craft' - so I assume they were going to build a prison out of paddle pop sticks.

vs 2

Apparently their patience wears thin pretty quick, though, after feast day.

vs 3

Mmmm, nard. Actually, nard does not sound all that appetising. It is expensive, though, and without second thought, she basically accosts Jesus with it more thoroughly than any of those department store perfume saleswomen. Can I also just point out that Jesus is staying at a leper's house. That is just way cool. One assumes that he's now an ex-leper.

vs 4

Sounds like something Judas might say... but we're not told here it was him specifically.

vs 5

Apparently Jesus lived pretty simply. He called himself king, but he ate with lepers. He walked around, did his teaching thing, stayed in other people's houses... apparently expensive perfume was not something the disciples were used to seeing on the balance sheet. Which now, it seems, makes them forget that Jesus actually is the messiah, and he can have nice things.

vs 6

See? Jesus likes his perfume bath. Moreover, he doesn't like that they're losing it at this poor woman.

vs 7

It's a fair point, made better in the NIV, I think. The TNIV's "You can help them whenever you want," does not really have the same link to Deuteronomy 15. In any case, Jesus is a limited time offer, and if you want to do something nice for the Lord of all creation while he's here, get in fast.

vs 8

Now, this should not have been a surprise to them. But I'll bet it was. Even she was likely surprised. But Jesus had been saying they were headed to Jerusalem and he was going to die for some time now.

vs 9

Now, it makes me want to ask, does this story make it in because Jesus said these words, or would it have made it in anyway, and so Jesus' words are just highlighting the point? I actually go for the latter, because of the whole burial preparation thing, which you would certainly not leave out if you were writing a gospel. It is worth noting that this is one of the few stories that makes it into all four gospels. So it is a pretty important story.

vs 10

Because Jesus rebuked him, as well as the others, for harassing the woman about the perfume? It's possible. Could have been the last straw. Some people draw Judas as a communist style sympathiser, and when he sees Jesus accept the perfume, he thinks Jesus is just like all the other would-be messiahs, he just wants to be rich. It's not impossible for people to have such disequilibrium in their minds (he stole from the poor bag, after all), but it would seem a little strange. I generally go for he got rebuked one too many times.

vs 11

In the end, the chief priests didn't even need to work very hard. It's like God planned the whole thing, and made sure that even the bumbling bad guys could get a break.

vs 12

They knew Jesus would want to celebrate it, after all - he did every other celebratory thing. And no doubt they were keen to celebrate it. Passover was a big deal - still is, for Jews.

Mark 13

vs 20

So apparently it won't go as long as it should... it will still go a little while though.

vs 21

So all this stuff happens, and still, the end hasn't come. Anyone who thinks it has at this point is still fooled.

vs 22

The elect, of course, should know this message, and so should not get sucked in. But they are only human, and so Jesus says that yes, even they will get fooled.

vs 23

That's exactly it. Jesus tells us ahead of time so that we might not be fooled. Doesn't stop some from being fooled, but at least we're warned.

vs 24-25

Jesus very helpfully quotes Isaiah here, to ensure that we all... know... that it's going to get dark? Sorry, it's not a great deal of help. I am guessing that he is trying to link what he's saying to the Day of the Lord type events. But that would involve me looking more at Isaiah.

vs 26

Seems to me that the darkening of the sun and the heavens shaking is more of a sign that people will notice. Then we should be expecting the glorious reappearing. Which is, really, another sign I don't think anyone will miss.

vs 27

No doubt angels can probably be invisible - although I don't know that it's actually recorded anywhere that they can be in the Bible... hmm... - in any case, I'm expecting this little endeavour will also be quite visual.

vs 28

Well... I do now. But apparently this is a way of telling the season in Israel - look for fig trees with tender twigs and new leaves.

vs 29

Jesus says what I would expect - if the end times are coming, you'll know it.

vs 30

Now, see, here I am, talking all end times, but Jesus seems to be talking about the destruction of the temple. I have read things where people have said that the 'generation' is more like an age - like the Age of Christianity, or something. But I am prepared to allow for the fact that either Jesus is talking about the fall of Jerusalem generally, or he is swapping between that and some end times picture. I find it hard not to read end times into it, but that is more because that's the sort of focus it gets from us today. I guess the fall of Jerusalem isn't as important to us these days.

vs 31

In other words, we can trust them, despite all the other lies and falsehoods that people will speak. This stuff will stand up.

vs 32

So we see now that he was being at least a little bit expansive - I mean, the fall of Jerusalem is surely the sort of thing that doesn't require swathes of secrecy.

vs 33

You don't know, so be alert! It could be any time.

vs 34

I love that servants time is so cheap that you can tell one that his job is to keep watch at the door for when you return.

vs 35

So, like servants, we shouldn't sit around doing nothing - which I am sure is a very tempting thing to do as a servant - but we should work even when we feel we aren't being watched (even though we always are). One assumes, then, that the servant who was posted to door watch duty was also meant to do other things - because otherwise, we'd all just be staring up at the sky.

vs 36

Definitely we are allowed to sleep. I think we can take it in shifts across the world waiting for this to happen.

vs 37

If you need it any more clear, Jesus spells it out. The thing is, of course, we aren't to watch in exclusion to all other activities, as I have said. It's more that in doing all our other duties, we should not neglect watching.

Mark 13

vs 1

No doubt the temple was a magnificent building. This is the one Herod rebuilt, I think, and it was meant to be pretty awesome. Why not comment on it?

vs 2

When the Romans got sick of the Jews making trouble, this is exactly what they did.

vs 3

Andrew for some reason is there - usually it's just the three, but he got in on this conversation.

vs 4

This whole chapter could have been answered in one sentence. Jesus could have said. "Look, about forty years after I die and am resurrected, the temple will be destroyed, because the Romans will attack Jerusalem." So there has to be a reason why he doesn't just answer their question. Probably he takes it as an opportunity to teach the disciples something - as per usual.

vs 5

Jesus' first concern is that people are going to use eschatology and prophecy to trick people. And of course this is a totally legitimate concern. After all, when there is something no-one can know (the future) they can just make stuff up, or even genuinely but wrongly believe that they know, and people could get sucked in.

vs 6

I assume the 'I am he' is an answer to the question, 'What will be the sign'? Because Jesus did not specifically state that this would be a mark of his return, and nor did they specifically ask that.

vs 7

In other words, wars will not herald the end times. They will herald a continuation of things to come. Because people will fight wars all the time.

vs 8

Again, all these things are pretty normal. You can't use them as pointers towards the end times.

vs 9

All this happens by the end of Acts. So that's not really a mark of the end times.

vs 10

This one verse is counted in Matthew too. Now, some people consider that Paul reaching Rome is 'all nations', but obviously there are whole groups of people who hadn't heard, and God cares about them, not just the Roman empire. So this is a pretty long-term goal. We did surprisingly well in 2000 years, I reckon. Note that it only says preached, not that the whole globe must be Christian before the end. Of course, God's word does not return empty to him, but that doesn't mean that just because it is preached everywhere, it will be accepted everywhere.

vs 11

This kind of advice is pretty darn useful and comforting to people who find themselves being persecuted by a government authority.

vs 12

Not that this never happens anywhere else in the world, but it will also be true of Christianity - it will be punished by death, and families will give up their own for being Christians.

vs 13

Not that we're meant to go out and make people hate us - not exactly - but if we are faithful to the message, it will get on people's nerves.

vs 14

Most likely this is referring to the destruction of the temple, and so telling people to flee to the mountains so they don't get killed by the Romans. It's really interesting that Mark adds in his little editorial comment there. Again, he could have far more easily added an editorial comment explaining what Jesus meant.

vs 15

This all sounds a lot like... is it Ezekiel? Where Ezekiel is describing someone trying to flee from the oncoming army? Could be.

vs 16

Get out of there fast. A lot of people seem to picture this as some sort of last battle thing, where Christians will have to flee as the armies of the world come to hunt us all down. Maybe. I'm struggling to see it.

vs 17

How thoughtful of Jesus to think about how nasty it will be for them.

vs 18

Note, though, that he's obviously not talking about some sort of rapturous event - he's worried about them surviving a whole season. Possibly longer.

vs 19

'Never to be equalled again' could just be rather fitting hyperbole. I think it works.

Mark 12

vs 24

Bam. It's not really a question. It's a statement.

vs 25

In as much as the angels are not married, one assumes.

vs 26

Okay, now this argument is not the argument I would make for resurrection. But it is the argument Jesus makes. I think what he's arguing is that God is the God of living people, because he doesn't just say, "I'm the god of Abraham." When Abraham died, he was the God of Isaac. When Isaac died, he was the God of Jacob, and so on.

It's a Rabbinical argument (read: it doesn't make sense), because God really stops there. He regularly refers to himself as the God of Jacob (although really, he could be meaning Israel the nation, which does mean he's the God of the living). But he also does say "Your God", and he rarely talks to dead people.

vs 27

Badly mistaken! Jesus had a real hard spot for the Saducees. Possibly because they were so sad, you see.

vs 28

Note that this teacher of the law asks Jesus a question, not to trap him, but because he'd given a good answer. And it's fair to think that where one good answer is, another might be.

vs 29

Note that Jesus does not reply with one of the Ten Commandments. He replies with the shema.

vs 30

You might notice that Jesus seems to add a word, 'mind'. But in fact, culturally, he is adding the word 'heart'. Because in the OT, the word 'heart' refers to 'that bit of you where you do your thinking'. At least, that's what my resident OT scholar tells me.

vs 31

Not being content to just answer the question, Jesus goes on to give the second best commandment. I think he does this because, in these two commandments, the whole law is summed up. This might actually be said elsewhere (Matt 22:40).

vs 32

So step one - confirm God's unity, check.

vs 33

This really is a great reply from the guy. He's obviously impressed with Jesus.

vs 34

I wonder why people stopped asking questions at this point? Was it because this was just so wise and profound, they couldn't top it? Or was it because Jesus commented back saying the guy was not far from the Kingdom, and others weren't quite so keen to see how far their ignorance took them away.

vs 35

Jesus now takes the leadership on toe to toe. He's not answering questions now - he's asking them.

vs 36

Everyone expects the Messiah to come in the line of David. There's probably a prophecy that says as much. And it is only fair to point out that Jesus' adopted line comes from David.

vs 37

Most people seemed to enjoy Jesus' teaching. It was refreshing and new, no doubt, as well as interesting and who knows, maybe some people liked seeing the teachers of the law having it stuck to them a little.

vs 38

What did I say? Jesus is merciless when it comes to these guys.

vs 39

He loves to point out their hypocrisy. Apparently, they enjoy finery and pomp and importance.

vs 40

And yet, they think that raising money for the temple (and so their own pomp) is more important than the livelihood of a widow, one of the time's most marginalised positions. Jesus judges them severely, and so suggests that anyone who supports them is supporting the wrong team.

vs 41

Personally, I am not one to think that giving is a spectator sport, but apparently Jesus wants to make his point, and most others don't mind letting people see the big wads of cash (remember, these would probably be big chunks of gold or heaps of coins) into the bucket.

vs 42

Just looking across the four translations, it's interesting to see that these two coins are worth: a farthing, a cent, a few cents, and less than a penny. Honestly, I don't know why they bother. The point is that the amount she is offering is bugger all. I suppose you can't put that in your translation (the Greek says, thank you NASB, two lepta, worth a quadran). This is as meaningful, really. If you work off the fact that a denarius is a day's wages for a worker, a quadran is worth 1/64th of that. Were you to, say, take an Australian widow's pension, and work out how much it pays for one day, and then divide that by 64, you would get $0.81. Obviously widows did not get pensions back then, but imagine if someone in your church could only afford to give a weekly donation into the bag of 80 cents.

vs 43

Jesus is obviously impressed by her generosity, so much so he points it out to his disciples.

vs 44

Now imagine that the widow who put the 80 cents in the bag at your church couldn't even afford that. I mean, don't even imagine that she was going to use that money to buy food or something. Even just imagine something as simple as she put that in there instead of being able to buy any tea. How would you feel knowing that an old widow was giving up tea just to give money to the church? See, this story is a two-bladed sword. On the one hand, this widow is giving up all she has for the sake of God. Which is awesome. But on the other hand, the teachers of the law are using that money to dress up in pompous robes.

Mark 12

Can we do a chapter in an hour? Let's find out!

vs 1

Sets the scene. Vineyard built, owner moved.

vs 2

Sure, probably part of the rental agreement - a barter system.

vs 3

This is fairly unbelievable, but not totally crazy. I imagine back then the idea of claiming land would be "We live here, you take it back".

vs 4

After the first servant, it is less believable he'd send a second. But hey, perhaps he is merciful.

vs 5

At this point you should know that the story is about Israel, and the servants being sent are prophets. No Jew would argue - they treated all their prophets badly.

vs 6

Now, see, this is just crazy. You would not send your beloved son to do something dangerous like this, knowing they had already killed your servants. Or would you? Remember, Jacob sent Joseph off to go to his brothers. Still, if he's not at the head of an army, you seriously have to think sending your son is a big deal. Obviously Jesus.

vs 7

About this time, I would be feeling pretty hot under the collar if I were a temple priest or whatever.

vs 8

Eep.

vs 9

Yikes. Seriously, you think that Jesus is preaching peace and love. He just dropped an OT bomb on Israel - I will strip you of your vineyard (common OT picture of Israel) and give it to others (ie non-Israelites). Sound reminiscent of the exile?

vs 10

I love it when Jesus says thinks like, "Haven't you read the scripture" to people whose job it is to do just that. The piece of scripture itself points out that the rejected messengers become the most important part of the thing - that is, it turns out their message is really important, which is probably why they didn't want to listen to it.

vs 11

It must be remembered that many times in history, God has done this same thing - taken someone or something that is seen as nothing, and transformed that into his awesome tool for his own glory.

vs 12

See, the priests and leaders knew what he was talking about. The stupid thing is, of course, that by wanting to arrest him and have him killed, they are really playing right into the parable. That's what Jesus said they'd do. Now they're going to do it. How does that parable end for them again?

vs 13

This will work, for sure. Jesus isn't a good public speaker and debater, let's attack him with questions.

vs 14

Long verse! Very flattering. The question is still cut in half between 14 and 15 though! Stupid verse numbers.

The question is an important religo-political question. The Romans are 'in charge' - if you don't pay taxes to them, they will hurt you. But the Jews have their strong feeling about this being 'their land', and they don't feel they should pay. So what does Jesus say? Does he get the Jews offside, or the Romans?

vs 15

Jesus of course knows they're hypocritical bastards. I know some people try and stand up for them, but we have been told they are trying to trap him, and want him dead. So they're bastards.

vs 16

And so he uses an object lesson. The currency in use, of course, is Roman currency, and so it's got a little image of Caesar on it.

vs 17

So Jesus says, "Sure, pay the tax. But the important thing is that if you are made in the image of God, you should be worried about giving yourself up to God." Which they weren't. So bam.

vs 18

I for one love this question. It's far more theological. It's also one of those classic straw man arguments put up by people who don't actually believe in the thing they're arguing about. Yes, atheists, I'm looking at you.

vs 19

So, they set their argument up in Law. Moses said this, so we're talking about someone who is Law-abiding.

vs 20

This happens fairly regularly in those days, remember.

vs 21

It gets a little silly, but sure, it could happen.

vs 22

The thing about children is, of course, that if any one of them had fathered a child with her, that person might have a 'bigger' claim to being her husband. So it's got to be a childless set of marriages.

Just take a step back from this - how much pressure does the Law put on women! Imagine having to do this today. Crazy.

vs 23

And the question is who will she be married to at the resurrection. You will note, of course, that since polygamy is allowed under the Law, if it had been a man with seven wives, there would be no issue. But polyandry, oh no, can't have that. That's crazy talk.

What's Jesus' answer? Find out tomorrow!

Mark 11

After a long hiatus, it is time to restart my morning readings. A lot of things put them on hold. Not all of them are gone, but still, here I am.

vs 1

Which two? I guess it doesn't matter who was on donkey duty (or as one could so easily see it today, carjacking duty).

vs 2

Okay, I suppose it's not colt-jacking if someone is not riding it at the time. It's more like grand theft colt.

vs 3

It's okay, though, because Jesus tells them he's just going to 'borrow' it, and that should be a more than reasonable excuse for nicking off with the colt, he tells them.

vs 4

Now, I have a lot of negative things to say about the disciples from time to time - about how thick they are, and how they miss things. But I give them credit here. They are told to go commit grand larceny (borrowing, kender style) and off they go.

vs 5

This is not to be unexpected. It is, after all, not theirs.

vs 6

It lacks something - I love the "The Lord needs it" from another synoptic, but this is still great. Jesus' name is obviously well enough known, although it doesn't record a conversation, just a result. They could have preached the gospel at the person, and had the colt given up freely. But the context, and Jesus' instructions, seems to suggest they just go and say, "Jesus wants it," and so it is given.

vs 7

As one does, I suppose.

vs 8

This has some sort of cultural significance. Given the whole context, you could probably say it's got a link to some sort of king-entering-city activity.

vs 9

Yeah, it's a bit of a party. I like the note in the TNIV that explains Hosannah essentially means "Huzzah", although the more original meaning is quite poignant considering it's Jesus. It's a pretty full on procession.

vs 10

So people apparently thought that Jesus was bringing in a kingdom of David. Which, he kinda sorta was, but not as political and temporal. Or really at all political and temporal. Unless you're in the Catholic church in the pre-enlightenment - they were pretty hella political.

vs 11

Did he ride the colt into the temple courts? Did he handbrake it in there, look over its shoulder, and frown? That would be more action. What he did do is see it was late, and decided to head out with his posse to come back later.

vs 12

This story is so apposite, but if you just read it on its own, it makes very little sense, and makes Jesus look like a bastard. Anyway, Jesus is hungry - one of his many human feelings.

vs 13

So it's not that it's a bad tree - it's the wrong season. Our lemon tree has no lemons on it now for the same reason. Come back in a few months, and you can have all the lemons you want - assuming the cockatoos don't get them first.

vs 14

Ouch, that's quite a curse. And he did it in full view of his disciples. He did not entertain private conversations with trees.

vs 15

And now, the tree story is over... or is it? Anyway, Jesus is in a cursing mood, because now he goes into the temple and starts overturning the capitalist state - via merchant tables. It should be noted that for many, this would have been a convenience - being able to buy your sacrificial offering at the door, instead of hauling it from the other side of the country.

vs 16

I think his problems with it were twofold - one, that they were inside the temple courts, and the temple is a holy place, not a market. Two, they were most likely ripping people off. Convenience comes with a price, after all.

vs 17

Some people point out that he says this, and the merchants were most likely in the court of the Gentiles, where non-Jews went to pray, so it was like they were rubbishing on the Gentiles' ability to come to the temple and worship God (which is a huge deal, considering the prophets make it clear that God wants the nations to come obey him in his temple on his holy hill), and so Jesus takes them to task.

vs 18

Yeah, can't have people going around giving amazing teaching. Wait, what? One just has to assume that they were getting a cut of the action here. But also, if he was against the merchants, would he not come after the priests next? And then what happens? Better to get him out of the way.

vs 19

Back home to Bethany. A day's work of teaching and communism well done.

vs 20

That's one dead fig tree. I don't like figs, so no real loss. Apparently, Jesus was all about figs.

vs 21

Good old Captain Obivous. Peter can always be counted on to step forward and say, "Look, the thing I can see is seeable!"

vs 22

This is not an answer, although really, Peter's words were not a question. What does this even mean? Perhaps the next verse will clue us in.

vs 23

And so Jesus is telling them that they, too, can deforest fig plantations if they want to. God will honour their requests.

vs 24[and 25?]

The TNIV on Biblegateway seems to run 24 and 25 together. It skips 26 (the NIV has a footnote telling you words are there, but not what they are, giving a reference to Matt 6:15). The NASB gives the text in square brackets. Anyway, it could be a typo. My hardcopy TNIV is not within arm's reach.

The actual verse(s) themselves say that God will listen to our prayers, and answer them, and will even forgive our sins - as long as we forgive others too. It's a pretty big message. But it raises lots of questions, the most obvious one being, "So if I don't get what I prayed for, I didn't believe hard enough?" Just realise that universal affirmatives may be only partially converted. So this is providing an option for why your prayer will or won't work. It's not exhaustive.

vs 27

Ahh, so he doesn't ride the colt through the temple, like bikie gang Jesus would.

vs 28

Jesus makes it pretty darn clear where his authority comes from, but they probably thought it sounded like an officious sort of question to ask.

vs 29

Damn it, Jesus, that is so annoying. They asked you first!

vs 30

Oh, come on, this question doesn't have anything to do with what they asked Jesus! Well, actually, of course it does. Jesus is spelling out the nature of their question. They're not asking him who signed his permission slip to come to temple. They're asking is his ministry of God or not. And so he throws the question back at them - since they want to judge his ministry, let them judge John TBs first.

vs 31

Okay, you've got to ask, how did Mark (or Peter) overhear this little conversation? I don't know, he doesn't explain. It could be that one of the priests told him later this is what happened.

vs 32

Ahh, Jesus has trapped them with a question. They try to do this to him from time to time, but he is really good at it. It's surprising that John the Baptist still is so loved by the crowds, even after he's been dead so long. I say so long, it's been at most a year or a bit more, likely less.

vs 33

See, I will just point out, we do not always need to be in a rush to explain every aspect of every bit of theology to every person every second. Sometimes, you can just say to someone, "You just don't seem to be worth telling at the moment. I don't think you're going to listen, because your heart is obviously not in the right place." That might sound harsh, and you might think you've no right to make that call. But you know that sometimes you can just feel that someone is being a dick, or obstreperous, or wasting your time. I tell you what, if we all lived for Christ as much as we should, we would not abide people who wasted our time nearly as much. That's something for me to think about more.

Mark 10

vs 1

Customary Jesus lectures. Like I've said before, a really good speaker in ancient times could charge money for their teachings, simply for the sake of entertainment. So someone going around who is a high quality speaker, and doing it for free - well, people are going to go and listen.

vs 2

A fair and easy question, really, when worded like that. The law has specific arrangements for such things.

vs 3

And so Jesus takes them to the Law. They should know it, so he asks them what it says.

vs 4

By their reading, Moses allowed the issuing of a certificate of divorce, which would tend to indicate it is lawful, Moses being the lawbringer.

vs 5

The crossover of epochs here in this single sentence really profoundly illustrates something I've talked about before - the ancient near eastern sense of history. Moses wrote the law because the Pharisees' hearts were hard? Surely not, at least, not in the way that we would think. He wrote it obviously because people's hearts are hard. But Jesus saying 'your' connects the Pharisees with Israel of old. It's something we wouldn't do, as a rule.

vs 6

The Pharisees go back to Moses, but Jesus goes back to Genesis. He says that God created the two genders, first of all.

vs 7

He then also created the idea of marriage in the two coming together (leaving their families to do so, and start a new family, as it were).

vs 8

Jesus now extrapolates that the two becoming one flesh makes a unity, not two parts.

vs 9

With all of these text together (well, it's all really one bit of Genesis, isn't it) Jesus uses these propositions to defend his position - that people should not separate that which God joins at marriage. So sure, there is a function for divorce in the law, but that is because it assumes it will happen. The law also has rules with what to do with murderers - that doesn't mean it condones murder, only that it deals with it.

vs 10

The disciples obviously find this teaching interesting, and perhaps difficult. After all, it seems to relate directly to an ignoring of the law. Can Jesus really be serious, that people should not get divorced?

vs 11

Jesus lays it out bare. God does not like divorce, so don't do it. Just because there is an option, doesn't mean it's condoned, merely tolerated. In fact, Jesus' language is so strong, he doesn't tolerate it. He says God treats it as adultery. Remember, adultery carries a death sentence - stoning. So don't think he says that lightly.

vs 12

For you girls, he makes it clear it works both ways. Of course, it's mostly women who got stoned for adultery, or at least I've heard. Can't confirm it, of course, I don't have much in the way of statistical data from 1st century Judea.

vs 13

As I would too, I guess. Children do quite often get in the way of things.

vs 14

What does Jesus mean? I've always read it as the unimportant, the marginalised, the powerless. Some people prefer to see it as the ignorant, the innocent, the pure. Never met a child like that, personally. Could be a mix of both. Of course, Jesus could also be saying that little children just go straight to heaven - which is still a fairly popular idea.

vs 15

Again, it's debatable exactly what is meant here. The idea of a simple, direct acceptance, almost gullible acceptance, like that of a child, I think is appealing to some people. I think the idea of accepting the kingdom of God may have a little to do wit that, but also the idea that children pretty much have to take what they're given, because they don't have a choice. They are accepting because of ignorance, but also because of powerlessness.

vs 16

Nawwwww. Jesus huggles the kiddies.

vs 17

It must be something to have people fall to their knees at your feet all the time. A lot of people have made the point, and I will repeat it - you can't actually do anything to inherit something. It's a funny question, really. The whole language of heaven and God is messy like that sometimes. It goes to show how much we misunderstand sometimes, how much we just gloss over things and don't think about them.

vs 18

Jesus doesn't pick on that, though - he picks on the word 'good', and for good reason - because he uses it to further boost his authority. He tells this guy if he really wants to accept his teaching, then he should accept it as God's teaching.

vs 19

Yep, they're commandments all right. He should know them.

vs 20

And he probably has. I'm not saying he was Moses or anything - although Moses killed someone... Anyway, the guy isn't perfect, but he may well have been a righteous man.

vs 21

It's just one thing. Jesus picks on the one thing. It's money. If you really understood the kingdom of God, you surely would just drop the cash and run. Or perhaps you wouldn't...

vs 22

I generally take that to mean that he doesn't return. Which doesn't surprise me, really. Lots of people love money. It's pretty loveable. It's liquid stuff.

vs 23

And so Jesus says it's hard for rich people to get into heaven. This guy is an object lesson.

vs 24

Jesus expands his thought a little there. He states it's simply hard to get in at all! No wonder they're all so shocked.

vs 25

But he repeats himself, and shows how hard it is for rich people to enter the kingdom. I'll make it clear here - there is no "Eye of the Needle" gate. It's not about camels loaded with goods. This is a fallacy. Large animals being squeezed through the eye of a needle is a not uncommon Hebrew idiom. It's used in the talmuds. It means something unlikely or impossible. So Jesus is saying - shock horror - that it's unlikely, or impossible, for a rich man to get into heaven.

vs 26

That's why the disciples are surprised. If Jesus had said, "Rich people just need to give me their money, then they can get to heaven," he would have been a televangelist. But what he's saying is that rich people - who seem to be able to get whatever they want - can't buy their way into heaven. You can't do it by giving your money to a preacher, or giving it away to the poor. Jesus wants people to see that it's only by relying on God being your primary aim and goal in life will you get to heaven.

vs 27

You have to rely on God, you see. It doesn't matter if it's impossible for rich men to get into heaven. Because God can still do it. It's impossible for thousands of people to be fed from a breadstick and a sardine, or for people to be healed of leprosy by touching them. But Jesus does it.

vs 28

Yeah, you tell him, Peter. Of course, they had. They were pretty much official hangers-on.

vs 29

Long list there - but basically boils down to family and fields. Which are the two most important things to a Jew - tribe and land.

vs 30

Jesus does promise a temporal reward! But it's not the sort of thing we in the future think of as reward, I think. It's a huge family, with all the requisite blessings and responsibilities. It's pretty awesome, though. I mean, including people into your family is actually really nice. And with it comes persecutions, too. And then there is also eternal life into the bargain. Awesome.

vs 31

That's one of the big lessons of the family of God - those who we think are first - the rich, the powerful, the influential - they aren't first in God's family. They're not the fathers, mothers, sisters and brothers. They are the ones lucky to get in the door at Christmas time. Well, lots of them are. And many of the poor huddled masses are the ones who will find themselves strolling into heaven without a care in the world - not because they're poor, but because it is so much easier to accept things are out of your control when you're powerless.

vs 32

They're probably astonished and afraid because they know that a showdown will no doubt await Jesus in Jerusalem, and Jesus himself has said that when he goes there, he will die. Long verse.

vs 33

This is not the kind of sentence you want to hear - one that includes "Son of Man" and "handed over to death". I think the disciples know full well that Jesus has not made friends with a lot of Pharisees, and so they are going to be out to get him.

vs 34

It's quite specific, really. Of course, it probably wasn't impossible to guess that they would do such things, if it was a common occurrence. Whether it was or not, of course, the rising from the dead three days later is not common. That's pretty long odds, really.

vs 35

What a strange request to make. I mean, they're hardly going to say, "Can we have a loaf of bread?" when they ask something like this.

vs 36

Funny that Jesus assumes it's going to be something for them. Or it could just be that they are asking. You know how sometimes you'll ask someone to do something, but you'll say, "Oh, it's not for me." I guess you'd still call that doing something for them. Anyway, disregard.

vs 37

Oh, look at that, it does turn out they're asking for something. It's not a terrible thing, though, you know. I mean, sure, it's a little selfish - unless perhaps they really thought they deserved it, and so figured this was the way of going about it. Who knows, perhaps these sorts of petitions were regularly made of the powerful. But in positive, it shows that they really believe that Jesus will be glorified.

vs 38

Jesus asks a question which is rather vague. What he probably refers to is drinking the cup of God's wrath, and being baptised into death.

vs 39

They answer, probably assuming he means drinking from his cup, in fealty perhaps, and being baptised in the Jordan, which perhaps they already had been.

Jesus tells them they will drink the cup and be baptised as he is - this is not a hugely happy thing to be told, but the assumption is they don't fully understand it right away.

vs 40

Whoever they are. I know we've pretty highly exalted people like Peter and Paul, but there is no reason that other truly righteous people, perhaps that we've never heard of, won't have those seats. I certainly won't. Good on them, whoever they are. Kudos.

vs 41

A lot of people think they are saying, "Damn them, why didn't we think of that?"

vs 42

Just like most leaders, really. I mean, there are not many effective leaders who don't do these things.

vs 43

Again, this simply does not work in the real world. What Jesus is describing is impossible. Which is all the more reason to do it - because when we do it and it works, people will go, "No, that's not possible. How do they do it?" to which our response will obviously be, "God does it."

vs 44

Jesus is, thankfully, first. But that's the model we should try and follow.

vs 45

A lot of commentators describe this as the fulcrum of the book - the pivotal point where Jesus' ministry stops being teaching and miracles, and starts towards Jerusalem for the grisly end. It highlights what Jesus' mission is - he has done his preaching, proved his authority, and now he goes knowingly to die.

vs 46

Are we supposed to care that he's the son of Timaeus? I don't really know why we get to know what his name means. Marks him out as a real person, perhaps, that people could go meet? Possibly. Anyway, he's blind, he's begging, and there's a huge crowd around Jesus.

vs 47

Son of David - that's a rather novel title to give Jesus. I don't know that he's claimed it himself, although Messiah is probably close enough.

vs 48

I love that people told him to be quiet. "Quiet blind man. Don't bother the messiah, who regularly heals blind people. Shut your hole. It's only blindness, man up." Damn right you shout.

vs 49

Jesus knows what's what. Someone calls him son of David, they get a cookie.

vs 50

One assumes he followed his voice, or people pointed him in the right direction. Perhaps he had a labrador with him. No, a dog would have added an extra element of coolness to the story.

vs 51

The blind man could have said so many things. This is like in a D&D game when the party comes across a God, and the God offers them anything they want, and they ask for fresh rations and healing. Sure, God can do it, but he could also have made you a king, or given you a golden ape, or whatever.

vs 52

This guy actually gets to follow Jesus, instead of being told not to tell anyone (well, there was a huge crowd). He also gets to see. Both are pretty awesome. Maybe that's why we know his name - because he followed the disciples?

Mark 9

vs 1

Of course, that doesn't refer to the second coming, unless one of the apostles is still kicking about. It's referring to the cross, and the resurrection. That's actually quite cool to think about - the kingdom has come in power - in as much as the firstborn from among the dead is raised. Now we're just waiting for the secondborn.

vs 2

How would you go about describing this in writing? You know, I can't really imagine what happened up there. I can picture a few ideas, based on what is written, but this is such an awesome thing. Also, could this be the first glimmers of what he just mentioned?

vs 3

Of course, this was before nappisan was invented. Seriously though, it must have been awesome.

vs 4

This is a great fulfilment of prophecy on the one hand, but also a great statement of the Law and the Prophets being invested in Jesus' ministry.

vs 5

I guess he was trying to be hospitable? It's a pretty amazing sight - knowing you have the messiah there, and the two biggest names in Judaism.

vs 6

I think we always assume we would just handle these sort of apparitions or visions with total poise. But seriously, it would be rather scary.

vs 7

And this would be scary too. But the sonship of Christ is stated yet again - not only his relationship with the father in terms of family, but in terms of heir to God's power. Listen to him!

vs 8

And then it's done. They get the picture - the law, the prophets, the power of God himself - all are found in Christ Jesus. That's pretty killer. It's a great part of the gospels.

vs 9

See, this time he gives them more specific instructions - once he has risen, this story can come out. Perhaps by way of explanation for his arising. Is it better to do it that way, rather than leave a trail of evidence that points to why he would be resurrected? It seems the resurrection is the key that unlocks the earlier, rather than the other way around.

vs 10

Isn't that great? They didn't want to take it literally, so they thought, "Well, since it can't be literal, how can we interpret it figuratively?" How often do people do that? Of course, some things aren't meant to be literal. And remember, Jesus was always speaking in parables. So it's only fair they're confused.

vs 11

Which is a fair question, seeing that Elijah was there and all.

vs 12

So Jesus tells them that this is how it works - Elijah does come first. But now, can they answer the question of why it is written the messiah must suffer? That is the question they were wondering about, after all.

vs 13

He is of course talking about John the Baptist - who came before Jesus, and has now been beheaded.

vs 14

Great, an argument.

vs 15

But Jesus is too shiny to argue around in mobs - people just want to be around him.

vs 16

Jesus, peacemaker.

vs 17

Okay, so a guy has a demon possessed kid.

vs 18

Ahhh, the disciples couldn't get this one to go. That's quite incredible. Of course, it's quite incredible they could get any of them to go in the first place. But here we are, something to argue about - why couldn't they do what they had done for others?

vs 19

Jesus calls it - he says it's a function of unbelief.

vs 20

Nerves. Also demon.

vs 21

Can you imagine? A childhood of this suffering. Probably awful for the parents too. And no doubt plenty of people can imagine it, and Jesus is unfortunately not there to make it better.

vs 22

Interestingly, this is one of those demons that sounds a lot like epilepsy. Hard to say. Obviously we can't tell. Regardless, it's untreatable at the time.

vs 23

Jesus is prodding here. He's just said that it was because of unbelief that the boy couldn't be healed. Now he's picking up on the words of the father. They have brought him on a chance, with perhaps little feeling that there can be any success. No doubt the disciples' inability to do anything hasn't helped, and probably the pharisees arguing has further strengthened the idea.

vs 24

But of course, the father really wants his child healed. He wants it so much, he is prepared to both state his belief, but also admit his unbelief. He wants to do whatever it takes.

vs 25

Come out, and never enter him again. Two commands there. I must admit, the idea that even if you get rid of evil spirits, that they can just come back and haunt you again, scares the hell out of me. But really, is it any different to the other illnesses and problems that we have, that Jesus dealt with? I mean, the people who he cured of illnesses, did they never get sick? The people he rose from the dead, did they not die again? But here, Jesus makes it clear - the demon shall leave, and not return to the boy. Does that mean he might not get another spirit later in life pestering him? I honestly don't know. It is interesting the point is made, though.

vs 26

I don't know if spirits can just kill people, but certainly they can thrash you around a bit, it seems.

vs 27

Even if he was dead, Jesus could deal with it, so no problem.

vs 28

Which is a fair enough question! I mean, they had driven others out, but this one seemed stubborn, was causing the boy and his father no end of pain, and also had caused an argument with the pharisees.

vs 29

It's very interesting that the fasting bit is only attested to in some manuscripts, to the point that the (T)NIV has left it out. But it's an interesting answer overall - with or without fasting. The idea that Jesus had commented at first about a lack of faith, and now talks about prayer being what dislodges this particular form of nasty, could be seen as giving two quite different answers. The thing is, since instructions for driving out spirits aren't really given, I think our reactions would generally be to pray anyway. Prayer as an action is an act of faith. It makes me wonder if the disciples didn't have to pray aloud to drive out a spirit. Jesus didn't have to.

vs 30

Wouldn't it be great if your ministry was so popular, that you had to go and hide to get away from people?

vs 31

Again, this isn't stuff that he wants the general populace to hear. But he wants his disciples to be ready.

vs 32

This topic seems to keep coming up, almost as if Jesus is trying to get them to realise what he's saying. But I think the more he repeats it, the more scared they are of what it might mean.

vs 33

You never want Jesus asking you about your stupid arguments.

vs 34

And when your argument is something you're already sure Jesus isn't going to like, you really don't want to own up.

vs 35

This is a huge table turner. They were following the way of the world - which is, you know, pretty easily lined up. You're powerful, people serve you. But Jesus and the kingdom of God don't work that way. They're about service, putting others first. How is it that the kingdom of God can be such a topsy turvy place? Isn't it strange that the ways of the world seem natural? I find that strange.

vs 36

Because as you know, children just seem to wander around all over the place, to the point where you can just reach out and grab one at leisure. Good to know some things haven't changed.

vs 37

This is not a road to heaven. To welcome God, you must welcome Jesus. To welcome Jesus, you do not necessarily need to welcome all children all the time. You do need to welcome them in Jesus' name, though. Damn.

vs 38

This rings so selfsame as what the Pharisees would say. It's hard to believe one of the disciples would say this. And yet they do. The AMA smacks of this sometimes - that person is healing people, but not with our methods, so hence he can't be a doctor any more. Of course, some of them shouldn't be, but there's a line.

vs 39

They could say something wrong, possibly, but not bad. I know when I was a younger Christian heresy and wrongness were something I really battled against. I wanted the perfect theology. Nowadays, I recognise that we are always going to be wrong. Better to say something wrong than something bad. We can always be corrected.

vs 40

Remember, of course that whoever is not for us is against us. Both statements can be correct. In this case, people who (a) claim to be following Jesus, and (b) are driving out evil spirits can generally be trusted.

vs 41

Even the simplest gift of encouragement to a fellow Christian is worthy. We've all got to stick together, team. Damn terrorists are out to get us, with their AKs and their AWP campers.

vs 42

Okay, things get a little freaky here if you're reading the TNIV on Biblegateway, because it skips from 42 to 47. In my printed copy, it goes 42, 43[44], 45[46], 47. So I'm not sure if it's a print error in the online edition, or they changed it to be like that. Anyway, I'll follow the printed TNIV and do all these verses under 42, 43, and 45.

So this verse goes till 'sea'. Basically Jesus says you're better off being drowned than causing a Christian to stray. Nasty.

vs 43

Now Jesus looks at those things that might cause us to stumble ourselves. This is a series of damn hard sayings. Whatever it is that causes us to stumble, we should cut it out of our lives. To the point where our hands should be removed by our own volition.

But more than that, stumbling equals falling - because the result is hell. It's verses like these where I suddenly see purgatory as becoming fashionable. The bit that's missing is about worms not dying and fires not being quenched.

vs 45

Same again, but this time with feet. Just repeating to reinforce the message. Again, the bit that's missing is exactly the same words. But don't worry, they are included further down.

vs 47

Yeah, I won't be plucking my eyes out, or cutting my hands or feet off. Does that make me a bad Christian? I'm going to take a gamble and say no, that Jesus is using hyperbole to make the point. The reason I say this is that there is no recorded instances of any of the disciples doing it, or the early church, and I've never known any great Christians to have done it.

vs 48

Finally, Isaiah 66 gets a look in. Nasty. But probably not necessary to repeat. The message is surely clear enough.

vs 49

Salt is good, remember. It makes things tasty and preserved. Salting things with fire sounds a little nasty, though, in the context of people burning in hell. But I think the idea, considering the next verse, is that everyone will taste judgment, but only some will burn. For the rest, the smell of the sulphur and threat of the flames will be enough to preserve them by thrusting them into God's arms, as it were.

vs 50

How often would we go around telling people to have the salt of judgment in them, and to thus be at peace with each other? It's a pretty scary idea, in a way. It's also what you might call threat based teaching, or 'stick based' - do this, or you burn in hell. Something we definitely don't do in schools.

Mark 8

vs 1

See, I read this one verse, and I can see what's coming.

vs 2

Similar situation. Come on guys, you can put 1 and 1 together!

vs 3

Look, he doesn't want to send them away. They're hungry. What will you do?

vs 4

See? Come on, guys. Even the average joe, having heard Jesus heals people, brings someone on the assumption he can do it twice.

vs 5

Seven. More than last time, but with no fish.

vs 6

Again, following a similar formula.

vs 7

Unless a few was a few thousand, we're not really changing anything from last time.

vs 8

I wish I was there. I personally have no need to see miracles per se, but this one is just too awesome. It's my favourite, I think, and not because it feeds people. It is just so unexplainable.

vs 9

Is that men, women, children? Doesn't say. Still a heap.

vs 10

I love that they follow him for days, he feeds them, then just dismisses them as if class is over, and off they go on their next adventure.

vs 11

Perhaps they were just hungry, and bummed they missed out on the bread.

vs 12

Ouch. Although, it's not as if he hasn't given a heap of signs, and isn't about to give yet more. So why even say it? Perhaps this is linked to the whole 'faith that saved you' thing. Jesus doesn't just do miracles for entertainment. Sure, when he does them people might see them, but much of what he does is about compassion as well as testament.

vs 13

Quick boat trip, that.

vs 14

What happened to all those baskets? Perhaps they distributed them among the people.

vs 15

Just... I mean, he says Pharisees and Herod right there. Unless they own bakeries, how could anyone mistake what he's talking about? You know, I bet they did have their own bakeries.

vs 16

Of course it is. That makes perfect sense. Only possible explanation.

vs 17

I suppose the answer is yes.

vs 18

Seriously guys, after all Jesus has said and done, does he have to use these words to describe his closest posse?

vs 19

They remember the details.

vs 20

Seriously! It was in the same chapter! Not that that necessarily reflects chronology, but it was obviously put here for a reason.

vs 21

Note that Jesus doesn't explain it to them, nor us. You would have to be thick not to get it. But people are thick. That's why we need preachers.

vs 22

New story, new cripple, another miracle, we assume.

vs 23

Again, we have the spitting in the eyes, the rubbing, as if Jesus needed to clean his eyes off or something. But Jesus can bring people to life by telling them to stand. He can heal people's daughters without seeing them. So what is the purpose?

vs 24

The blind man, he can see something, but it looks like trees. Obviously this guy wasn't born blind - he knows what trees look like.

vs 25

Which, you know, is awesome. This guy is obviously going to be happy with this.

vs 26

And once again, Jesus tells him to keep it secret. Best of luck keeping that you aren't blind any more a secret. You might be able to do it if you have a white cane and a labrador, I suppose. But this story starts and ends, and we're left thinking, "Okay, so Jesus heals a blind man. Big deal, he's healed plenty." Why pick this story out? Because of the spit on the eyes thing? Okay, great, what does that tell us about Jesus, that his power is running low? Obviously not. The answer, I think, lies in the story that follows. This is just one example of why we can't read things purely in isolation. You need context. It's vital.

vs 27

What's the next story about? Well, Jesus wants to know what his reputation is among the people, who they think he is, how they explain his miracles and teaching.

vs 28

All good answers, really. You might think it's funny that he's not just allowed to be Jesus, but remember, people thought the prophecy was that Elijah would return, so you sort of look for him.

vs 29

Huzzah for Peter! So now we see a little bit of why the miracle was put above - Peter's eyes have been opened. He can see the truth.

vs 30

And once again, Jesus gives his strange, messianic secret warning. I think we've talked about this a fair bit, so we'll move on from it for now.

vs 31

This is obviously a strange teaching to hear when you've just heard Jesus call himself the Messiah - or at least agree to it. We don't expect our powerful leader figures to talk about them being captured and killed.

vs 32

Peter is obviously thinking what I would be thinking - don't ruin the moral of the team!

vs 33

And so now we see that, sometimes, people's heart's blindness can only be partially cured at first. I suppose sometimes we all see Jesus as just a tree walking around, and not in the stark relief that we should.

vs 34

Strong, terribly powerful words. Jesus makes it clear - not just to the twelve, but all the disciples, that his way is a way of death. It's at about this time we would be calling it a cult.

vs 35

The eternal reward picture is strong. It takes a lot for people to be prepared to risk their lives. Of course, not everything people risk their lives for is eternal. Makes me wonder about communist rebels, though - they really want to go and die for the greater good? Strongly held, if a little mistaken, beliefs there.

vs 36

Obviously not much good. But do we think about this enough? I know I certainly don't. I quite like the world sometimes. Particular bits of it. Are they worth my eternal soul? Damn, hard saying.

vs 37

Well, lots. But is it worth it is the question. I mean, mad guitar skills? So the story goes, anyway.

vs 38

I wonder how many people turned around and just walked away here, thinking, "Take up cross? Lose your soul? This is too much. I liked him better when he healed blind people." It sounds crazy, but a lot of people say it now, "I like what he has to say about loving your neighbour, but I don't like what he has to say about righteousness or hell." So I imagine it was similar back then.

Mark 7

vs 1

Are they a posse, or just come to visit?

vs 2

Not just that they hadn't washed their hands - that they hadn't followed a religious rule made up by the pharisees.

vs 3

See, tradition.

vs 4

Nice of Mark to explain it for us. Just a little note that helps us recognise that this gospel isn't written just for Jews, or else why include something like this?

vs 5

A fair enough question, if you're in charge of religious decision-making for your people. Or at least you think you are.

vs 6

Ouch! Hot damn, that's harsh. Jesus calls a spade a spade. I mean, we wouldn't know if they really cared about God and just had it wrong. But Jesus knows.

vs 7

Isn't it awesome that while the Bible might not have a verse for everything, it's got a verse for an awful lot of specifics, and it seems to have killer cool prophecies for Jesus to fulfil or see fulfilled.

vs 8

See, it wouldn't be so bad if they had not let go of God's traditions. I think so, anyway.

vs 9

See, they have to set aside God's laws to follow the traditions of people. That's just stupid. Surely God's laws would trump a man's laws.

vs 10

Which I personally think is rather harsh, but hey, that's just me. That doesn't mean they shouldn't follow it. Should we put people to death? No. But we should obviously treat dishonouring parents as important.

vs 11

The concept is a little strange, but takes us into the mind of these people. They would claim that it is more important to give to God's temple than to support your family. Very basically.

vs 12

As I said above, the idea was that you should devote stuff to God, and in doing so if your parents starved or something, well, that's just that. God is more important. And you know what, I can see where they're coming from, too. I mean, I would find it easy to think this way.

vs 13

But God wants the former without the latter being undone. And Jesus points out that this isn't the only example.

vs 14

What a powerful statement. Remember, there are laws in the OT that actually do talk about religious uncleanness. What Jesus is saying is quite radical. But it's true. Touching a dead body doesn't make you sinful because it's a dead body. It makes you sinful because God made a law, and you broke it.

vs 15[16]

This puzzled me for ages! The Biblegateway version is missing any notes, or even the number 15! Very strange, just a typo methinks.

vs 17

Not what I'd call a parable, but that's what Mark calls it.

vs 18

Ouch, Jesus is on an insult streak today. Even his disciples are copping it. Although, it seems a fairly clear lesson to me. But then, I don't have hundreds of years of culture telling me it's wrong.

vs 19

Mark makes it clear what Jesus is saying, that all food is clean. It's not clear from the words he records, though. Mark is putting the interpretation on it for us.

vs 20

That is, your actions. Like eating something you shouldn't.

vs 21

It's quite a list. But it is interesting to think about - that these things come from within us. But so often, don't we try and hold things outside us responsible? Pornography, movies, poor education, whatever. Sure, they don't help. But the sin comes from us.

vs 22

The list goes on.

vs 23

And of course evil defiles us. That is, it makes us unable to come to God. But Jesus thankfully does away with that, so we can.

vs 24

I think sometimes Jesus just wanted some privacy for prayer and general health and wellbeing. He wasn't trying to be a ninja, it's just that the thousand people who see you now don't realise you just spent three hours preaching to the thousand people you saw you a few hours ago.

vs 25

This is not an uncommon occurrence for Jesus.

vs 26

But this is a little new. Greeks weren't often going to come and throw themselves at the feet of a Jewish messiah. For one, why would they believe anything would happen? For two, why would a Jewish messiah help a Greek person? But desperate times call for desperate measures.

vs 27

A lovely thought, isn't it, that Jesus is referring to this Greek woman as a dog. But you know what? Jesus spoke to her! We must assume in Greek. I would doubt she was speaking Aramaic. So there, Jesus spoke Greek.

vs 28

This is a ballsy answer. A lot of people would have said, "Dog? You son of a bitch." But her daughter is possessed, that's all she cares about, and so she is prepared to accept Jesus' words at face value, and tell him that even if it is true that she is unworthy of all that Jesus might be, can't she at least have the scraps of what's left over? Because for her, even that is enough to heal her daughter.

vs 29

Jesus got the right answer - it accepted the primacy of the Jews in God's plan, but it also allowed for gentiles to be involved. Plus, it accepted that even if Jesus was to give a tiny amount to her, she felt that would be enough, because he is so powerful. So he heals her daughter. That's killer sweet.

vs 30

And that's the end of that story. Happy ending!

vs 31

This is the same sort of area where that ex-Legion guy was meant to go preach.

vs 32

That the people who brought this deaf man were begging is probably a sign they cared about the outcome.

vs 33

Considering that he just healed a woman's daughter without even seeing her, the whole spitting thing seems a little strange here. Is it to show something? The earlier context doesn't really seem to reveal anything. Perhaps something comes after it.

vs 34

Kind of an interesting thing to say - I mean, Jesus does talk about people whose ears are closed. Perhaps that's the thing he's going for?

vs 35

Huzzah for him! I can't imagine what it's like not being able to speak properly. I have enough problems sometimes as it is. I was saying 'like' so much in the car on the way home, I felt like such a moron. I think I was tired. But to be unable to express yourself for a long time... blergh.

vs 36

Is that why he does it, reverse psychology? It just doesn't sound like that's the reason.

vs 37

That's really just a restatement of his actions. Perhaps this is what the problem is? That when people go and tell Jesus' story, they repeat the miracles, but not his words? So Jesus tells some people to preach, but others he tells to keep silent. Perhaps the ones he lets preach are the ones who will tell the whole story.