Friday, October 28, 2011

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.

No comments: