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.

Mark 6

Only have 20 minutes before I have to catch my bus!

vs 1

More travel, always on the move, Jesus was.

vs 2

Because all of that stuff - his teaching, authority, miracles - are all pretty awesome in and of themselves. It's also cool that Jesus would visit synagogues and teach there. He's not a rebel - he worked within the system too. Synagogues, then, are a human construction that God seemed to be happy with at the time.

vs 3

Unfortunately, it's harder to accept something awesome from someone when you've seen them as a child. That's just life. This is nothing new for Jesus. If you're a king, but not born in a castle, it's a hard life.

vs 4

He says it a little differently in John, but the principle is the same. That sort of closeness of relationship is a negative the more official recognition of position.

vs 5

Could not sounds so constraining. But here is a fantastic thing that we see in this verse - miracles are not there for those who lack faith. If the argument is, "People don't believe, quick, do some miracles!" you will see that's not Jesus' ministry at all. These people lack faith, and so he does hardly any miracles.

vs 6

And so are we, who would have given our right foot to be there and meet Jesus. Funny how things work. To us he's messiah and God, to them he's the carpenter's son.

More travelling.

vs 7

Just the twelve, but it's a good start. You see he doesn't send them out alone, but in pairs. I think that's important. Got someone to watch your back.

vs 8

This verse is probably the one that we can most pin "faith" ministries on - the idea that you go out with nothing, and God will provide you with whatever you need. And you know what? That's absolutely true. But the problem is that some people go out in "faith", and then when the money/stuff/whatever does not come to keep them there, they get stubborn, and stay anyway, saying, "Must faith harder," which in effect means bugging people at home to send them money. Honestly, some people are not meant to be out there, I reckon. Jesus was right there, and sent them out, pointed them in the direction. Obviously it's a little bit different now, where Jesus isn't standing there with an arrow.

This is obviously different to when people find themselves in a situation not of their making - like the Christians in the diaspora. They just hit the ground where they were shoved to, and started doing Christiany stuff.

vs 9

Take everything you need, and nothing more, I guess is the lesson here.

vs 10

So the first house that accepts them, they stay in. They don't house-hop. What a different culture we have.

vs 11

Jesus has it all worked out. Their ministry is going to be simple, but still profound.

vs 12

Their job was to preach to people about repentance. Repentance meant something to these people. They'd heard this message before both historio-culturally (exile) and recently and popularly (John the Baptist). It doesn't work quite as well if people aren't ready for it.

vs 13

These things also work better when Jesus is around, but that doesn't mean they don't work at all. Just that it would seem that, even in the olden days, miracles were rare and special, except when something super killer awesome was happening, like Jesus.

That's all the time I've got, folks. More Mark 6 later!

vs 14

You've got to admit, it would be pretty freaky to think someone you had beheaded has come back to life more powerful than you can possibly imagine.

vs 15

This is not really much more comforting, although perhaps less believable due to the time difference. What I mean by that is it's more likely to be not accepted simply because more people would think, "Magical figure, John the Baptist!" since they'd seen him recently.

vs 16

See, he went for the former.

vs 17

We now get a little backwards rewind, to see why this would freak Herod out so much. It all started with throwing John in prison.

vs 18

Which I suppose it isn't.

vs 19

It's a funny thing how spiteful some people can be. I guess Herodias was quite happy to be living in the palace.

vs 20

So Herod feared John, but did he divorce Herodias? No. But he listened to John, and that could lead to some action, so best to take matters into one's hands quickly.

vs 21

As rich and powerful people are wont to do.

vs 22

This sort of largesse is typical, because it both shows his pleasure, and also his power.

vs 23

That's a big promise. Of course, if you asked for that, you'd probably get a dirty look.

vs 24

Fat lot of good it will do for the daughter - except perhaps let her stay in the palace longer too.

vs 25

How gruesome. She'd better have been an awesome dancer.

vs 26

Of course. Can't be soft on prophets in an election year.

vs 27

Lucky John was in prison. Well, not so lucky for John.

vs 28

How lovely. Mother's day cards and a box of chocolates eat your heart out.

vs 29

And Jesus doesn't resurrect him. That would be hella freaky, without a head.

vs 30

Now that our flashback is over, we can return to the story of the twelve and their doings.

vs 31

Jesus is all about rest, and private time. You'd think he'd be all hyperactive healing as many people and preaching as often as he could. But no, even Jesus needed quiet time.

vs 32

Lots of boat travel. Beats walking.

vs 33

They ran! That's how excited the people were to see Jesus.

vs 34

They wanted to hear Jesus teach, so he taught them. The opportunity was there, and even though his disciples were tired and hungry, he still took the opportunity. So the lesson is, take rests and look after yourself, but if someone interrupts your dinner to ask you about Jesus, then tell them.

vs 35

They did pick a remote spot, after all.

vs 36

Remember, McDonald's hadn't opened its Galilee branches yet. It was actually not going to be easy to just pick up food for thousands of people. Like the disciples say, they would need to go to a bunch of surrounding villages, and forage the countryside.

vs 37

Did they have that much in the kitty? Perhaps, they did distribute to the poor after all. Funny, Jesus doesn't 'cure' poverty with a wave of his hand. He gives people money.

vs 38

Not exactly a feast. I could eat that, I reckon.

vs 39

Ahh, the green grass. How picturesque. I've never noticed that before.

vs 40

It's like huge dinner parties, or wedding receptions, all over the place.

vs 41

When you read it like that, it sounds like they are awfully small bits of food, or really, really big loaves and fish.

vs 42

So they're either all on that weight loss stuff that fills your stomach with foam, or there was lots of food.

vs 43

Truly, I think this is my favourite miracle. It shows Jesus' over creation in a quite incredible way. There is simply no way to explain this miracle without miracle (not if you take it that Jesus somehow made the food appear. If you want to get all, "Oh, the people produced their own packed lunches," that's not a miracle, that's a picnic). It flies totally in the face of anything science can explain - unless there's a paper in the journal Nature that has something on spontaneous bakery.

vs 44

Lots of men. Who knows how many people there were! If only we had Jesus catering at Ministry of Game.

Making the last big push this morning.

vs 45

Immediately. Like, the moment they'd finished eating, bam! Return to your homes, nothing to see here.

vs 46

Interesting that the immediacy of the dispersal comes after Jesus had wanted some quiet time, got a huge group of hungry people foisted on him, and he helped them. But right afterwards, he shooed them away and went and prayed. I never noticed that before.

vs 47

Oh, I wonder what's going to happen? Only one verse ago I was learning something new, and yet I can see how easy it is to want to gloss over known stories.

vs 48

It's almost like Jesus thinks, "They can do it, I'll just let them row their hearts out after having done it all night." But then he has mercy.

vs 49

In the meantime, they see him out there, and freak the hell out. Which probably doesn't help their situation any.

vs 50

You'd think after hanging around Jesus for a while, things would get blazé. But no! There's still things that terrify them. Lucky Jesus is there to give them a pep talk.

vs 51

Of course, once Jesus is in the boat, he doesn't feel like a rough ride, so he calms things down.

vs 52

See, Jesus expects people to have a big picture view of him and God. If God can feed 5000 men on a hill with a loaf of bread and a can of sardines, he can do anything. So as if he's going to let his disciples die in a boating accident. We've been here before. But they still don't get it. They can't accept that level of faith. And so they're described as having hard hearts.

vs 53

With, you know, an anchor or something.

vs 54

Jesus is becoming a celebrity. I'm surprised there wasn't a little fleet of boats following him.

vs 55

I wonder how many people brought sick loved ones, and how many people just grabbed the nearest beggar and pulled them towards Jesus in the hope of seeing another healing.

vs 56

The incidence of terrible illness must have dropped pretty significantly during Jesus' little three year tour. I wonder if it had an impact on the population? Probably had an impact on how well Christianity was received. Or possibly not, considering how many people who were healed seemed not to turn around and Thank Jesus for it sometimes.

Mark 5

vs 1

So they crossed the lake.

vs 2

Tombs aren't a nice place to live. Also, they're unclean.

vs 3

So, he was strong - either that or darn wily. Although why they wanted to bind him with a chain is not yet apparent.

vs 4

Definitely strong, possibly slightly wily - wilyness uncertain.

vs 5

This is I think what is called 'high risk' behaviour these days. Obviously this is not typical for your average social person. As actions go for crazy hermits, I'm not sure where this is on the scale.

vs 6

This is better than getting punched to custard, so it's a win.

vs 7

Now, if you were the average person, and you didn't know that Jesus had driven out evil spirits before, and that they would regularly address him in this way, you might thin it odd that someone pleads that Jesus doesn't torture him.

Even then, though, you may still wonder about the whole "Jesus/God torturing demons" thing. Perhaps torture is sometimes appropriate.

vs 8

Okay, so Jesus had actually tried something on the demon, and now it was begging.

vs 9

I wasn't really aware demons had names (did Adam name them? not important), but this is probably a good illustration, like an object lesson, for Jesus' disciples.

vs 10

Why does the demon ( or the demons) want this? It's not explained. I guess some people might say that they don't want to go back to hell, but really, they get a reprieve of about 10 seconds in that case. Also, I think that's making some assumptions about hell that probably aren't well backed up.

vs 11

They would occasionally eat the corpses. I'm just kidding. Or am I?

vs 12

Again, why? Who can question the desires of demons, really.

vs 13

Which sucks if you own a herd of 2,000 pigs. I mean, that's a hell of a lot of pigs. Now, normally, a Jew wouldn't farm pigs I'm guessing (I mean, what would they do with them?). But still, that probably represents a rather big hit to someone's bottom line.

vs 14

Because, that's a hell of a lot of pigs to end up drowning in a lake.

vs 15

Because people who help hermits are scary. Or probably more reasonably, because people who can help a hermit who was so out of it as him are probably powerful. And that can be scary.

vs 16

And why not? It's a good story, and quite relevant to the time. "Those there told the others about the scores in a recent game of football" would be rather more confusing.

vs 17

Before he kills more livestock. You'd think they might ask how he did it, but no, all they want is the pig-killer to leave.

vs 18

He's a good beggar, this man, although apparently the demons were better and begging than him.

vs 19

It was a fair bit of mercy. About 2,000 pigs worth. It was also a mercy to the demons, apparently, which is a hugely confusing thing to think about. Probably why I don't think about it much. If God can show mercy to fallen demons, that doesn't really impact me a huge amount, except to prove something I already know - that God is good at mercy. But Jesus here is showing mercy to demons, to this guy by giving him a purpose in life and driving out his demons, and to the people of his village by sending him to them to tell them about Jesus.

vs 20

And rightly so. I mean, it's pretty amazing stuff. But what gets me is that Jesus sets in train very early on in his ministry a pattern of people telling people about him, and those people believing. That's no different to you or me, who never got to meet Jesus face to face.

vs 21

So wait, he sailed all the way over there just to heal this guy? That's service!

vs 22

Jesus must have gotten used to this. I've never had anyone fall at my feet, except by accident.

vs 23

Not an uncommon occurrence.

vs 24

So Jesus follows. I've also never had a huge crowd follow me around, or even been in a huge crowd trying to get to one person.

vs 25

Which could no doubt mean all sorts of things. But obviously isn't healthy.

vs 26

I'm sure there are many people who could testify to the truth of this statement in their own lives. Good to know that doctors stick to this tradition.

vs 27

Because cloaks have obvious healing powers. It's funny how people think about this stuff.

vs 28

Which, hey, turned out to be true. So she perhaps knows more about it than me.

vs 29

Which must have been a huge relief.

vs 30

The obvious absurdity of this question should be apparent.

vs 31

It's not lost on the disciples.

vs 32

Why is it he does this? Perhaps it is to call her out, to make her stand up for her faith, to show that it has healed her. I mean, obviously Jesus knows who it is, but he wants them to admit it.

vs 33

Why was she so afraid? Because she stole healing off him?

vs 34

Not his cloak, but her faith. Obviously in him, that he could do it.

vs 35

That's bad news. Perhaps if he didn't heal that woman, the girl would be alive. Perhaps if thousands of people didn't crowd around Jesus, he could have walked faster.

vs 36

This is a ballsy statement. I mean, healing is one thing, but this girl is dead. And it's not like they had no idea when someone was alive or dead. But even if they got it wrong, it's gutsy if you don't already know you can bring someone back from the dead.

vs 37

Why is this? Perhaps because he wanted to actually get there before midnight, but perhaps because he works on this pattern of him doing things, and other people having to take someone else's word that it's true.

vs 38

Typical cultural reaction to death. Watch a Muslim funeral in Palestine some day.

vs 39

He has not even seen her. They probably watched her die - or were called in afterwards to wail and mourn.

vs 40

Regardless, stating a dead person isn't dead makes Jesus a laughingstock. So Jesus sends them all away, except his three and the parents.

vs 41

Why does he record it in Aramaic? I assume because Jesus said it in Aramaic. But why here? Not sure. Perhaps he speaks to her in Aramaic because she's young, and that's the language most spoken in the home?

vs 42

So almost marrying age, would be a real loss to the family. A huge win for Jesus here, showing that patience is a virtue. Also, that he has power over death.

vs 43

Perhaps Jesus didn't want every man jack bringing out their dead and asking Jesus to raise them. That would kind of suck. Or perhaps he wanted some of his better stories to leak out later. I mean, obviously people were told, because we know about it. And I for one and glad, it's a cool story.

Mark 4

vs 1

You might remember that I preached a sermon on a good part of this chapter, so a lot of this might be repetition.

Also, you might remember that last chapter Jesus asked his disciples to set up a boat for just such an occasion. It's as if he's prescient or something.

vs 2

One of the things he taught them was this.

vs 3

As they do.

vs 4

Not the most effective way to sow seed, perhaps he was feeling rushed.

vs 5

I guess you might have occasional rocky patches on your land, but again, not the best place to sow seed.

vs 6

I'm not much of a horticulturalist, so I'll just take people who have 1st century farming skills at their word.

vs 7

I hate weeds, but that's about as far as I go. Again, others do the gardening.

vs 8

This I can at least attest to, having been in a wheat field and seen (and eaten) bits of grain off a wheat stalk. I don't suggest it - it's much better when ground up and baked into bread.

vs 9

And that's the end of the story. And people go... er, what?

vs 10

Thankfully, or we'd all be in the dark.

vs 11

This is quite a phenomenal statement. We are often struck by it, which is kind of nice, considering that I think we like to think, "Hey, that's not very fair and democratic. Why can't everyone hear the message?" Very communist of us, well done. But in fact, we live in a society where things are advertised to certain groups of people, and are sometimes basically put in code so that others don't understand/aren't interested.

vs 12

Of course, the difference between not wanting to buy cornflakes and not going to heaven might be seen by some to be rather more serious. There's really only two ways to understand it. One is that Jesus knows who should and shouldn't hear, and so tailors his message accordingly. The other is that it's a matter of your own heart, and so the blame is shifted squarely to you. Or a mix of both, I guess, because as I have said in the past, theological paradox does not necessitate dichotomy.

vs 13

Note that I don't think he is saying, "This parable is a key to unlocking all other parables." I think he is saying, "If you can't solve an easy sudoku, you can't solve a master sudoku."

vs 14

Who is the farmer? Apparently not important. Could be God, Jesus, any of us. Jesus doesn't say. What is interesting to consider is that even though it's terrible farming practice, whoever sows the word sows it so that the people who probably won't react to it still at least hear it.

vs 15

Satan's role is important. As I said in my sermon, it's worth remembering that it's not purely people's disinterest that keeps them deaf.

vs 16

Initial investment shows swift return - obviously a scam.

vs 17

This is a damn shame, but I think can be mitigated by explaining to people that with Christianity comes trouble.

vs 18

So the word is heard among the thorns, which is one nice thing.

vs 19

Note that only one kind of response is really wanted - fruit. It was this that made me want to translate the parable into something more akin to an 'all of life' story. Is that what Jesus is saying primarily? It's a good question. He doesn't specify, is my answer.

vs 20

I wish I were this fruitful. I didn't say it in my sermon, because it's a downer and it's not truly a correct way to measure your Christian life, but I wish I could say that 100 people would be in heaven because of me.

vs 21

I don't do either, but I at least know how light works. Also, putting an oil lamp under a bed is likely to set it on fire - which, hey, will generate a lot of light. Briefly.

vs 22

Jesus is saying that, even though he speaks in parables, the truth of God is a mystery meant to be revealed. Sure, some people won't get it, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't tell them. God wants revelation.

vs 23

Basically what I said above covers this little saying.

vs 24

It's like a justice plus mix. Extra berries.

vs 25

This often seems unfair, but again, we must all be communist, because this is exactly how capitalism works. Besides, since it is talking about understanding of God, I think those who have little probably won't care too much if they lose what they have. Not in the short term, anyway.

vs 26

Wait, didn't we just do this, Jesus?

vs 27

This is true. And sure, biologists will argue, but the simple fact is that Jesus meant "everyone but biologists, because they're pedants". Philosophers have no problem with this statement, because we're imaginative.

vs 28

That is how a seed grows, I assume. We even have one growing on the windowsill in the kitchen, but I didn't pay too much attention.

vs 29

That's how it works. What was this parable about? It's more farming practice. Obviously we must read it in the context of the parable of the sower (so perhaps it IS the key to understanding some parables!). We sow the seed, and others may reap it, but God makes it grow. Thank you, Paul.

vs 30

I don't know, Jesus, will you perhaps describe it with another seed analogy?

vs 31

Hah.

vs 32

Who are the birds? What colour is the seed? Why do they perch in the branches? I think it's just a big tree. Small amount seen now, big return in the future. That's the message. Kingdom is like that.

vs 33

And probably a little they couldn't. Or perhaps that's just me.

vs 34

The disciples were part of the plan, see. It's not about controlling flow of information, it is about sustained dissemination. Jesus was thinking long term.

vs 35

Of the lake, I assume.

vs 36

Jesus is an admiral of a little navy. I'd never noticed that before.

vs 37

I wonder if it affected the other boats?

vs 38

I've never been on a boat in a storm (well, kinda once on a ferry), but considering my general reaction to boats is the same as the disciples, even when it's not stormy, I feel for them.

vs 39

It's not as impressive when it doesn't work, trust me.

vs 40

Ouch. But when you think about it, as if the messiah was going to die in a boating accident. "He was drowned for our sins."

vs 41

The thing is, of course, that we're in early days, and they were still baffled at this man called Jesus. I live in a permanent state of bafflement about Jesus, so I am akin to them.