Today we move to the second gospel which was apparently the first of the 4 we have to be written though Paul's letters and other writings may have preceded even this gospel. Some scholars think that as many anticipated Jesus returning soon and the apostles were still living among them to tell the first hand stories so gospels did not need to be written down until later as the disciples were dying off and being executed.
Though the word does not pop up in this translation other translations are peppered frequently with the word "immediately" to let you know how quickly things progressed in the story or how quickly the author wanted the reader to read this story is just 16 chapters. This story is attributed to Mark also known as John Mark a follower of Paul's we will read about in the book of Acts. This gospel seems to have been known by both Matthew and Luke who took this as a basic format and then seemed to add additional materials in various places to tell other things they thought important for their readers to know (like birth stories) that are not recorded here.
Mark begins Chapter 1 with a grown up Jesus. It starts with the purpose of the gospel - to tell "the good news about Jesus Christ, God's Son just as it was written in the prophecy of Isaiah." He then tells of the grown up John the Baptist and a short story of Jesus being baptized by John. different than Matthew here the voice from the cloud comes to Jesus saying not "This is" but "You are my Son..." And then not immediately but at once the Spirit did not encourage Jesus into the wilderness or lead Jesus, but here it says forced! No temptations are listed but adds there were wild beasts - it was a wilderness after all and angels took care of Jesus. Does it remind you of Daniel in the lions' den?
Jesus then shares with people his purpose or mission 15 verses into the story, "Now is the time! Here comes God's kingdom! Change your hearts and lives, and trust this good news!" I note that Mark calls it God's kingdom here where Matthew used the kingdom of heaven presumably so with his Jewish Christian audience he would not have to write the name for God but just a heavenly reference for those who did not like using the holy name in case it might be taken in vain.
In this gospel Jesus is not so much a rabbi or teacher as a preacher as is noted in verses 38-39. He is also a miracle worker and healer though here he tries to keep that quiet as in verse 44. The focus seems to be on preaching not on healing. In chapter 2 the healing of the man let down through a hole made in the roof becomes a preachable moment, as in verse 2 it notes that he was speaking the word to them a good description of preaching. The healing becomes an illustration to the point that Jesus has the authority on earth to forgive sins.
The story of the tax collector here not named Matthew but Levi becomes a preachable story as Jesus goes to eat with other tax collectors at his home. After eating there is the lesson fasting we heard in Matthew. But then there is an interesting story with an illustration that is a bit problematic. The situation is about the disciples working on the Sabbath albeit picking grains of wheat while they walk through the field. and the moral of the story like we saw in Matthew is that Sabbath was created for humans and not the other way around. But the illustration was about David eating the holy bread and nothing about the Sabbath. And there is a technical error that when Luke retells this story he adjusts and deletes the name of the high priest as Abiathar was not high priest at that time according to 1 Samuel 21. So the question was, did Mark get it wrong or did Jesus make a mistake?
No comments:
Post a Comment