|
The BibleTexts.com Bible Commentary Copyright 1996-2005 Robert Nguyen Cramer THE GOSPEL OF MARK |
|
.
|
|
Jump
to chapter ...
|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 |
| Other resources |
| Other resources |
Note here that Jesus' role in these verses is the same as the role of a "Paraclete" ("Comforter", KJV; Strong's <3875>), which is how Jesus is described in Joh 14:16 ("another Comforter", KJV) and 1Jo 2:1 ("an advocate", KJV). In these verses he announces the palsied man's acquital (forgiveness) from the allegations of and from the imprisoning sentence instigated by "the Accuser" (Satan, Devil). The Greek term aphiemi <Strong's 863>, translated 'to forgive,' in classical Greek is described by Colin Brown (Dictionary of New Testament Theology, Volume 1, Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1975, pages 697-698) as follows:
CL [classical Greek] aphiemi (derived from apo, from, and hiemi, to put in motion, send), attested since Homer, means .the voluntary release of a person or thing over which one has legal or actual control. In addition to the vb., the noun aphesis [forgiveness], discharge, setting free, is used from Plato onwards. In its fig. use aphiemi overlaps in meaning with pariemi (Homer), lit. to let drop, let by; fig., to let pass, allow (the noun paresis, since Hippocrates).
1. aphiemi is used in classical Gk. both in a lit. and in a fig. sense:
(a) With a personal object, to send forth, send away (of a woman, to divorce; of a meeting, to dissolve, end), to let go, to leave, dispatch; with an impersonal object, to loose (e.g. a ship into the sea), to discharge (e.g. arrows), to give up.
(b) In the fig. sense the vb. means to let alone, permit, let pass, neglect, give up... The legal use is important: to release from a legal bond (office, guilt, etc. and also, a woman from marriage...), to acquit (e.g. cancellation of criminal proceedings,...), to exempt (from guilt, obligation, punishment, etc.; e.g. pardon, or remision, etc. All these meanings apply from Homer onward only to human relationships; they are not found in a religious sense.
For a further description of "Paraclete" (Advocate, Comforter, Counselor, Helper, Strong's <3875>), browse http://www.bibletexts.com/terms/comforter.htm.
| Other resources |
| Other resources |
| Other resources |
The exorcism of the Gerasene demoniac (5:1-20) is one of the longest and most vivid of the NT miracles. Mark has here adapted an early folkloric narrative to his theology. (Geographical details that puzzled even ancient commentators, such as the location of Gerasa some thirty miles from the Sea of Galilee, are not important to Mark.) Just as Jesus began his ministry on Jewish soil with an exorcism (1:21-28; 1:24 and 5:7 are almost identical in Gk.), his first arrival in gentile territory (where pigs could be raised; cf. Luke 15:15) involves even more violent conflict with the power of evil. The first half describes the exorcism (5:1-13), while the second describes its effect on various people (vv. 14-20). The demoniac comes to him from the realm of the dead (v. 2; cf. Isa. 65:5, where Gentiles are a people “who sit in tombs”) and his destructive power is as uncontrolled as the raging sea (Mark 5:3-5).
The narrative violates the normal pattern of exorcisms: first, meeting of demoniac and exorcist; second, silencing and expulsion of demon by exorcist; and third, departure of demon, with reaction of onlookers. Instead, on first sight (vv. 6-7) he “worships” Jesus and recognizes him as “Son of the Most High God” — a way of speaking of God characteristic of pagans (Dan. 3:26; 4:2; cf. Isa. 14:14). The exorcism (Mark 5:8) has already occurred and is mentioned almost as an afterthought. By departing from the traditional arrangement, Mark highlights the Christology of the narrative. The expulsion of the demons into the herd of swine and their drowning in the sea initiates the purification of gentile territory. Since the unbridled power of the water has already been subjected to Jesus’ power (4:35-41), it now becomes the tomb of the demons. The subsequent meeting between Jesus and the freed demoniac is also unusual in miracle stories. Rather than commanding silence, Jesus now commissions the man to proclaim, “how much the Lord has done for you and how he has had mercy on you” (5:19). He is the prototype for Mark’s community of a gentile convert, freed from the domination of evil, who becomes a missionary proclaiming God’s mercy.
| Other resources |
| Other resources |
| Other resources |
In his commentary on Mark 8:35, Sherman E. Johnson (Black's New Testament Commentaries: The Gospel According to Mark, A&C Black: London, 1977, page 151) writes:
His willingness to risk and lose his physical life is given as the supreme example of the true way of salvation. Whosoever wishes to save his life, to hoard it and protect it, as though it belonged to him alone, will lose it or destroy it in the true sense of the word. But to lose it, as Jesus does, in the cause of the Good News, is to preserve it.
| Other resources |
| Other resources |
Mar 10:29 - omit KJV wording: or <2228> wife <1135> - (based on a needed correction of the KJV's Greek text)
Note: Not only was "or wife" not in the original texts of Mar 10:29, but also the KJV's (and Textus Receptus') teaching to 'leave wife' to follow Jesus, is clearly a misrepresentation of Jesus' genuine teachings as found in the gospels and as witnessed in Paul's letter to the Corinthians (1 Co 7:10-16).
The Greek words translated "or wife" were in the Textus Receptus Greek text that the KJV translators used in their 1611 translation of the Bible; however, these words ("or wife") were added to the Greek texts of Mar 10:29 and Mat 19:29 by a later copiest. This is further attested by the fact that these words "or wife" do not appear in similar passages in the Gospel According to Thomas (Thomas 55:1,2, and Thomas 101:1-3. Though the Gospel According to Thomas is not part of the generally accepted canonical writings of Christians, it does provide another very early witness to some of Jesus' sayings.) "Or wife" has so little manuscript support that it is not even mentioned in the extensive footnotes of the United Bible Society's definitive Greek New Testament, Fourth Revised Edition (1994) or in Bruce Metzger's A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, Second Edition (1993).
According to Mat 19:27, Mar 10:28, and Luk 18:28, Peter "left all" to follow Christ Jesus. By implication, "all" would include those houses and people listed in Mat 19:29, Mar 10:29, and Luk 18:29. According to the synoptic gospels (Mat 8:14; Mar 1:30; Luk 4:38) and according Paul (1Co 9:5), Peter continued to be married and to take his wife with him when he traveled, so "wife" clearly was not included in the "all" that Christians were expected to leave behind in their spiritual (or human) journey.
To further explore many topics regarding "marriage," browse http://www.bibletexts.com/topics/marriage.htm.
| Other resources |
ACCS has some very interesting commentary from early Christians such as Augustine, Hilary of Poitiers, Ephrem the Syrian, Gregory the Great, and Cyril of Jerusalem. Cyril's comments (page 160), whether or not consistent with what Jesus actually had in mind, provide considerable food for thought:
Remember at the time of the sin of Adam and Eve they clothed themselves -- with what? Fig leaves. That was their first act after the fall. So now Jesus is making the same figure of the fig tree the very last of his wondrous signs. Just as he was headed toward the cross, he cursed the fig tree -- not every fig tree, but that one alone for its symbolic significance -- saying: "May no one ever eat fruit of you again." In this way the curse laid upon Adam and Even was being reversed. For they had clothed themselves with fig leaves.
Sherman E. Johnson in his The Gospel according to Mark, by (London: Adam and Charles Black, 1977, page 188) represents many scholars when he writes:
This is the only curse miracle attributed to Jesus in the gospels, it reminds one of the apocryphal infancy stories (e.g., Greek Gospel of Thomas iii-v...), and it seems to conflict with Jesus' character. The simplest explanation is that the parable of the barren fig tree (Luke xiii. 6-9) has been turned into a miracle which symbolizes the rejection of Israel or of the priesthood.
Schweizer concludes his commentary on this section with the following insightful summary:
The development is interesting. The cursing of the fig tree was originally interpreted as a prophetic sign of the judgment of God upon stubborn Israel (similar to Luke 13:6-9). When this was no longer an immediate concern in the Gentile-Christian church, they found its general relevance in the demonstration of the power of prayer, and added vss. 22-24. Finally, Mark used it as a framework for the cleansing of the temple, thereby strongly emphasizing the great and crucial transition from a temple which was open only to Israel to one open to all nations. This, in essence, is what Jesus' Passion means to Mark.
Nineham points out (pages 300-301):
St. Mark's understanding of the temple cleansing emerges in part from the way he has sandwiched it betweeen the two parts of the fig tree story. The temple and its worship stand for Jewish life and religion; the Messiah comes to it and when he finds that the outward foliage of ceremony hides no fruit of righteousness, his only possible reaction is one of judgement and cleansing... Jesus' action is therefore seen as that of the messianic king on his great final visit to his Father's house and people, and as such, it embodies God's ultimate judgment upon the life and religion of Israel... It would appear that what Jeus objected to was the 'secularization ' of a place which should have been kept holy for worship.
Some mention must be made of the suggestion of Lightfoot, who saw the clue to the passage in v. 17, where St Mark, alone among the Evangelists, completes the quotation from Isaiah by including the words for all the nations. In the passage from which the quotation comes the prophet is expressing the fairly widespread Jewish belief that when the messianic age came, redemption would be found to extend to Gentiles as well as Jews, so that Gentiles would have their share in the Jewish house of prayer. Lightfoot points out that Jesus' action is entirely confined to the so-called 'court of the Gentiles', the only part of the sacred precincts to which non-Jews were admitted... Jesus' only concern is to safeguard the rights and privileges of the Gentiles and to remove all that prevented them from worshipping in the one part of the temple open to them.
In A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, Second Edition, New York: United Bible Societies, 1994, page 93), Bruce M. Metzger explains how the original text with the aorist tense (elabete) was changed by later some copyists of the Gospel of Mark. He writes:
The aorist tense, representing the Semitic usage of the prophetic perfect (which expresses the certainty of a future action), seemed too bold and was altered either to the present tense (lambanete) or, under the influence of the parallel in Mt 21:22, to the future tense (lempsesthe).
In Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1996, pages 563-564), Daniel B. Wallace writes:
The aorist indicative can be used to describe an event that is not yet past as though it were already completed. This usage is not at all common... An author sometimes uses the aorist for the future to stress the certainty of the event. It involves a "rhetorical transfer" of the future event as though it were past.
| Other resources |
| Other resources |
The [United Bible Societies' Greek New Testament ] Committee regarded the reading kai proseuchesthe [English translation: "and pray"] as a natural addition (derived perhaps from 14:38) that many copyists were likely to make independently of one another. If the words had been present originally, it is difficult to account for the omission in [the very ancient and reliable manuscripts] B D 2427 it(a,c,d,k) cop(fay).
| Other resources |
| Other resources |
Note: Bruce Metzger (A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, Second Edition, New York: United Bible Societies, 1994, page 99) writes:
The earliest and best witnesses of the Alexandrian and the Western types of text lack ver. 28. It is understandable that copyists could have added the sentence in the margin from Lk 22:37, whence it came into the text itself; there is no reason why, if the sentence were present originally, it should have been deleted. It is also significant that Mark very seldom expressly quotes the Old Testament.
| Other resources |
| Abbreviations |
Copyright
1996-2004 Robert Nguyen Cramer
|
Bibliography |
|
|
editor@bibletexts.com |