ALPB Forum Online

ALPB => Your Turn => Topic started by: Dan Fienen on March 18, 2021, 11:53:53 AM

Title: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: Dan Fienen on March 18, 2021, 11:53:53 AM
As all of us, except perhaps those devoted to the One Year Lectionary, know this is Year B and the primary Gospel this year is that of Mark. As we approach Easter, one of the things that we must come to terms with is the way that Mark treats the Easter story and the notorious and abrupt ending to the Gospel in the earliest manuscripts. Many theories have been advanced as to how the Gospel should end, including the possibility that very early in the textual transmission the original ending was lost. There are a couple of endings given in early manuscripts that round out Mark’s account of Jesus with Resurrection appearances like those given in the other Gospels.

In the introductory material for his first Marcan commentary Mark 1:1-8:26 in the Concordia Commentary series, James Voelz argues that the 16:8 ending is the original ending and that to end the Gospel with that ambiguous ending fits with the themes and point of the Gospel.

Quote
Simply and succinctly put, in the Second Gospel we see a story hard to follow and a hero difficult to understand Therefore, we cannot see clearly to believe (cf. 8:22-26). Or as summarized by the Jewish leaders at the cross (15:32): “the Christ, the King of Israel, let him come down now from the cross in order that we may see and believe” (‘ίνα ỉ‛δωμεν καί ϖιστεύσωμεν)! In fact, this is exactly what this Gospel will not give: seeing to believe; clear sight to understand; unambiguous evidence to be sure. In this strange and perplexing Gospel, seeing is not believing; on the contrary, seeing follows from believing, not the other way around.

. . .

This, then, is what Mark’s Gospel is about: the ambiguity of the evidence, the necessity of believing in the face of such evidence, and the reliability of Jesus’ Word.
(Mark 1:1-8:26, Voelz, p. 55, emphasis original)

Thus the demand of the Jewish leaders at the cross for evidence that they can see before they will believe, is met not with the evidence of resurrection appearances, but with ambiguity and a refusal to meet their demands.

Voelz went on to point out another instance in the Gospel where a demand for evidence that can be seen was denied. In Mark 8 Jesus conversed with Pharisees who demanded a sign from heaven. Jesus declared that the demand for a sign was characteristic of a wicked and adulterous generation. And no sign would be given but that of Jonah.

Quote
What, then, is the message of this book? According to our analysis it is this: in this age, the reign and rule of God in Jesus Christ has come in power, but in hiddenness, as it were, in humility and lowliness. The goal of the ministry Jesus was to serve, not to be served and to give his life as a ransom for many (10:45). Therefore, the true revelation of the Son of God was at the cross, where he gave his life as that ransom.
(Mark 1:1-8:26, Voelz, p. 61, emphasis original)


Quote
But the answer of the Second Gospel is this: “It was ever thus. If you had been there, it would not have been any easier than it is today. The evidence would have been ambiguous, even with your Lord. What you have is what the disciples and the women had, also on that Easter morning; you have the promise of his Word a Word that is ever sure.
(Mark 1:1-8:26, Voelz, p. 61)
Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: Dan Fienen on March 18, 2021, 12:24:16 PM
Apologetics has been a standard genre of Christian literature since the earliest Church Fathers. In the last half century, many books have been published that attempt to present a case for Christianity based upon evidence that can be seen and analyzed, and upon which conclusions can be based.

If James Voelz is correct in his understanding of the message of Mark, or even if he has only hit upon one theme in Mark, it suggests that we may need to be careful about an over reliance on evidence that we can find as a basis for and support of our faith.

That is not to say that there is no place for consideration of the evidence that is available. The New Testament itself is not without presentations of evidence in support of the Christian Gospel.

Paul, in the great Resurrection Chapter of 1 Corinthians 15 goes on in some length listing the witnesses and evidences for the Resurrection. Many of those witnesses were at that time still alive and could be interviewed, although some had died. The miracles of Jesus were discussed as signs pointing to who and what He was and that many believed at least in part because of those miracles. So signs and evidences are not totally rejected.

A couple of the miracles are especially instructive to this point. Jesus' healing of the paralytic in Capernaum (Mt. 9:2-8, Mk. 2:1-12, and Lk. 5:17-26) Jesus began by forgiving the man his sins. When that was met with skepticism, Jesus added the healing of the man's paralysis, "That you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins." (Mt. 9:6) A visible sign to support Jesus' claims supplied by Jesus! Apparently all use of evidence and signs was not forbidden.

Of special interest was the healing of the man born blind, John 9. This miracle amply demonstrated the limitations of providing evidence. The Jewish leaders disputed that this miracle indicated Jesus' divine nature and so they thoroughly investigated the miracle and the man healed to discredit this as evidence. Every bit of their investigation substantiated the miracle and still they refused to believe.

What this means for our use of apologetics is not simple. It is clear that we cannot overcome all opposition to the Gospel and provide an irrefutable foundation for our faith simply by accumulating enough evidence. Faith, in the end, is still faith and not proof. But neither is evidence useless.
Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on March 18, 2021, 01:38:59 PM
I believe that simply stated, Mark's gospel ends with all of Jesus' followers being unfaithful. The men ran away in the Garden, the women leave and disobey the command to spread the news. However, our unfaithfulness doesn't change Jesus' faithful. The risen Jesus will appear to the disciples in Galilee just as he had promised, regardless of their belief or knowledge of the resurrection.


The women's silence is not the last word. Jesus' promise is.


I like the thought an essay on the ending made: "When is the ending not the end? When it stops in the middle of a sentence; and when there's an empty tomb and a resurrection."


Related to this, Mark 1:1 talks about "the beginning of the Gospel …." I think that the whole Gospel is "the beginning." We, the readers through the centuries, determine how the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, continues.
Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: RDPreus on March 18, 2021, 01:46:22 PM
What benefits does Baptism give?
It works forgiveness of sins, rescues from death and the devil, and gives eternal salvation to all who believe this, as the words and promises of God declare.
Which are these words and promises of God?
Christ our Lord says in the last chapter of Mark: “Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.” (Mark 16:16)

I think I'll go with the Catechism over textual critics who reject the testimony of the vast majority of Greek manuscripts.
Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: George Rahn on March 18, 2021, 01:49:51 PM
A different take on this:  Who is left at the end of Mark 16:8?  You, the reader/hearer are.  Jesus says in certain terms to go to Galilee.  There you will see Him as He told you. 
Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on March 18, 2021, 02:02:46 PM
What benefits does Baptism give?
It works forgiveness of sins, rescues from death and the devil, and gives eternal salvation to all who believe this, as the words and promises of God declare.
Which are these words and promises of God?
Christ our Lord says in the last chapter of Mark: “Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.” (Mark 16:16)

I think I'll go with the Catechism over textual critics who reject the testimony of the vast majority of Greek manuscripts.


Then you also have to deal with the following verses: 17 "These signs will be associated with those who believe: they will throw out demons in my name. They will speak in new languages. 18 They will pick up snakes with their hands. If they drink anything poisonous, it will not hurt them. They will place their hands on the sick, and they will get well.”


Those "vast number of Greek manuscripts" that include the longer ending come from the 5th-15th centuries. The two oldest Greek manuscripts (4th century) do not include it. They are not in an Old Latin manuscript (4th-5th century) nor in a Syriac manuscript (4th-7th century). Even older authors: Clement of Alexandria (215) and Origen (254) show no knowledge of the longer ending. Eusebius (339) and Jerome (420) attest that the ending was absent from almost all Greek copies of Mark that they knew.


A number of copies from the 10th-15th centuries mark the longer ending with asterisks or obeli, which was the conventional way of indicating a spurious addition to a document.


Both the external evidence (oldest manuscripts) and internal evidence (at least nine words that occur no where else in Mark,) and the awkward transition from v. 8 to v. 9, favor vv. 9-20 as later additions.


However, questions remain: Did the evangelist intend to end the gospel at v. 8? Was there another sheet of manuscript that was lost?


I think that the ending at v. 8 fits well the themes of Mark's gospel.


While 16:16 may be a favorite verse, other verses are not so favorable. Similarly, even though the Gospel of Thomas is not canonical, there are verses that are likely to go back to Jesus - and many that do not.



Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: peter_speckhard on March 18, 2021, 02:07:44 PM
What benefits does Baptism give?
It works forgiveness of sins, rescues from death and the devil, and gives eternal salvation to all who believe this, as the words and promises of God declare.
Which are these words and promises of God?
Christ our Lord says in the last chapter of Mark: “Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.” (Mark 16:16)

I think I'll go with the Catechism over textual critics who reject the testimony of the vast majority of Greek manuscripts.


Then you also have to deal with the following verses: 17 "These signs will be associated with those who believe: they will throw out demons in my name. They will speak in new languages. 18 They will pick up snakes with their hands. If they drink anything poisonous, it will not hurt them. They will place their hands on the sick, and they will get well.”




So? Those things have all happened among Christians.
Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on March 18, 2021, 02:37:34 PM
What benefits does Baptism give?
It works forgiveness of sins, rescues from death and the devil, and gives eternal salvation to all who believe this, as the words and promises of God declare.
Which are these words and promises of God?
Christ our Lord says in the last chapter of Mark: “Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.” (Mark 16:16)

I think I'll go with the Catechism over textual critics who reject the testimony of the vast majority of Greek manuscripts.


Then you also have to deal with the following verses: 17 "These signs will be associated with those who believe: they will throw out demons in my name. They will speak in new languages. 18 They will pick up snakes with their hands. If they drink anything poisonous, it will not hurt them. They will place their hands on the sick, and they will get well.”




So? Those things have all happened among Christians.


Note: I added to my post.


And many more have died from snake bites and poison. A friend, based on these verses, with the church he was attending, believed so strongly that the laying on of hands would heal him that he stopped taking his insulin. He ended up in the hospital. They tried again, trying to muster up even more faith in the truth of v. 18; their prayers and the laying on of hands would bring healing. Stopped the insulin. Ended up hospitalized. He stopped going to that church. He is religious about taking his insulin now.


I think that more damage has been done by these verses than any help they may offer.
Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: John_Hannah on March 18, 2021, 02:37:51 PM
Mark 16:9-20 is most certainly part of the canonical scriptures and is to be to be treated as such. These verses may not have been written by the same author as the rest of Gospel named by long standing tradition "Mark." They probably were not. I agree with Prof. Voelz.

Peace, JOHN
Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: RDPreus on March 18, 2021, 04:56:53 PM
What benefits does Baptism give?
It works forgiveness of sins, rescues from death and the devil, and gives eternal salvation to all who believe this, as the words and promises of God declare.
Which are these words and promises of God?
Christ our Lord says in the last chapter of Mark: “Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.” (Mark 16:16)

I think I'll go with the Catechism over textual critics who reject the testimony of the vast majority of Greek manuscripts.


Then you also have to deal with the following verses: 17 "These signs will be associated with those who believe: they will throw out demons in my name. They will speak in new languages. 18 They will pick up snakes with their hands. If they drink anything poisonous, it will not hurt them. They will place their hands on the sick, and they will get well.”


Those "vast number of Greek manuscripts" that include the longer ending come from the 5th-15th centuries. The two oldest Greek manuscripts (4th century) do not include it. They are not in an Old Latin manuscript (4th-5th century) nor in a Syriac manuscript (4th-7th century). Even older authors: Clement of Alexandria (215) and Origen (254) show no knowledge of the longer ending. Eusebius (339) and Jerome (420) attest that the ending was absent from almost all Greek copies of Mark that they knew.


A number of copies from the 10th-15th centuries mark the longer ending with asterisks or obeli, which was the conventional way of indicating a spurious addition to a document.


Both the external evidence (oldest manuscripts) and internal evidence (at least nine words that occur no where else in Mark,) and the awkward transition from v. 8 to v. 9, favor vv. 9-20 as later additions.


However, questions remain: Did the evangelist intend to end the gospel at v. 8? Was there another sheet of manuscript that was lost?


I think that the ending at v. 8 fits well the themes of Mark's gospel.


While 16:16 may be a favorite verse, other verses are not so favorable. Similarly, even though the Gospel of Thomas is not canonical, there are verses that are likely to go back to Jesus - and many that do not.

Irenaeus quotes from Mark 16:19 in Against Heresies.  That's in the 2nd century.  In P 45, just a few pages of Mark's Gospel survive.  What do we have of Mark's Gospel in P 45 (about 225 A.D.) corresponds closest to Codex Washingtonianus in the 4th or 5th century which contained the long ending of Mark.  It is reasonable to assume that P 45 did as well.
Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: peter_speckhard on March 18, 2021, 05:05:12 PM
Brian, you think more damage has been done by those verses than any help they may offer? Perhaps reading them prescriptions instead of descriptions leads people astray, but that’s what real pastors are for— not ditching the verses they don’t like, but helping people apply them properly.
Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on March 18, 2021, 06:02:50 PM
Mark 16:9-20 is most certainly part of the canonical scriptures and is to be to be treated as such. These verses may not have been written by the same author as the rest of Gospel named by long standing tradition "Mark." They probably were not. I agree with Prof. Voelz.


Did we not also inherit the Apocrypha as canonical scripture? Shouldn't they be treated as such?
Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: George Rahn on March 18, 2021, 06:16:44 PM
Mark 16:9-20 is most certainly part of the canonical scriptures and is to be to be treated as such. These verses may not have been written by the same author as the rest of Gospel named by long standing tradition "Mark." They probably were not. I agree with Prof. Voelz.


Did we not also inherit the Apocrypha as canonical scripture? Shouldn't they be treated as such?

Is canonical (having to do with the biblical canon) also to ignore the issue that the Bible is a collection of writings as it also tends to the question as to the apostolic and prophetic writings of the Old and New Testaments (cf. Formula of Concord)? I am not a fan of taking the whole Bible as we have it today as canon even though the issues about what comprises the canon must be involved  in evaluating content (ie. apostolic and prophetic).
Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: John_Hannah on March 18, 2021, 06:22:14 PM
Mark 16:9-20 is most certainly part of the canonical scriptures and is to be to be treated as such. These verses may not have been written by the same author as the rest of Gospel named by long standing tradition "Mark." They probably were not. I agree with Prof. Voelz.


Did we not also inherit the Apocrypha as canonical scripture? Shouldn't they be treated as such?

Why not? It's fine for a majority of Christians.

Peace, JOHN
Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on March 18, 2021, 06:29:02 PM
Irenaeus quotes from Mark 16:19 in Against Heresies.  That's in the 2nd century.


It's also quoted in the Diatesseron (2nd century).


Quote
In P 45, just a few pages of Mark's Gospel survive. What do we have of Mark's Gospel in P 45 (about 225 A.D.) corresponds closest to Codex Washingtonianus in the 4th or 5th century which contained the long ending of Mark.  It is reasonable to assume that P 45 did as well.


The old manuscripts that omit it are א and B, both 4th century.
Those that include it include A C D W (5th century) K Δ Θ Π Ψ (9th century)


It is not just external evidence, such as the manuscripts that are used, but also internal evidence. Bruce Metzger in A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, Second Edition, writes: "(a) the vocabulary and style of verses 9-20 are non-Markan (e.g. ἀπιστέω, βλάπτω, βεβαιὀω, ἐπακολουθέω, θεάομαι, μετὰ ταῦτα, πορεύομαι, συνεργέω, ὕστερον are found nowhere else in Mark; and θανάσιμον and τοῖς μετ᾽ αὐτοῦ γενομένοις, as designations of the disciples, occur only here in the New Testament). (b) The connection between ver. 8 and verses 9-20 is so awkward that it is difficult to believe that the evangelist intended the section to be a continuation of the Gospel. Thus, the subject of ver. 8 is the women, whereas Jesus is the presumed subject in ver. 9; in ver. 9 Mary Magdalene is identified even though she had been mentioned only a few lines before (15:47 and 16:1); the other women of verses 1-8 are now forgotten; the use of ἀναστὰς δἐ and the position of πρῶτον are appropriate at the beginning of a comprehensive narrative, but they are ill-suited in a continuation of verses 1-8. In short, all these features indicate that the section was added by someone who knew a form of Mark that ended abruptly with ver. 8 and who wished to supply a more appropriate conclusion. In view of the inconcinnities between verses 1-8 and 9-20, it is unlikely that the long ending was composed ad hoc to fill up an obvious gap; it is more likely that the section was excerpted from another document, dating perhaps from the first half of the second century." (pp. 104-105)
Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on March 18, 2021, 06:30:36 PM
Brian, you think more damage has been done by those verses than any help they may offer? Perhaps reading them prescriptions instead of descriptions leads people astray, but that’s what real pastors are for— not ditching the verses they don’t like, but helping people apply them properly.


Yes, good pastors note that these verses were a later addition to the Gospel of Mark.
Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on March 18, 2021, 06:47:09 PM
Mark 16:9-20 is most certainly part of the canonical scriptures and is to be to be treated as such. These verses may not have been written by the same author as the rest of Gospel named by long standing tradition "Mark." They probably were not. I agree with Prof. Voelz.


Did we not also inherit the Apocrypha as canonical scripture? Shouldn't they be treated as such?

Why not? It's fine for a majority of Christians.


I always try to buy Bibles that include it. One reason I seldom use NIV, ESV, NASB.


We can also wonder if Jerome did the church a disservice by changing to the Hebrew for the Old Testament after about 300 years of Christian use of the LXX as their scriptures. (The Eastern Church continues to use the LXX. However, one problem I've found is that there are not good translation, in my opinion, of the LXX. The Orthodox Study Bible (© 2008), is not really a new translation, but uses NKJV except where it differs from the LXX. A New English Translation of the Septuagint [NETS] (© 2007) is a new translation, but doesn't flow real well, and transliterates many of the names, e.g., "Dauid," so they are different than what we are used to. The Lexham English Septuagint (© 2019) is new to me and I haven't used it much, but what little I've used it, it seems less accurate than NETS, but it uses the more familiar names.
Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: Richard Johnson on March 18, 2021, 08:10:53 PM


I always try to buy Bibles that include it. One reason I seldom use NIV, ESV, NASB.




Unless I am mistaken, there is available an ESV with apocrypha included, and an NIV version with a portion of the apocrypha.
Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: Dana Lockhart on March 19, 2021, 12:52:53 AM
I was blessed to take two classes with Clayton Croy in seminary. His book, "The Mutilation of Mark's Gospel" is compelling. After reading it and discussing the matter with him, I am convinced that the most logical, straightforward answer is that the original beginning and ending of Mark's Gospel were lost early in the history of their transcription.

Personally, I would go further than Dr. Croy and say that I find the theory that Mark's Gospel formed much of the source material of Matthew and Luke only sensible in light of the reality of a damaged Markan Gospel.

This "mutilated" Gospel became the source material for attempts to rework/complete the lost original, which also drew on other sources (including Q and potentially an Aramaic gospel attributed to Matthew) to form Matthew and Luke. Because the tendency seems to be to add and clarify rather than subtract and replace when it comes to Scripture, Mark was preserved in enough communities that it was never replaced by the two other synoptic Gospels and entered the canon in its current state.

But then again, as Dr. Croy said in class, "Scholars can build castles in the clouds: you don't have to live in them."

The same is true for parish pastors.



Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on March 19, 2021, 02:47:25 AM


I always try to buy Bibles that include it. One reason I seldom use NIV, ESV, NASB.




Unless I am mistaken, there is available an ESV with apocrypha included, and an NIV version with a portion of the apocrypha.


I believe that if you find a NIV or ESV version with the Apocrypha, a publisher borrowed it from some other translation. One indication is that BibleGateway.net has no results when searching for an Apocrypha text in NIV and ESV.
Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: Dan Fienen on March 19, 2021, 01:11:36 PM
CPH has published The Apocrypha: The Lutheran Edition with Notes, using the ESV translation of the Apocrypha. The "Preface to the ESV Apocrypha" notes:


Quote
This translation of the Apocryphal Books is not completely new. It draws, in fact, on the mainstream of classic translations extending of the last five centuries: and most recently, it takes the 1971 Revised Standard Version (RASV) Apocrypha as its starting point.
Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on March 19, 2021, 01:28:55 PM
CPH has published The Apocrypha: The Lutheran Edition with Notes, using the ESV translation of the Apocrypha. The "Preface to the ESV Apocrypha" notes:


Quote
This translation of the Apocryphal Books is not completely new. It draws, in fact, on the mainstream of classic translations extending of the last five centuries: and most recently, it takes the 1971 Revised Standard Version (RASV) Apocrypha as its starting point.


Is the Apocrypha copyrighted by Crossway Bibles?


I found the answer on CPH webpage. https://www.cph.org/pdf/012065.pdf


Copyright © 2012 Concordia Publishing House
3558 S. Jefferson Ave., St. Louis, MO 63118-3968
1-800-325-3040 • www.cph.org

All rights reserved. Except as noted below, no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of Concordia Publishing House.

The Apocrypha is adapted from the Revised Standard Version of the Bible and Apocrypha, copyright © 2009 by Oxford University Press, Inc., New York, NY 10016. All rights reserved. The Apocrypha text appearing in this publication is reproduced and published in cooperation between Oxford University Press and Concordia Publishing House. Unauthorized reproduction of this publication is prohibited.


The General Editor was Edward A. Engelbrecht. Perhaps he can tell us who actually translated the Apocrypha from the Greek. (It doesn't seem to be the folks who translated the ESV, but I could be mistaken.)

Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: Weedon on March 19, 2021, 02:48:55 PM
I use the Apocrypha in my KJV (and that’s my usual for Bible reading too). It’s definitely translated by the same folks who worked on the translation.
Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: George Rahn on March 23, 2021, 04:25:24 PM
The challenge before us is the peculiar ending to Mark’s Gospel at chapter 16, verse 8:  “And they said nothing to anyone for they were afraid.” (RSV)

If the disciples are not there and if the women (disciples) flee and no longer stay or speak to anyone, the general question is how will the message be transmitted to others that indeed Christ has been raised from the dead, as he had said and promised during His ministry?  Even the young man at the tomb reminds us of what Jesus had promised and that Galilee was the place at which He could be found.

The common presupposition is that no one remains to carry on the Christian mission because they all Jesus’ disciples and the women have fled in fear.   Then the fill-in-the-blanks begin from that point as to what happens next, if any thing. 

However, theoretically, two individuals do remain at the empty tomb.  The transmission of the message is not as bleak as the story seems to indicate. 1) The young man remains inside the empty tomb and 2) the one who is being addressed about these events, ie. you, the reader or listener.  You remain at the empty tomb.  So in fact the message of the Gospel for others transmitted to others remains a possibility and in fact becomes an actuality in that if you yourself are reading this today, the message has been transmitted successfully because you didn’t leave the tomb without mentioning to someone else that Christ has been raised.  You in fact are part of the file of continuing transmission. 

But what of the young man dressed in his white robe who announced the amazing fact that indeed the tomb was empty and that Jesus had been raised?  You too have heard that message.  Presumably since you, the reader/listener have not fled in terror, now cooler heads have prevailed.  It’s time for you to go to Galilee in obedience to Jesus’ command by way of the young man’s announcement not just to the women but to you as well. 

For it is in Galilee where you will see the risen Lord, as he had said.  The young man and you are the crucial keys which address whether the message gets around despite both the disciples’ and women's failure of being transmitters.

And so off you go with the promise that in your life the Lord meets you and in fact does meet you just as he has promised.  You are the one who will want to put this all together as you try to express to others what the living Christ does for you in your life.  What does Jesus really mean for you? 

Since “death no longer has dominion over Him (Jesus)” his encounter of you in His word for you drives you forward with the strength of his promises for you.  Jesus will never abandon you now because He is always for you and never against you (Romans 8).  He is always with you as he promised to be (Matthew 28:20b).

Going to Galilee means to shed all that prevents you from receiving his promises.  Going to Galilee means to leave the empty tomb not in fear but in anticipation of seeing the Lord who is always on your side and never against you.  Galilee is the place where Jesus always did his ministry of teaching, healing, comforting, forgiving, showing mercy and even raising the dead.  Galilee is your life as you see Jesus just as he told you.

From my place in Galilee to your place, I can assure you through my own testimony of what God has done in my life that God will do so for yours, similarly.  His mercy and forgiveness are for real.  It testifies that He has told you that He will be there.  He has promised.
Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: peter_speckhard on March 23, 2021, 05:48:59 PM
I think the danger of saying “going to Galilee” means shedding whatever prevents you from receiving His promises is that people hear that and think, “Boy, I didn’t get that at all when I read it. I must be a spiritual dunce. Either that or the Bible is a big code that I don’t know.” So it preaches well, I’m not arguing against the idea. I just think it has to be presented with that danger clearly in mind. How can we today do the equivalent of going to Galilee is a slightly different question than what does it mean to go to Galilee.
Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on March 24, 2021, 02:02:08 AM


However, theoretically, two individuals do remain at the empty tomb.  The transmission of the message is not as bleak as the story seems to indicate. 1) The young man remains inside the empty tomb and 2) the one who is being addressed about these events, ie. you, the reader or listener.  You remain at the empty tomb.  So in fact the message of the Gospel for others transmitted to others remains a possibility and in fact becomes an actuality in that if you yourself are reading this today, the message has been transmitted successfully because you didn’t leave the tomb without mentioning to someone else that Christ has been raised.  You in fact are part of the file of continuing transmission.
 

Note: νεανίσκος, the word for “young man” who is dressed in white (16:5), is the same word used for the “young man” in the garden who is wearing only in linen cloth until he flees naked (14:51-52). These are the only two instances of this word in Mark.


Quote
But what of the young man dressed in his white robe who announced the amazing fact that indeed the tomb was empty and that Jesus had been raised?  You too have heard that message.  Presumably since you, the reader/listener have not fled in terror, now cooler heads have prevailed.  It’s time for you to go to Galilee in obedience to Jesus’ command by way of the young man’s announcement not just to the women but to you as well. 

An interesting question: Who is Mark written for? Is he writing an evangelical tract to convince unbelieving readers about the reality of Christ and the resurrection? Is he writing to people who already know about Jesus and believe the resurrection? If so, then he isn’t trying to convince them that Jesus rose from the dead. If we assume that Mark is writing to believers, then we need to ask: “What is Mark trying to say to these believers (and to us) with the way he ends the narrative?”

I also like the thought that the Gospel of Mark is like some parables that leave the conclusion to the hearers. Does the barren fig tree bear fruit after the gardener spends a year caring for it (Luke 13:6-9)? Does the older brother join the party (Luke 15:11-32)? The unstated conclusion then poses the question to the hearers. “Will you bear fruit?” “Are you willing to join the party?” Or, at the end of Mark, “Are you willing to go and tell others about Jesus being raised?” It seems clear that the gospel cannot end at v. 8. Especially, if it was written for believers, they know that the story didn't end with silence.

Quote
For it is in Galilee where you will see the risen Lord, as he had said.  The young man and you are the crucial keys which address whether the message gets around despite both the disciples’ and women's failure of being transmitters.

Why Galilee? My hunch is that after the disciples ran away, they would have gone back to their homes. It is likely that the territory of Galilee was where most of them were from. (Mark tells us that about five of them.) So, before they get home, Jesus is already there! Jesus doesn’t follow them there, but goes before them! The place they will see the risen Jesus is back at home – perhaps, we might even say, in the ordinary stuff of life.
 
Jesus is going to keep his promises to his disciples who have failed him – and even to Peter who has denied him. That is a message that I think Mark’s readers needed to hear.

Mark tells them that Jesus goes ahead of them – through the trials, sufferings, and death. Jesus goes ahead of them to the resurrection from the dead. Even if they have failed Jesus, Jesus will not fail them.

That's a message Mark's readers needed to hear. They were in the midst of the Jewish-Roman war - a war that brought the destruction of the Temple and mass suicides on Masada. There were probably many believers who were failures at following Jesus - like the first disciples. Jesus will not fail them. He goes before them - even as they are running away from him.
 
This may also be a message that our pew-sitters need to hear – not just in reference to their own sufferings, deaths, and resurrections; but also about going back home after the Easter celebration. At home there may be piles of dirty dishes, unmade beds; a yard or garden that needs tending, a house that needs cleaning; cars that need washing; spring shopping that needs doing; and preparations for a great crowd of people coming for dinner.
 
It can be easy to “see” the risen Christ in a packed Easter Sunday worship service, or perhaps even in a sunrise or the spring flowers blooming; but where is the risen Jesus when the people return home – to the drudgery of the same old things? The risen Christ has gone there ahead of them. They will see him. They will have opportunities to share the news.

Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: Rev. Edward Engelbrecht on March 24, 2021, 10:50:38 AM
The ESV Apocrypha was prepared by David daSilva, Dan McCartney, and Bernard Taylor. Their work was then edited by David Aiken. The team worked from the 1971 RSV Apocrypha and for additional books from the 1977 expanded Apocrypha. The whole was published by Oxford University Press with the ESV Bible. I believe it happened this way because Oxford University Press owns the rights to the RSV. The chief audience for the publication would be Anglicans.
Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: John_Hannah on March 24, 2021, 11:55:44 AM

Note: νεανίσκος, the word for “young man” who is dressed in white (16:5), is the same word used for the “young man” in the garden who is wearing only in linen cloth until he flees naked (14:51-52). These are the only two instances of this word in Mark.


One interpretation of these two (connected?) passages is that the young man represents all the baptized. As Jesus is dying the young man runs away leaving his σινδων behind. σινδων is normally the word used for a burial garment. We are buried with Jesus but trade the burial garment for the white robe of the baptized who are raised with him. Such an interpretation (dying/rising) is consonant with Romans 6 and the νεανίσκος with the new born infants of I Peter 2. It is perfect for an Easter Vigil where baptisms are administered.

Peace, JOHN
Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: peterm on March 24, 2021, 03:08:44 PM
I've always been intrigued by two things in the Gospel ending in question.

 The tomb is open and already empty.  The resurrected Christ is on the loose in the world, two things stand out right away (for me anyway)

God has burst whatever chains, or boxes, or definitions we care to put on Him even death itself. ( there is IMO a wilder edge to this resurrection narrative which leads me to ponder what God is up to since he is running loose and not defined in a neat and tidy way.

"Go to Galilee and there you will see him as he said..."  Where and how do we see Jesus?  He has promised we will.  Can we see  him?
Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: Weedon on March 24, 2021, 03:25:38 PM
The Markan Gospel is THE historic reading for Easter morning in the Western Church. I am struck always by two things, but they’re different from Pr. Morlock’s.

1. The absence of any encounter with the risen Christ in that reading; instead all they’re left with is sort of the same as what we get. Some dude got up in white telling the good news that He is risen as He said!

2. The ambiguity of the ending. Did they say anything? Will we? Will fear overcome? Or will the joy and wonder of the news overcome?

Well, and add in the third:

3. The women’s worry about the stone. And God had already seen to it. Yet they worried. So do we. Over a thousand and one things that simply don’t matter once it sinks into our bones: “He is risen as He said.”

Well, and add in the fourth:

4. Yes, to Pr. Morlockk’s Galilee. Go meet Him where He has promised to be for you. For them, Galilee (though I love that He couldn’t seem to wait for that; too much joy to hold off for the journey and so the Jerusalem appearances too); for us, the Supper.
Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: George Rahn on March 24, 2021, 05:32:30 PM
If all of them (disciples) forsook Jesus and fled (Mark 14:50), and even the women eventually leave the empty tomb (literally in the Greek) with trauma and ecstasy, (no one says anything to anyone because they were/are afraid), the only ones who have not abandoned Jesus at the end of the Gospel are the man still in the tomb, an otherwise empty tomb, and then also, you yourself, the reader.  I guess with the Gospel still around today someone went to Galilee and let the word out!  Someone went to Galilee.  Isn’t that a wonderful thing?
Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on March 24, 2021, 05:34:09 PM

Note: νεανίσκος, the word for “young man” who is dressed in white (16:5), is the same word used for the “young man” in the garden who is wearing only in linen cloth until he flees naked (14:51-52). These are the only two instances of this word in Mark.


One interpretation of these two (connected?) passages is that the young man represents all the baptized. As Jesus is dying the young man runs away leaving his σινδων behind. σινδων is normally the word used for a burial garment. We are buried with Jesus but trade the burial garment for the white robe of the baptized who are raised with him. Such an interpretation (dying/rising) is consonant with Romans 6 and the νεανίσκος with the new born infants of I Peter 2. It is perfect for an Easter Vigil where baptisms are administered.


σινδών is the word used for the (linen) cloth used for wrapping Jesus' body (Mt 27:59; Mk 15:46; Lu 23:53). It's not really a word that means "burial garment," but refers to a "good quality linen cloth" or a "garment made of this cloth." It's used with that sense in the LXX (Jd 14:12, 13; Pr 31:24). In addition, the Hebrew word it replaces, סָדִין, refers to an undergarment worn next to the body made of linen.


Using νεανίσκος for "newborn infants" is going beyond its definition. BDAG indicate that it refers to a young man from about the ages of 24-40. Lowe & Nida state: "a young man beyond the age of puberty, but normally before marriage."


1 Peter 2:2 uses ἀρτιγέννητα βρέφη for "newborn infants". βρέφος refers to children from before birth ("fetus") through the nursing stage ("baby, infant").


Perhaps the closer traditional liturgical connection is when the baptized were naked and put on a white garment when coming out of the water to the new life in Christ.

Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: George Rahn on March 24, 2021, 05:39:54 PM

Note: νεανίσκος, the word for “young man” who is dressed in white (16:5), is the same word used for the “young man” in the garden who is wearing only in linen cloth until he flees naked (14:51-52). These are the only two instances of this word in Mark.


One interpretation of these two (connected?) passages is that the young man represents all the baptized. As Jesus is dying the young man runs away leaving his σινδων behind. σινδων is normally the word used for a burial garment. We are buried with Jesus but trade the burial garment for the white robe of the baptized who are raised with him. Such an interpretation (dying/rising) is consonant with Romans 6 and the νεανίσκος with the new born infants of I Peter 2. It is perfect for an Easter Vigil where baptisms are administered.


σινδών is the word used for the (linen) cloth used for wrapping Jesus' body (Mt 27:59; Mk 15:46; Lu 23:53). It's not really a word that means "burial garment," but refers to a "good quality linen cloth" or a "garment made of this cloth." It's used with that sense in the LXX (Jd 14:12, 13; Pr 31:24). In addition, the Hebrew word it replaces, סָדִין, refers to an undergarment worn next to the body made of linen.


Using νεανίσκος for "newborn infants" is going beyond its definition. BDAG indicate that it refers to a young man from about the ages of 24-40. Lowe & Nida state: "a young man beyond the age of puberty, but normally before marriage."


1 Peter 2:2 uses ἀρτιγέννητα βρέφη for "newborn infants". βρέφος refers to children from before birth ("fetus") through the nursing stage ("baby, infant").


Perhaps the closer traditional liturgical connection is when the baptized were naked and put on a white garment when coming out of the water to the new life in Christ.

Nice connection here.  Isn’t it odd after all these years the rawness of this historical event continues to mystify and cause one to either scratch their head or rejoice!
Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on March 24, 2021, 05:59:03 PM
The Markan Gospel is THE historic reading for Easter morning in the Western Church. I am struck always by two things, but they’re different from Pr. Morlock’s.

1. The absence of any encounter with the risen Christ in that reading; instead all they’re left with is sort of the same as what we get. Some dude got up in white telling the good news that He is risen as He said!

2. The ambiguity of the ending. Did they say anything? Will we? Will fear overcome? Or will the joy and wonder of the news overcome?

Well, and add in the third:

3. The women’s worry about the stone. And God had already seen to it. Yet they worried. So do we. Over a thousand and one things that simply don’t matter once it sinks into our bones: “He is risen as He said.”

Well, and add in the fourth:

4. Yes, to Pr. Morlockk’s Galilee. Go meet Him where He has promised to be for you. For them, Galilee (though I love that He couldn’t seem to wait for that; too much joy to hold off for the journey and so the Jerusalem appearances too); for us, the Supper.


Note that both Jesus (Mt 26:32; Mk 14:28) and the messenger at the tomb (Mt 28:7; Mk 16:7) state that the risen Jesus "goes before" (προάγω) them to Galilee. Before they get to Galilee, Jesus is already there.
Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: peterm on March 24, 2021, 06:28:29 PM
The Markan Gospel is THE historic reading for Easter morning in the Western Church. I am struck always by two things, but they’re different from Pr. Morlock’s.

1. The absence of any encounter with the risen Christ in that reading; instead all they’re left with is sort of the same as what we get. Some dude got up in white telling the good news that He is risen as He said!

2. The ambiguity of the ending. Did they say anything? Will we? Will fear overcome? Or will the joy and wonder of the news overcome?

Well, and add in the third:

3. The women’s worry about the stone. And God had already seen to it. Yet they worried. So do we. Over a thousand and one things that simply don’t matter once it sinks into our bones: “He is risen as He said.”

Well, and add in the fourth:

4. Yes, to Pr. Morlockk’s Galilee. Go meet Him where He has promised to be for you. For them, Galilee (though I love that He couldn’t seem to wait for that; too much joy to hold off for the journey and so the Jerusalem appearances too); for us, the Supper.

YES!  Someday if we ever end up in the same geographic space I would like to sit down with you and while away some time.
Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: Weedon on March 24, 2021, 07:08:45 PM
Pastor Morlock, that would be a joy indeed! I pray may grant it.
Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: Dave Benke on March 25, 2021, 07:35:35 PM
Here is a really insightful conversation between Richard Lischer and Will Willimon, both Duke Divinity School professors past and current (Lischer a Concordia St. Louis grad late 60sish), useful on the topic at hand, entitled "Stunned Observers":  https://www.christiancentury.org/article/interview/preaching-holy-week-middle-pandemic-again

Dave Benke
Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on March 27, 2021, 12:55:41 PM
In an article unrelated to our specific text, Donald Juel writes: "It is not enough to ask what a passage means; we must ask what it intends to do – or perhaps even more accurately, what we intend to do with it." ("The Strange Silence of the Bible, Interpretation, January 1997, p. 16) In an oral culture words were not so much centered on what the words mean (to readers,) but what the words do to hearers.


We should wonder what reading Mark 16:1-8 does to the people sitting in the pews. When the story ends with silence, what reactions should we expect from the people who know the story of the resurrection thousands of years later?


In that sense, I think that our audiences are much like those of Mark's: people who know the truth of the resurrection who are surprised by this ending of Mark. In fact, a short commentary on Mark by Donald Juel is called: A Master of Surprise: Mark Interpreted.
Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: Harvey_Mozolak on March 27, 2021, 01:51:20 PM
Has it been offered here or elsewhere... a possible connection of the Messianic Secret and the short ending of Mark?  I wrote the following elsewhere in one of my mailings.

Is the ending another piece in the puzzle of the Marcian secret that Christ delivered any number of times-- “don’t tell anyone” and “don’t tell anyone until after….”   Could the so-called Messianic Secret be an applied tool used in crafting the conclusion of the Gospel?

This being the last instance of Jesus warning given one final time to be undone by his resurrection.  Well, no one to tell….  Or so someone would think if they didn’t have this manuscript in their hand or being read to them or being told to them with a loooooong pause... and know that the church is well and alive, thank you very much, Jesus!

Has anyone done any reading among NT scholars that suggests such a use of the ending’s seemingly truncated conclusion?

We are used to and enjoy secretly hidden, colorful Easter eggs, chocolate candy and once waxed, black outlined, European pysanky hidden behind the couch or in the grass and best in the crook of a backyard tree with eggs hanging like blood red and yellow sun-filled and blue as the waiting Virgin rain drops baptizing creation with hope and promise and risen love.  Blessed days of discovery ahead!   
Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: Weedon on March 27, 2021, 02:30:39 PM
I think the problem of it intentionally ending there is that “gar.” I think there had to be another leaf that we’ve lost and that was supplied (probably from Peter’s preaching) with the other accounts summarized in the rest of the chapter. I think the Messianic secret is a thing of the past after the Triumphal Entry. Jesus openly proclaimed it was HIS City and He was its King. “Blessed be the kingdom of our father David, that cometh in the name of the Lord.” Mk 12:10 Or more explicitly in Lk 19:38 “Blessed be the King that cometh in the name of the Lord.” Significantly, though, he didn’t lead the crowds to storm the Praetorium but up to the Temple. He’s a King of a different kind, of course.
Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on March 27, 2021, 07:26:58 PM
I think the problem of it intentionally ending there is that “gar.” I think there had to be another leaf that we’ve lost and that was supplied (probably from Peter’s preaching) with the other accounts summarized in the rest of the chapter. I think the Messianic secret is a thing of the past after the Triumphal Entry. Jesus openly proclaimed it was HIS City and He was its King. “Blessed be the kingdom of our father David, that cometh in the name of the Lord.” Mk 12:10 Or more explicitly in Lk 19:38 “Blessed be the King that cometh in the name of the Lord.” Significantly, though, he didn’t lead the crowds to storm the Praetorium but up to the Temple. He’s a King of a different kind, of course.


Jesus did not proclaim himself king. The crowds did. (The reference is Mark 11:10.) Crowds were often wrong about their understanding of Jesus. Could it have been the same crowd who later yelled, "Crucify him"?


I don't think that the "secret" of Jesus' identity is revealed until the centurion sees him die. That is what properly revealed him as the Son of God. That's what the disciples and the crowds couldn't get right before.
Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: Dave Benke on March 29, 2021, 08:41:17 AM
I think the problem of it intentionally ending there is that “gar.” I think there had to be another leaf that we’ve lost and that was supplied (probably from Peter’s preaching) with the other accounts summarized in the rest of the chapter. I think the Messianic secret is a thing of the past after the Triumphal Entry. Jesus openly proclaimed it was HIS City and He was its King. “Blessed be the kingdom of our father David, that cometh in the name of the Lord.” Mk 12:10 Or more explicitly in Lk 19:38 “Blessed be the King that cometh in the name of the Lord.” Significantly, though, he didn’t lead the crowds to storm the Praetorium but up to the Temple. He’s a King of a different kind, of course.


Jesus did not proclaim himself king. The crowds did. (The reference is Mark 11:10.) Crowds were often wrong about their understanding of Jesus. Could it have been the same crowd who later yelled, "Crucify him"?


I don't think that the "secret" of Jesus' identity is revealed until the centurion sees him die. That is what properly revealed him as the Son of God. That's what the disciples and the crowds couldn't get right before.

Speaking of the crowds, this is a fine message presented by the brother (I believe) of the former Supreme Court Justice Scalia:  https://www.thecatholicthing.org/2021/03/28/barabbas-a-holy-week-examen/?utm_source=The+Catholic+Thing+Daily&utm_campaign=6b70e42101-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_12_07_01_02_COPY_43&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_769a14e16a-6b70e42101-244195713.

Dave Benke
Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: peter_speckhard on March 29, 2021, 09:01:10 AM
I think the problem of it intentionally ending there is that “gar.” I think there had to be another leaf that we’ve lost and that was supplied (probably from Peter’s preaching) with the other accounts summarized in the rest of the chapter. I think the Messianic secret is a thing of the past after the Triumphal Entry. Jesus openly proclaimed it was HIS City and He was its King. “Blessed be the kingdom of our father David, that cometh in the name of the Lord.” Mk 12:10 Or more explicitly in Lk 19:38 “Blessed be the King that cometh in the name of the Lord.” Significantly, though, he didn’t lead the crowds to storm the Praetorium but up to the Temple. He’s a King of a different kind, of course.



Jesus did not proclaim himself king. The crowds did. (The reference is Mark 11:10.) Crowds were often wrong about their understanding of Jesus. Could it have been the same crowd who later yelled, "Crucify him"?


I don't think that the "secret" of Jesus' identity is revealed until the centurion sees him die. That is what properly revealed him as the Son of God. That's what the disciples and the crowds couldn't get right before.

Speaking of the crowds, this is a fine message presented by the brother (I believe) of the former Supreme Court Justice Scalia:  https://www.thecatholicthing.org/2021/03/28/barabbas-a-holy-week-examen/?utm_source=The+Catholic+Thing+Daily&utm_campaign=6b70e42101-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_12_07_01_02_COPY_43&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_769a14e16a-6b70e42101-244195713.

Dave Benke
Very nice. Not sure how I never made the connection on the meaning of the name. But it fits perfectly. In school chapel we always have the whole congregation shout out "Crucify him!" when we do the Passion reading with 8th graders speaking the various parts. "No, not him. Release to us Barabbas!" Much to repent of.
Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: John_Hannah on March 29, 2021, 09:13:52 AM

Speaking of the crowds, this is a fine message presented by the brother (I believe) of the former Supreme Court Justice Scalia:  https://www.thecatholicthing.org/2021/03/28/barabbas-a-holy-week-examen/?utm_source=The+Catholic+Thing+Daily&utm_campaign=6b70e42101-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_12_07_01_02_COPY_43&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_769a14e16a-6b70e42101-244195713.

Dave Benke

An excellent homily. Fr. Paul Scalia is the son of Justice Scalia. He preached at his father's funeral, also an excellent homily. One memorable anecdote. One evening he came to his father and mother's home for dinner. His father related how he had gone to confession earlier and found himself in line at his son's booth. He immediately exited. He told his son something like, "I'll be d***d if I will confess to you."   ;D

Peace, JOHN
Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: Steven W Bohler on March 29, 2021, 10:50:28 AM

Speaking of the crowds, this is a fine message presented by the brother (I believe) of the former Supreme Court Justice Scalia:  https://www.thecatholicthing.org/2021/03/28/barabbas-a-holy-week-examen/?utm_source=The+Catholic+Thing+Daily&utm_campaign=6b70e42101-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_12_07_01_02_COPY_43&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_769a14e16a-6b70e42101-244195713.

Dave Benke

An excellent homily. Fr. Paul Scalia is the son of Justice Scalia. He preached at his father's funeral, also an excellent homily. One memorable anecdote. One evening he came to his father and mother's home for dinner. His father related how he had gone to confession earlier and found himself in line at his son's booth. He immediately exited. He told his son something like, "I'll be d***d if I will confess to you."   ;D

Peace, JOHN

"My son, the Father"  Cliff Clavin and Cheers: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1dRgYgZ5U0
Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: Dave Benke on March 29, 2021, 11:30:28 AM
I think the problem of it intentionally ending there is that “gar.” I think there had to be another leaf that we’ve lost and that was supplied (probably from Peter’s preaching) with the other accounts summarized in the rest of the chapter. I think the Messianic secret is a thing of the past after the Triumphal Entry. Jesus openly proclaimed it was HIS City and He was its King. “Blessed be the kingdom of our father David, that cometh in the name of the Lord.” Mk 12:10 Or more explicitly in Lk 19:38 “Blessed be the King that cometh in the name of the Lord.” Significantly, though, he didn’t lead the crowds to storm the Praetorium but up to the Temple. He’s a King of a different kind, of course.



Jesus did not proclaim himself king. The crowds did. (The reference is Mark 11:10.) Crowds were often wrong about their understanding of Jesus. Could it have been the same crowd who later yelled, "Crucify him"?


I don't think that the "secret" of Jesus' identity is revealed until the centurion sees him die. That is what properly revealed him as the Son of God. That's what the disciples and the crowds couldn't get right before.

Speaking of the crowds, this is a fine message presented by the brother (I believe) of the former Supreme Court Justice Scalia:  https://www.thecatholicthing.org/2021/03/28/barabbas-a-holy-week-examen/?utm_source=The+Catholic+Thing+Daily&utm_campaign=6b70e42101-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_12_07_01_02_COPY_43&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_769a14e16a-6b70e42101-244195713.

Dave Benke
Very nice. Not sure how I never made the connection on the meaning of the name. But it fits perfectly. In school chapel we always have the whole congregation shout out "Crucify him!" when we do the Passion reading with 8th graders speaking the various parts. "No, not him. Release to us Barabbas!" Much to repent of.

One year during our Lenten Circuit sharing series, where five or six congregations move to one another's location (pre-COVID) and eat/fellowship and then worship together, we did a type of passion narrative with our youth group.   So it came to Jesus, Barabbas and Pilate, the rest of the kids being the crowd "crucify him" crew.  At the crowd-sourced vote that favored Jesus for crucifixion, the youth playing Barabbas jumped up in the air - this was a spontaneous non-scripted moment - shouted out "I'm FREE!  FREE!"  and sprinted down the aisle and out of the sanctuary.  He was a reverse-directed memento of us, freed because of the Eternal Son of the Father, carried back into the sanctuary of the Father's love.

Dave Benke
Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on March 29, 2021, 03:00:12 PM
I think the problem of it intentionally ending there is that “gar.” I think there had to be another leaf that we’ve lost and that was supplied (probably from Peter’s preaching) with the other accounts summarized in the rest of the chapter. I think the Messianic secret is a thing of the past after the Triumphal Entry. Jesus openly proclaimed it was HIS City and He was its King. “Blessed be the kingdom of our father David, that cometh in the name of the Lord.” Mk 12:10 Or more explicitly in Lk 19:38 “Blessed be the King that cometh in the name of the Lord.” Significantly, though, he didn’t lead the crowds to storm the Praetorium but up to the Temple. He’s a King of a different kind, of course.


Jesus did not proclaim himself king. The crowds did. (The reference is Mark 11:10.) Crowds were often wrong about their understanding of Jesus. Could it have been the same crowd who later yelled, "Crucify him"?


I don't think that the "secret" of Jesus' identity is revealed until the centurion sees him die. That is what properly revealed him as the Son of God. That's what the disciples and the crowds couldn't get right before.

Speaking of the crowds, this is a fine message presented by the brother (I believe) of the former Supreme Court Justice Scalia:  https://www.thecatholicthing.org/2021/03/28/barabbas-a-holy-week-examen/?utm_source=The+Catholic+Thing+Daily&utm_campaign=6b70e42101-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_12_07_01_02_COPY_43&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_769a14e16a-6b70e42101-244195713 (https://www.thecatholicthing.org/2021/03/28/barabbas-a-holy-week-examen/?utm_source=The+Catholic+Thing+Daily&utm_campaign=6b70e42101-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_12_07_01_02_COPY_43&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_769a14e16a-6b70e42101-244195713).


One tradition has "Barabbas" meaning: "bar abba" = son of the father.
Another, that goes back to Jerome, who saw it as "bar rabbin" = son of the master. (He expressed it in Latin: "filius magistri eorum.") "Rabbi" comes from the same "rb" root.
Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on March 29, 2021, 03:03:46 PM

Speaking of the crowds, this is a fine message presented by the brother (I believe) of the former Supreme Court Justice Scalia:  https://www.thecatholicthing.org/2021/03/28/barabbas-a-holy-week-examen/?utm_source=The+Catholic+Thing+Daily&utm_campaign=6b70e42101-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_12_07_01_02_COPY_43&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_769a14e16a-6b70e42101-244195713 (https://www.thecatholicthing.org/2021/03/28/barabbas-a-holy-week-examen/?utm_source=The+Catholic+Thing+Daily&utm_campaign=6b70e42101-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_12_07_01_02_COPY_43&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_769a14e16a-6b70e42101-244195713).

Dave Benke

An excellent homily. Fr. Paul Scalia is the son of Justice Scalia. He preached at his father's funeral, also an excellent homily. One memorable anecdote. One evening he came to his father and mother's home for dinner. His father related how he had gone to confession earlier and found himself in line at his son's booth. He immediately exited. He told his son something like, "I'll be d***d if I will confess to you."   ;D

Peace, JOHN

"My son, the Father"  Cliff Clavin and Cheers: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1dRgYgZ5U0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1dRgYgZ5U0)


Exactly! Some good friends have that relationship. Their son became a priest. (We attended the ordination.) The father of the son was ordained a deacon. (We also attended that service.) They are now living in the same town with the father attending masses led by the Father who is his son; and whom he can assist as a deacon. To add to the confusion, they both have the same name.
Title: Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
Post by: Padre Emeritus on March 30, 2021, 06:09:36 PM
Just a FYI, I have a NRSV in very large font that has Apocrypha interspersed amongst the OT books much like other Anglican preparations, rather than the Lutheran arrangement as a group between Testaments.