So far my sermon outline for this passage is:
Following Jesus means:
i. Loving Jesus before all others (vv25-26)
ii. Carrying our cross (vv 27)
iii. Careful Consideration (vv28-33)
iv. Something about salt (!) (vv 34-35)
Any ideas about point 4? I remember doing a course on preaching where we were taught that the verse that you don’t understand how it fits into the passage is often the key to the whole passage. That’s why I am quite keen to get this one right…
Thursday, 27 November 2008
German
One of the interesting (!) features of the German language is the ‘overloaded adjective construction’. In English we might say: The man, who was walking his recently purchased Boxer dog, stumbled across two men burgling his neighbour’s house.
German might put it like his: The walking his recently purchased Boxer dog man stumbled across two men burgling his neighbour’s house.
Now, if that’s not interesting I don’t know what is…
German might put it like his: The walking his recently purchased Boxer dog man stumbled across two men burgling his neighbour’s house.
Now, if that’s not interesting I don’t know what is…
Tuesday, 18 November 2008
Where is Jesus now?
I have been working on two German theologians - Albert Schweitzer and Ernst Käsemann. Although, I would not recommend their writings for a young Christian (at all!), they do have lots of profound insights into Paul in particular. Interestingly, they have polar opposite views on one question - the current location of Jesus:
Käsemann: ‘Paul knows no invisible Christ whom one can localize only in heaven’
Schweitzer: ‘For Paul, as for all the believers of his generation, Christ is in Heaven, with God, and nowhere else’
Who do you think gets it right?!
Käsemann: ‘Paul knows no invisible Christ whom one can localize only in heaven’
Schweitzer: ‘For Paul, as for all the believers of his generation, Christ is in Heaven, with God, and nowhere else’
Who do you think gets it right?!
Machen on Education
“Modern pedagogy has emancipated us, whether we be in the pulpit or in the professor’s chair or in the pew, from anything so irksome as earnest labour in the acquisition of knowledge.”
Machen on God’s Care
Out in the dressing station, when the shells were falling close around, I somehow gained the conviction that I was in God’s care and He would not try me beyond my strength; that courage would keep pace with danger, or rather that danger (for I confess it turned out rather that way) would keep within the limits of courage. In short, I understand the eighth chapter of Romans better.
Tuesday, 11 November 2008
Machen on War II
Nichols (162-163): Machen was also moved by the ruin of the countryside, “a scene of desolation so abominable.” He adds, “I have seen burnt and ruined forests before. But the effects of shellfire are different. There was something indescribably sinister about the scene of ruin.” He had more of the countryside to see than he wanted to as they fought their way through France and into Belgium. A month or so before the end of the war, he wrote that his “shoes gave out completely under the stress” of the marching, adding, “Of course my feet were wet all the time.” He recalls what happened next: But finally I “salvaged” a dry pair of socks. Do you understand that word “salvage”? It is a great word in the army. When you see anything good lying around and appropriate When you see anything good lying around and appropriate it that is not “stealing”; it is merely salvaging. . . .You may laugh, and think I am irreverent, but I can say in all seriousness that one of the most fervent prayers that I ever offered in my life was the prayer of thanksgiving that I prayed that night in my dug-out when I pulled on those warm socks.
Rugby League World Cup
Now that the favourites have been knocked out, this competition is wide open...
Hays on Mark III - The implications
If Mark is presenting Jesus as the God of Israel then the implications are immense. Because Jesus - who is revealed in Mark as the Christ - is crucified. In other words we are seeing an identification of the Crucified Messiah and the God of Israel. Our God is the God of the Cross. No wonder Paul said that the Cross was a stumbling block to his fellow Jews and foolishness to the Gentiles (1 Cor 1:23). And can we do anything other than marvel at and lay down our lives in worship of this God who went to the cross for us?
Monday, 10 November 2008
Machen on acts of humanity during the War
Machen served as a YMCA volunteer during the first world war. A lot of his time was taken up with serving tea and hot chocolate to the soldiers:
One German fellow said when I gave him the chocolate that it was “wie bei der Mutter.” It would have taken a harder heart than mine to keep from being touched by that. By the way, along with the hatred and bitterness incidental to war, there are some examples of the other thing which like the fair lilies in swampy ground are all the more beautiful because of the contrast with the unlikely soil in which they grow. Thus at one of the dressing stations near the front, I saw an American wounded soldier deliberately take off his overcoat and give it to a wounded German who was suffering a lot worse than he. When one reflects what that little act meant—the long cold hours of rain and damp along the way to the rear and the interminable waits— it becomes clear that magnanimity has not altogether perished from the earth.
One German fellow said when I gave him the chocolate that it was “wie bei der Mutter.” It would have taken a harder heart than mine to keep from being touched by that. By the way, along with the hatred and bitterness incidental to war, there are some examples of the other thing which like the fair lilies in swampy ground are all the more beautiful because of the contrast with the unlikely soil in which they grow. Thus at one of the dressing stations near the front, I saw an American wounded soldier deliberately take off his overcoat and give it to a wounded German who was suffering a lot worse than he. When one reflects what that little act meant—the long cold hours of rain and damp along the way to the rear and the interminable waits— it becomes clear that magnanimity has not altogether perished from the earth.
Hays on Mark II
Why does Mark not make it obvious that he is referring to Jesus deity? Why do it through oblique allusions to the OT? Hays gives a number of reasons.
Firstly, the truth that Jesus is being identified as Jesus’ God is simply too radical to proclaim directly. It was simply too shocking a truth for a 1st Century Jew to say that a man could be indentified by God. So, Mark projects his story of Jesus onto the background of the story of Israel and as he does so ‘remarkable patterns emerge’ that show Jesus’ true identity.
Secondly, this elusive technique fits with Mark’s view of Jesus’ agenda. The secret of the kingdom of God is 4:12 is not given to everyone - only to those who have ears to ear. Mark’s use of the OT to reveal Jesus’ identity is only available to those who go beyond a superficial reading of the text. Mark uses his OT allusions like Jesus used the parables - to keep people out as much as to bring them in.
Thirdly, Mark 4:21-25 give us the hermeneutical key to what Mark is doing. Most English versions render v21 something like this (ESV): Is a lamp brought in to be put under a basket, or under a bed, and not on a stand? However, there are couple of interesting things in the Greek - it is not ‘a’ lamp, but ‘the’ lamp and it isn’t brought - rather it ‘comes’. Hays argues that Jesus is the lamp - and he has come to be revealed. The language in vv24-25 about paying attention to how you hear and about the measure given to you, argues Hays, and this is possibly where he strains things a bit, refer to how you read the OT. If you read the OT with a ‘generous measure’ with respect to Jesus you will see him as he really is - the God of Israel.
What Mark was doing has parallels in other Jewish writings - especially Apocalyptic. So, for example, the book of Revelation uses lots of OT symbolism to argue its point - symbolism that if you miss it can lead to nonsensical interpretations (e.g. one writer arguing that the locusts of Revelaton 9:7 referred to US Cobra attack helicopters).
Whether or not you buy all the details of Hays’ argument, I think he is convincing in showing that Mark is presenting Jesus as the God of Israel.
Firstly, the truth that Jesus is being identified as Jesus’ God is simply too radical to proclaim directly. It was simply too shocking a truth for a 1st Century Jew to say that a man could be indentified by God. So, Mark projects his story of Jesus onto the background of the story of Israel and as he does so ‘remarkable patterns emerge’ that show Jesus’ true identity.
Secondly, this elusive technique fits with Mark’s view of Jesus’ agenda. The secret of the kingdom of God is 4:12 is not given to everyone - only to those who have ears to ear. Mark’s use of the OT to reveal Jesus’ identity is only available to those who go beyond a superficial reading of the text. Mark uses his OT allusions like Jesus used the parables - to keep people out as much as to bring them in.
Thirdly, Mark 4:21-25 give us the hermeneutical key to what Mark is doing. Most English versions render v21 something like this (ESV): Is a lamp brought in to be put under a basket, or under a bed, and not on a stand? However, there are couple of interesting things in the Greek - it is not ‘a’ lamp, but ‘the’ lamp and it isn’t brought - rather it ‘comes’. Hays argues that Jesus is the lamp - and he has come to be revealed. The language in vv24-25 about paying attention to how you hear and about the measure given to you, argues Hays, and this is possibly where he strains things a bit, refer to how you read the OT. If you read the OT with a ‘generous measure’ with respect to Jesus you will see him as he really is - the God of Israel.
What Mark was doing has parallels in other Jewish writings - especially Apocalyptic. So, for example, the book of Revelation uses lots of OT symbolism to argue its point - symbolism that if you miss it can lead to nonsensical interpretations (e.g. one writer arguing that the locusts of Revelaton 9:7 referred to US Cobra attack helicopters).
Whether or not you buy all the details of Hays’ argument, I think he is convincing in showing that Mark is presenting Jesus as the God of Israel.
Saturday, 8 November 2008
Hays on Mark's Gospel
In examining Mark’s Gospel, Hays points to a number of ways that Mark uses Scripture to ‘narrate the identity of Jesus’. Here are a few examples:
-Who is the Lord of 1:2-3? In the context of Isaiah 40:3,9 it is no-one but God himself.
-Who can forgive sins (2:7)? According to Exodus 34:6-7 and Isaiah 43:35 no-one but God himself.
-Who can make the wind and sea obey him (4:35-41)? According to Ps 107:23-32 only God himself.
-Who is the shepherd of Israel (6:34)? According to Ezekiel 43:11-5 it is God himself.
-Who comes looking for figs (11:12-14)? According to Jeremiah 8:13 only God himself.
The most interesting one is the account of Jesus walking on water in 6:45-52. Often an attempt is made to see this as somehow referring to Moses leading the people across the Red Sea. However, a clearer OT background is surely Job 9:4-11 which speaks in v8 as God being the one who ‘treads on the waves of the sea’. Who can walk on water? Only God. The end of verse 48 often generates a bit of discussion. Why does Mark add the detail that Jesus was about to pass by them? Well, in verse 11 of Job 9, Job says of God ‘When he passes me, I cannot see him; when he goes by, I cannot perceive him.’ In the Greek translation of this verse, the correspondence to Mark 6:48 is very close. In other words, in alluding to Job 9 Mark is simultaneously emphasising Jesus’ deity and the disciples’ inability to grasp his identity.
All this raises the obvious question - why was Mark not explicit in all of this? After all, Peter’s recognition of Jesus as Christ in 8:29 seems to be central to Mark’s Gospel. Does he really have another agenda to communicate the deity of Christ?
-Who is the Lord of 1:2-3? In the context of Isaiah 40:3,9 it is no-one but God himself.
-Who can forgive sins (2:7)? According to Exodus 34:6-7 and Isaiah 43:35 no-one but God himself.
-Who can make the wind and sea obey him (4:35-41)? According to Ps 107:23-32 only God himself.
-Who is the shepherd of Israel (6:34)? According to Ezekiel 43:11-5 it is God himself.
-Who comes looking for figs (11:12-14)? According to Jeremiah 8:13 only God himself.
The most interesting one is the account of Jesus walking on water in 6:45-52. Often an attempt is made to see this as somehow referring to Moses leading the people across the Red Sea. However, a clearer OT background is surely Job 9:4-11 which speaks in v8 as God being the one who ‘treads on the waves of the sea’. Who can walk on water? Only God. The end of verse 48 often generates a bit of discussion. Why does Mark add the detail that Jesus was about to pass by them? Well, in verse 11 of Job 9, Job says of God ‘When he passes me, I cannot see him; when he goes by, I cannot perceive him.’ In the Greek translation of this verse, the correspondence to Mark 6:48 is very close. In other words, in alluding to Job 9 Mark is simultaneously emphasising Jesus’ deity and the disciples’ inability to grasp his identity.
All this raises the obvious question - why was Mark not explicit in all of this? After all, Peter’s recognition of Jesus as Christ in 8:29 seems to be central to Mark’s Gospel. Does he really have another agenda to communicate the deity of Christ?
Hays in Durham
Every Monday night in the Theology Department we have seminars from different speakers. This week we had one of the leading NT theologians in the world at the moment - Richard Hays. He gave us a lecture on part of a chapter of a book he is writing on the use of Scripture by the Gospels. This particular lecture was entitled: Jesus as the Embodiment of the God of Israel?
I have to say that it was one of the most stimulating theological lectures I have ever heard! (Perhaps that says more about me than the lecture!).
Hays argued that, similar to Paul, Mark alludes to the OT and in fact his Gospel is saturated with the OT. Often Mark is seen as presenting the human side of Jesus - in contrast to say John who wants to stress his deity. However, Hays argued that when you see the many allusions to the OT, you can’t help but see that Mark has a remarkably high Christology - and sees that Jesus is God.
More to follow...
I have to say that it was one of the most stimulating theological lectures I have ever heard! (Perhaps that says more about me than the lecture!).
Hays argued that, similar to Paul, Mark alludes to the OT and in fact his Gospel is saturated with the OT. Often Mark is seen as presenting the human side of Jesus - in contrast to say John who wants to stress his deity. However, Hays argued that when you see the many allusions to the OT, you can’t help but see that Mark has a remarkably high Christology - and sees that Jesus is God.
More to follow...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
