BetterMost Community Blogs > The Twist Family Bible Study
Twist family Bible study: the Gospel of Mark
Wayne:
As always, Wikipedia has some interesting insights ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_3
there is an intriguing footnote: "by the time Mark was writing in the late 60s, the Gentile churches outside of Israel were beginning to resent the authority wielded by Jerusalem where James and the apostles were leaders, thus providing the motive for Mark’s antifamily stance… (Butz, 2005, p. 44)."
So there were already disagreements as early as AD 60. ::) Sounds like we shouldn't feel too bad if we can't resolve all the details now. ;)
Shakesthecoffecan:
The foreshadowing is very interesting to me, and the part about his conflict with healing on the Sabbath seems to conflict with the part from matthew that Jess brought up about all th elaws remaining in effect until they are finished.
Could Jesus have thought the laws did not apply to him as he saw himself as the son of God?
Could this be the begining of what he knew would be a wedge between the old and the new?
Wayne:
:-X Just my opinion, but my impression at the moment is that he was ready to completely change the rules.
"not to abolish the law but to fulfill the law..." What does that mean? Something like - the law was here to prepare us for the next step?
"Your sins are forgiven..." "Sin" meant lots of things. According to Leviticus, most of those things are along the lines of not tithing your rosemary.
He could not speak explicitly what he wanted to say. The gospel writers frequently remind us that he could not, because he would get killed if he did. That's why he spoke in parables.
(Spoiler alert: actually he does wind up getting killed, but I don't want to ruin the ending for anybody! :o )
I suspect that if he could have spoken freely he would have said look, this is ridiculous. It's time for a change.
Shakesthecoffecan:
I had never thought of that before, he did have to "spin" him message to get it out to people.
I have heard Brokeback described as a parable.
injest:
--- Quote from: wdj on December 04, 2007, 05:52:07 pm --- :-X Just my opinion, but my impression at the moment is that he was ready to completely change the rules.
"not to abolish the law but to fulfill the law..." What does that mean? Something like - the law was here to prepare us for the next step?
"Your sins are forgiven..." "Sin" meant lots of things. According to Leviticus, most of those things are along the lines of not tithing your rosemary.
He could not speak explicitly what he wanted to say. The gospel writers frequently remind us that he could not, because he would get killed if he did. That's why he spoke in parables.
(Spoiler alert: actually he does wind up getting killed, but I don't want to ruin the ending for anybody! :o )
I suspect that if he could have spoken freely he would have said look, this is ridiculous. It's time for a change.
--- End quote ---
dang it Wayne!!
>:( >:( >:( >:(
now you have ruined the book for me!!
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version