INTRODUCTION
The Markan passage contains stern
warnings as well as unique promises. It follows closely on the Petrine
identification of the Son of Man regarding Christ. Christ, following this
identification, describes the coming suffering that He must endure. However,
the theme of suffering does not end with Christ, the passage in review here
points out that His followers will also suffer. This review and analysis
determines what exactly Mark 8:34-9:1 demands from followers of Christ, the end
result of following Christ by gaining their soul, as well as explaining in
detail what occurs to those who deny Him, the loss of their soul. This passage
then ends with a future reference to the Parousia of Christ. This process
begins with a review of the context (historical and literary), followed by a
textual analysis, and concluding with a section on application.
CONTEXT
Identifying the author of the Gospel
of Mark may perhaps give better historical and literary insight into the
passage under review. Thus, succinctly, this section will seek to answer three
things. First, who wrote the Gospel of Mark? Second, what was occurring around
him (historical)? Third, to whom did the author write the Gospel of Mark and
how did the author write it (literary)?
"Like the other canonical Gospels, the Gospel of Mark
nowhere identifies its author, nor even, as is the case with Luke (1:1-4) or
John (20:30-31), the occasion of the writing."[1]
However, Eusebius identifies Mark as the author of the book,
That Mark
wrote the second Gospel under the influence of Peter, or as a record of what he
had heard from him, is the universal tradition of antiquity. Papias, in the
famous and much-disputed passage, is the first to record the tradition. Justin
Martyr refers to Mark’s Gospel under the name “Memoirs of Peter”. Irenæus,
Tertullian, and Origen confirm the tradition, thus repeated by the Fathers.[2]
Because of this identification, scholars identify this Mark
as John Mark.[3]
While brevity is in order, one should consult Stein's work discussing the
arguments for and against in order to gain a better understanding of the
authorial debate.[4]
Not all scholars follow this stance. To present
one argument,
This
relationship to Peter does not mean that the author of this Gospel is the same
John Mark that we meet in Acts (12:12, 25; 13:4, 13) and the fellow worker of
Paul (Col. 4:10; Philem. 24; 2 Tim. 4:11). Mark was one of the most common
names in the Roman world, both in Greek (Markos)
and Latin (Marcus), and there were
probably several Marks in the early church. One should therefore refrain from
any fanciful recreations of the Evangelist's career on the basis of the
disparate New Testament references to Mark.[5]
The stance of this paper follows Steins and Edwards’
conclusion, "Although we cannot prove that John Mark was the author of the
Second Gospel, the weight of evidence rests firmly in his favor."[6]
Historical-Cultural Context
If John
Mark is the author, when was Mark writing, and what was occurring at that time?
Several scholars see the writing based on the persecution of the Roman church, "The
church faced major crises in the 60s. Christians had to cope with the death of
eyewitnesses, which created the need to conserve and stabilize the traditions
about Jesus."[7]
What brought about this persecution? The main factor started at the top person
of the Roman Empire. Nero was the emperor of Rome, and after the fire of A.D.
64, blamed the Christians producing widespread persecution.[8]
Furthermore, some authors add internal support
and place the dating sometime between the 60s to early 70s because of the
inclusion of the persecution passages within Mark and prophecy of the temple
destruction in AD 70.[9]
However, Stein correctly points out that the Christian church experienced persecution
before Nero's administration thus negating this argument to an extent.[10]
While this is true, the prophecies of the temple remain. Were the prophecies in
fact, post-event 'prophecies,' or did they occur before the event? Evans
concisely argues that the prophecies demonstrate a "vaticinium ex eventu".[11]
Mark's Gospel would have served to identify the events of the time as well as
warn the believers that what was occurring was not the end, but merely extreme
times of faith.[12]
Not every
author is willing to come to such a definitive conclusion. Donahue, Harrington
and Edwards cautiously approach this result, but posit that dating the text
based on internal sources can be problematic.[13]
France, arguing from Bauckham’s perspective that dating does not affect
exegesis, cautiously agrees with Hengel and opts for the same dating.[14]
Literary Context
With the
persecution of the early church occurring during the 60s, scholars continue to
debate the intended recipients, "To undergird Christians in their
suffering, Mark showed the similarity between what Jesus faced and what they
were facing […]. Cross-bearing was an integral part of discipleship (8:34-39);
and for some, it had become a literal reality."[15]
Is this the only clue within the text, or are there other clues that can
identify the recipients?
Stein
lists five arguments identifying the audience. First, the audience spoke Greek,
but did not know Aramaic because the author translates several Aramaic phrases (3:17-22;
5:41; 7:11, 34; 9:43; 10:46; 14:36; 15:22, 34).[16]
The audience knows gospel traditions, as well as several Old Testament
characters and possessed vast knowledge concerning first century Judaism.[17]
Traditional consensus places the audience at Rome, against a newer
identification of Syria.[18]
Stein lists fifteen Latinisms found within Mark's Gospel which suggest that the
author wrote from [and to] a Roman audience.[19]
Edwards
points out that Mark utilizes the colloquial vocabulary in order to convey extraordinary
events.[20]
Mark wrote the book with the mindset that it was to read aloud to the
illiterate.[21]
Furthermore, France determines that Mark wrote the gospel in the form of a
dramatic, biographical narrative that unfolds over three "acts."[22]
General agreement rests on the way Mark wrote
the gospel using vivid language and the prominent kai
usage known as a parataxis.[23]
Donahue and Harrington note five literary techniques found within Mark: rapid
movement and changes of scene, repetition, framing or bracketing, chiasms and
three-fold structure, and foreshadowing and echoes.[24]
In conclusion, this paper adheres to the argument that Mark wrote a
biographical narrative to the Roman believers during the 60s in order to
introduce the unique life, teaching and deeds of the euaggelion, Jesus Christ (Mk. 1:1). Edwards accurately concludes by stating, “A
combination of external and internal data appears to point to a composition of
the Gospel of Mark in Rome between the great fire in 64 and the siege and
destruction of Jerusalem by Titus in 70, that is, about the year 65.”[25]
ANALYSIS OF THE TEXT
(Mark 8:34a)
In order
to understand the passage, one needs to know two things concerning Mark: where
this falls within the overall text of Mark, and what specifically precedes the passage
under review. Concerning the overall text, France's argument for structure
seems most probable focusing on the three geographical stages within the
Gospel: a prologue (1:1-13 or 1:1-15), stage 1 in and around Galilee (1:16-8:21),
stage 2 on the road to Jerusalem (8:22-10:52), and stage 3 (11:1-16:20).[26]
The text under review falls within the second stage, while Christ and His
disciples are on the road to Jerusalem.
The beginning of the text falls within a
discussion between Christ and His disciples. Peter has just identified Jesus
as, "the Christ" (vs. 29). Jesus responds by ordering them not to
tell anyone (vs. 30). This aorist, active, declarative indicative statement
concerns the identification of Jesus as the Christ.[27]
Jesus then began to teach them what He will
experience in the coming future (vs. 31). The beginning word, kai,
according to Stein, identifies a new stage in the ministry of Christ.[28]
However, Young states that kai occurs as a "discourse
additive," joining two elements in order to continue the main plot
forward.[29]
Christ describes what it means to be the true Messiah, countering earlier
understandings of a physical government that would overthrow Rome.[30]
"At the beginning of the Gospel, Mark announced Jesus to be the Christ
(1:1), but until now he has kept the theme under wraps […]. Peter has called
Jesus "Messiah" (8:29), and Jesus now begins to explain what it
means."[31]
Thus, the discourse additive for kai carries
weight continuing the main topic within the passage: Christ as the Messiah.[32]
The necessity of the death is paramount to
God's will.[33]
Thus, Jesus' talk was open with the disciples (kai parrasia ton logon elalei). Interestingly, some Bible translations do not translate
the phrase (ton logon); however, "now for the first time the word is
specifically identified with the necessity of Jesus' passion and suffering.
The 'word' is thus not a religious abstraction but the proclamation of the
cross."[34]
Peter thus began to rebuke (epitiman)
Jesus. Jesus' quick response and rebuke are necessary in order to identify the
serious error within Peter's mind concerning the Messiah's role.[35]
Donahue and Harrington point out that Peter's rebuke was in front of the
disciples, thus making it a teaching opportunity.[36]
Gar, after Jesus calls Peter "Satan," is used as a conjunction of explanation identifying
why Peter was called Satan.[37]
Once Jesus
rebukes Peter, Mark uses the word proskalesamenoj [“having called
together”] introducing a shift in audience from just the disciples to the crowd
following them on the way to Jerusalem.[38]
Thus, the instructions that will come in the second Pericope are not just to
the disciples, “but also to anyone who might wish to learn about and become
part of Jesus’ movement.”[39]
Pericope 2
(Mark 8:34b-38)
Following
the call, Mark uses a term that reflects back to when Jesus called the original
disciples, akolouqein [“to follow”].[40]
How does one follow Christ? His disciples have been following him since their
calling, and the crowd has joined up at some time along the way? Then,
something different must be in order. Jesus presents three demands that
describe how the true disciple is to follow Him. The disciple denies himself,
takes up a cross, and follows Christ.
Jesus is not asking a disciple to deny something,
but to deny one’s self and every
self-promoting ambition.[41]
Aparnhsasqw is a compound word, consisting of apo and
arneomai. The term arneomai means, “To disown,” with
the addition of a preposition of disassociation (apo) reinforces the idea
of disownment.[42]
Skinner, discussing the imperative of the word, states, “More profoundly, one
who follows Jesus continually enacts self-denial through living without regard
for the security and priorities that people naturally cling to and that our
society actively promotes as paramount.”[43]
Mark’s usage of the imperative here uses the aorist imperative for general
guidelines, much like Paul.[44]
Following closely upon the heels of denying
one’s self, Jesus states that one must carry their cross (aratw ton stauron autou). “The imagery implies both death and shame, for
crucifixion was reserved for the most hardened criminals and for revolutionaries
committing treason against the state.”[45]
This second imperative (aratw) is a command that as one denies one’s self, one “joins
Jesus on the way to execution.”[46]
Skinner demonstrates three functions behind carrying one’s cross: a cross
threatens a person’s being, it functions in the realm of finality, and it
occurs in the public.[47]
Jesus then reiterates with a third imperative
to follow Him (akolouqeitw
moi). “Jesus tells His disciples to follow the
way He has chosen, not the way they would choose for themselves. Jesus does not
want a convoy of followers who marvel at His deeds but fail to follow His
example.”[48]
Stein sees within this present tense imperative, an emphasis that continually
follows Jesus.[49]
Following these three demands, Jesus’ speech
uses a chiastic arrangement designed to give further explanation for following
Him:
A.
oV gar
ean qelh thn yuchn autou swsai... (vs. 35)
B.
ti gar wfelei anqrwpon... (vs. 36)
B.
ti gar doi antqrwpoV...
(vs. 37)
Each of these sentences begins with a conjunction of
purpose (gar) semantically supporting the imperatives of vs. 34.[51]
Jesus presents a rationale by appealing to the
basic human nature of securing one's self in the light of sacrifice.[52]
Thus, true salvation comes at the price of losing one's physical body, but
gaining eternality in the end,
The verse involves several puns in that the crucial terms
('save,' 'lose,' 'life') possess double meanings. Mark uses 'Save' (swsai)
first in the negative sense of not denying oneself and then in the positive
sense of achieving eternal salvation in the final day (cf. 8:38). 'Lose' (apolesei)
is first used negatively in the sense of not acquiring eternal salvation and
then in the positive sense of denying oneself and acquiring salvation. 'Live' (yuchn)
is first used to describe human, physical existence that does not deny personal
goals and desires, that is, does not repent (1:15), and then it is used to
describe one's personal being, that is, the real self that continues to exist after
death.[53]
Thus,
Mark does not attach eternal life to physical death, but to the choice one
makes: enjoy the physical realm now and lose eternal life (qelh thn yuchn autou swsai apolesei authn);
or, place Jesus and the Gospel (eneken
emou kai tou euaggeliou) above your life upon this earth and gain eternal life
through salvation (swsei authn).[54]
Verses
36-37 are not separate from verse 35, but expound and reinforce the contrast.[55]
Donahue and Harrington demonstrate that this cluster of verses carries the
terminology of commercial value with words such as "prophet,"
"gain" and "loss."[56]
The opportunity to 'gain the world' (kerdhsai
ton kosmon olon) requires the payment of the
person's soul; however, the short gain of the temporal world pales in
comparison to the value of the human soul.[57]
Lane sees a reflection of Ps. 49:7-9: "Truly no man can ransom
another, or give to God the price of his life,
for the ransom of their life is costly and can never suffice, that he should live on
forever and never see the pit." The Psalmist carries this thought
throughout the remainder of the passage.[58]
Verse 38 changes from the crowd and
the possible disciples to those who already consider themselves disciples.[59]
The term ashamed, epaiscunqhsetai, used only here by Mark, does not refer to the internal
emotion of embarrassment; it refers to denying Jesus when physical torture is
threatened.[60]
Those who choose to deny Christ may earn a few more years upon the earth; but
they have gained eternal denial by Christ before the throne of God.[61]
Thus, "The better part of wisdom is to follow Jesus' way, even if it leads
to earthy humiliation; the only other choice leads to divine
condemnation."[62]
The
vindication and future triumph provided assertion that those who stayed true
would also be a part of the future glory.[63]
France understands the phrase (otan
elqhen th doxh tou patroV
autou meta twn aggelwn twn agiwn) in the light of Dan. 7:13 and locates this action within
the heavenly throne room.[64]
However, Donahue and Harrington argue contextually that this refers to a
physical return to earth by the Messiah (Parousia) referring to Mark 13:26 and
14:62. "Its presence at the end of Jesus' instructions gives the whole
teaching on discipleship in 8:34-38 an eschatological framework and confirms that
yuch must mean more than life."[65]
Pericope 3
(Mark 9:1)
Some
commentaries argue that the phrase, ewV
idwsin thn basileian tou qeou elhluquian en
dunamei, refers to the transfiguration
occurring in 9:2-8.[66]
Edwards argues that this refers to the resurrection of Christ.[67]
However, textually, both of these arguments are improbable. First, there were
no angels at the transfiguration. Second, Jesus does not identify that as the
coming of the kingdom once the transfiguration occurred. Third, no biblical
author refers to Christ's resurrection as His return in power. Ultimately, a
better explanation understands this to refer to the Parousia spoken of in 8:38.
Mark uses
the phrase, Amhn legw umin, creating a climactic promise which concludes the
preceding section (vs. 34b-38).[68]
France, arguing the location between 8:34-38 and 9:2-8 is "too explicit to
be overlooked."[69]
Thus, the transfiguration is not the actual coming, but a taste of what is to
come in the future.[70]
Furthermore, John the Evangelist does see both the transformation as well as
witnesses the apocalyptic visions of Revelation which contain the Parousia,
where Christ does come back with power and angels.[71]
APPLICATION
The abundant Christological emphasis
within this passage demonstrates that the eternality of the human soul depends
upon the relationship between the individual and Christ.[72]
Thus, the teachings recorded on discipleship are paramount for one to
understand the required relationship between Christ and that person.
"Jesus had no intention to fill the ranks of His army with volunteers who
professed allegiance to him and talk grandly of victory but were unwilling to
make sacrifices."[73]
Mark wrote his gospel to believers
who faced persecution and death daily within their lives. The immediate
suffering will end in death, either at the hands of a persecutor, or at the end
of their days. Faithfulness to Christ would bring eternal peace and joy;
however, denial, while bringing immediate reprieve, would bring eternal
suffering. There exists a unique symbiotic relationship between the true
disciple and Christ that will receive ultimate fulfillment in the life to come,
regardless of the death in this life as long as that disciple stays true to the
end.[74]
"The ultimate power is with God, not with those who will threaten their
life, and the time will soon come when they will see that to follow Jesus is
not to be on a 'hiding to nothing,' but to share in God's assured
victory."[75]
CONCLUSION
This process began with a review of the context
(historical and literary), followed by a textual analysis, and concluded with a
section on personal application. In essence, this review and analysis
determined what Jesus demands from His followers of Christ. The result of
following Christ leads to the eternal gaining of their soul. An exegesis in
detail identified what happens to those who deny Him, the loss of their soul.
This analysis ended with the conclusion that Mark 9:1 contains a future
reference to the Parousia of Christ, not the transcendence, nor the
resurrection.
Further study on the passage might include the
following. First, what is the responsibility of those not in persecution to
those persecuted today? Second, how does this affect missionaries who spend
enormous amounts of time on deputation and furlough in order to reach a field?
Should those missionaries step out in faith without support and believe that
God will provide, or should they spend such time trying to garner support?
Many believers "face the temptation to
evade Jesus' stern demands by substituting a more congenial, less rigorous
variant of Christianity. Many today appear to want choices, not eternal
imperatives."[76]
The true cost of discipleship is to place this second to His calling to reach
those that are hungry for the truth. In the face of true adversity, the Gospel
must shine so that those in darkness may see the light (II Cor. 4:4). Let the
believer during persecution state, “Amhn,
ercou kurie Ihsou,” remaining true unto the end.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Donahue, John R. and Daniel J. Harrington. The Gospel of
Mark. Vol. 2 of Sacra Pagina. Edited
by Daniel J. Harrington. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2002.
Edwards, James. The Gospel According to Mark.
Vol. 2 of Pillar New Testament Commentary.
Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001.
Evans, Craig A. Mark 8:27-16:20. Vol. 34b of Word Biblical Commentary. Nashville:
Thomas Nelson, 2001.
France, R.T. The Gospel of Mark. Vol. 2 of New International Greek Testament Commentary.
Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002.
Garland, David. Mark. Vol. 2 of New International Version Application Commentary. Grand Rapids:
Zondervan, 1996.
Lane, William
L. The Gospel According to Mark. Vol. 2 of The New International Commentary on the New
Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974.
Perschbacher,
Wesley J. ed. The New Analytical Greek
Lexicon. Peabody: Hendrickson, 1992.
Schaff, Phillip.
"Eusebius Pamphilius: Church
History, Life of Constantine, Oration in Praise of Constantine." Vol. 1 of
Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Series II. Peabody: Hendrickson, 2012.
Skinner, M. L.
"Denying Self, Bearing a Cross, and Following Jesus: Unpacking the
Imperatives of Mark 8:34." Word & World 23, no. 3 (2003):
321-331. New Testament Abstracts, EBSCOhost (accessed February 4,
2013).
Stein, Robert
H. Mark. Vol. 2 of Baker
Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker
Academic, 2008.
Young, Richard A.
Intermediate New Testament Greek: A
Linguistic and Exegetical Approach. Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1994.
APPENDIX
I
Block Diagram
[PERICOPE I]
And calling the
crowd kai
proskalesamenoV
ton oclon
to him --
with his disciples sun toiV
maqhtaiV
autou
[PERICOPE II]
He said to them, eipen autoiV
If anyone would come after me, Ei tiV
qelei opisw mou akolouqein,
let him deny himself, and aparnhsasqw
eauton kai
take up his
cross, and aratw ton stauron autou kai
follow me. akolouqeitw moi.
For whoever would save his life oV gar
ean qelh thn yuchn autou swsai
will lose it, but apolesei authn. oV
whoever loses his life d’ an apolesei
thn yuch autou
for my sake and eneken emou kai
the gospel's tou
euaggeliou
will save it. swsei authn
For what does it profit a man ti gar wfelei anqrwpon
forfeit his soul? zhmiwqhnai thn yuchn autou;
For what can a man give ti gar doi antqrwpoV
in return for his
soul? antallagma thV yuchV
autou;
For whoever is ashamed oV gar
ean epai scunqh
of me and me kai
of my words touV
logouV
in this
adulterous and en []1 tauth []2 amartwlw
sinful
generation, [th genea]1 [th]2 moicalidi,
of him will the
Son of Man []3 o uioV tou anqrwpou
also be ashamed [kai]3
epaiscunqhsetai auton,
when he comes otan elqh
in the glory en th doxh
of his Father tou patroV autou
with the holy
angels." meta
twn aggelwn twn agiwn
[PERICOPE III]
And he said to them, Kai elegen autoiV
Truly, I say to you, Amhn legw umin
there are some
standing here oti eisin tineV wde twn esthkotwn
who will not
taste death until oitineV ou
mh geuswntai qanatou ewV
they see the
kingdom of God idwsin thn basileian tou qeou
after it has come
elhluquian
with power." en dunamei.
[1]
James Edwards, The Gospel According to Mark, vol. 2 of Pillar New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001), 3.
[2]
Phillip Schaff, "Eusebius
Pamphilius: Church History, Life of Constantine, Oration in Praise of
Constantine," in vol. 1 of Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Series II
(Grand Rapids: Hendrickson, 2012), 116n4.
[3]
E.g. R.T. France, The Gospel of Mark,
vol. 2 of New International Greek
Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002), 7-9.
[4]
Robert H. Stein, Mark, vol. 2 of Baker
Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker
Academic, 2008), 1-9. He concludes that John Mark is the author and gives five
strong areas demonstrating this conclusion.
[5]
David Garland, Mark, vol.
2 of New International Version
Application Commentary (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), 27. John R. Donahue
and Daniel J. Harrington, The Gospel of
Mark, vol. 2 of Sacra Pagina, ed.
Daniel J. Harrington (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2002), 38-39; Donahue
and Harrington go farther by stating the unlikeliness of John Mark due to
cultural and geographical issues within the text.
[6]
Edwards, 6.
[7]
Garland, 28.
[8]
William L. Lane, The Gospel According to
Mark, vol. 2 of The New International
Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974), 13-14; cf.
Garland, 28; he was probably responsible for the fire.
[9]
Craig A. Evans, Mark 8:27-16:20, vol.
34b of Word Biblical Commentary (Nashville:
Thomas Nelson, 2001), lxiii; cf. Garland, 17 and Stein, 13-14.
[10]
Stein, 14.
[11]
Evans, lxiii; the Latin phrase refers to prophecy after the fact.
[12]
Garland, 31.
[13]
Edwards, 6-9; cf. Donahue and Harrington, 41-46.
[14]
France, 35-41.
[15]
Garland, 29.
[16]
Stein, 9; phrases such as "Syrophoenician" describing the woman would
not make sense if the audience was Syrian or Palestinian (pg. 11).
[17]
Ibid., 9-10.
[18]
Ibid., 10-11; the argument of Syria is that some see Mark 13 as describing the
Jerusalem War, not Nero's persecution (11).
[19]
Ibid., 11-12.
[20]
Edwards, 11.
[21]
Ibid., 9.
[22]
France, 9-10.
[23]
Lane, 24; cf. Donahue and Harrington, 17. A parataxis is a series of sentences or clauses that begin with a
simple 'and.'
[24]
Donahue and Harrington, 16-19; cf. Edwards, 10-12, Edwards uses the term
"sandwiches" for framing and bracketing. Garland does not discuss
genre in his work.
[25]
Edwards, 9; cf. Stein, 12-15. The brevity of this topic does not allow this
paper to treat all the arguments for dating, thus the author has chosen to
follow the strongest argument for the dating of the book of Mark.
[26] France, 11; cf. Donahue and Harrington,
47-50. Lane (29-32), Evans (Contents), Stein (35-37) and Garland (32-36)
break it down even farther; however, Edwards, 20, only sees two sections:
Galilee (1:1-8:26) and Jerusalem (8:27-16:8).
[27]
Stein, 400.
[28]
Ibid., 401; cf. Young, 253.
[29]
Richard A. Young, Intermediate New
Testament Greek: A Linguistic and Exegetical Approach (Nashville: Broadman
& Holman, 1994), 188.
[30]
Stein, 401; cf. Edwards, 252; France, 334, sees where Jesus corrects the
disciples' understanding of the Son of Man image from Dan. 7.
[31]
Edwards, 252.
[32]
France, 332.
[33]
Stein, 401; oti dei.
[34]
Edwards, 255; cf. Stein, 402 who identifies this as the gospel message.
[35]
Ibid.; cf. Stein, 403.
[36]
Donahue and Harrington, 262.
[37]
Young, 182.
[38]
France, 339; this word is an aorist, middle deponent,
nominative, masculine, singular verbal participle.
[39]
Donahue and Harrington, 263; cf. Lane, 306 and Edwards, 256; “Ei tij qelei….” Following Young's
explanation, this passage exists as an expository discourse (pg. 249).
[40]
Ibid., this word is a verbal, present, active infinitive.
[41]
Garland, 327.
[42]
Young, 90. Wesley J. Perschbacher, ed., The
New Analytical Greek Lexicon (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1992), 36 (aparnhsasqw) and 53 (arneomai), respectively. This
author uses this text throughout the paper to identify the lexical structure of
the Greek words. Aparnhsasqw is a third
person singular, aorist, middle deponent imperative.
[43]
M. L. Skinner, "Denying Self, Bearing a Cross, and Following Jesus:
Unpacking the Imperatives of Mark 8:34," Word & World 23, no. 3 (2003): 321-331. New Testament
Abstracts, EBSCOhost (accessed February 4, 2013).
[44]
Young, 142-143.
[45]
Stein, 407.
[46]
France, 339; aratw is a third person
singular, aorist, active imperative.
[47]
Skinner, 329-330, this public view rears its head in vs. 38 in light of denial.
This is the first usage in Mark for stauron.
“Such language is calculated to shock, and evokes a vivid and horrifying image
of the death march with all its shameful policy” (France, 339).
[48]
Garland, 328.
[49]
Stein, 407.
[50]
Ibid., 405.
[51]
Young, 182; cf. Edwards, 257 and Stein, 408.
[52]
Garland, 328. Lane, 305n95-96, identifies yuch
with נפשׁ, designating man in his totality and
implies the fault upon the person who chooses the world over Jesus.
[53]
Stein, 408.
[54]
France, 341; Edwards, 257, proposes a chiasmus within vs. 35 itself.
[55]
Stein, 409; cf. Edwards, 258.
[56]
Donahue and Harrington, 263; wfelei – 3rd
person singular, present active indicative, kerdhsai
- aorist active infinitive, zhmiwqhnai - aorist passive indicative.
[57]
Lane, 309.
[58]
Ibid.
[59]
Stein, 409; Edwards, 259, sees a different understanding. Jesus' words echo his
earlier accusation that 'These people honor me with their lips, but their
hearts are far from me (7:6)."
[60]
Ibid., 410.
[61]
Garland, 329.
[62]
Ibid.; cf. Lane, 310.
[63] Lane, 311.
[64]
France, 342-343; "His rejection on earth will lead to vindication and
glory in heaven, and his followers must be prepared for a parallel
experience." France understands the phrase uioV
anqrwpou referring to Christ coming into his kingship, located in heaven
and does not prophesy a coming Parousia.
[65]
Donahue and Harrington, 264.
[66]
E.g., Evans, 29; Stein, 411, lists seven authors who see this refer to the
transfiguration.
[67]
Edwards, 260.
[68]
Stein, 410.
[69]
France, 345.
[70]
Stein, 411; cf. France, 345 and Lane, 313-314. Garland only states that this
must be an event after the resurrection, but draws no definitive conclusion
(330).
[71]
Thus, his statement recorded in Rev. 22:20, "Amhn, ercou kurie Ihsou."
[72]
Stein, 411.
[73]
Garland, 338.
[74]
Edwards, 261; cf. Garland, 340 and Lane, 314.
[75] France, 346.
[76]
Garland, 340.
No comments:
Post a Comment