[1] Jesus said them, “Amen I say unto you: that there be some of them that stand here, which shall not taste of death, till they have seen the kingdom of God come with power.’”
-2Esdras 6:25= “…whoever remains after all I’ve foretold will be saved… and they shall see those who were taken, who from birth haven’t tasted death… converted to a different spirit.” = though 2Esdras exists mostly in Latin translation, this must have been where Paul got the ideas he spouts at 1 Thessalonians 4, which led to the still popular 19th century heresy of the Rapture—despite it being invented by a fanatic who repeatedly proved a failure! A testament to how much the readers’ selfish interest in a matter really matters, not the merely the substance or subject. This line here may appear again at chapter 13. But section 4 of 1Thess verse 16 reverses LXX Psalm 46:6 where “God ascends with a shout, the Lord with a trumpet’s sound.” Paul quotes this, but for him it is a ‘descent’ as per some kind of Parousia event.
-2Sam 3:35 = David swears an oath saying “May God do such and such to me if I go back on this promise, that in no way shall I taste [ου μη γευσομαι] of bread until [οτι εαν] going down of the sun etc…”
-Mark 9:1= “In no way taste [ου μη γευσωνται] death until whenever [εως αν]…”
[2] And after six days Jesus took with him Peter, and James, and John, and led them up into an high mountain apart by themselves: and he was transfigured before them.
Exodus 24:16 = “after six days [εξ ημερας] … a cloud covered them.” [εκαλψεν … νεϕελη]
-Mark 9:2 “after six days [μεθ ημερας εξ] … verse 7: “a cloud overshadowed them” [νεϕελη επισκιαζουσα]
-notice that Luke 9:28 “after 8 days” [ωσει ημεραι οκτω] purposefully changes Mark 9:2 “after 6 days” [μετα ημερας εξ], seemingly Luke wants to remove the Exodus reference? More likely the reference the number of days to wait before a newborn male circumcision is performed on a newborn male, something he’d mentioned in Luke 2.
-Jesus, along with Peter James, and John, are altogether here meant likely to represent Moses, with Joshua, Eleazar, and Ithamar at Exodus .
[3] And his raiment became shining, exceeding white as snow; such as no laundryman on earth can whiten them. [4] And there appeared unto them Elijah and Moses, who were conversing with Jesus. [5] Peter answered Jesus: “Master, it is good for us to be here: and let us make three tents; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elijah.” [6] because he didn’t know what to say—for they were very much afraid!
-Genesis 45:3 = “His brothers weren’t able to answer him, for they were disturbed.” [ουκ ηδυναντο οι αδελϕοι αποκριθηναι αυτω, εταραχθησαν γαρ]
-Mark 9:6 = ου γαρ ηδει τι λαλησει ησαν γαρ εκϕοβοι
-Mark 14:40b = “they didn’t know what to answer him” [ουκ ηδεισαν τι αυτω αποκριθωσι]
-compare Mark 14:40 and 9:6 with 2Sam 3:11 where Abner threatens Mephibosheth with his reign being turned over to the house of David: “And he was not able yet [και ουκ ηδυνασθη ετι] to answer him [ανταποκριθηναι] … because he was afraid [ϕοβηθηναι] of him.”
-Genesis 37:4 = Joseph’s brothers “weren’t able to speak to him one peaceable thing” [ουκ ηδυναντο λαλειν αυτω ουδεν ειρηνικον]
-though there aren’t many contacts between the texts, Numbers 12:8 may be in view here: God asks Miriam and Aaron, “Were you not afraid [ουκ εϕοβηθητε] to speak [καταλαλησαι] ill of my attendant Moses?” Mark has reversed ‘not afraid to speak’ into ‘not speak because afraid!’ This is likely because Numbers 12 also, like here, involves a scene with a cloud of God’s presence affirming someone as his “trustworthy” (=Num 12:7) representative, and also “three” figures involving a “tent.”
-Exodus 28= Aaron's clothes are "transcendent"
EXCURSUS ON LUKE’S BORROWING =
-First Luke 9:52 quotes the beginning of Mark outright and obviously= απεστειλεν αγγελους προ προσωπου … ωστε ετοιμασαι αυτω
compare the Mark 1:2 = απεστελλω τον αγγελον μου προ προσωπου σου, ος κατασκευασει … ετοιμασατε
-Luke 9:32 = (Peter:) ησαν βεβαρημενοι υπνω. διαγρηγορησαντες
-Mark 14:40 b= ησαν γαρ αυτων οι οϕθαλμοι καταβαρυνομενοι και ουκ ηδεισαν τι αποκριθωσιν αυτω
-compare the above to Luke 9:6 =
-Luke 9:36 = ουδενι απηγγειλαν εν εκειναις ταις ημεραις ουδεν ων εωρακαν
-Mark 1:9 = εν εκειναις ταις ημεραις
-Mark 16:8 = ουδενι ουδεν ειπαν εϕοβουντο γαρ
-Luke 9:45 = εϕοβουντο ερωτησαι
-Mark 9:6 = ου γαρ ηδει τι αποκριθη. εκϕοβοι γαρ εγενοντο
-Mark 9:8 = ουκετι ουδενα ειδον
-Luke has noticed that Mark 14:40b mirrors Mark 9:6 = thus he has borrowed the ‘eyes weighed down’ (at Luke 9:32) for Peter and those with him, thus also mixing up his transfiguration scene with Mark’s Getsemane. Luke uses 9:6 of Mark to make 9:45 of Luke, and the word ‘fear’ there leads him to mashing up Mark 1:9 with 16:8. This is perfect proof of exactly how the Lucan author has utilized and understood his source’s purpose.
-Mark 9:9 = Jesus himself orders/charges the three main disciples to tell none of the “things they saw” [ειδον διηγησωνται] while Luke 9 makes this the doing of the disciples on their own.
-Raymond Brown, ‘Death of the Messiah’ (vol 1 page 83 footnote 107) = “I have postulated that the Matthean and Lucan evangelists did work directly on Mark’s Passion Narrative, but they emerged with end products far closer to Mark than is John.”
-Raymond Brown, ‘Death of the Messiah’ (vol 1 page 206) = “But for Mark “burdened eyes” are probably an illustration of the weakness of the flesh. In Genesis 48:10 the eyes of Jacob/Israel are said to be ‘heavy’ with age, and that is an example of weakness.”
-Raymond Brown, Death of the Messiah vol 1 page 206 = [on Mark 14:40 = Luke 9:32-33] “Has Luke, seeing the connection between Mark’s transfiguration and Mark’s Getsemane, taken details from the latter for his own description of the former?”
-Mark 9:32 the disciples didn’t understand the “saying” [ρημα], Mark uses the word only here and at 14:72 at the condemnation of Peter
[7] And there was a cloud that overshadowed them: and a voice came out of the cloud, saying, “This is my beloved Son: hear him.”
-Mark 9:2= “after six days” James, John and Peter are “brought up to a high mountain” (αναϕερει … εις ορος) and in verse 7 a “cloud overshadows them” (εγενετο νεϕελη επισκιαζουσα) with a ‘voice from heaven’ incident similar to that of Jesus’ baptism at 1: [=a ‘bat qol’ in Hebrew, a common device of Rabbinical tales in the Talmuds]. All this is obviously based on Exodus 24 where Moses takes Joshua (v. 13) being commanded by God to “ascend unto the mountain” (v. 12) where “for six days a cloud covered up” Sinai. Mark even allows Moses a physical cameo, as if by hologram, along with Elijah in verses 4-5. As usual Mark has to include some prophetical reference in his little myths, so there is a reference to Isaiah 40:9 in the detail about the height of the hill they’re on: “Ascend into a high mountain (επ ορος υψηλον αναβηθι) you who proclaim good news!” This is of course the important section of Isaiah so beloved by the early Christians as a proof-text, where is it very likely the word ‘evangelize’ originates in terms of its specific NT usage. The prophet’s sentence here ends with an admonishment: “not to fear!” (μη ϕοβου)—as at Mark 9:6 where Peter is tongue-tied as spokesman for the 3 witnesses to the transfiguration, rendered mute: “for they were afraid.” (ησαν γαρ εκϕοβοι) This is the first appearance of Mark’s great punchline, the coda of this gospel where the first generation of disciples is shockingly displayed as cowering failures. This is the real transfiguration within this propagandistic text. Mark 9:32 reiterates that the disciples lack of competence is due to a pitiful timidity.
Isaiah’s point is that the ‘one announcing glad tidings’ should boldly point out to Judah: “Behold, your God!” This is paralleled in Exodus 24:10 where the elders of Israel “saw the place where the God of Israel stood.” By making this association the gospel author might be pointing us toward identifying Jesus with YHWH again. If so, then there is a parallel between Mark 9:3 where Jesus’ garments are described as lustrous, and Exodus 24:10 where God’s physical body is likened to “the cleanness of the whole sky” which may have triggered Mark’s use of a ‘whiteness’ theme here, although I detect a reference to Malachi’s “the Lord is more powerful than laundry soap” [=i.e. lye detergent, which is dangerously volatile] which has like given us the allusion to a fuller, which seems to so out of place in setting our scene. Mixed with all this is possibly Daniel’s description of the angel Gabriel. But all that has been pointed out by others, this commentary will focus on what appear to this author the ignored elements of the text.
Also, Exod 24:2 on “Moses alone” (μονος) being allowed to “approach” to receive the commandments in person might be the origin of the detail at Mark 9:8 where the ghostly OT characters vanish and Jesus is “alone”, or verse 2 where Jesus takes the disciples “in private, alone” (κατ’ ιδιαν μονους), which hearkens back to 4: where the ‘privacy’ of of correct interpreting parables is expounded. In Mark 9:11 Jesus’ speaks of scripture where Elijah, in the guise of Baptizer John, is somehow foreshadowed as being ‘mistreated.’ Mark possibly has in mind something similar to what Paul says in Roman’s 11:2-3 where he asks his hearers: “Do ye not know what the scripture says of Elijah, how he argued with God against Israel? [Paul then quotes 1Kings] ‘Lord, they’ve murdered thy prophets... I alone (μονος) am left.” This association is likely why Mark has paired Pharaoh’s archenemy with Ahab’s.
Mark intends to contrast the greatness of Jesus, Moses, and Elijah with “so-called pillars” of the Jerusalem church, James, Peter/Cephas, and John, whoever he was. This is more incidental evidence that Paul’s denigration of “these servants of Satan, disguised as angels of light” in his letters is behind the overall attitude of all the New Testament evangelists.
-at Mark 9:5 is it possible that Peter nervously babbling: “Rabbi, it’s good we are here!” is meant to parallel the ‘rich’ man at Mark 10 who calls Jesus “good teacher” [since ‘rabbi’ means ‘teacher’]
-Matthew 3:17 and 17:5 has same words: “This is my son, the beloved”
-compare Numbers 10:34= η νεϕελη … εγενετο σκιαζουσα επ’ αυτοις = with Mark 9:7= εγενετο νεϕελη επισκιαζουσα αυτοις = near perfect match!
[8] And suddenly, when they had looked round about, they saw no man any more, save Jesus only with themselves.
-compare Gen 45:1b = “No one stood beside Joseph when he revealed himself to his brothers.”
[9] And as they came down from the mountain, he charged them that they should tell no man what things they had seen, till the Son of man were risen from the dead. [10] And they kept that saying with themselves, questioning one with another what the rising from the dead should mean.
-Myers, ‘Binding the Strongman’ (page 283) = “I have noted the ways in which Mark draws upon the devices of apocalyptic narrative, especially Daniel. His use of parody in portraying disciples is unparalleled. Although it is not uncommon for the recipient(s) of a revelation to doubt or question it, Mark takes this to an extreme.”
-Binding the Strongman page 248 = “Mark identifies it instead (=the Son of Man’s coming) with the event of the cross; that is what “some of those standing here” (9:1) will live to see.” [that is—immediately]
-Binding the Strongman page 389 (on eclipse at 15:33-38) = “Hence, the motif represents the first indication that the apocalyptic ‘moment’ spoken of in 13:24 is being realized: the fall of the dominant world-order symbolized in the unraveling of the cosmic forces of the universe.”
[11] And they asked him, saying, “Why say the scribes that Elijah must first come?
-while writing his own later and very different fan-fiction based on Mark, Luke keeps the earlier ‘transfiguration’ but eliminates Mark 9:11-13—probably because he found it difficult to explain how John could be Elijah. Luke 1:17 says John is the “spirit and power” of Elijah—an adoptionist-type of reasoning? We don’t have room here for the later Jewish traditions that associate John with the ‘Hidden One’, some kind of Messianic figure—though most of these notices are negative and make fun of him, as do similar stories about Jesus’ brother James and some other ‘disciple’-type figures who seem to be mostly legendary.
[12] And he answered and told them, “Elijah indeed arrived first, and restored all things; and how it is written of the Son of man, that he must suffer many things, and be treated as if nothing.”
-Isaiah 53:3 = ‘exoudenein’ (=‘as if nothing’) is used of the ‘servant’ figure in Isaiah in the Aquila Greek translation, also Symmachos and Theodotion = Just as in Mark 9:12 the ‘son of man’ is treated “as nothing” [exoudenein’] = proof the gospel writers aren’t stuck only on the LXX! It needs to be noted how interesting it is that the OG of Psalm 89 seems, like Mark 12 (and the whole story?) questions why if God can’t break his promises (=verse 35: “I wouldn’t lie to David!”) then why was the Jewish kingship eradicated brutally by Gentiles= verse 38 mourns: “You treated your anointed [χριστον σου] as if he were nothing.” [εξουδενωσας] . One suspects, perusing lines like Psalm 89:48 “Who is the man who shall live and not see death, recusing himself from Hades?” The final line (52) repeats, in a fervent plea for Messianic restoration, “Amen, amen!”
-Mark 9:12 = John, somehow, as ‘Elijah’ has “restored all things.” —but how ? =see Sirach 48:10 and Mal 3 for the proof-texts for this folkloric tradition.
[13] “But I say unto you, ‘That Elias is indeed come, and they have done unto him whatsoever they listed, as it is written of him.’”
-What does Mark refer here, some unknown scriptures where Elijah’s [aka John’s] passion is foretold? Likely he simply means 1-2 Kings. Mark never explicitly says he (or his stand in Jesus) thinks John was somehow Elijah his mission as per Malachi of inter-generational peace didn’t get accomplished because of his martyrdom. Later Matthew 17:13 narrates the exact minute when the disciples mentally comprehend this concept.
[14] And when he came to his disciples, he saw a great multitude about them, and the scribes questioning with them. [15] And straightway all the people, when they beheld him, were greatly amazed, and running to him saluted him. [16] And he asked the scribes, “What question ye with them?” [17] And one of the multitude answered and said, “Master, I have brought unto thee my son, which hath a dumb spirit; [18a] And wheresoever it takes him, he tears him: and he foams, and gnashes with his teeth, and pines away:
-Psalm 35:14-16 cripples mocked me, “gnashing their teeth at me” (εβρυξαν επ’ εμε τους οδοντας) =see Matt 8:12, 13:42, 50, or 22:13, 51; 25:30 and Luke 13:28
-Mark 9:18 the possessed boy “grinds” [τριει] his “teeth” [οδοντας] and “withers” [χαραινεται]
-one of Matthew’s favorite mean phrases, gloating over the butchering of Judeans by the Romans, is the “gnashing [βρυγμος] of teeth = gestures made by those abandoned to “the outer darkness,” obviously meant to envision both Gehenna and the exile suffered by the Judeans banned from Jerusalem after the Flavian and Hadrianic wars.
[18b] and I spake to thy disciples that they should cast him out; and they could not.”
-Robert M. Fowler, ‘Let the Reader Understand’ (p 216)= “…not one single episode of successful healing or teaching by the disciples is actually narrated. In one episode the work of the Twelve is prominently on display, but the outcome is wholly negative. This episode is 9:14-27, the exorcism botched by the disciples and set right by Jesus by the power of prayer. … Many readers do not want to recognize that 3:14-15 and 6:12-13 are not the presentation, but the withholding, of stories of the success of the Twelve.”
-Robert M. Fowler, ‘Let the Reader Understand’ (p 183) = “Mark reserves for himself primarily the privilege of indirect speech. If he is to retain control over his narrative, he cannot let it be taken over by his protagonist, no matter how highly he may think of him. Mark’s gospel remains fundamentally Mark’s discourse and not Jesus’, and the true master of indirection in the Gospel is its implied author and narrator, not its protagonist. Readers have been accustomed to giving all of the credit for parabolic speech to the protagonist, which would probably please a master of indirection such as Mark, but that Mark’s own use of indirection is masterful should now be brought to light.”
[19] He answered him, and said: “O faithless generation, how long shall I be with you? how long shall I suffer you? bring him unto me.”
-Mark 9:19 wicked generation = a reference likely to Deuteronomy 32:5.
-Philippians 2:15’s ‘wicked and perverted generation’ is inspired by Isaiah 45:2
[20] And they brought him unto him: and when he saw him, straightway the spirit tore him; and he fell on the ground, and wallowed foaming. [21] And he asked his father, “How long is it ago since this came unto him?” And he said, “Since boyhood.
-at Mark 9:21 the father of the deaf-mute boy with epilepsy tells Jesus he’s been like this “since his boyhood” —which mirrors the answer of the rich man in the next chapter who boasts that he has kept the Torah “from his youth.” Also, Jesus tells the distraught dad that “all things are possible” to one who believes [=verse 23] which is complemented in the next chapter 10: where the disciples are upset that Jesus seems to brutally condemn all wealthy people as utterly hopeless in terms of being “saved.” But he leaves open some slim hope, since “all things are possible” with God. The reference to Deuteronomy at Mark 9:19 where the ‘faithless generation’ is condemned, and also where there is one of the only LXX references to the ‘demons’ Gentiles worship as falsely as gods, a major theme of Mark, obviously.
[22] And often it’s cast him into fire, and into water, (in order to) to destroy him: but if you are able to do anything, have compassion on us, and help us.”
-Isaiah 42:19 = makes it clear that the blind/deaf/dumb etc of Mark are not meant to be literal = “Who is blind but My servants? Or deaf-mute but those but those dominating them?” Also this line makes Jesus quip about the disciples not dominating those they rule over being sarcastic or ironic. Isaiah goes on: “even the servants of God were blinded.”
[23] Jesus said unto him, “If you have faith—for all things are possible to him that has trust.” [24] And straightaway the father of the child cried out, with tears declaring: “Lord, I believe; help this unbelief of mine!”
-Jeremiah 3:22 = “Return, faithless sons, and I will heal your unbelief.”
-Ezekiel 24:27 = “In that day, your mouth shall be opened wide [διανοιχθησεται] to the one having been saved, you will speak [λαλησεις] and be mute no longer [αποκωϕωθης ουκετι].” [=here Ezekiel elaborates on the true meaning of his earlier imagery, which has the significance of those who’ve survived the Babylonian rampage against Judah shall bear witness to it, too late for themselves and their contemporaries, their testimony meant to survive only as warning to future progeny to take heed of]
-Mark 9:25= “O spirit speechless [αλαλον] and mute [κωϕον] … enter him no longer [μηκετι].”
[25] When Jesus saw that the people came running together, he rebuked the foul spirit, saying unto him, “Thou dumb and deaf spirit, I charge thee, come out of him, and enter no more into him.” [26] And the spirit cried, and rent him sore, and came out of him: and he was as one dead; insomuch that many said, “He’s dead.” [27] But Jesus took him by the hand, and lifted him up; and he arose.
-Mark has rewritten here Jairus’ daughter’s story, all the elements are here but moved around and added elements from Psalm =
-Mark 5:36 = Jesus tells the father: ‘Believe!’ [πιστευε]
-Mark 9:24 = “with tears [δακρυων] the father said, ‘I believe!’ [πιστευω]
-Mark 5:38 = Jairus’ household is “weeping and wailing” [αλαλαζοντας]
-Mark 9:25 = the unclean spirit is “voicelessly wailing’ [αλαλον]
-Mark 5:38-39 = “many [πολλα] … Jesus said [λεγει] ‘…the child did not die [απεθανεν].’”
-Mark 9:26 = “many [πολλους] said [λεγειν] that he died [απεθανεν].”
-Mark 5:41-42 = “holding the hand [κρατησας της χειρος] of the child [του παιδιου] … ‘Arise!’ [εγειραι] and immediately rose up [ανεστη].”
-Mark 9:27 = “having held his hand [κρατησας αυτον της χειρος], he raised [εγειρεν] him and he got up [ανεστη].”
-Mark 9:24 = “the child” [του παιδιου]
-Mark 9:30 = “he didn’t want that [ουκ ηθελεν ινα] anyone should know [τις γνω] of this.”
-Mark 5:43 = “he warned them much that none [ινα μηδεις] should know of this [γνω τουτο].”
-verse 31 of Mark 9 makes it clear this is all some metaphor for Jesus resurrection: he tells the 12 that the ‘son of man’ figure will be given over to the ‘hands’ of men, but like the epileptic boy previous narrated is ‘not really killed’ and will ‘rise up.’ Here for the first and only time Mark makes obvious that he’s referring to Hosea 6:2 by using the phrase ‘third day.’
-Psalm 37:12 = “The sinner shall closely watch (=like Jesus’ enemies in Mark 3:2? same verb!) the righteous man, gnashing his teeth [βρυξει τους οδοντας αυτου] over him.”
-Mark 9:18a = the epileptic boy’s father describes how his son “grinds his teeth [τριζει τους οδοντας αυτου] and withers [ξηραινται].”
-Psalm 37:2 = the lawless “shall be withered” [αποξερανθησονται]
-Mark 9:22 = the demon tries “to destroy [απολεση] him”
-Psalm 37:20 = “For sinners shall be destroyed [απολουνται]”
-Psalm 37:24 = “Whenever he falls [πεση] he won’t break [καταραχθησεται]”
-Mark 9:20 = “Beholding [ιδων] him, the demon made him seizure [εσπαραξεν] and having fallen [πεσων] …”
-Psalm 37:25 = “I was younger [νεωτερος] once [εγενομην] … and never have I beheld [ειδον] a righteous man get left behind…”
-Mark 9:21–22 = ‘How long has this happened [γεγονεν]?’ ‘From youth [παιδιοθεν].’
-Psalm 37:40 = “the Lord shall help [βοηθησει] them”
-Mark 9:22 = the father begs Jesus: ‘Help us [βοηθησον]!’
-Psalm 38:13= the psalmist likens himself to a “deaf-mute” [κωϕος] who is “speechless” [αλαλος]
-Mark 9:25 = Jesus commands the “spirit speechless [αλαλον] and deaf-mute [κωϕον]”
-Psalm 38:10 = “my strength [ισχυς] abandoned me”
-Mark 9:18b = “I spoke to your disciples to cast it out, but they had not the strength [ουκ ισχυσαν].”
-Psalm 37:28 = “the lawless will be driven out”
-after his exorcism, this adolescent cured from ‘falling-sickness’ will be presumably like the speaker of Psalm 37:30-31 with “a tongue speaking equality and footsteps that are not tripped up.”
[28] And when he was come into the house, his disciples asked him privately, “Why could not we cast him out?” [29] And he said unto them, “This kind can come forth by nothing, but by prayer and fasting.”
[30] And they departed thence, and passed through Galilee; and he would not that any man should know it. [31] For he taught his disciples, and said unto them, The Son of man is delivered into the hands of men, and they shall kill him; and after that he is killed, he shall rise the third day. [32] But they understood not that saying, and were afraid to ask him.
-Mark 9:30-32 connects vaguely to Daniel 7:25 and later 12:2 on “being given over to wicked rulers” for judgment/trial and the eventual “resurrection of the just”, though there is some ironic reversal in that King Antiochus IV (alluded to in Daniel) is the one that ‘rises up’ while in Mark it is of course, unexpectedly, the messiah himself.
-in Isaiah 53:6, 12 the ‘handed over’ verb occur in LXX Daniel 7:25 though not the same in Hebrew, yet 4 Ezra 13:32 associates ‘son of man’ with ‘servant’ in Hebrew.
-it needs to be asked: where does this “third day” language derive from? Many assume, due to the cleverness of Mark’s narrative, that this has something to do with a historical rabbi named Jesus and his supposed disciples telling a story. Looking at how Paul uses this phrase this is unlikely to be anything more than Mark’s sneaky gloss on a metaphor Paul probably invented, drawing as he always does from the scriptures. While Hosea 6:2 is the ultimate proof text of course, one should examine Exodus 19:16ff where the Israelites are instructed to “wait until the third day” and told that “God will appear to them, in the morning.” The striking parallel to the ending lines of Mark’s gospel need not be underlined further.
[33] And he came to Capernaum: and being in the house he asked them, “What was it that ye disputed among yourselves by the way?” [34] But they were silent: for by the way they had disputed among themselves who should [end up to] be the greatest.
-Mark 3:4b= Jesus asks opponents: “Is it allowed [εξεστι] to heal or kill on Sabbath?” = “And they were silent” [οι δε εσιωπων] is mirrored in 9:33-34 when Jesus asks the 12 what they disputing about (διελογιζεσθε) on the road: “And they were silent” [οι δε εσιωπων]. There might be a hint here of the scribes at 2:6-8 who “reasoned within themselves.” At any rate this is similar to 8:17.
[35] And he sat down, and called the twelve, and said unto them, “If any man desires to be first, the same shall be last of all, and servant of all.”
-1Corinthians 9:19= Paul says “I became a servant of all, that I might gain…”
-Mark 10:31 later repeats near verbatim Jesus’ statement from 9:35! (=Last/first reversal) This is perhaps to signal how many parallels/repetitions are shared between chapters 9 and 10 of this gospel.
[36] And he took a child, and set him in the midst of them: and when he had taken him in his arms, he said unto them, [37] “Whosoever shall receive one of such children in my name, receives me: and whosoever shall receive me, receives not me, but him that sent me.”
-Mark 9:35= Jesus is “sitting down” [καθισας]
-Gen 48:2 = Jacob/Israel “sits” [εκαθισεν] up in bed to meet and bless his grandsons.
-Gen 48:16 = blessing Ephraim and Manasseh, Israel says “they shall be called by my name” [επικληθησεται αυτοις το ονομα μου]; then in verse 19 he proclaims the younger brother shall be the “greater” [μειζων]
-Mark 9:34 = disciples argue over who is “greater” [μειζον]
-Jesus commands his followers to “receive such children [τοιουτων παιδιων] in my name [επι τω ονοματι μου].” (although a later line in Gen 48 has the exact phrase επι τω ονοματι (=), much closer to Mark’s language)=
-Gen 48:10= the children of Joseph “approached [ηγγισεν] (Jacob) and he kissed them and hugged/embraced [περιελαβεν] them.”
-Gen 48:16= “Bless these boys!” [τα παιδια ταυτα]
-Mark 10:16= “having embraced them [εναγκαλισμενος] he put his hands on them to bless.” (=same word for “hug” as in Mark 9:36)
-Gen 48:13-14= Ephraim and Manasseh stand on “the right and the left” of Israel, but he crosses his hands to give a better/stronger blessing to the younger one= like the two brothers/disciples who presumptuously ask for elevation to the status of Messianic satraps.
=there are some more possible affinities to Gen 48 at Mark chapter 10=
-Isaac asks the shocked and cheated Esau: “What then may I do for you, son?” [σοι δε τι ποιησω τεκνον]
-Mark 10:36= Jesus poses the question “What may I do for you (plural)” τι … ποιησαι με υμιν = so here this may be a negative example of younger supplanting the elder, perhaps in reference to how Mark intends to present Christians as replacing the OT Judah/Judea as a whole.
-Gen 48:15= the patriarch mentions “the God maintaining me since my youth” [εκ νεοτητος μου] (=like the ‘rich man’ interlocutor from Mark 10?)
[38] And John answered him, saying, “Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name and we stopped him, because he doesn’t follow us.” [39a] But Jesus said, “Forbid him not:
-the son of Zebedee complains about an unknown person healing in Jesus name who is “one of them” yet the master/teacher insists: “Do not forbid him!” [κωλυσον αυτους] (=Mark 9:38). This very probably references the book of Numbers 11:28 when Joshua says about those speaking in the Lord’s name as prophets without permission of the established hierarchy: “Lord Moses, forbid them!” [μη κωλυετε αυτον]. Though Mark doesn’t mention it, being understated as he always is, the intertextual implication here is that of Moses retort at Number 11:29= “What, are you jealous?” As usual, this sounds suspiciously like Paul or the work of his loyal followers disparaging the Jerusalem apostles.
-is this an early Christian attempt at solidarity at all costs, in attempt to combat the social phenomenon complained of by Rabbi Yohanan at Yerushalmi, Sanhedrin 10.6 [29c] who says God exiled Jews from eretz because "24 kinds of heretics had arisen."
[39b] “for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can soon after speak evil of me.
-when Jesus that no one is capable of saying anything derogatory about soon after having performed a miracle in his name. This is an extremely ironic comment by Mark’s narrator—he is saying Simon Peter was not a miracle worker, since he denied Jesus at the end of this story. Simon is not ever actually shown to us by this gospel as having successfully done a cure or made a miracle, none of the disciples are ever so pictured. Again, it is likely that the entire point of the novel known as Mark is to indirectly reject the so-called first generation apostles of Jerusalem, whom Paul so fiercely disagreed, thus retroactively vindicating his position.
-the jokes in the gospels are almost always about semantics: in chapter 3 Jesus says it is an unforgivable sin to call someone ‘Satan’ who has received the Holy Spirit, then in chapter 8 the disciple Simon is labeled clearly as ‘Satan’ by Jesus, leaving us readers no other choice than to agree with the protagonist Jesus, a personage whose opinion the narrator want us to understanding to be infallible and omniscient.
[40] “For he that is not against is with us.
-1Corinthians 12:1-4= “None that are in the Spirit would ever say ‘Jesus is anathema!’, but instead (only claim he is) ‘Lord.’
[41] “For whosoever shall give you a drinking-cup of water in my name, because ye belong to Christ, verily I say unto you, he shall not lose his reward.
-Mark 9:41= “…water [μδατος] to drink [ποτιση]…”
-a reference to a wandering Elijah receiving a receiving a cup of water from the widow of Sarephta at 1Kings 17:10= “Bring me a little water [υδωρ] for me to drink [πιομαι].” .
-that it is John here who rejects one who “does come after us” might be meant to mirror chapter one where John the Baptist predicts one who “comes after” him then both incidents mention “water.”
[42] “And whosoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea.
-for the word σκανδαλιζειν as sexual in meaning see Ben Sirach 9:5 and Psalms of Solomon 16:17 = this seems to a prohibition of pedophilia, a major point of contention between Semites and Hellenes in their moral outlook at the time, and something not specifically mentioned as such any where in the Torah, a lack that perhaps the Marcan author intends here to remedy, if however obliquely. It’s also possible that a reference to Micah 7:19 here: the Lord “shall toss our sins into the depths of the sea!”
[43] And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, [44] where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.
-Mark 9:43-48 depends verbatim on Isaiah 66:24= “Undying worm and unquenchable fire” (This is the very last and final sentence on the prophet Isaiah’s book.)
-notice that the hellish torments inflicted upon the possessed seizuring boy at Mark 9:22 who’s pushed by a demon into “water” (like the sinner in verse 42) and “fire” (like that of Gehenna at verses 44-45).
=callbacks to previous pericopes:
-Mark 9:36 Jesus “sets a child in their midst (literally ‘in the middle’)” [εν μεσω αυτων] while in 3:3 the withered-hand man “arises to the middle” [εγειραι εις το μεσον] as does the high priest in 14:60 [αναστας ο αρχιερευς εις το μεσον]. At 9:34 there may be a homonym pun between “middle” and “greatest” (μειζων).
-Mark 3:5= “restored was his hand” [αποκατεσταθη η χειρ αυτου] is surprisingly mirrored in reverse by 9:43’s suggestion that you should “cut off your hand” [η χειρ σου, αποκοψον αυτην] if it causes some difficulty.
-Seneca, Epistulae 51.13= "Cast out of your heart whatever torments it, and if it cannot otherwise be extracted—then cut out your own heart!"
[45] And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: [46] Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. [47] And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire: [48] Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.
-in some midrashic sense, the author of Mark has interpreted the final eschatological battle in front of Jerusalem from the end of the book of Isaiah as a reference to an eternal Hell where sinners are punished, something not present in the OT and drawn from Hellenistic Orphic and Platonic ideas
[49] For every one shall be salted with fire, and every sacrifice shall be salted with salt. [50] Salt is good: but if the salt have lost his saltness, wherewith will ye season it? Have salt in yourselves, and have peace one with another.
-Mark 9:49= “Every sacrifice [πασα θυσια] shall be salted with salt [αλι αλισθησεται]”
-Leviticus 2:11 = “Every [πασαν] sacrifice [θυσιαν] you shall leaven… (verse 13=) all gift-offering must with salt be salted [αλι αλισθησεται]”
-Colossians 4:6= "Let your speech be gracious, seasoned with salt."
No comments:
Post a Comment