Baptism and the New Birth by Dave Miller, Ph.D.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=1516

Baptism and the New Birth

by	Dave Miller, Ph.D.

A major cleavage within Christendom pertains to the point at which the “new birth” occurs. Most of Christendom maintains that a person is born again, and thus has sin washed away by the blood of Christ, when that person “accepts Jesus Christ as his personal savior.” By this expression, it is meant that a person must mentally and/or orally decide to embrace Christ as the Lord of his life. Hence, the new birth is seen simply as a determination of the will—a moment in time when the person accepts Christ in his mind and couples that decision with an oral confession.
The passage in the New Testament that alludes specifically to being born again pertains to a conversation that Jesus had with a high-ranking Jewish official:

There was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews. This man came to Jesus by night and said to Him, “Rabbi, we know that You are a teacher come from God; for no one can do these signs that You do unless God is with him.” Jesus answered and said to him, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.” Nicodemus said to Him, “How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother’s womb and be born?” Jesus answered, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again’ ” (John 3:1-7, emp. added).

In an effort to avoid identifying “water” (vs. 5) as water baptism, many within Christendom in the last half century have proposed a variety of novel interpretations. For example, some have proposed that “water” is a reference to the Holy Spirit. While it certainly is true that John uses the word “water” symbolically to represent the Spirit later in his book (7:38-39), that fact had to be explained by the inspired writer. However, in chapter three, the normal, literal meaning is clearly in view, not only because water baptism throughout the New Testament is consistently associated with the salvation event (e.g., Acts 2:38; 8:12-13,36-38; 9:18; 10:47-48; 16:15,33; 18:8; 19:5; 22:16; Romans 6:3-4; Galatians 3:27; Colossians 2:12; Hebrews 10:22; 1 Peter 3:21), but even in this context, eighteen verses later, the term clearly has a literal meaning: “Now John also was baptizing in Aenon near Salim, because there was much water there” (John 3:23). Additionally, if “water” in John 3:5 is an allusion to the Holy Spirit, the result would be nonsensical: “unless one is born of the Spirit and the Spirit.”
Another quibble offered in an effort to avoid the clear import of John 3:5 is that “water” is a symbol for the blood of Jesus. Of course, no rationale exists for making such a connection. Elsewhere John refers explicitly to water and blood, but clearly distinguishes them from each other in their import (1 John 5:6).
Perhaps the most popular notion, advanced only in recent years, is that “water” is a reference to a pregnant woman’s “water”—i.e., the amniotic fluid that accompanies the physical birth of a child. However, this suggestion likewise fails to fit the context of Jesus’ remarks. In fact, Nicodemus himself thought that Jesus was referring to physical birth (“mother’s womb”). But Jesus corrected his misconception, and contrasted such thinking with the intended meaning of “water and Spirit.” Indeed, Jesus would not have told Nicodemus that he needed to be born physically (“water”). He would not have included the act of physical birth in His listing of prerequisites to entering the kingdom. That would make Jesus say that before a person can enter the kingdom he or she must first be a person! What would be the point of stating such a thing? [Would it perhaps be to ensure that everyone understands that non-humans (i.e., animals) cannot enter the kingdom?!] Later in the same chapter, did John baptize near Salim “because there was much amniotic fluid there”?
If one cares to consult the rest of the New Testament in order to allow the Bible to be its own best interpreter, and in order to allow the Bible to harmonize with itself, additional passages shed light on the meaning of John 3:5. According to the rest of the New Testament, spiritual conception occurs when the Gospel (i.e., the seed of the Holy Spirit—Luke 8:11) is implanted in the human heart and mind (James 1:18; 1 Corinthians 4:15; Ephesians 6:17; 1 Peter 1:23). The Word of God, in turn, generates penitent faith in the human heart (Romans 10:17) that leads the individual to obey the Gospel by being baptized in water (Mark 16:16; Acts 2:38; Hebrews 10:22). The resulting condition of the individual is that he or she is now a child of God, a citizen of the kingdom, and member of the church of Christ (Matthew 28:19-20; Galatians 3:26-27; Romans 6:4).
Additional verses in the New Testament clarify and cinch this meaning of John 3:5, pinpointing the “new birth,” while also allowing us to understand the activity of the Holy Spirit in the act of conversion. Consider the following chart (Jackson, 1988):

John 3:5	Spirit	Water	Kingdom
1 Corinthians 12:13	Spirit	Baptized	Body
Ephesians 5:26	Word	Washing/Water	Cleansed Church
Titus 3:5	Renewal of Spirit	Washing of Regeneration	Saved by Mercy

These verses demonstrate that God achieves conversion through the Gospel message authored by the Holy Spirit. When a person comes to an understanding (Acts 8:30) of the that inspired message, his penitent faith leads him to submit to water immersion for the remission of sins (Acts 8:36,38; 10:47). The result of his obedient response to the Gospel is that he is saved and cleansed from past sin and instantaneously placed into the kingdom of Christ.
Notice that submission to the divine plan of salvation does not mean that humans save themselves by effecting their own salvation. Their obedience does not earn or merit their forgiveness. Rather, the terms or conditions of salvation are stipulated by God—not by humans—and are a manifestation of His mercy! When people submit to the terms of entrance into the kingdom of Christ, they are saved by the blood of Jesus and the grace of God—not their own effort! Water immersion is not to be viewed as a “work of righteousness which we have done” (Titus 3:5). When we submit to baptism, we are being saved by “the kindness and love of God our Savior” (Titus 3:4). We are being saved “according to His mercy” (Titus 3:5).

REFERENCES

Jackson, Wayne (1988), “The New Birth: What is It?,” Christian Courier, 24:14, August.

Jesus Christ—The Same Yesterday, Today, and Forever by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=10&article=5085

Jesus Christ—The Same Yesterday, Today, and Forever

by	Eric Lyons, M.Min.

The inspired penman of Hebrews reminds us repeatedly throughout his epistle of the preeminence of Christ. The Lord Jesus is greater than angels; He is superior to Moses; He is higher than the Jewish high priesthood. His sacrifice is better; His everlasting covenant is better; His ministry is better. The eternal Savior (not expired Judaism) reigns supreme.
Jesus is preeminent for countless reasons. He is Divine and thus worthy of worship (Hebrews 1:5-9). He is the creator and sustainer of the Universe (1:2-3). His reign is “forever and ever” (1:12,8). He is without blemish (4:15; 9:14). He defeated death (13:20). He alone is the “author of eternal salvation” (5:9).
Jesus’ excellency is further established in Hebrews by appealing to the Lord’s amazing immutability. Near the end of the epistle, after an exhortation to remember one’s spiritual leaders (13:7), and prior to giving a warning against “strange doctrines” (13:9), the Hebrews writer reminds his readers of the precious, faith-building truth that “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever” (13:8).

Jesus’ Consistent Character

Society benefits greatly from the dependable and consistent character of its citizens. The steady marriage of a faithful husband and wife will only strengthen the foundation of civilization. The stable, strong, and reliable father gives his family a backbone upon which to lean that will not easily degenerate in difficult times. Faithful, spiritual leaders help keep churches grounded in the Truth, rather than led astray by false doctrine. But such dependable leadership is only found among those who genuinely strive to imitate the consistency of Christ (Hebrews 13:7-9).
By the very fact that Jesus is Divine, He is changeless. God said, “I am the Lord, I do not change” (Malachi 3:6). With the Father of lights, “there is no variation or shadow of turning” (James 1:17). Though the material universe will grow old and be changed, God said to Jesus, “You are the same, and Your years will not fail” (Hebrews 1:10-12; Psalm 102:25-27).
Christians should rejoice in the fact that, though “time is filled with swift transition,” our High Priest is perpetually dependable. Our Savior is endlessly steadfast. Christ revealed Himself as the perfectly consistent One. Though He “was in all points tempted as we are,” He was “without sin” (Hebrews 4:15). Jesus never once broke the old law, nor was His purpose to destroy it. He came to fulfill it perfectly and completely (Matthew 5:17-19), and through His unblemished sacrifice He established the new covenant (Hebrews 9:14-15).
Even the most difficult of circumstances never caused Jesus’ perfect character to change. Neither 40 days of fasting nor a face-to-face confrontation with the deceitful devil broke His resolve to live consistently with the Will of God. He did not use hunger, homelessness, or weariness as an excuse to become bitter and fickle. Jesus is the perfect foundation of the church because nothing could break His will to build her. Not torture or tears, not the betrayal of friends or the shadow of death, could shake Jesus’ resolve to offer salvation to a fallen world in desperate need of a steadfast Savior.

Jesus’ Consistent Teachings

Jesus’ preeminence is further seen in His perfectly reliable instruction. Unlike the father of lies in whom “there is no truth” (John 8:44), Jesus is the Truth (John 14:6). Unlike the contradictory and “strange doctrines” of false teachers, Jesus’ teachings are beautifully and powerfully dependable. His witness is true. His judgments are true. His counsel is perfectly consistent.
Though the Herodians and the disciples of the Pharisees came to Jesus with phony flattery in hopes of entangling Him in His talk, truer words could actually never be spoken of Jesus: “Teacher, we know that You are true, and teach the way of God in truth; nor do You care about anyone, for You do not regard the person of men” (Matthew 22:16). Proof of Christ’s genuineness and consistency on this occasion is seen in the fact that He immediately called out their hypocrisy before briefly and powerfully answering their question (22:18-22).
Jesus preached a consistent message that was so often about the importance of being consistent. The Sermon on the Mount is a discourse on authentic righteousness in which Jesus gets to the heart of the matter. Praying, fasting, making judgments, doing charitable deeds, etc. are important, but without the proper attitudes and motivations behind these actions—without being righteous on the inside—they profit us nothing (cf. 1 Corinthians 13:1-3). Jesus would later rebuke the scribes and Pharisees as “hypocrites,” saying, “Well did Isaiah prophesy about you…, ‘These people draw near to Me with their mouth and honor Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me” (Matthew 15:7-8). Outwardly many of the scribes and Pharisees appeared righteous, yet inwardly they were “full of hypocrisy and lawlessness” (Matthew 23:28). Jesus refused to overlook the inconsistency among the religious leaders of His day. His unchanging nature and consistent message were then, and are today, the greatest tools to fight the “various and strange doctrines” that so often carry men away from the Truth (Hebrews 13:9).

Conclusion

Meditating upon the magnificence of the Messiah is faith building and inspiring. In the book of Hebrews, the Holy Spirit has given us a gold mine of motivation to lift up and serve Jesus as the Son of God. He reigns supreme, and His unwavering, unchangeable nature and message are to be loved and lauded. Praise God that “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever!”

*Originally published in Gospel Advocate, December 2014, 156[12]:17-19.

“With God One Day is a Thousand Years”? by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=9&article=2191

“With God One Day is a Thousand Years”?

by	Eric Lyons, M.Min.

If I had a dollar for each time I heard someone use this phrase to add thousands of years to the biblical, six-day Creation, I finally might be able to purchase that newer model minivan my wife would love to have. It seems as if whenever there is a discussion of the days of Creation, someone mentions how those days may have been long periods of time. After all, the Bible does say, “With God one day is a thousand years and a thousand years is one day.” Does this phrase really support the Day-Age Theory as many suggest?
First, the Bible does not say, “With God one day is a thousand years and a thousand years is one day.” The apostle Peter actually wrote: “[B]eloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day” (2 Peter 3:8). Peter used a figure of speech known as a simile to compare a day to a thousand years. It is not that one day is precisely equivalent to 1,000 years or vice versa. Rather, within the specific context of 2 Peter 3, one could say that they share a likeness.
What is the context of 2 Peter 3? In this passage, Peter reminded Christians that “scoffers” would arise in the last days saying, “Where is the promise of His [Jesus’] coming?” (vss. 3-4). Peter declared: “[T]he heavens and the earth...are reserved for fire until the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men” (vs. 7). Regardless of what the scoffers alleged about the Second Coming, Peter wanted the church to know that “the Lord is not slack concerning His promise [of a return], as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance” (vs. 9). Sandwiched between these thoughts is the fact that the passing of time does not affect God’s promises, specifically the promise of His return. If Jesus promised to return 1,000 or 2,000 years ago, it is as good as if He made the promise yesterday. Indeed, “with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.” With men, the passing of long periods of time generally affects their keeping of promises, but not with God. Time has no bearing on whether He will do what He said He would do: “a thousand years are like a day” (vs. 8, NIV).
Another point to consider is that Peter used the term “day” (Greek hemera) and the phrase “thousand years” (chilia ete). This in itself is proof that God is able to communicate to man the difference between one day and 1,000 years. (For similes to make sense, one first must understand the literal difference between what is being compared. If there were no difference, then it would be meaningless to use such a figure of speech.) What’s more, within Genesis chapter one God used the terms “days” (Hebrew yamim) and “years” (shanim). Many rightly have questioned, “If a day in Genesis is really a thousand years (or some other long period of time), then what are the years mentioned in Genesis chapter one?” Such a definition of “days” makes a reasonable interpretation of Creation impossible. The facts are: (1) God knows the difference between a day and a thousand years; (2) Peter and Moses understood this difference; (3) their original audience comprehended the difference; and (4) any unbiased reader today can do the same.
Finally, even if 2 Peter 3:8 could be tied to the length of the Creation days (logically and biblically it cannot), adding 6,000 years to the age of the Earth would in no way appease evolutionary sympathizers. A person could add 600,000 years or 600 million years and still not come close to the alleged age of the Universe. According to evolutionary calculations, one would still be 13+ billion years away from the Big Bang and four billion years this side of the formation of Earth. Truly, even an abuse of 2 Peter 3:8 will not help Day-Age theorists.

An Atypical American’s Typical Bible Knowledge by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

 

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=7&article=1193

An Atypical American’s Typical Bible Knowledge

by	Eric Lyons, M.Min.

Charles Barkley is no average Joe. In the 1990s, he was one of the best basketball players in the world. While playing in the National Basketball Association, he scored more than 23,000 points, played in nine All-Star games, was voted the NBA’s Most Valuable Player in 1993, and now serves as a television basketball analyst. Even people who know very little about basketball are familiar with Charles Barkley. As atypical as Barkley is as a famous athlete and television personality, sadly, his Bible knowledge is typical of many Americans.
In a recent political discussion with CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, Barkley condemned “conservative” Christians for making judgments against homosexuals and abortionists. He said:

Every time I hear the word “conservative,” it makes me sick to my stomach because they’re really just fake Christians.... I think they want to be judge and jury. Like, I’m for gay marriage. It’s none of my business if gay people want to get married. I’m pro-choice. And I think these Christians—first of all, they’re supposed to be—they’re not supposed to judge other people, but they’re the most hypocritical judge of people we have in this country.... [T]hey act like they’re Christians, and they’re not forgiving at all (2008).

Barkley has implied that “fake Christians” are those who oppose homosexuality and abortion. Christians who condemn homosexuality and abortion supposedly are hypocritically judging others, and being unforgiving.
Sadly, Barkley’s beliefs and allegations are typical of many, many Americans whose Bible knowledge would hardly fill a thimble. This kind of ignorance, combined with an attempt to teach people about unrighteous judgments, forgiveness, and morality, is a dangerous combination. You get the very opposite of what God’s Word actually teaches.
The same Jesus who said, “Judge not, that you be not judged” (Matthew 7:1), taught men to “judge with righteous judgment” (John 7:24). The same Jesus who taught about the necessity of forgiveness (Matthew 6:12; Luke 17:3-4), denounced fornication, adultery, and murder (Matthew 15:18-20). In the same letter in which the apostle Paul warned Roman Christians of making unrighteous judgments (Romans 14:3-4), he condemned men who “burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful” (Romans 1:27). To the same church that Paul wrote to “forgive and comfort” (2 Corinthians 2:7), he commanded to condemn sexually immoral Christians when the church gathered together (1 Corinthians 5:1-13).
The fact is, Satan has sold lie after lie to Americans. Just like he convinced Israel in Isaiah’s day to “put darkness for light, and light for darkness...bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter,” he has convinced American politicians, the media, and others to “call evil good, and good evil” (Isaiah 5:20).
“Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight” (Isaiah 5:21). Woe to the typical, biblically ignorant American who attempts to pit the virtues of forgiveness and righteous judgments against specific sins that Almighty God condemns. Americans, be warned. Christians, listen carefully. The same prophet who condemned Israel for their depravity, prophesied of their captivity.

“Therefore my people have gone into captivity, because they have no knowledge” (Isaiah 5:13, emp. added).

“My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge. Because you have rejected knowledge, I also will reject you from being priest for Me; because you have forgotten the law of your God, I also will forget your children” (Hosea 4:6).

REFERENCES

Barkley, Charles (2008), “CNN Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer,” CNN, February 17, [On-line], URL: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0802/17/le.01.html.

“Extra, Extra, Read all about it” by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

http://apologeticspress.org/AllegedDiscrepancies.aspx?article=1565&b=Luke

“Extra, Extra, Read all about it” by Eric Lyons, M.Min.


One of the most commonly neglected rules of interpretation that Bible critics overlook when attacking Scripture is that extra information is not necessarily contradictory information. When one Bible writer offers more details than another on a particular subject, it is inappropriate to assume that one of the writers is mistaken. When a journalist in the 21st century writes about a man on the side of the road who has just escaped death following a particular catastrophe, while another journalist writes how this same man and his wife (standing next to him) are suffering survivors of the devastating disaster, it does not mean that the first journalist was dishonest in his representation of truth. Similarly, countless times throughout Scripture, and especially within the gospel accounts, extra information is given that critics cannot justifiably prove to be contradictory.
Consider how Matthew, Mark, and Luke all wrote about how a man named Joseph took the body of Jesus following His crucifixion, “wrapped it in linen, and laid it in a tomb that was hewn out of the rock” (Luke 23:53; cf. Matthew 27:59-60; Mark 15:46). The apostle John, however, noted that Joseph actually had help in burying Jesus. He wrote: “Joseph of Arimathea...took the body of Jesus. And Nicodemus, who at first came to Jesus by night, also came, bringing a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about a hundred pounds. Then they took the body of Jesus, and bound it in strips of linen with the spices, as the custom of the Jews is to bury” (19:38-40, emp. added). Are the accounts of Jesus’ burial contradictory? Such could never be proven by skeptics. This simply is an example of extra information being given by one of the Bible writers. Had Matthew, Mark, and Luke stated that Joseph was the only person involved in Jesus’ burial, then skeptics would have a valid point to argue. But as it stands, John simply added facts to the story.
When Mark and Luke recorded how the Jews petitioned Pilate for the release of Barabbas, they both called him a murderer (Mark 15:7; Luke 23:18-19; Acts 3:14). Yet when John wrote about Barabbas, he omitted all discussion about his homicidal past and simply indicated that “Barabbas was a robber” (John 18:40). Is it possible that Barabbas was both a murderer and a thief? Of course. How many prisons around the world today house individuals who have committed both murder and burglary?
The Bible writers may not have worded things exactly the way some may think they should have, but such personal (or cultural) preferences do not invalidate their writings. Throughout the gospel accounts, statements are supplemented. Extra evidence frequently is given. And, the truth is, such supplementation should be expected from inspired, independent writers who did not have to participate in collusion in order to convey accurately the Good News of Jesus Christ. When one recognizes that supplementation cannot inherently be equated with a contradiction, many of the so-called “Bible contradictions” are easily (and logically!) explained away.

Mark, the Power Gospel by Roy Davison

http://www.oldpaths.com/Archive/Davison/Roy/Allen/1940/markthepowergospel.html

Mark, the Power Gospel

Powerfully and concisely, Mark tells “the good news of Jesus Christ, the Son of God” (1:1). The testimony of the Roman centurion at the cross expresses the theme of the book, “Truly this Man was the Son of God!” (15:38).


Mark and the other Gospels

The Gospels are four inspired accounts of the life of Christ. “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God” (2 Timothy 3:16); “for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit” (2 Peter 1:21).

This explains both the similarities and the differences in the Gospels. The Holy Spirit is the Author of all four Gospels, so of course they are similar! There are differences because the Spirit moved four different men to write, each from his own perspective and with specific goals and primary audiences in mind.

The many Old Testament quotations in Matthew are persuasive for Jews and others familiar with the Old Testament. John’s intention was obviously to record information not found in the other Gospels (John 20:30, 31; 21:25). Luke, a Greek Physician (Colossians 4:14), addresses his narrative to “most excellent Theophilus” (Luke 1:3), a title appropriate for a Greek person of some standing. Mark’s emphasis on the power of Christ would impress the Romans. He gives the Roman coin equivalence of the widow’s two mites in 12:42, a ‘quadrans’.

Combined, the four Evangelists powerfully proclaim Christ to all people of all times!


Writer of the second Gospel

Although the writer is not specified in any of the Gospels, there is no reason to doubt the names historically assigned to each.

Numerous historical sources state that the second Gospel was written by John Mark, the son of Mary whose house was a place of prayer when Peter was in prison (Acts 12:12), the cousin of Barnabas (Colossians 4:10), and the fellow worker of Peter (1 Peter 5:13) and Paul (2 Timothy 4:11; Philemon 24).

He is designated as the writer by Eusebius in references from Papias, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria and Origen (H.E. 2:15; 3:39; 5:8; 6:14, 25) and in the writings of Irenaeus (Against Heresies 3:10, 5) and Tertullian (Against Marcion 4:5). According to these authors, Mark based his Gospel on the eye- witness accounts of Peter.


Date of writing

There is no definite knowledge about the date of writing of any of the Gospels. The supplemental nature of John and historical references favor its being written last. Since Luke was written before Acts (Acts 1:1), which ends its narrative abruptly while Paul is at Rome in 62 AD, we surmise that Luke was written before that date. It is usually believed that Matthew and Mark were the first two Gospels written, but it is not known when, or, which was written first. Mark’s concluding statement, “And they went out and preached everywhere” (16:20) indicates that the gospel had been preached widely by the time he wrote. Historical references favor Matthew as having been written first.

Disputed ending

The last 12 verses of chapter 16 are missing from the earliest (almost) complete manuscripts of Mark, Codex Vaticanus (est. d. 325-350 AD) and Codex Sinaiticus (est. d. 330-360 AD). This can be explained, however, by the ease with which the end of an earlier scroll could have been broken off and lost before it was copied, resulting in a chain of incomplete manuscripts.

The above two manuscripts end with a conjunction, and in such an abrupt manner that something is obviously missing. “And they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid” (Mark 16:8) is hardly how one would expect Mark to end his Gospel! Although Vaticanus lacks 16:9-20, it has a blank column after 16:8 indicating that the copyist left room for an ending he knew was lacking in his source.

Codex Alexandrinus (est. d. 400-440 AD) contains 16:9-20.

Christian writings much older than these manuscripts contain references to these verses, the oldest being by Justin Martyr (160 AD) in the First Apology, Chapter 45, “preached everywhere” from 16:20 and by Irenaeus (180 AD) who quotes all of 16:19 -“So then, after the Lord had spoken to them, He was received up into heaven, and sat down at the right hand of God” (Against Heresies 3:10, 5).

The testimony of the vast majority of NT manuscripts, which contain 16:9-20, cannot be set aside by two manuscripts, which - although old - are obviously defective at this location, as indicated by a blank column in one of the two.

For a detailed scholarly rebuttal of internal arguments presented against the authenticity of verses 9-20 see “The Style Of The Long Ending Of Mark” by brother Bruce Terry at http://bible.ovc.edu/terry/articles/mkendsty.htm


Interesting details

Although Mark is the shortest Gospel, it contains details not found elsewhere.

Although only four parables are included, one is not in the other gospels (4:26-29). Emphasizing the power of Christ, miracles comprise more than 20% of Mark with two of the eighteen not being mentioned elsewhere (7:32-37; 8:22-26).

More details are given than in Luke’s account about the calming of the storm (4:35-41) and than in Matthew’s account about the cursing of the fig tree (11:12-14, 20-24).

Mark mentions a young man who, while Jesus was being arrested, escaped by leaving his clothes behind (14:51, 52). Some wonder if this might have been Mark himself.


Emotions of Christ are described in greater detail

He “looked around at them with anger, being grieved by the hardness of their hearts” (3:5). “He marveled because of their unbelief” (6:6). “Then looking up to heaven, He sighed” (7:34). “But He sighed deeply in His spirit” (8:12). “When Jesus saw it, He was greatly displeased” (10:14). “Then Jesus, looking at him, loved him” (10:21).


People’s reactions are told in greater detail.

“Then they were all amazed, so that they questioned among themselves, saying, ‘What is this? What new doctrine is this? For with authority He commands even the unclean spirits, and they obey Him’” (1:17).

After Jesus healed the man let down through the roof, “all were amazed and glorified God, saying, ‘We never saw anything like this!’” (2:12).

After Jesus walked on the water, “they were greatly amazed in themselves beyond measure, and marveled” (6:51).

“Immediately, when they saw Him, all the people were greatly amazed, and running to Him, greeted Him” (9:15).

When Jesus told His followers what would happen to him in Jerusalem, “They were amazed. And as they followed they were afraid” (10:32).

After the three women saw an angel in the empty tomb, “They went out quickly and fled from the tomb, for they trembled and were amazed. And they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid” (16:8).

Such reactions are also in the other Gospels, but more details are given in Mark. In addition to the above, people ‘marveled’ (5:20; 12:17; 15:5, 44) and were ‘afraid’ (5:15; 9:6, 32).


Certain Jewish customs are explained.

Ablutions of the Pharisees and Jews are explained (7:1-4). The Roman coin equivalent, a quadrans, is given for two mites (12:42). It is explained that the Preparation Day is the day before the Sabbath (15:42).


Aramaic words are used and translated

Much more than in the other Gospels, Mark inserts the actual Aramaic words used on several occasions, which adds a warm, personal touch. Translation is included where needed.

Jesus called James and John “Boanerges” [Sons of Thunder] (3:17).

To the dead daughter of the ruler of the synagogue, Jesus said: “Talitha, cumi” [Little girl, I say to you, arise] (5:41).

A selfish son who did not want to help his parents would tell them: “Whatever profit you might have received from me is Corban” [that is, a gift to God] (7:11).

As Jesus healed a deaf man, “He sighed, and said to him, ‘Ephphatha’, that is, ‘Be opened’” (7:34).

Rather than the standard Hebrew ‘Rabbi’ usually used, the Aramaic ‘Rabboni’ is used in dialogue by the man who wanted to be given his sight (10:51). It is also used by Mary in John 20:16.

“Hosanna” (11:9) is also used by Matthew and Luke.

In the garden, Jesus prays, “Abba, Father” (14:36).

On the cross, He prays, “Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?” [My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?] (15:34). This is also found in Matthew.


A suggestion

Mark’s Gospel can be read aloud in an hour and twenty minutes. Some Lord’s day afternoon, why not gather the family around and take turns reading Mark’s Gospel aloud from beginning to end? It will strengthen your faith.
Roy Davison
[First published in the Gospel Herald, September 2012]

The Scripture quotations in this article are from
The New King James Version. ©1979,1980,1982,
Thomas Nelson Inc., Publishers unless indicated otherwise.
Permission for reference use has been granted.

Published in The Old Paths Archive
(http://www.oldpaths.com)

Listen, try, repeat! by Gary Rose

By this time, you are probably aware of how much I enjoy viewing clouds. I am not exactly sure as to the WHY of it; I just do, that's all.  If I were to guess- I would say it has to do with possibilities and what MIGHT BE. 

The picture and quote are great as far as they go, but consider the context and its application.

Mark, Chapter 9 (WEB) 

   ² After six days Jesus took with him Peter, James, and John, and brought them up onto a high mountain privately by themselves, and he was changed into another form in front of them.  ³ His clothing became glistening, exceedingly white, like snow, such as no launderer on earth can whiten them.  ⁴ Elijah and Moses appeared to them, and they were talking with Jesus. 

  ⁵ Peter answered Jesus, “Rabbi, it is good for us to be here. Let’s make three tents: one for you, one for Moses, and one for Elijah.”  ⁶ For he didn’t know what to say, for they were very afraid. 

  ⁷ A cloud came, overshadowing them, and a voice came out of the cloud, “This is my beloved Son. Listen to him.” (emp added GDR)

  ⁸ Suddenly looking around, they saw no one with them any more, except Jesus only. 

  ⁹ As they were coming down from the mountain, he commanded them that they should tell no one what things they had seen, until after the Son of Man had risen from the dead.  ¹⁰ They kept this saying to themselves, questioning what the “rising from the dead” meant. 

  ¹¹ They asked him, saying, “Why do the scribes say that Elijah must come first?” 

  ¹² He said to them, “Elijah indeed comes first, and restores all things. How is it written about the Son of Man, that he should suffer many things and be despised?   ¹³  But I tell you that Elijah has come, and they have also done to him whatever they wanted to, even as it is written about him.”

When I was 18, I thought I knew just about everything. If someone asked me a question on ANY TOPIC- I had a ready answer. Well, after almost 50 years later, I realize how much I don't know, and frankly its a bit scary how true this is. However, more often than not, I can find "an" answer or two and then make a good guess as to what is right! 

When it comes to matters of a religious nature, I have learned to trust God. God, the father says listen to Jesus; I will listen to Jesus. Like the disciples coming down from the mountain I don't understand a lot and I wonder sometimes about a variety of topics, but I will listen to Jesus from his word.

The thing is: Just listening is not enough, I must internalize and apply it.

I keep trying and trying and trying. I imagine you do as well. Take heart, as long as we both keep trying, eventually WE WILL SUCCEED!!!!