Gospel of Mark: Finished!

 

Image by [Pedroivo] via Pixabay at https://pixabay.com/photos/bible-religion-christianity-gospel-879070/

I did it! It wasn't in a day and it certainly wasn't in one setting, but I did it. I read through the Gospel of Mark in the KJV. That means I am one book shy of reading the entire New Testament in the King James Version, except for Matthew, which will come next.

I'm sure I missed on out some things by reading chapter by chapter. I did read chapters 1-4 in one sitting and then I read the last six chapters in one sitting. The reason for the latter was that I fell behind and was reading chapters 11-14 and then it dawned on me, "With only two chapters left, I might as well read two more chapters and then I can move on to Matthew."

Now, I'm going to confess there is a lot that is hard to understand in the KJV unless I'm really familiar with it. But of course there are new things I glean from reading in a different translation than what I am the most familiar with. I think it would be more helpful to have a KJV study Bible to keep me on track (That's a hint to anybody wondering what to buy me for Christmas. I'd prefer the Oxford Annotated Study Bible with the Apocrypha).

There are three things that stand out to me (Why is it always three?). One, in each Synoptic Gospel (Matthew, Mark, and Luke), the sermon is different. Matthew's is on a mountain (a.ka. mount), Mark's is on a boat, and Luke's is on a plain. I will spare you my speculation on what harmonizers of the gospels (You must know my agony in whether to capitalize "gospel"). I'll save the biggest one for the end.

Second, is the two different endings in Mark. Of course, anybody who reads only the KJV will be confused about this point if they have never read a modern translation that brackets everything after verse 8 of chapter 16. And if the shorter reading is correct, Mark ends kind of on a sour note. "And they went out quickly, and fled from the sepulcher; for they trembled and were amazed: neither said they any thing to any man; for they were afraid." (KJV) Okay, so not quite the sour note I remembered. But not as clear as the rest of the chapter, allegedly added later, according to some scholars. First on my wish list is the dissertation of Kara Lyons, Gospel Women and the Long Ending of Mark. I'll save a conclusion of which is appropriate for further study.

Third, get ready for a flashback to my seminary days. I actually took a class on the Gospel of Mark, taught by Andy Johnson at Nazarene Theological Seminary in Kansas City. If you don't know me, this was a constructive time in my faith journey. My faith was broken down in college at Eastern Nazarene College and Northwest Nazarene University and then my faith was built up at Nazarene Theological Seminary. This is not a post to complain about those institutions. All three were good. But I have to admit, as I read the end of Mark, I was reminded of that class and that time in my life. At one point I was disillusioned and even tried to be Agnostic but my now deceased uncle, Leland Dirks, mostly convinced me that wasn't a realistic position because we have to make choices every day on limited knowledge. And so, this time as well, I was grabbed (read "convicted") by Mark 15:39. 

We miss the point today, but the gospels were originally dramas that were read to congregations. They were dramas, according to Andy Johnson (That was more than a few years ago but that is how I recall it being presented in class). Imagine hearing/seeing the story unfold and the most unlikely of candidates affirms that Jesus was in fact, the Son of God. That character was "the centurion, which stood over against him, saw that he so cried out, and gave up the ghost, he said, Truly this man was the Son of God" (Mark 15:39). 

Suddenly the read (a.k.a. audience) is without excuse. You can't just say, "I'll think about it." No, you have to choose to be a person in the story. You can be Judas who betrays Jesus or you can be a variety of people. You could be the centurion, one who would seem to be objective and yet not even he doubts the reality of Jesus being the Son of God, or to put it another way, that Jesus was who he said he was. Can you deny the reality of Jesus as the Son of God?

You may be more bold than I. I personally cannot. I am compelled to respond favorably to God's grace that says God revealed Godself to us through Jesus who was in fact the Son of God. The centurion believes in Jesus as the Son of God (We could get hung up on whether the centurion really believed that Jesus was the Son of God, but I think we'd be missing the point that this was a rhetorical device to make a point). It is as if to say, "Who are you, that you don't believe Jesus was who he said he was and others like the centurion and the disciples who became apostles who testified that Jesus was in fact the Son of God, and yet you don't believe Jesus was the Son of God." I for one could not and cannot. I am compelled to believe that Jesus is the Son of God.

Book Review: "The Giver"

 

This photo originates from https://www.amazon.com/Giver-Quartet-Book-ebook/dp/B003MC5N28/ref=tmm_kin_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=.

My wife, son and I are in the midst of a reading contest. The bad news is that it is going very slow. The good news is that I'm winning! "The Giver" by Lois Lowry is my second book in the contest. I told you it is going slow. The first person to read 31 books is the winner.

I confess, when I first started reading this book, I fell asleep while reading it at Namsa Public Library in South Korea. But let's not blame that on the writer. I had gone hiking with my family in the morning and apparently I was very exhausted.

I won't deny that I was tempted to shelf the book but since the whole purpose of this contest is to encourage my son to read the books we recently bought him, and since he chose this book as the next one I have to read, that didn't seem like a viable option.

So, I started again. And am I ever glad I didn't give up on it. I realized that the reason I fell asleep was not because the book was boring but that it is 100% contrary to my reality. I actually thought this was a book about communism. To put it bluntly, I thought this story was weird.

It's about a people who live in a community (So I was reading into community so much that I erroneously induced Communism, but can you blame me?) and everything is set up in a way that nobody questions anything. There's even a special time set aside to talk about "feelings," that seems like more of an accountability group where that's the only time one can talk about one's feelings. Nonetheless, I thought it might be a good model for my family to follow. I digress.

At the age of 12, children are given jobs. This is based on having been monitored by the powers that be for the last 12 years. Usually it's a good fit. Jonas, the main character, is assigned the task of "Receiver." His job is to carry the memories of the community passed on by the "Giver." Nobody else in the community has these memories. They know nothing of the past, only what happens now. They know nothing of color, diversity, or even love. Even the assembling of the "family" is not naturally but people are grouped together by the authorities.

Jonas's predecessor disappeared. She was "released," which he comes to realize means she was euthanized. If you are unfit for the community, this happens to you. But they don't call it death. Once Jonas realizes this, he and the Giver decide this is not good for the community and that they need to hold onto the memories, not the Giver and the Receiver. Jonas decides to escape with Gabriel, the baby his father is caring for as part of his job. He's about to be euthanized because he cries through the night except when he's with Jonas.

When Jonas starts going through puberty and having romantic dreams, he is instructed by his "mother" that he is to take a pill, which he obediently takes, but once he learns of love, not just in the erotic sense but in the agape sense, and realizes this is a good thing for a family to love each other, he stops taking the pill. 

Is his escape with Gabriel successful? It is indeed, and the place he ends up going is exactly the place he learned of in his first memory passed onto him by "The Giver." And Jonas ends up giving Gabriel memories, starting with when he slept in the same room as Gabriel, in Jonas's room. But then as they escape, though he starts to lose the full memories as he escapes from the community. 

The reader is not given information on what happens to the community after Jonas and Gabriel disappear. Perhaps the reader is left with the hope that both Jonas' and Gabriel's old and new communities experience color, diversity (not sameness) and of course, love in all its facets.

I highly recommend this book to anybody looking for a highly imaginative book that has the potential to challenge us in our current world where it seems we are aiming for some kind of sameness with a lack of diverse perspective. And as a Wesleyan, it's a good reminder that love is the essence of who we are as human beings, created in the image of God.

The Gospel of Luke

 

Image taken by Pedroivo via Pixabay.

I have finally finished the Gospel of Luke (St. Luke according to the KJV). As I may have mentioned before, I am reading through the King James Version of the Bible "backwards." I started with Revelation and have now read through Luke. The reason? I was challenged several years ago to read through the KJV but I got stuck on the law. The person making this challenge said I needed to read the New Testament so I thought this would be a good way to cut to the chase and also to see a reverse perspective of New Testament to Old rather than the other way around. Since some people read Jesus into the Old Testament anyway, I thought this would be an interesting way to see that perspective.

I should be much further than Luke by now but 2024 has been filled with drama with two relatives passing away (the drama is only related to one of them) and lots of back and forth, in the Bible, out of the Bible, in the Bible. I highly recommend reading each book of the Bible in one sitting but that is harder to do with longer books, like Luke, which has 24 chapters. It's much more meaningful to read books straight through and you get more of a sense of context than reading individual chapters.

I wish I could make a long list of differences I saw between John and Luke (the order I have read only two of the four Gospels) but with such intermittent reading, that is harder to do. I remember my notes from Bible School, that John presents Jesus as the Son of God, whereas Luke presents Jesus as the Son of [Hu]Man[kind]. I think specifically of the reference in Isaiah which Jesus read in the temple, in Luke 4.

17 And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias [Isaiah]. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written,

18 The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,

19 To preach the acceptable year of the Lord. (KJV, Bible Gateway).

Jesus added that on that day this Scripture was fulfilled. Who wouldn't want to be on the same side of one who brought in a kingdom, The Kingdom, which rescues people in such desperate situations.

The other thing that stuck out to me is when Jesus preached the Sermon on the "Mount," he was not on a mountain but on level ground. In Luke 6,

17 And he came down with them, and stood in the plain... (KJV, Bible Gateway)

One ought be alarmed. Clearly, Luke's record is different. Whereas Matthew's Gospel portrays Jesus as the new Moses, Luke's Gospel is portraying Jesus as the Son of Man, the chief of all humans (really, it's another way of saying Son of God). Matthew's Gospel has a Sermon on the Mount and Luke's Gospel has a Sermon on the Plain.

One also cannot forget that Marconi, the great heretic (Great here does not mean superb) who read his Bible with scissors, so to speak, cherished parts of Luke's Gospel. I don't endorse that in the least but it is worth mentioning that there is an attraction to Luke's Gospel. Oftentimes, I have heard people recommend new Christians or those interested in learning about Jesus, start with John's Gospel. I personally recommend reading Mark's Gospel first since it is believed to be the first Gospel by some contemporary scholars (This is a red herring. I am choosing not to get into the debate about what a "scholar" is. Some would argue that scholars are only those who embrace the documentary hypothesis and other tools that are the result of Biblical Criticism. I think it is arrogant for me to say what consists of a scholar and what doesn't) and it is also the shortest. 

Up next, I'll be reading Mark's Gospel. I hope that will be done in one sitting, but stay tuned to see whether I'm able to accomplish that.