The Gospel of Mark

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

Register Log in
Is adult era chion ... a maturity of wisdom?

Thus secularism ... when folks divide up ... allowing separation!

Some say it is good for the heart ... or so it was herd up as cattle ... more beef? Moo eph on ...

Word is like that ... evolves! Take the wider perspective as broad based ...
 
unsafe said:
paradox3 ---your quote -----Now we have Jesus' pronouncement about marriage. It seems clear enough that He is opposed to divorce & imposes a higher standard than the Law of Moses. Moses has allowed divorce as somewhat of a compromise but only when initiated by the man.

unsafe says -----Jesus is Not opposed to divorce -----as in Matthew 5:31 He says this ---so He gives boundaries here -----

Posting from Matthew here ----

Matthew 5:31-35 (ESV)
Divorce
31 A)'>“It was also said, B)'>‘Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.’ 32 C)'>But I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of sexual immorality, makes her commit adultery, and D)'>whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.

unsafe says -----What is Happening in Mark 10 here about Divorce is the Pharisees are questioning Jesus about Divorce Hoping that He forgets what He said about Divorce so they can have something on Him ------verse 2 tells us this ----2 Some Pharisees came and tested him by asking, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?”

unsafe says ----
But Jesus refuses to get trapped and brings the conversation to the joining of a husband and wife in marriage become one flesh ---they are not 2 separate people any longer ----so He turns the conversation to the meaning of what marriage is ----


This is From Matthew ---Message Bible here ---verses 31-37

Matthew 5:31-37 (MSG)
31-32 “Remember the Scripture that says, ‘Whoever divorces his wife, let him do it legally, giving her divorce papers and her legal rights’? Too many of you are using that as a cover for selfishness and whim, pretending to be righteous just because you are ‘legal.’ Please, no more pretending. If you divorce your wife, you’re responsible for making her an adulteress (unless she has already made herself that by sexual promiscuity). And if you marry such a divorced adulteress, you’re automatically an adulterer yourself. You can’t use legal cover to mask a moral failure.

Empty Promises
33-37 “And don’t say anything you don’t mean. This counsel is embedded deep in our traditions. You only make things worse when you lay down a smoke screen of pious talk, saying, ‘I’ll pray for you,’ and never doing it, or saying, ‘God be with you,’ and not meaning it. You don’t make your words true by embellishing them with religious lace. In making your speech sound more religious, it becomes less true. Just say ‘yes’ and ‘no.’ When you manipulate words to get your own way, you go wrong.



unsafe says ----so for people to say that Jesus is opposed to divorce is wrong and that is why it is important to bring other passages into play when doing a Bible Study --------This is why putting our own spin on Scripture is very dangerous ---it sends the wrong Message to others about God and His Word -----
Click to expand...
Agreeing with you that Jesus does not appear to be totally opposed to divorce. He wants more restrictions than the Law of Moses which simply allowed a man to write a certificate of dismissal.

The nuances of Mark's and Matthew's gospels are not identical, I agree with you there as well.
 
In those days, in very much a patriarchal culture, for a woman to be divorced meant alienation from family and community, shame upon her, and material suffering. Jesus, in his time, was advocating for that not to happen. Unlike today, in our society, she wasn’t free to rebuild her life on her own terms. He turned it around and made it shameful for men to treat women badly (in the context of the time). His own mother was saved from the suffering (again, context of the time) of being a single woman and social shunning. So, it makes sense he might have empathy for what men put women through.
 
Summary: Mark 10: 17-52

1. A man runs up to Jesus, saying, "Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?' Jesus reminds him that no one but God alone is good. The man has kept all the commandments but this is not enough. He must sell what he owns, give the money to the poor & then follow Jesus.

Jesus looks around at the disciples and says it is hard for the wealthy to enter heaven. But for God, all things are possible.

Those who have left everything to follow Jesus will receive eternal life in the age to come.

2. Jesus foretells his death and resurrection after three days.

3. James and John request to sit at the right and left hand of Jesus but they do not understand what they are asking. Jesus says this is not for Him to grant. The other disciples are angry with James and John.

Jesus states, "Whoever wishes to be great among you must be your servant and whoever wishes to be first among you must be slave of all. For the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life a ransom for many." (10: 44-45 NRSV)

4. A blind man, Bartimaeus, requests healing from Jesus. Jesus makes him well, stressing that the man's faith is responsible.
 
Interesting to note in v. 18 Jesus seems to be drawing a distinction between himself and God. (Why do you call me good? None is good except God alone.) Gives one cause to ponder, when it comes to Jesus' divinity, and how it was (or wasn't) evident in passages like this.
 
Reflection: Mark 10: 17-52

Following Jesus requires sacrifice of much in life but will mean eternal life in the age to come. Leaving house, family and fields will also mean receiving a hundredfold back in this life (10: 30) and persecution.

Discipleship is costly and requires being a servant to others. Faith is emphasized in the healing of the blind man.
 
Redbaron said:
Interesting to note in v. 18 Jesus seems to be drawing a distinction between himself and God. (Why do you call me good? None is good except God alone.) Gives one cause to ponder, when it comes to Jesus' divinity, and how it was (or wasn't) evident in passages like this.
Click to expand...
Atonement theology is evident in this passage. It doesn't necessarily follow that Jesus was divine in nature. Resurrection is predicted after three days but belief in the resurrection of the body was widespread in biblical times.

And I am getting ahead of myself here but don't we believe that God raised Jesus from the dead? Not that Jesus was capable of doing this Himself.

Very interesting to ponder, as you say.
 
Redbaron said:
Interesting to note in v. 18 Jesus seems to be drawing a distinction between himself and God. (Why do you call me good? None is good except God alone.) Gives one cause to ponder, when it comes to Jesus' divinity, and how it was (or wasn't) evident in passages like this.
Click to expand...

When Jesus asks the man why he applies the attribute "good" to him, he wants him to understand the word's importance. In calling Jesus "good," the man attributed to him a quality of God himself, he placed Jesus on a level with God. This is both right and good. God is good; Jesus is good. They're on the same level.
 
Jae said:
When Jesus asks the man why he applies the attribute "good" to him, he wants him to understand the word's importance. In calling Jesus "good," the man attributed to him a quality of God himself, he placed Jesus on a level with God. This is both right and good. God is good; Jesus is good. They're on the same level.
Click to expand...
This is an interesting interpretation of the comment made by Jesus but I don't see it in today's text.

"Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone", said Jesus. (10: 18)
 
paradox3 said:
This is an interesting interpretation of the comment made by Jesus but I don't see it in today's text.

"Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone", said Jesus. (10: 18)
Click to expand...

What I don't see is what has been suggested here by someone else - that Jesus is denying divinity.
 
Redbaron said:
Interesting to note in v. 18 Jesus seems to be drawing a distinction between himself and God. (Why do you call me good? None is good except God alone.) Gives one cause to ponder, when it comes to Jesus' divinity, and how it was (or wasn't) evident in passages like this.
Click to expand...

In one way of expressing what is enforced as mysterious unknown ... is the alternate trying to enlighten brute-4's minds?

A little levity might lift the burden of breeding as perceived only for monarchs, wealthy industry and curates (mental control advocates) ... then bang we'd be out of the post 'ole we're ein! When separating from the secular ... is that an out there projection as OBI denied by some psychic examiners that haven't caught on yet to the concept of mysterious sol factor ... fractals?

Coming forth ... the subtle support system of the lesser mind connected by negative ions ... photons? Tons of eM fall to earth each Dai in mystery of what happened to the proton part! Thus prephased articles to separate such wordings like "aus" and "de" things forerunners of "the" and "a" as indeterminate against the determinate nothing.

Some say nothing cannot exist without a great void of cognizance!

Worry naught ... tis something to learn about and pass over ...

Perhaps this relates to cyber dimensional squeakers:

Tis something to be turned all about and done etude upon the insides and outs ... not just piously ... as that might be too staunched ... given the environment ... what would I know as an outsider ... blackened as a swan by many theologians that deny their profession is based on theory and epi stumped concerns ... mystery?

The unravelling is based on low keyed string theory ... for all we know attached to a big bust ... swell in-space as rift ... ae*sot*eric? What's sot ?
 
Last edited:
Besides is gođđ, like gott ... good or something to learn in the mystery when delving into Runes of dead languages laid out between the sheets and chad?

Expect changes, smears, smudges, alterations and such as all evolve the icons in their own way across great times of the vernacular against the legalistic seizures! Don't cause the judge dissonance or he could awaken ... then all di light could break loose in a flash ... that should spread som fear amongst those that fear knowing a great spread of information ... broad-based intellectualism in black and white as shades of twilight zones as bleu over ...?

Twitter about golfs inbetwixt to loosing of thought ... may lead to interspace chatter as unseen cyber ... stuff even the experts seem to lost a handle on due to avarice on the coin ...

Just a bit? O's Hite ... consequence or conned orders ... blinded by mystery? Dame ... that Dark Velvet one ...
 
Thoughts on Mark 10:17-20...

Jesus continued his journey. He went out and forward on his way..

The passion's inevitableness and the end of Jesus' life's indicated in the gospels.

Here one, a certain man, a ruler, the synagogue's chief elder, stopped Jesus. The man came running to him, he was excited; he threw himself down upon his knees before Jesus.

As the synagogue's elder, he was acquainted with the elders' laws, with the observances' interpretation. But he derived no satisfaction from that knowledge, he found no peace for his soul in the works prescribed there.

The new teacher would be able to help him solve the problem which he was battling with, the question of how to obtain peace with God.

His cry's, "Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?" It's a cry which thousands have echoed since, in churches where salvation by works is taught.

The man wanted to do something to be considered the heir of life - one for whom the glories will be laid up in heaven, in safe-keeping.

Now as for his question, Jesus reminds him of the Law's fulfillment, keeping God's commandments would give him heaven.

Jesus had noted that this young man was satisfied with keeping the Law when in front of people.

God's people must be referred to the keeping of God's Law. If this method works shame's knowledge, then there'll be opportunity for the knowledge of Jesus as Savior, and for faith in him.

In this case. the man stated that he had kept these commandments from his youth. He supposed an abstaining from dark deeds constituted the Law's fulfillment. Here was true pharisaic conceit.

It's the same experience which missionaries today will have in their dealings with the world's hypocrites. If they live an outwardly moral life, then they believe they've fulfilled God will, and that they'll be okay.
 
Mark 10:17-18 (ESV)
The Rich Young Man
17 A)'>And as he was setting out on his journey, a man ran up and B)'>knelt before him and asked him, “Good Teacher, what must I do to C)'>inherit eternal life?” 18 And Jesus said to him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone.

unsafe says -----this passage is not saying that Jesus is denying His Divinity -----what it is saying in this scripture is that the man said he keep all the commands that Jesus listed and when Jesus said go sell everything the man left so His Heart was not in God but in his stuff ---Goodness comes from God alone not your yourself or your stuff ---God will provide all that we need ----The young man Failed to keep the First and Greatest Commandment ---Love God first with all your heart all your soul all your mind and all your strength ------

This lesson here is huge because we Human think we can skip the First Commandment and do the Second commandment which is Love your neighbour like Jesus Loves us ------Jesus was getting the young man to Think about what he said ----you can't serve 2 masters ---and the man chose where his heart really was ----in his stuff -----

We humans need to understand that serving others should be all about giving God the Glory not us ------ today without God in us we serve ourselves not God -----the rich lad was serving his own ego God was no where in his sights ------


unsafe posting from Matthew here ----

Matthew 6:21 (ESV)
21 For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jae
Jesus is still just a spark in the mystery as someone buried it subtly ... sur·rep·ti·tious·ly?

Twas subtle for those on great highs ... surries with fringes? Cereus lye ... like gravid lyre? Alternate to the crete 'n ...

Allows for the mystery of unravelling string theory ... a plot and agenda all of its own ...

Heidi couldn;t see it because her eyes were closed believing Jacque was a dream ... that subtle demos that came upon her on the isle side of the isolated ...

After that all was upended ... evolution of reciprocation in the wobbling word as Robin AD eire ...
 
Jae said:
Here one, a certain man, a ruler, the synagogue's chief elder, stopped Jesus. The man came running to him, he was excited; he threw himself down upon his knees before Jesus.

As the synagogue's elder, he was acquainted with the elders' laws, with the observances' interpretation. But he derived no satisfaction from that knowledge, he found no peace for his soul in the works prescribed there.
Click to expand...
Where do you get the man being the chief elder of the synagogue? I don't see it in Mark 10.
 
unsafe said:
This lesson here is huge because we Human think we can skip the First Commandment and do the Second commandment which is Love your neighbour like Jesus Loves us
Click to expand...
We had many debates about this on the original wondercafe. Some thought that loving God and loving our neighbour were the same thing. I always argued that they were intertwined but different concepts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top