No matter how many times I study a passage of scripture, I can always find something more in it. If I look at it from a different angle, the light falls on something I didn't notice the last time. If I approach it while dealing with something in my life or in the lives of people in my congregation, I see something new. It happened again this month, as I took another look at the gospel of Mark, along with Borg and Crossan. A few days ago, a discussion among preachers touched on themes in this book. I loved the thinking in this exchange:
One said,Borg and Crossan discovered that many Christians are not clear about the details of events during the week leading up to Jesus's crucifixion, so they present a day-by-day account of Jesus's final week of life, with eight chapters for the eight days. (Notice that this would fit nicely into a Lenten Bible study.) They begin by differentiating between what we call "Passion Week" (a time of suffering) and what Jesus was passionate about — the kingdom of God. Let's take a look the first two days.
"Palm Sunday is April Fool's day this year. Any thoughts on linking the two? (Personally I'd love it if the full moon was a week earlier and Easter Sunday was April 1.)"The other responded,
"I've been thinking along the same lines. The Last Week by Borg and Crossan talks about the entrance of two different parades ... that might be a way into the connection."
On Palm Sunday, as Elaine mentioned, there were two entries into Jerusalem. The triumphal entry of the Roman governor Pontius Pilate, riding on a horse and leading his soldiers into the city, symbolized the military strength of the empire. The other entry was a peasant procession that Borg and Crossan suggest "looks like a planned political demonstration" (p. 4). Pilate represented a domination system of political oppression, economic exploitation, and religious legitimation. And Jewish leaders were on his side.
"What was new was that the temple was now at the center of local collaboration with Rome" (p.15).The temple authorities raised tribute for Rome with an annual "temple tax." They were supporting imperial violence and injustice. And here we have a chance to mention April Fool's Day, as the first preacher above wants to do. Jesus, riding his little donkey, was making fun of Pilate. Making a fool of him. Making an important point about the kingdom of God, that it was nonviolent.
And that leads us to Monday. Remember the story about the money-changers in the temple? Actually, they were in the courtyard of the temple. Jesus took a look around the place on Sunday evening (according to Mark) and saved his second "demonstration" until morning. But notice he did check it out. He was preparing for the next day, just as he had lined up the donkey ahead of time.
Overturning the tables was planned, just as Jesus planned his entry into Jerusalem. These were two demonstrations against the system. Sunday, the anti-imperial entry into Jerusalem, and Monday, the symbolic destruction of the temple.
"What is involved for Jesus is an absolute criticism not only of violent domination, but of any religious collaboration with it" (p. 53).Borg and Crossan give compelling details that show how Mark carefully painted a picture of Jesus demonstrating against violence and injustice. In the preface, they show how the word passion has come to mean the suffering of Jesus during Holy Week. Yet the passion of Jesus, what he was passionate about, was the kingdom of God.
"There was a terrible ambiguity in that the priest who represented the Jews before God on the Day of Atonement also represented them before Rome the rest of the year" (p. 41).
"The first passion of Jesus was the kingdom of God, namely, to incarnate the justice of God by demanding for all a fair share of a world belonging to and ruled by the covenantal God of Israel. It was that first passion for God's distributive justice that led inevitably to the second passion by Pilate's punitive justice" (p. viii).FRAMES
The authors point out how Mark used "frames" around scenes to make his points. It was fascinating to me to see the stories of healing the blind before and after the disciples had totally misunderstood Jesus. In other words, they were blind. After reading this book, I can see that Mark was a much more sophisticated and nuanced writer than I had realized. The careful placement of stories about blind men being healed, immediately before and after a story about the disciples' incomprehension, serves to emphasize that part of the story. The point is made with the frames: the Twelve just don't get it. They can't see, and thus miss the point of what Jesus is trying to teach them. This is a major point in the book:
"Notice, above all, how repeatedly Mark has Jesus insist that Peter, James, and John, the Twelve, and all his followers on the way from Caesarea Philippi to Jeusalem must pass with him through death to a resurrected life whose content and style was spelled out relentlessly against their refusals to accept it. For Mark, it is about participation with Jesus and not substitution by Jesus" (p. 102).That understanding is from the Wednesday chapter, but it is made even more explicit in the Friday chapter:
"Was Jesus guilty of advocating violent revolution against the empire and its local collaborators? No. ... was Jesus guilty of nonviolent resistance to imperial Roman oppression and local Jewish collaboration? Oh, yes. Mark's story of Jesus's final week is a sequence of public demonstrations against and confrontations with the domination system. And, as all know, it killed him" (p. 163).Another quote, this time from the Easter Sunday chapter, points out how these authors understand the point Mark and the other gospel writers wanted to make:
"Good Friday and Easter, death and resurrection together, are a central image in the New Testament for the path to a transformed self. The path involves dying to an old way of being and being reborn into a new way of being. Good Friday and Easter are about this path, the path of dying and rising, of being born again" (p. 210).And finally, using the gospel of John, the authors give their understanding of the claim that Jesus is the "only way."
"The Jesus of John's gospel speaks explicitly about being 'born again' (3:1-10). In another passage, he says that unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it cannot bear fruit (12:24). He speaks of this way as 'the only way' (14:6) in a verse that has unfortunately often become a triumphalist claim justifying Christian exclusivism. But within John's incarnational theology, the death and resurrection of Jesus incarnates the way of transformation. This is what it means to say, 'Jesus is the only way.' The path we see in him — dying and rising — is the path of personal transformation" (p. 211).This review may seem to have little focus, hitting various points as it does. But taken all together, the points Borg and Crossan make show what Mark was attempting to do in his narrative. It may be a new way of seeing the story for you, not what you were expecting. That's happened to Matthew and Luke, who used Mark's gospel as a basis for what they wrote, according to most scholars. Borg and Crossan show where Matthew and Luke changed a thing or two, here and there, while writing their gospels, not aware of what Mark had been doing, like with his framing technique. (In the Monday chapter, page 33 has a chart of half a dozen stories Mark "framed" to make his point.)
I highly recommend this book and rate it 9 of 10, an excellent book. I also reviewed it for RevGalBookPals today.