peter krey's web site

scholarship, sermons, songs, poems, weblog writing on Wordpress.com

Observations and Responses to the Passion Story according to Mark

with 2 comments

Ten Observations and Responses to Reading the Passion Story in Mark 14:1-15:47. Sunday of the Passion, April 5, 2009

  1. Mark intertwines stories: one story goes in and out of another.
  2. (Mark 14:3): Jesus was in the house of Simon the Leper and that would make him unclean. Here his anointing also takes place at the hands of a woman. “Christ” means the anointed one.
  3. (14:13) Why do they know to follow the man carrying a jar on his head to lead them to the Upper Room?   Because usually women carried jars on their heads not men. That made it a sign.
  4. (14:51) Who is the young man who flees away naked when Jesus is arrested? Some think it is Mark himself.
  5. (14:62) Jesus certainly did not blaspheme God. He even refers to God as the “Power” not to use God’s name.
  6. (14:67-72) With Peter the rooster acts like a clock. The disciples don’t know or understand themselves and therefore they also do not understand Jesus.
  7. (15:2) Where Pilate asks Jesus if he is the Messiah, I think a good translation would be: “You said it!”
  8. (15:15) Jesus even saves a murderer, Barabbas.
  9. The tearing from top to bottom of the temple curtain concealing the Holy of Holies, probably symbolizes the eradication of the temple and giving immediate access to God, because of Jesus’ death. We now worship God in the Third Temple, in Jesus’ body – in Spirit and Truth.
  10. Five times there are unknowing royal acclamations for Jesus:
    1. (15:9) King of the Jews
    2. “Hail King of the Jews.” like Hail Caesar, Conqueror
    3. (15:32) Messiah
    4. King of Israel
    5. The centurion: “Truly, this man is the Son of God!”
Advertisements

Written by peterkrey

April 11, 2010 at 9:40 pm

Posted in Selected Sermons

2 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. The Passion Story isn’t limited to ‘Mark’ and if the truth be known (about the Passion Story) the entire Gospels were actually caused to be written (‘planted’ as ‘documented proof’ of Jesus Christ’s existence) behind the scenes} by Saul of Tarsus -aka the Apostle and eventual Saint Paul.

    No Jew, during the period, ever knew or saw or even heard of “[Jesus] Christ”. Jesus Christ 1st appeared after Paul’s epiphany… around 40 c.e.

    “Jesus Christ” is actually an epiphany or an aberration or personal ‘vision’ of the crucified ‘descendant of David’ (who was actually Judas the Galilean) but in any event, Jesus Christ is a Ghost.

    Hello.

    Do you believe in ‘ghost’ or, rather what is right in front of you… or, what Other ppl tell you?

    Roland

    April 25, 2010 at 1:06 am

    • dear Roland,

      it would be helpful if you mentioned sources, because how in all the world in 2010, can you make the determination that no Jew knew of Jesus before 40 c.e.? Perhaps you are referring to David Friedrich Strauss’ denial of the existence of Jesus. He actually did not do so, while some French scholars may have. But that scholarly question was put to rest a long while ago by Albert Schweitzer’s “Quest for the Historical Jesus.”
      If Jesus was a figment of Paul’s imagination, then how do you explain the community of Jesus’ followers in Jerusalem? Why did Paul have to answer to them and why was James, the brother of Jesus, their leader? Why did he have to stand St. Peter to the face, if the whole movement was started by Paul? How could he have persecuted Jesus’ followers as Saul before his conversion? Your position brings so many absurdities to mind that it proves to be false and unfounded.
      I did not imply that Mark was the only reference to the Passion Story. I know the other three Gospels as well as the Pauline letters. Each year, we just use a different Gospel to reflect on Jesus’ passion. But Mark champions Peter and not Paul. Paul as a leader comes after those reflected in the gospels and none of the Gospels are Pauline. You seem to be mixing up the dates that the gospels and the Pauline letters were written with the event they describe. The events written about took place long before the writings about them. If I write about Abraham Lincoln, that does not make him a “ghost” who never existed before 2010.

      But thank you for responding to my post. So many people just make self-serving comments to get hits for their sites. peterkrey

      peterkrey

      May 17, 2010 at 3:52 pm


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: