Mark Chapter 15
Starts with Jesus being "delivered" to Pilate, first thing in the morning. Pretty much just where Matthew 27 above started. Jesus is silent, answering none of the charges against him. Mark also says this amazed Pilate.
Mark also says that Pilate surmised that those who had delivered Jesus did so out of jealousy, and that Jesus had done no harm at all. He knew they were manipulating him to murder for them. In Mark, it says the crowd brought up the tradition of a prisoner being released. It wasn't initiated by Pilate here. I wonder if it was those who loved Jesus that suggested this at first, to try and get him released. In this account, Pilate asks them if they want him to release Jesus. This is what he assumed the majority wanted...at least it could have been that. Once Pilate suggested Jesus as the one to be released, the chief priests (again, no mention of Pharisees here) incite the crowd - or parts of it - to yell for the release of Barabbas instead. Pilate had under-estimated the influence of the religious leaders over the crowd. This is the power of false religion also. It makes people mindless. They fear that the elite can cost them their souls - surely the Catholics teach that the priests have the power to forgive you when you die, or to leave you in purgatory forever. They influence by fear.
Pilate's hand-washing is not mentioned by Mark. Neither is Herod's part in this.
Mark also tells of the soldiers - Like Matthew, Mark tells us it was the whole battalion - getting together to mock Jesus, to put the purple robe on him and the crown of thorns. They mockingly bow to him and call him King, and then they spit on him. How many today are mocking when they bow? I note that this happened back in the interior of the Governor's headquarters. There were no scribes or elders or chief priests back here. This scourging was done by the Gentile soldiers, on their own, and they bear full responsibility for that. Also, who told Matthew and Mark about what went on back there? Were some of the soldiers decent, and opposed what was going on, and recounted the events to either Matthew or Mark?
"20 And when they had mocked him, they stripped him of the purple cloak and put his own clothes on him. And they led him out to crucify him." [Mar 15:20 ESV]. The thing is, though they gave Jesus the trappings of royalty, they never for a moment really believed they were his. Though they bowed to him in homage, they didn't respected him. The soldiers mocked Jesus' civil authority. They were concerned only with his claim - or the accusation against him - of earthly kingship. They completely misunderstood. And yet they mocked him and scourged him for it anyway. They clothed him with the authority they did not believe he had.
Simon of Cyrene is "compelled" to carry the cross. Mark says Simon was just coming in from the country, minding his own business. It also mentions that Simon is the father of Alexander and Rufus, suggesting that these names will be recognized by those to whom Mark is writing. Perhaps Mark is saying they are witnesses to all this and can testify to the truth of what Mark writes. (I read somewhere else that Alexander and Rufus are mentioned as members of the church in Rome I think. Which may tie to the MSB book notes saying this book was written to Christians in Rome.)
Mark's description of the scene at the cross is very much like the description in Matthew. Not much difference at all. No Pharisees mentioned here either. He was offered wine and myrrh, and refused. They cast lots for his clothing.
2024 - He was crucified at 9 am. All the things that we know about - from Pilate, to Herod, and then back to Pilate - all these things happened between "early in the morning" in vs 1, and 9 am. That is not very long for a man to be condemned to such a death. Another example of prophecy "hanging over us" for a very long time, but when fulfillment comes, it is sudden - like a thief in the night. I believe the end times will be like that. One day we won't think it is very near, and the next day it will fully in progress and we'll wonder how we didn't see it and get prepared. This is ever the "rule" with such prophesy.
The inscription with the charge against him said "King of the Jews". Two robbers crucified with him. Passersby know who he is, and revile him. The chief priests, etc, also revile him. And lastly, the two robbers revile him. There is a sermon in these three groups I am sure. Three groups reject him. The disinterested, the falsely religious, and the publicly, un-apologetically guilty, maybe. These don't reject God, they don't care enough to realize that even this kind of rejection has consequences.
Vs 29 indicates that the disinterested knew who he was and what he'd said, but they didn't even stop to look. They didn't care what happened to him, they didn't consider that he had anything to do with them. He was just a passing Jerusalem phenomenon, just another preacher duping everyone else, but they were above all that. Indifferent is what they are. They don't feel guilty, they don't seek, they are self-sufficient and need nothing else. They don't even realize their need.
Vs 31, 32a, the falsely religious. Those who set themselves up as religious leaders but who were hypocrites with no real belief. These see the truth as an enemy that might reveal their hypocrisy and diminish their authority. Doesn't have to be preachers and deacons who do this. Anyone at church who is there for the social part, or out of habit, or just because no one else will put up with them is in this falsely religious category. I believe these know where they stand. They know they are false - if they will be honest with themselves. But they like the power and position of this world, they like to be seen as religious, and they like to lead others. These secretly reject God, but no one knows. This is anathema to Jesus' teaching that the last shall be first.
Vs 32b, The brazenly, knowingly, brashly, outspokenly guilty. The "So what" group. The noisy rejectors of salvation offered. These won't tolerate being told what to do even as the consequences of their attitude and actions become obvious to themselves and all who see them.
Everyone falls into one of these groups.
Possible FB or linked website post here.
2022 - A different concept of the three groups in Mark 15:29-32:
"29 And those who passed by derided him, wagging their heads and saying, "Aha! You who would destroy the temple and rebuild it in three days, 30 save yourself, and come down from the cross!" 31 So also the chief priests with the scribes mocked him to one another, saying, "He saved others; he cannot save himself. 32 Let the Christ, the King of Israel, come down now from the cross that we may see and believe." Those who were crucified with him also reviled him." [Mar 15:29-32 ESV]
First group, the passersby. These knew Jesus from afar. He was part of their culture, they'd heard of him, they'd heard the claims about him, they knew people who lived their lives with Jesus at the center. But Jesus didn't really fit with their concept of reality. They didn't think miracles really happened but were in fact just flukes of medicine or science...some people just get well, even when you think they can't. Those are random exceptions, not directed miracles. And when these saw Jesus on the cross, they nodded knowingly, and congratulated themselves for not falling into this non-rational belief in miracles and heaven and hell and all that other stuff that can't be proven to exist or not exist. If the number one claimant that all these things were true was being executed by the Roman government, then where were those miracles now? His death, to them, proved that his claims were invalid. They were skeptics before, imagine the 2x4 it will take to convince them of their need for a crucified carpenter after this. They've heard of Jesus, they've doubted Jesus, and now that they see him dying on a cross, they've dismissed Jesus.
Second group, the religious. I use the word religious in its worst possible sense. These were the ones who were fixated on ritual and rule. These are the ones who are all about Sunday morning, Sunday night, and Wednesday night. That's when you have church, that's all the church you have. Sunday morning, four songs, a special, the sermon, the announcements, and out. By noon. Anything else is entertainment, not church, and ought not be allowed. These are the ones who don't want anything new. Everything about church ought to be just like it was for their parents, their grandparents, and their great grandparents. They might "allow" a sound system, but they don't see a real need for it. They will let the "young people" have their way on some things, to shut them up, but obviously if they want those things they aren't very good Christians. Not like in the old days. And when Jesus died, so did the message of relationship with God, of a daily walk, of stepping out in faith, and of doing what is right even when it is not the rule. These went right back to their stifling traditions, to ritual without heart or feeling. They are Christians by definition and by rote, as they are happy as long as they don't have to change anything. If seeing a man dying for them on a cross couldn't shake these out of their entrenched complacency, what chance will anything else have. These are in church every Sunday, and they will be in hell in eternity.
Third group, the two thieves. These knew Jesus, too, like the other two groups, but these actively hated him. They hated him because he told them they were thieves and that was wrong. He told them they were selfish and ungrateful and that if they didn't change they'd go to hell. They hated him for daring to tell them about a better way to live life, as if he was some kind of authority on good. What right did this man Jesus have to tell them how they should live? These were only interested in doing what they wanted, whenever they wanted, to whomever they wanted. These wanted to make their own rules, and to they wanted to beat down anyone who questioned their rules. And most of all, these hated Jesus because he told them their rules were wrong, and self-destructive, and would result in eternal fire, not in wealth and riches. But here's the thing. It was one from this third group that changed. This hating, despising, angry group turned out to have a better chance at salvation than the "I'm a good person" skeptics, and a better chance than the "I go to church every Sunday" but I'm dead on the inside religious people. It was a hater that got saved. So...who should we be talking to about Jesus?
Three FB posts, possibly. They need work, they need better coherence, but I KNEW there was a sermon here, and I think this is it.
Where are the Pharisees? Why have I never before noticed how conspicuously absent they are. The deal with Judas is made in the Temple...but I don't think it was with Pharisees, it was with the priests. The Pharisees hate Jesus, and try to trip him up, but are they really any part of this conspiracy to kill him? Isn't it Caiaphas that explains it is better for one to die than the whole country to be lost? He was a priest. Maybe I never noticed because up until a few days ago, I was not aware of how recently the Pharisees had come on the scene. And I most certainly was not aware that Pharisees were NOT from the priesthood in any way. Scribes were part of the Temple also, and no Pharisees were scribes. The Pharisees were layman, perhaps trying to exert some influence outside the official temple elite. They wanted part of the pie. Wow. This idea of who the Pharisees really were just changes so many things!
The three hours of darkness are also mentioned by Mark. Both record Jesus cry to God, asking why he is forsaken. Many think he's calling Elijah.
In both accounts, upon hearing Jesus cry out, they run and get some sour wine and offer it to him on a reed to drink. They want to see if Elijah will really show up and save him. So this sour wine was offered to prolong Jesus life - and so prolong his suffering on the cross - so that they can see a spectacle. (It was NOT that the wine was withheld to see if Jesus was rescued, it was so he would suffer longer, to give Elijah time to show up.) They believe Elijah might really come back from the dead, but they are not thinking that Jesus will. They believe in ghosts, but not in God. These are not good people either. Maybe there should be four groups in the sermon.
2024 - He dies shortly after 3 pm. Six hours on the cross.
Mark does not mention the earthquake, the rocks, or the saints rising and walking into town. But something makes the Centurion believe that Jesus as indeed the Son of God. The women watching from a distance are also mentioned by Mark. I believe that Mary, the mother of James, Joses, and Salome' was Jesus mother also. In Mark, James is referred to as James the Younger. There were also many other unnamed women who had followed Jesus from Galilee. They seem to have traveled with him from there to Jerusalem. The way this reads, it is pretty difficult to tell just how many mothers are specifically identified. Just hard to know where the commas really go.
Mark also says Joseph of Arimathea asked for the body. He says this is because it was the day before the Sabbath. He adds for us that Joseph was a "respected member of the council". Mark says Pilate was surprised to hear Jesus was dead already, and confirms the fact with a centurion. Witnesses confirmed that Jesus was indeed dead on the cross. Jesus is wrapped in a new linen shroud (Mark says Joseph bought it). Jesus was laid in "a" tomb. Mark does not specifically say it was Joseph's tomb. A stone was rolled in front of it. Mark also tells us that Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Joses saw where he was laid. Witnesses that the empty tomb was not just a mistaken location. They KNEW where he was laid.
2024 - Looking back to the "great debate" yesterday about how time was reckoned as to when the Passover was eaten, we now get this verse:
42 And when evening had come, since it was the day of Preparation, that is, the day before the Sabbath, [Mar 15:42 ESV]
42 And now when the even was come, because it was the preparation, that is, the day before the sabbath, [Mar 15:42 KJV]
42 When evening had already come, because it was the preparation day, that is, the day before the Sabbath, [Mar 15:42 NASB95]
And now here is yesterday's explanation from the external source for what was meant by "evening":
“In the evening” is better translated “between the two evenings.” It is referring to that period of time between sunset and dark. So the lamb was to be killed after sunset but before dark. Notice that they were to keep the lamb until the 14th, not after or toward the end. “Until the 14th” would be at sunset right after the 13th.
Also this: Deuteronomy 16:6 was quoted above. It says that the Passover lamb was to be sacrificed “at even, at the going down of the sun ….” The Gesenius’ Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon says this about the term “at even”: “the time between sunset and deep twilight.”
So based on the conclusions from yesterday about the Passover, we see that Jesus was taken down from the cross AFTER SUNDOWN, but before full dark. He was in the tomb, therefore, on the 14th of Nisan, even if for a very short time, BEFORE full dark came and the 15th began - at full darkness on what would have been our Friday. He was there all day Saturday. At full dark on Saturday, the 16th of Nisan, which was a Sunday, began, and very early the next morning - still Sunday according to the Jews, and the first day of the week since it followed the Sabbath, Christ arose. He was in the grave FriDAY, SaturDAY, and SunDAY. Three DAYS.
Looking back at the MSB notes on Matthew 27, it says that the "other" Mary was the wife of Cleopas also known as Alphaeus, and the mother of James the Less. In fact, MSB implies a lot of commas in the recounting of the women at the crucifixion. Four in fact, and none was Mary the Mother of Jesus. The MSB note says we know his mother was there from John's gospel, and that she was apart from the others, perhaps right up at the cross. These others were watching from a distance.