Mark 14

[wolfpurplemoon]

Jesus has a last meal with the disciples, gets betrayed, arrested and condemned to death in pretty much the same way as detailed in Matthew. Though the disciple who runs off naked was new.

Comments

[zteccc.livejournal.com]

Verse 5 Mark puts a price to the bottle of perfume at 300 silver coins. This was approximately what someone could earn in a year (an average day's wage was 1 denarius (silver coin of the time), however a Jewish person would not work the entire 365 days because of Sabbaths and feast days, so 300 coins is just slightly more than they could work. This is a very expensive act indeed.

Verses 22-26 Jesus establishes a new tradition for the passover feast. The passover required full families to gather together. The story of the exodus (the deliverance of the Jews from Egyptian slavery) would be retold. There was much ritual involved. We don't see any of this in any of the Gospels, instead we see Jesus redefining the meal indicating a new era is beginning.

Verse 51-52 The young man is described as wearing only a linen cloth. It is unclear if this is a toga, a tunic or some other garment. A toga is the most likely explanation because it was the most common garment worn among Roman civilians of the time (and the Jews, being under the governance of Rome, were Roman citizens unless born into slavery). The man is grabbed (apparently by the cloth) and he escapes by discarding it and fleeing. The man is described as a follower of Jesus. Mark is the only Gospel to mention this man. One common reason for this inclusion is that the author of the Gospel of Mark is the man. The inclusion here suggests that this is an eyewitness account of this singular event (the arrest of Jesus) that would be unremarkable to the other Gospel authors. Compare this to the Gospel of John in which John never refers to himself as "I", but as the "one Jesus loved." This is a literary device to show that the author was present without breaking the historical feel of the writing.

There are many who like to suggest a homosexual Jesus for various purposes. They add non-canonical "discoveries" to the gospels, or point to phrases such as this naked man (who was clearly clothed until apprehended) or phrases such as "the one Jesus loved" (Gospel of John) as evidence. There is, however, no verifiable evidence to suggest any sexuality for Jesus. For that matter, there is no sexuality mentioned for most of the apostles or for the majority of the prophets, so this is not anything out of the ordinary. The legal term for this type of suggestion would be "assuming facts not in evidence." For a fact to be admitted into evidence, it must be verifiable as authentic by experts. In the case of any evidence of Jesus' sexuality, the works that suggest anything sexual are at best disputed. None can be found in early manuscripts, and few even exist outside of third party references. As such, they are not considered authentic. They make for great sensationalism, but don't stand up to scrutiny.

I have indeed said that the gospels were written by different authors for different audiences, but I'm pretty sure that I haven't suggested that the gospels are to make anyone believe. A writing cannot make anyone believe. People believe as a choice and I'm generally consistent on that point.

-- Jeff

[yukinoomoni.livejournal.com]

I choose to believe that you're annoying.