Mark 15-16

[wolfpurplemoon]

When the disciples went out into the world to spread their message after Jesus rises, God worked with them confirming their message with several signs. These were acts that could be performed by people who believe: they will be able to drive out demons, speak new languages, pick up snakes, drink poison without being harmed, and heal the sick. These don't seem to be very convincing signs and I think they have simple explanations.

People who seem to be possessed by demons are often suffering some sort of psychological disorder so noone who thinks they are driving out demons is helping. Anyone can babble incoherently especially if in a religiously motivated fervour, so I don't think that a bunch of people doing that would be much of a sign. There are people who pick up snakes with their hands, they're called herpetologists, still not a sign. I'd be incredibly sceptical about anyone claiming to be able to drink a poison they'd had no previous exposure to without harm, I doubt their claims would hold up under scientific conditions. And as for healing people by touching them, I think there have been plenty of studies which show that faith healing has no more than a placebo effect.

Comments

[zteccc.livejournal.com]

Chapter 15
Verse 15 Scourging of a prisoner was done with a whip made of leather, embedded with pieces of lead or bone. These pieces would shred the skin and muscle from a person's back, leaving their organs and skeletal structure exposed. Scourging was often a death sentence in itself. We gloss over this verse, thinking it akin to a whipping we might have seen in some movie where a few welts are raised, or the skin might be broken, but it was significantly worse. Jesus knew this was going to happen and willingly suffered it for us.

Verse 38 The temple curtain was rent from top to bottom. I learned an interesting fact recently. This curtain would be a huge cloth, a 30 foot by 60 foot rectangle. It was said to be the thickness of "the palm of the hand" (about 1 inch thick). The material used was very heavy (it was said that 300 priests were needed to lift it). In short, this would have been a very difficult material to tear (it would have been extremely difficult to even cut), yet it was torn vertically (60 foot tear) in an instant.

Verse 44-45 Pilate is surprised that Jesus is alreday dead. Crucifixion typically took a long time. The crucified person could suffer for many hours and even over the course of a few days. Jesus did die on the cross, but much sooner than expected. Some have suggested that Jesus did not die, but had passed out, however the testimony of the Centurion verifies that he did indeed die.

Chapter 16
Verse 8 Some manuscripts of Mark, including ones considered to be the most authentic, end with Verse 8. It could be that the original was unifished, that it was lost due to a torn or fragmented scroll or codex or that it was intentional (although this is unlikely given the language used and the ending of the ladies being terrified at hearing that Jesus was resurrected and would meet with the disciples in Galilee). It is most likely that the original was either unifinished due to the death of the author or that it was lost. The remaining verses are canonical in Christianity, but are likely a later addition.

Verses 9-13 have people witnessing Jesus resurrected, but others who do not see him doubt. This alludes to people of all walks who are exposed to the gospel, to the knowledge of Jesus and yet refuse to believe until Jesus is proven to them. Proof is certainly the desire of many people today, but what proof would be acceptable? Would multiple eyewitness accounts be reasonable? How about archaeological evidence? Would the dying testimony of many people, who could have lived if they recanted their testimony be enough? We have all of these. Even if Jesus were to perform miracles on demand through believers today (as has been requested by some), people would still choose to disbelieve and seek any other explanation. Similarly, some are willing to accept by choice and by Faith.

Verses 15-16 Although this is part of the disputed ending of Mark, the words mirror what are found in other Gospels and thus are still Jesus' words. This is the Great Commission, believers are supposed to preach the gospel. Note that it doesn't say believers are supposed to change people's minds, but to preach the gospels. It is up to people to change their own minds or not as is their inclination, knowing the consequences of their decision.

Verses 17-19 Again, part of the disputed ending, but supported by other scriptures. The signs speak of various things that believers can do (even today) when representing Jesus. Believers do speak in other languages; languages that are real, not babbling, but are not known to them. Believers have described ingesting poisonous substances (and other harmful substances) and it not affecting them. This doesn't happen on a "dare" to "test God", but rather it has happened as a way to protect them. Healing as well has happened and there is much anecdotal evidence to support it. Again, belief of these signs comes down to the proof discussion above. Some will believe and others will demand scientific evidence of something that cannot even be discussed scientifically. Therein lies the real problem. Science cannot address miracles, and as such, even if a scientist were to experiences one, that wouldn't suffice as scientific proof.

-- Jeff

[zen-says.livejournal.com]

what jeff missed out om his comments that OLD Manuscripts finished at verse 8. Other verses, well your guess is as good as mine.

Talk about sensationalising in the previous entry, is this not sensationalising? Many commentaries would have stated that missing verses but not Jeff, Why?

Remember, the gospels are written for certain groups of people so they can believe, whatever it takes.

If the gospel requires someone to die on the cross, what will the disciples do to make believe. Anyway they can, just like jeff

Thoughts of a non-believer of Atheism

[(Anonymous)]

Wolf, I find your commentary of Bible comical. This is great what you’re doing, it’s like listening to someone trying to describe walking on two legs but doesn’t have any legs themselves. Here is another British self proclaimed Atheist trying to interpret the Bible according to his own Atheistic worldview. Another atheist that has made it their purpose in life to tell others there is no purpose in life all while using laws of logic and its chain of reasoning which evolution cannot account for. You lack the spiritual discernment required to understand God. True Science cannot account personal experience as evidence of proof, since the definition for science is: systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation. Because of the worldview you have chosen you have to refuse that any god exists because it would disprove the atheistic worldview. Which this is what we would expect from you “In the pride of his face the wicked does not seek him; all his thoughts are, There is no God.” Psalms 10:4
Here is a little clarity for you on Casting out of Demons and or faith healing. Matthew 17:15 Jesus casts out a demon from a boy. Since it seems you are using the NET version I will post that version.
“and said, “Lord, have mercy on my son, because he has seizurest and suffers terribly, for he often falls into the fire and into the water.”
The Greek word here for seizurest (Lunatic in KJV) is Seleniazomai (that is the English transliteration) Which translate to Moon-struck. Its 2 greek words combined half meaning moon the other being stricken or possessed. This refers to occultism practice that take place under full moons, this boy somehow was Physically and mentally changed during an occult ritual. So versions translate this as epilepsy but this is doubtful as the Greeks 2000 years ago had very little knowledge of it.
I look forward to reading your posts. :)

Re: Thoughts of a non-believer of Atheism

[wolfpurplemoon]

I'm glad I can be such a source of entertainment for you and I hope you feel nice and smug in your opinion of me based on what I've said about the bible.

And just because the Greeks had no knowledge of epilepsy doesn't mean that the child who had seizures didn't have epilepsy, you're just playing with semantics there.

Re: Thoughts of a non-believer of Atheism

[(Anonymous)]

"And just because the Greeks had no knowledge of epilepsy doesn't mean that the child who had seizures didn't have epilepsy, you're just playing with semantics there."

The original Greek implies nothing of Seizures or epilepsy, The later English translators had never see this word before as it is no where else in the texts. KJV from the 1600's translates it as Lunatic while ASV 200 years later translators called it epileptic. I didn't do a very good job of explaining this earlier and that's my fault.

Re: Thoughts of a non-believer of Atheism

[(Anonymous)]

Also I noticed you post about the KJV being hard to read, I agree maybe 400 years ago you would have had no problem. I would suggest the NLT as it is a Thought-for-Thought translation. It will make your life much easier :)

Pleasant Surprise

[blesserbeing.livejournal.com]

Anonymous, you do have a good point about the atheist thing, but I see it as slightly rude to proclaim it directly on his page.
Wolfpurplemoon, I'm unsure if you are reading this to make sarcastic remarks, to better understand Christians, or to look the bible through for inklings of truth. My advice to you would be to read it without any preconceived notions, and try to find real truth within the text, for instance, the fact that God's law IS reallly written on our hearts, and in our minds.
C.S. Lewis was an atheist until JRR Tolkien told him to ACTUALLY read the bible without intentions of bashing and ridiculing it. This is what he did, and he eventually came to accept A God, and then, eventually, THE God of the Bible.
I think you would find a biography of C.S. Lewis quite interesting. I recommend you read one, or any of his work, even the Chronicles of Narnia, which is basically shows what God would be like in a different world.
Anyway I just wish for you to be open-minded, thank you for your time.
-Brennen

Re: Pleasant Surprise

[wolfpurplemoon]

I heard that C.S. Lewis' conversion put a strain on his friendship with JRR Tolkien. I read the Narnia series as a child and was oblivious to of its any Christian undertones, though more recently I have been informed that they are there and apparently quite obvious.

I'm always a little dubious about so-called ex-atheists (I've had a couple comment on my posts here) maybe because I can't see how an atheist whose world view has a strong rooting in logic could be swayed to religion by someone else and particularly not by reading the bible carefully cover to cover. 'Inspiring' conversion stories don't really interest me.

I assure you I'm quite open minded, but am commonly accused of not being because I reject (or can't get my head around) the religious point of view.

Thankyou for your interest in my little project!

to wolf

[(Anonymous)]

only the fool has said in his heart that there is no God. take it or leave it, someday you'll realise your error. I hope it won't be too late though.