Knowing the Truth...Living the Truth

I find it so interesting how time after time Jesus challenged everything the people of his time held so dear, especially the pharisees. I have dealt with this issue recently. I am constantly asking myself if I am challenging the things which common church members hold so dearly. I also wonder how I will react when someone challenges what I hold in great honor. I wonder sometimes about the knowledge the Pharisees had. For instance, time and again Jesus did things--he healed the sick, opened blind eyes, gave life to the dead--things only God could do. The pharisees knew this, yet they would try to explain the truth away. Well, Jesus must be possessed or something. Not really. I think the pharisees knew all along that Jesus was the messiah but for one reason or another could not accept him. Perhaps he acted too common, or didn't live up to their religious standards (even though he set a higher one), or maybe he wasn't the politically powerful leader who would lead a military revolt against Rome. Who knows? But for some reason the Pharisees chose not to believe what they knew to be truth. Which brings me to the point. There is a difference between knowing the truth and living the truth. Once again, we can make fun of the Pharisees for lack of believing, but for some reason I feel we are not too far off from their standpoint still today. I could be wrong, but I bet many of us don't truly want Jesus to be the absolute Lord of our lives because it will mean that we have to give up something we hold dear.

The Family

I found the concept of the family interesting. Not only in what was said about when Jesus was teaching and someone informed him that his family was outside. Jesus then responed and said his family was with him. But also the way the parents were viewed in those days. In America today it is hard to understand the way the parents were viewed. I found it interesting what Dr. Foster said about if our parents, wife, and children were in trouble who would you save? In America we would probally save our children but in those days the parents were more important.

Transfiguration

Motifs
I found this section of the reading of the Transfiguration to be most interesting to me. It is really unique and I have not even thought about some of them before. The first motif of the TRansfiguration is the brief lapse of time between Jesus' prediction about seeing the power of the kingdom and of the Transfiguartion. This time being six or eight days depending if you go with Matthew and Mark ( six-days) , or Luke ( eight-days). The article points out that it was probably on the seventh day that it actually happen,since after the sixth-day would be on the seventh day, and this comes from a comparsion with Exodus 24:16/
The second motif is the mountain that they went up to the mountain itself, which is thought to be Mount Sinai, but elsewhere in Scripture used as a place of revelation. Isaiah 40:9 talks about a high mountain, mountain in mentioned quite frequently in all three Synoptics, sixteen times in Matthew, eleven in Mark and twelve in Luke,and has great significance in Matthew. Then the third motif is the cloud that appers over their heads this is in comparison with the clould that led the Israelites in the desert again in the Exodus. BUt Isaiah refers to the cloud in the context of the future. So cloud here in this context could be referring to the Exodus or the Parousia, either way it still has great meaning.
The fourth and fifth motifs are the appearance of Moses and Elijah and the voice from Heaven itself. Moses was connected in Jewish thought to the with the future and the past since he was the paradigm for the eschatological prophet(Deuteronomy18:18), and Elijah was agruably and eschatological figure in Jewish reflection( Mal4:5-6). Each Synoptic gospel streses which person they think is of greater significance. The voice of heaven is an experience, expeciaaly for the inner circle of Disciples that are with Jesus, this voice of heaven is of the Law, according to Exodus 24, and here it speaks of Christ. Again a big point to proving Jesus is who He says He is. The voice compares Isaac with the Christ in a sense that they are both sacrificial in their love and purpose.
I have a clearer understanding of the pupose of the Transfiguration and it is awesome that it refers so much back to the OT days of the Exodus of the Jews. That makes it all the more important and all the more clear to understand the significance of Moses, Elijah, the cloud, and the mountain they all have their symbolic meanings, and they all work together to prove that Jesus really is the Son of God the Messiah

The portrayal of Jesus’ view on kinship is quite a stunning one. Jesus has the audacity to compare his relationship with his blood relatives no greater than his relationship with the new Christians. This is almost like a Jehovah Witness type of view as they abandon their families who will not convert to their religion. What if we started putting our church families as high as our immediate family? I do not think the church would be able to maintain its reputation any longer because the world would attack the institution even worse than it already has. I think the church would gain a lot of bad media if they did decide to begin to put less emphasis on personal family and more emphasis on church family.

God's power is so amazing. Through Jesus, God does some pretty amazing things, like drive out demons. If I ever came into contact with a demon-possesed man I would probably be terrified and never attempt any kind of ministry for him. This kind of ministry was on Jesus' everyday to-do lists, though. And when it came down to it, he did it with grace and love.

I know that it was Jesus who broke my fall two weeks ago. If not for his plan for my life, I would probably be dead. Just as Jesus performed miracles two-thousand years ago, he continues today. I know this because I am one of his miracles.

Let's stand in the gap

While Dr. Foster was lecturing about the last class period, I couldn't help but think about a psychological case study one of my psychology friends told me about once. She told me that a study had been done to observe the difference in behaviors of children playing on a playground. These children came from two different cultures: one Asian and one American. The case study basically showed that the Asian children played closely together without straying away from the playground area which didn't have any set boundaries while the American children spread far apart and wanted to go outside of the playground area. Why? The children came from two radically different cultures. To truly understand these children's actions and thoughts, their respective cultures must be understood.

In class Dr. Foster has pointed out that the culture in which Jesus lived was radically different from our own egotistical culture. While having a few similarities, they are for the most part two different worlds. In order to correctly understand and know what Jesus taught and the life that He set before us as an example before He ascended back into heaven, one must understand the culture in which He taught and lived. I am amazed at how ignorant the western church in which we find ourselves is about the cultural context of the New Testament era. May we be the much needed interpreters who stand in the gap explaining these differences, allowing the western church to see the life of Christ, maybe for the first time, as it actually was. Maybe then they will be able to understand on a deeper level our living Savior and what He desires.

Hypocrisy

Today I was reading Matthew 23 about the hypocrisy of the scribes and pharisees. I was drawn to a passage in Garland that discussed Jesus' responses to the Pharisees about sinners, fasting, and the Sabbath in Mark. Garland's commentary was nearly as blistering as Jesus comments when he wrote, "It is no wonder that Jesus' attitude toward sinners, fasting , and the Sabbath was threatening to the pietists. It seems to leave little room for outward religious performance--their specialty. In taking these passages into our contemporary setting, we will find that the opposition has not changed. Many today will be no less upset if their sanctified prejudices and cherished customs are changed." Garland was not saying that people today or even in Jesus' day, that set aside a day to rest or worship God, were or are acting in hypocrisy, rather, if outward expressions of piety is all we have, then God sees us as hypocritical. And I don't believe it is an overstatement (in view of Matthew 23) to say that God is disgusted with hypocrisy. Today I had to question myself, "Was Sunday all I lived in the way of godliness this week?" Answer? Yes. Thus, in many ways I am a hypocrite, just like the Pharisees and scribes. WOE TO ME man of self indulgence and lawlessness!

I'll have a dead girl and sick woman sandwich please.

;) Recognized as E-mail of the weak stomach! What's in a title anyway? -02/16/2005

I found the intercalation with Jesus, Jarius' daughter, and the woman who had been bleeding to be quite interesting. Jesus, as soon as he's kicked out of Gerasene by the pigless freaked out swinesmen, goes back across the lake. When he gets there a man named Jarius comes up to him and says his daughter is dying. So, Jesus, being the Son of God and all, decides to go with him and heal her.

On his way, all these people come up to him and one woman with a hemorrage, out of all the other people crowded around Jesus, must have had the most faith that if she could only touch Jesus that she would be healed and right she was. But was she really the only one that believed that she could be healed by just touching Jesus? I'm sure others thought that also because if not then why would they be surrounding him like that. How come, if the others had faith also, did Jesus recognize her touching him and not everyone else. I mean, Jesus could have said, "Alright, you and you and you just touched me." but he didn't, he said "who touched me?" I am sure that Jesus knew that it was the woman who had touched him, but why was she the only one Jesus said something about?

Then, while Jesus was talking, men from Jarius' place came and told Jarius that his daughter was dead. Then, Jesus just ignores them and tells the man to have faith. Jesus then goes into the house and raises the girl from the dead. This is also a very powerful demonstration of Jesus' power. In the earlier chapter, Jesus heals a demoniac. I would consider a demon possesed person to be about the furthest thing away from being "Spiritually" alive. When Jesus heals that man, he is saying that he can raise the spiritual dead. In this passage, Jesus is saying that he can also raise the "physically" dead also by only using words. I think that this is one of the most powerful miracles that Jesus performs in his ministry.

Kinship: a component of Honor

Kinship is just as much of a component of honor today as it was in Jesus' day. We seem to think that because we live in America we can be become anything we want no matter what family we come from. As Dr. Foster said in his lecture yesterday this is the American myth. America looks at what family you come from just as much as the society of Jesus' day did. If you are a Kennedy in America you can do anything, whether good or bad, and still be a leading figure in our government.

I now understand why Jesus was rejected by the people of His hometown. They did not see him as someone who was honorable. He was just some carpenter's son. They could not get past this aspect of who Jesus was. That was their culture though. If you were from the right family then you were honorable. It is sad to say that we still do this today.

Miracles of Jesus

Yesterday I was reading in Garland's commentary on Mark. Garland made reference to the healing of the deaf and mute man in chapter 7:31-37. I went back and read the scripture again and began to think about the different ways Jesus chose to heal people, and what might have caused him to use so many different and radical ways. In this healing he puts his fingers in the mans ears, then he spits and touches the mans tongue, looks towards heaven takes a deep breath and says "Ephphatha." For some he says your faith has made you well, on man he spits in dirt rubs the mud in the eye of the blind man, asks if he can see, which the man can only see partially, Jesus repeats the process and the man can see. Jesus with a word raises a girl from the dead. From a distance he heals the sick, and at a touch of his cloak he heals. I beleive by Jesus using several ways to heal rather than one particular way Jesus was showing the world that his power came from God, and that God could and would choose to work miracle how and when he chose to. Only God could talk to moses through a burning bush and the bush not be consumed. I find it interesting that the Blind, deaf, possesed, and the dead have more faith than do his family and his community. Just maybe their traditions blinded them from the truth, and caused them not to hear. I wounder what I would have done if someone came to heal me by putting their fingers in my ear, spitting and touching my tongue?

Christ stands His Ground

The Gerasene Demoniac has become one of my favorite stories. Its amazing to me to think how powerful and caring Christ is. Here's the deal, if a naked crazy man came running at me the last thing I would do is stick around, but Christ stands his ground as the demoniac approaches. Christ knew that this man needed help, that he had be plagued by these demons for a while and that no one could help him. Christ seeks out those that needs his help. The fact is that Christ came to the man where he was. In a land where Jews raise pigs and let a demoniac run wild in the cemetery. If Christ will come to someone like that then he most definitely will come to us.

Also, it is great to see the power of God at work. These demons thought that they could control him by calling out Christ name first. The only problem is that his plan failed and he was forced out of the mans body. Christ is powerful and we should never forget that, what he did for the demoniac he can to do for us.

Honor vs. Fame

After thinking about Dr. Foster's lecture about the components of honor in Jesus' society, I thought that the society of his day was so dramatically foreign that no comparison could truly be made to our Western culture. Tonight, however, I thought about comparing fame in our egocentric culture to honor in the dyadic culture of Jesus.

First, kinship obviously plays a role in the fame of an American individual, much like kinship played a role in the honor of an individual of Jesus' time. As Dr. Foster said, the Rockfellers, the Kennedys, and the Bushes are set apart from the rest of us because of their kinship. Second, personal achievement applies in the same manner. If you achieve great things, you will gain fame. Third, wealth and power increase one's fame. Donald Trump is not famous for his physical appearance. We all know why he has a television show--because he is ridiculously rich and powerful. Fourth, embodiment of the values of the society also factors into the equation. The rich and famous embody the capitalistic values of America--do anything you can to get as much money and power as you can. This is why many famous people think nothing about morality in the conventional sense; they want to earn money. In society, the pursuit of financial gain is a primary value.

I know that this comparison is limited, but I think that the comparison is justifiable. Fame is potentially the Western equivalent of Eastern honor. If we think about this, possibly we will reduce our distance from the society of the time of Christ by eliminating some of the tensions between the West and the East. I realize that fundamentally the Western mindset is dramatically different from the Eastern mindset, but perhaps the expressions of each respective mindset are not that different from each other in form.

I am overwhelmed with the radicalness of Jesus. Jesus challenged everything first century Jews held dear. I find myself similar to the Pharisees, unwilling to surrender so quickly that which I hold dear. Even a teacher who attempts to take the spotlight off Paul and shed some light on the Pentateuch receives ridicule in our day. Would we be so eager to accept Jesus' claims if they really affected our beliefs? Our beliefs are so bound to Christ that we can never really feel the full force of His challenges. Our cultures acceptance of Christ's claims limits our ability to fully and honestly accept his call to follow. It is fun and socially acceptable to laugh at the foolishness of the Pharisees and the disciples, but they understood the cost. Following Christ in our culture comes with little, if any, cost. The Pharisees and disciples were not fools; they were truly challenged to abandon everything they held dear. Foolishness is attempting to follow Christ without counting the cost. If we have not counted the cost have we reacted any differently than the Pharisees?
In our day, it is exciting and socially acceptable for Christ to harass the Pharisees, but would we be so willing to accept someone who so radically asalts those we think of as spiritual leaders. We hold great esteem for those who challenge authority, but are we willing to surrender authority of our personal lives to Christ?

Kinship

Yesterday's discussion on kinship has really made me think. I have never really thought about how egocentric the western culture is. This really creates many obstacles in trying the understand the worldview of the people during the time of Christ. It is so hard for me to step back and see things from their persepective. I hate that our culture greatly affects the way that we interpret and understand scripture. I have been convinced that I need to strip away all my cultural beliefs in order to understand those of Jesus' day.

True disciples

Are we true disciples of Jesus? As Christians we say that we love him, and what he has to offer to us. We say this, but do we take up the cross and carry it the way we are suppost to. While reading through Garland I came upon the following statement: everyone desires to take part in his rejoicing, but few are willing to suffer anything for his sake. There are many who follow Jesus as far the breaking of bread, few as far as drinking the cup of suffering. As servents of Jesus we must be willing to go all the way even if it means death. If we love him the way that we say we do there must not be any conditions placed in front of this love. This is what makes us a true disciples.

The Family Rejection

I've recently been struggling with the passages on Jesus' family. As Mark does not discuss the birth of Jesus as Matthew and Luke do, having those accounts in mind as I read Mark presents a problem to me. Why would Jesus' family, especially his mother, try to stop what he was doing when they knew who he was?

As I went back and read the accounts of the foretelling of Jesus' birth to Joseph in Matthew and to Mary in Luke, I was surprised at what I read. Luke records the angel telling Mary, "...You are to name him Jesus...and [he] will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord will give him the throne of his father David." In the past, as I've read this passage, I just assumed Mary knew that Jesus would be the spiritual Messiah, but as I read it again looking for answers to my question, I realized she must have thought Jesus would be the political messiah just like everyone else believed. Yet Joseph was given an insight that Mary wasn't. In his dream, Joseph was told to name him Jesus "because he will save his people from their sins." Joseph, if he understood the message, should have known, though no one else did, who Jesus was.

When Jesus was ministering to people, his family caught wind of what he was doing and thought, "He is out of his mind." His mother and brothers came to talk to him, to take charge of him. They didn't understand what he was doing. And now I realize, they only understood, at the most, that Jesus was the political messiah. His miracles and the crowds following him didn't make sense to them.

I understand that Mark's intention was not why Jesus' family rejected him, but to redefine family lines. Still, I couldn't get past what, to me, was an inconsistency. Now I see that what I saw as inconsistent, was my misunderstanding of Scripture. Again, I had based my recollection of Scripture on my own understanding of who Jesus was before reading the Scripture, rather than reading the Scripture with the idea that I'm learning who Jesus is for the first time.

Bethsaida

I enjoyed the story of the healing of the blind man from Bethsaida. I thought it was interesting that Jesus led the blind man away from the village and after spitting into his eyes, he was only partially healed. Jesus repeated the process and the man is completely healed. The process of regaining his sight is described as: He opened his eyes wide, his sight was restored, and he can see all things clearly. Jesus, then sends him to his house and orders him not to go back to the village. The disciples were said to "see" what Jesus is saying only in part, so the blind man came to see in part then fully. Later, the disciples were able to see.

"Bethsaida" means "House of grace". This is were the invalids would wait their turn to step into the troubled waters which where to possess healing virtue. It was believed that angels stirred the water and at the time of stirring, healing was released to those who could rush into the pool.

When I was in Israel, I visited Bethsaida and saw the pool. It is also believed to be the former site of the home of the parents of the Virgin Mary.

Incomprehension or disbelief?

In our reading for this week we read the DJG on discipleship. In this reading the writer makes critical statements about the disciples' lack of comprehension. While their lack of comprehension can't be denied by any sensible reader, I'm not altogether comfortable with coming down on them. Things always look simpler, cleaner, more exacting from the outside looking in. To borrow from the old adage, "Hindsight is 20/20."
However, what I would like to make comment on today is a particular statement made by the writer on p. 184. He said, "This incomprehension eventually leads Judas to bretray Him [Christ], the disciples to forsake Him and Peter to deny Him." I have a problem with this statement. I have already stated my position on coming down hard on the disciples They were "living in" the story that we are now "looking in" having the full historical, cultural, economical, and political view that they were very likely, very much unaware of. Some would argue they should have, or could have, been aware but were too lazy, uncommitted, undevoted, lacking in faith, etc.. I think such an argument is little more than idealistic arrogance. Maybe the historical, cultural, economic, and political gurus of the day had such insights, but these guys were fishermen, tax collectors, common men, am harets (sorry about the spelling). To suggest that Judas betrayed Christ, the disciples forsook Him, and Peter denied Him, all based on "not getting the big picture," I think is short-sighted to say the least! One must consider so many more factors involved in each of the situations listed by the writer. This post doesn't near afford such space.
Nevertheless, my quick (excessively annotated) arguement against the writer's statement is this. Today there are those in the church who have been there for many years. They have walked with the Lord in a relationship equally as long. Yet everyday, there are those among us who betray Jesus in our behavior, who forsake Him when in the public eye, and who deny Him in the locker rooms of our schools, bathrooms of work places, beauty shops of small towns, and many other places humans gather to "pass the trash" of verbal refuse. We as Christians find ourselves in these situations often, and often fail to honor Christ among those who would probably ridicule us, make fun of us, or simply become uncomfortable around us. Yet, we as Christians of 2005 have the privilege of seeing and understanding the "big picture" the disciples "lived in." We literally have millions of writings about it, analyzing it from every angle imaginable. Yet, comprehension doesn't prevent us from making the same foolish mistakes the disciples made. In full view of the truth of the hook we, on far too many occassions, gape our mouths open to consume the worm of acceptance, lust, and ease anyway! Why?
I don't think its a matter of "getting it." I think we "get the big picture" fine, I'm not so sure we fully believe it! Do we really believe that God is the "rewarded of those who diligently seek Him" and that He actually said "be ye holy because I am holy" and that we should "love righteousness and hate iniquity?" The apostle Paul (who may have actually qualified as one of the gurus mentioned above) demonstrated a comprehension that appeared to be greater than many Christians of his day and yet in the strong years of his ministry once asked, "heal me of my unbelief!" If the apostle Paul struggled with having an ironclad, airtight, waterproof, never wavering belief.................................

The Super 7-hour Seminar

When I first imagined this seminar idea, the only thing that went through my head was, "Seven Hours!!!! Seven stinkin hours!!!" But note Dr. Foster I am not complaining....yet! And I have this theory that when you're in Wal-Mart time elapses faster than it does outside Wal-Mart, so in order to make this experience go by faster I dreamed it took place in the most scholastic Wal-Mart I had ever seen. That was all a big joke by the way, though the Wal-Mart theory still holds.

Before this seminar I felt I had a clear understanding of the Gospels. But I realized right off that I have become ignorant when it comes to the Gospels....and even the rest of the Bible. I guess this comes from poor reading habits of reading and seeing but not reading and opening my mind to understanding. The project went real well and I enjoyed seeing unity among people that you don't normally see yourself associating with. It made me realize how particular I was with my selection of friends. But God showed me a lot through this seminar. And a lot of it was personal concerns that I need to fix. I don't know if anyone else really felt the same way or not, but it helps to understand your faults and see areas where you can improve and mature in your walk with God.

Life of Christ Seminar

The seminar last Friday was a great learning experience in many different ways. When we first read the letter, I didn't know how the class would do in constructing a gospel without any of the New Testament. I sure didn't think that it would be that accurate, but as the night progressed, I began to learn that we have a class that knows their Bible pretty well. I think that writing this gospel probably gave us all new insight into the minds of the actual gospel writers. Getting the story straight and in order must have been next to impossible. At this point I may I say that we must remember what we believe about inspiration. Of course since we know that order was not the main focus of the writers, we should not be troubled with the seemingly unchronological accounts that we read. I think our exercise helps us to really focus on the main point of what the gospel writer was trying to say about Jesus.

Another thing that I might point out as this point is what our purpose was in writing this gospel. As we all have been in different classes and have been taught about genres, I'm sure we all at different times have wondered why knowing literary types is important. Surely by this point in the game we've realized that they are indeed almost vital for good interpretation. I say that to say while I think that we, in the end, stayed true to the genre of gospel, but the purposes we tried to stay with, encouraging and informing, almost strayed away from what the gospel genre is. I know that in the letter, this is what we were asked to do, but I'm almost sure that the focus of the four gospel writers was more of trying to retell the story (good news) while emphasizing certain important theological details they felt were important for there hearers. As I said I think we did end up doing this.

Writing a Gospel

Personally, this experience was necessary for several reasons. I was reminded of how ignorant I am of God's Word. This seminar has fueled me to develop a healthier study of the Word. I have a passion for the Scriptures that is different than before.

I also enjoyed the group experience. I felt that it was a great time of fellowship. Wrestling through certain passages and attempting to jog each other's memory of how a particular story went, allowed me to draw closer to several individuals.

The last thing I'll comment about is the feeling I had while writing this gospel. For the first time did I ever gain some what of an understanding of how early scribes felt. I have a whole new respect for them. They were taking on a task that was so crucial. These new believers, old believers, and nonbelievers needed a written account of the life and ministry of Jesus. How important was the willingness of these scribes? It's changed our lives as well. We have a written copy!

Jesus Seminar: much better than the last one!

The project that we worked on last Friday during the seminar was far more than I had originally expected. Unlike most of my classmates I was looking forward to the seminar, but not knowing exactly what we would be doing for seven hours and staying until ten did worry me. When Dr. Foster gave us our assignment and we read the letter, I thought that the task was a neat idea, but also overwhelming. At first I was not sure if we could finish it on time or if even it would turn out the way we wanted it to, but we kept on working; and while we were waiting to compile the different parts together, I knew that it would turn out great.

I think that one thing that made this project so great was that it gave us a greater appreciation for the scriptures. It seems we all found out that we did not know the scriptures as well as we thought we did or as much as we would like. However, as a group we were able to recall enough for the completion of the "Antiochian Gospel". I think that as a result, the whole experience will give us a desire to learn more about and to pay more attention to the Life of Christ, thus causing us to get more out of the class than we would have before the seminar, or at least I know it does for me.

Furthermore, I want to congratulate my fellow classmates for a job well done, and for all the effort and thought that they put into the project. I especially want thank the people in my group for being pleasant to work with and for all of their input.

seminar

I, along with most of the class I'm sure, was not happy at all of the prospect of spending seven hours...in what I feared would be merely lectures from dr. foster and dr. gore and maybe someone else. And though it wasn't the Friday night that I would have picked, I ended up enjoying much more than I thought I would. I enjoyed getting to know some of the people in the class more, and seeing everyone work together in a group setting.
I really saw how little I, and some others, knew of biblical stories. Yes, we know the gist of the story, but when it comes to details, we're not so good. It really made me appreciate the details in the story more.

Comments on the Seminar

The class project made me think about the difficulty there must have been for the original authors of the Gospels. I fully believe that what they wrote was inspired, but the pressure they probably put on themselves to make sure that the information was accurate and exactly what God wanted had to have been intense. The text may be inspired, but the writers of the text where human and we can relate to the emotions that human beings go through when they are under pressure to perform in an area of such great importance. The reason I mention these things, is because I think we all had an opportunity to experience the same pressure during the project.

In the above mentioned paragraph, I mentioned pressure several times. The pressure I am referring to are the following. I experienced the pressure of writing down an accurate text. It is easier to verbally tell someone a story and for them to get the general idea, but when you try to put the story on paper the wording becomes crucial. I realized very quickly the other night that I did not know the stories in scripture as well as I thought I did. The fear I had of putting the stories accurately on paper were because the effectiveness could be lost or if someone recognized the story as being inaccurate they would discredit the whole thing. When it comes to God's word, it is not just about telling a great story, it is about getting a great and sincere response. The pressure of not telling someone what God had intended for them to hear is a heavy burden that I have come to the conclusion, I do not want to bear. To sum my comments up, I learned more about what I need to learn as usual.

evThe adventure of writing "The Gospel According to Willy"

I was not excited about having one of the few times i have for myself taken away for a class that already has me stretched to my limit. I began the process of whining in my head and psyching myself down for the torture that was bound to lay ahead. When I got there and the "letter" was written I was even more discouraged because I knew this would be boring.
I was wrong! As soon as we began fleshing out how we were going to go about writing this letter I began to get involved in a way that I had never really done before. I was really excited to see that everyone got involved. I was also glad to see the energy that went forth into getting it done and getting it done as correctly as possible. I learned a lot about my group and about myself as well. Mostly that I am not near as polished in the Word as I thought I was. This seminar will be one of those things i will look back fondly on from time to time remembering all the fun I had learning about the bible with a bunch of people i barely knew.

I was upset about the whole idea of giving up one of the few times I have for myself in a class that was already stretching me to the limit of my time. I went knowing I would hate it and that I would be bored out of my mind. My attitude did not get any better after the letter from Barnabas was read. I braced for seven hours of headache and internal whining.
Then we started fleshing out what we were going to do and I found myself getting more involved than in anything that I had ever participated before. I learned a lot from my group and about my group. I was also pleasently surprised to find that everyone got involved it was unbelieveable. I also learned a lot about myself. Mostly that when it comes to biblical knowledge I am nowhere near as polished as I thought I was. This seminar is one of those things you will remember and carry with you through your progression in education. I will remember fondly on all the fun I had learning about the bible, my group, and myself.

Life of Christ seminar

When I first heard about the seminar I admit I was a little worried about sitting in a classroom for seven hours. Then when I heard that Dr. Foster was taking up the bibles at the beginning of class that really worried me. But after understanding the assignment I began to think that we did not have enough time to do the assignment. I loved doing the seminar. It helped me understand the gospels so much more, by having to write down all I could remember about the parables and miricles.
The fact that we worked the whole time in a group was the most effective thing we could have done. There is no way for one person to have done this in the amount of time we had to do the project. As ministry majors it is important to learn to work in groups because alot of church work involves working with committees on fulfilling a certain goal. I would love to see this time of project in all the ministry classes and more so in the upper level classes.

Foster's Seminar

My thoughts toward having to attend a seminar that would last seven hours outside of our regularly scheduled class time, to say the least did not thrill me. Afterall, we would spend more time in one day than we would in class for two weeks. This was not exciting to me as a commuter. However, as the seminar approached I decided to attend.
Right from the beginning of the seminar my attitude changed. From the way our assignment was presented (rolled up like a scroll, etc.), to how we had to establish leaders, all added together to make the evening fun. Being on a tight schedule, in order to finish by the deadline, left very little time to get bored which also helped the seminar to be a success.
The seminar challenged me to remember all that I had read and studied in the past about Jesus' life. Without a Bible you either know it or you don't and as Dr. Gore would say, "I had been weighed on the scales and found wanting."
I think the seminar helped us come together, not just as a class but as friends. It helped me realize that though we are all taking classes in hopes of earning a degree, we have another common goal, each of us are trying to fulfill what God has called us to do. I hope that we all continue to be as supportive of eachother and of other Christians as we were Friday night.

Comments on the Product of the Seminar

Even though I was not at the seminar, I looked at the finished product and thought to myself "WOW! if I had my Bible taken away from me could I tell someone about the complete life of Jesus Christ?" and honestly the answer is no. I didn't realize how much I depend on my Bible to tell me about the life of Jesus that I quess I have never really taken the time to comprehend what His life really encompassed. It's sad I know but very true. The Gospel Project 2005 was completely an eye opener for me. All the times I have read the Bible but not really comprehended all the books as a whole. Project 2005 was a great success in my book. Thank you for sharing it on the web.

THE GREATEST SEMINAR EVER!!!!! REALLY IT WAS

Concerning the seminar that was held on Friday afternoon from 3:00 to 10:00; I thought it was exceptionally well. I thought that the group as a whole worked great together. It seemed, to me, that everyone that was there did their part. I went in to the seminar thinking that it was going to be extremely boring, but I was proved wrong. I had an amazing time and I learned many important aspects over the big picture of the life of Jesus.

My group was the responsable for writing the beginning of the gospel and I was, along with Wade Smith and Ben Banks, put in charge of creating and expounding on the the outline. I got scared! I was not sure I could help in recalling all of the information that we needed to put in the outline. We got through it though. I learned that I knew more than what I thought, but I need to study the gospels more. Anyway, I thought that the seminar was great and we need to do another one sometime no matter how much of a geek I sound in saying that.

Seminar Response

I really enjoyed the seminar. By the way Dr. Foster was talking, I knew it was going to be good, but I was worried about it lasting 7 hours. Those seven hours flew by and we could have used more that seven. I figured that we would have to write out a gospel or something like that. It was good that the whole thing was a secret because I learned that I need a better working knowledge of the gospel, and if I defiantly knew what we were going to have to do, I would have studied.
The experience was better than I expected. The letter and everything made it quite interesting. I enjoyed working with a group because we helped each other fill in the gaps of what we did and did not remember. It also allowed us to grow as friends with those we did and did not know well before the seminar.
I also gained a respect for the gospel writers. We had 7 (intense) hours to write a gospel, but we had over 30 people working on it. Two hundred and ten hours if only one person was working, and we still needed more time. We would have had to have a lot more time if we did not have the computer to help in the editing process. The gospel writers put a lot of hard work into their gospels, and even with 30 people working, their gospels are still better than our gospel.

FRIDAY

This Friday I had already made up my mind I wasn't going to enjoy the project. I was going to go do it get it out of the way and never think about it again. I thought I wouldn't enjoy it, but I was wrong. When I found out we would be writing. Our own account of Jesus life I thought this could be neat. The thing I learned from the project was how much I didn't know about the accounts of Jesus. I thought I had the gospels pretty much memorized but when the Bible was taking away from me I could remember big points but there were so many things I didn't know I just took for granted because I could just look them up. I also enjoyed getting a chance to put my knowledge to the test and see what I knew. Although I didn't want to go at first I enjoyed it and learned some things about my own knowledge of Christ in the process.

Seminar

I don't imagine that I'm going to say anything anyone else hasn't already said. But a few things that the seminar impressed on me was first of all my lack of exact knowledge. For instance, I had Herod the Great as the one whom called the for the census, and I had the shepherds following a star. While these differences aren't major they are false and inadequate. The seminar has challenged me to do my daily readings slower, in shorter increments, and with closer attention to details. Further, the seminar made me think about some of the critical analysis some have offered up about authorship. Many scholars point to multiple authorship at different time periods for just about every book in the Bible. They point to minute stylistic differences and exclaim "this must be a different author!" But the fact is, I saw multiple authorship (on a more obvious scale) in play last Friday night. The stylistic and linguistic differences were not miniscule they were blatant and drastic! So if multiple authorship is true, I suggest that it is very limited and collaborately written during the same time period.

Lessons Learned in the Seminar

After allowing the experience of the seminar a few days to soak in, the one thing that has remained in my mind is my new level of appreciation for the writers of the gospels, especially of the Gospel of Mark. When one has the Old Testament in one's hand and nothing but oral tradition upon which to rely, one understands just how important the written gospels are. We had difficulty remembering details about Christ's teaching, about his miracles, and even about historical details. I can now definitely sympathize with the writers of scripture with respect to chronology. Through writing the class gospel, I understood that the sequence of the events in the life of Christ is immaterial when compared to the message of his deeds and his teachings. Therefore, I feel little need to concern myself with perfectly reconciling the gospels' chronologies, focusing rather on the content of the message.

Another important lesson learned was teamwork. From what I observed, the class worked well together, all giving what they could give to the project. Most importantly, we saw how individual effort through the writing of pericopae led to a larger, cohesive unit of text. Vocabulary did differ from writer to writer, and each pericope had its individual flavor, but together they formed a gospel. When put together, the whole was indeed greater than the sum of its parts. Even though each person played a slightly different role in the grand scheme of writing this gospel, we all came together for one purpose. Some people were leaders, and others were less visible. Even so, all were important. Much like the church, we all have different roles, but all of our roles are necessary. To those who may not have received as much recognition as others have and to those who may have been less visible in the seminar, here's to you.

I really need to study the bible more...

First entering the Maddox center on that Friday evening at 3:00p.m., I feared the worst. I figured that we would just sit there and Dr. Foster would give us a topic and we would do nothing but look through commentaries and dictionaries for 7 hours straight doing research on something. Needless to say, I was very pleased when that was not the case and Dr. Foster gave us the letter instead a commentary on Mark.

When Charles started to read the letter at first I was very confused on what we were supposed to do. Then, when we went into the room, it finally clicked with me and I realized that this wasn't going to be too bad. At the beggining, when groups were being formed, I didn't know what part of the gospel I wanted to deal with. I knew some about the birth and some about the life and ministry of Jesus, but I didn't know specifics and I figured that is what we wanted to put in our gospel and not just stories like "and Jesus healed this person." So, the only thing that I felt I could help in was the Passion story.

After we were dismissed and got into our groups, I felt that I didn't know enough about this aspect of the gospel also. We split up our part of the gospel into more parts. I dealt with the Resurrection and Ascension of Jesus. I felt that this part of the story lacked much compared to the actual gospels. I didn't know exactly what to put about it because I wasn't actually present at the resurrection and there were so many stories that had popped into my head of Jesus visiting people and I couldn't get the facts straight so I just sort of omitted them.

I also felt that it was hard for me to focus on the Jewish target of our gospel because I couldn't find many or any Old Testament Passages on the Resurrection of Jesus. Other worries came up in my mind such as "there is no way that we are going to finish this by 10:00." But some how, in an act of God's mercy, we finished it on time. I looked back on "The Antiochian Gospel" on Dr. Foster's website and I noticed one small problem. In the part where group 1 put the little drummer boy, it says "Wise men from the east saw a star and followed it to Jesus. And both worshipped him." I think we need to change the both because it implies two wise men but other than that I thought that it turned out good.

A look back at Friday

All last week I thought that the seven hour seminar was going to be the most boring thing that I would ever experience. Now I feel like an idiot. I learned so much from the experience and have gained new insight into things that I never really thought about. I learned that I don't know as much about the OT as I should. I came to this realization when I took on the task of looking up OT support for the birth of Christ. Isaiah is a fat book and thumbing through it looking for one or two sentence phrase is a tough job especially when you haven't taken the time to read the book. It was kind of like a slap in the face as I came to the realization that I really need force myself to sit down and read the OT.

Also, I have gained a lot more respect for the writers of the gospels. They may have had more time, but this was still a huge job to accomplish, especially for the author of Mark. All scholars seem to be in agreement that it was the first gospel. What must have been going through the writer's mind the first time he put his pen on the paper and started to write? I believe that the gospels like the other books of the Bible are inspired by God, but to be the first to write an account of the life of Christ, the guy must have be a little nervous. I am so glad that God led the writer to right the gospel and then led three others to do the same. I am afraid that ours would not have been as good if we did not have these previous ones to draw from. I had a lot of fun with the project and it was a great learning experience. Now I just have to take what I learned and apply it.

Seminar Response

The seminar was a unique learning experience. I gained a great respect for the gospel writters. For years, I thought the gospel writter just sat down and wrote their memories of Jesus. I can clearly see how they crafted their memories into the Gospels. John used the seven miracles and the famous "I am" sayings. Mark used the "Son of God" title to reveal Him to others. The unity and clarity of the four gospel accounts make them masterpieces. I can see that the writter did more than just write; they thought first. We did an excellent job compiling a gospel account, but the final product was not as unified and concise as the four gospel accounts. With more time, we could have produced a more unified text.

It seems crazy to say, but if we had more time think of what we could have done. We could have written a clear unified gospel account. In the end, Dr. Foster accomplished his objective even though our account was inferrior to the scriptures. The group I work with kept stumbbling over twentieth century vernacular and interpretation. We thought a twentieth century gospel would be a cool project. Could we write a gospel account for the twentieth century to be evangelized and edified? Maybe I am going to far, or maybe that was the objective. Can we take our knowledge of scripture and evangelize and edify our twentieth century?

A breath of fresh air

For me, the seminar last Friday served as a breath of fresh air to my spiritual lungs. It reminded me of the main purpose for my Christian faith, the story of Jesus. Without this story, I would have no purpose and direction in life. Without it, I would be nothing.
By stepping into the disciples’ shoes, who complied the story from memory and testimony, I was awakened to the importance of not only getting the message out, but getting it right. Therefore, the activity has really helped me to understand how the Gospel writers had to lean on the guidance of the Holy Spirit for inspiration, because writing the story on our own is incredibly difficult! It also helped me to see how different accounts of Jesus may differ but the message is still the same. Jesus came, lived, and died all in the Father’s Name so that we might know Him and live a life that is pleasing to God. This is the message that the world needs to here and I believe that we did a good job of getting that message together.

Seminar Response

Like most I was hesitant, to say the least, about being stuck in a classroom in a "seminar" until 10pm, knowing I had yet an hour+ drive home, last Friday night. Yet, like most again, on the other side of this "seminar" I feel very privileged to have had the opportunity to have been a part of it!
What struck me most as we were going through the evening (and indeed what my thoughts about the evening have centered on since) was how similar the experiece was to accomplishing tasks in the local church setting, from a leadership perspective.
There is always a sense of urgency surrounding the task. Everyday we wait another X number of people pass from this life to the next, everyday we wait another X number of teens commit suicide, everyday we wait another 4400 babies die to abortion, etc.. There is always a fear of not getting it "right." Will God be pleased with our work? Will it be true enough to scripture to honor Christ and still be usable in our culture and society (heavenly minded vs earthly good!)? Will we get it by sister Atilla who only shows once a month at the business meeting without so much Hun('in) taking place it fails to ever get started? There is always the matter of starting well and ending well. Has adequate prayer and planning been put in to it ahead of time to ensure a good plan exist that is capable of seeing it through to the end? There is always the matter of leadership within the project, both to be developed anew and to be strenghtened in continued growth. Will it involve those who most need involvement for various reasons? Will it give opportunity for new member Jane Doe to find her niche among us? Will it allow 4 year member John Que to step into the leadership role he is now ready for? Will it allow for the older, very solid leaders to interject their timeless wisdom in such a way as they feel needed in both leadership and leadership training. There is always the matter of various personalities to be knit together in such ways that will create situations where persons can become aware of themselves and others. Sister Senior Saint and Sister Sweet Teen who both have a burden for the lost, but very different ideas of how to reach them. Brother Bible Thumper and Brother Benevolence who each have an intense desire to see God's Word at work in the lives of people, but in very different ways. Those who roll with the punches well and those that strain over a gnat. Those who are adament about presenting our best for God and those who are adament about stewardship.
These and many, many other dynamics go into any project (ministry) that take place in the local church. Likely many of those in our class will find themselves in leadership positions in the local church. Accomplishing the task well as a group many times is as important in the local church as the content and quality of the product produced by the project itself. In the accomplishing of the group-task; individuals discover strenghts and weaknesses in working with others, new individual abilities are discovered, new individual and group confidence is produced, and cohesiveness is bolstered. As the group strengthens, the product being produced by the group also strenghtens, both in quality of content and performance.
As much as reminding us of our great need to better know God's Word, this seminar may have also served as a training ground to the real-life battle ground experienced everyday by leaders within the local churches of America.

Seminar Response

The seminar was a learning experience for me in several ways. I spent the weekend in reflection in several areas of my study life. There are some important truths I have learned because of this seminar, which I hope will enrich my walk with Christ. I have learned and was convicted in the fact that I have read the gospels several times yet; I was not sure where the stories, parables, miracles, and healings I wanted to write about took place in the life and ministry of Christ. The disciples and early Christians kept the word of God in their hearts and passed them down mostly by oral tradition. They understood the importance of preserving the word of God which in their time meant memorizing the word. I have been lazy when it comes to memorizing scripture, and knowing where it takes place in the ministry of Christ.
I need to not only read the word of God, I need to reflect on where in the ministry of Christ this reading takes place and the importance to those involved in the stories. I am reminded of the importance of scripture memorization (yes even today). The authors of our Bible took great care in writing Gods word and we should realize its importance in our lives at whatever level we are in our walk.

Seminar response

The seminar was a great experience. Before the seminar, I was thinking it would be very boring and no fun at all. I found out different. It was a lot of fun and in a way very convicting. It helped me to realize how little I know about the gospels. I feel more confident now in this subject area. I feel that if someone asked me a question wanting to know more about Jesus I could answer with out any problem. I also liked the seminar because it allowed me to work with some very intelegent students that I don't usually work with.

Dido

I was also a little worried that we were going to sit for eight hours and listen to Dr. Foster and Dr. Gore talk the whole night (not that I do not enjoy that...from time to time). But to my surprise it was a meaningful night. Writing a Gospel is not something we are taught in class.
Several things throughout the night encouraged me. To see how well people can get together and work on something that is as important as writing an account of Jesus, and not fight or argue about things, is amazing to me. We did have our disagreements but I believe that they were handled very well and in an adult-like fashion. We did not even start out by voting on committees or conducting a meeting.
What I learned is that I know more than I thought and I could know more. I also saw the importance, firsthand, of knowing the authors purpose and audience in each book of the Bible. I left Friday night with a feeling of confidence, more than I have ever felt, in the Biblical text. I am not saying that I did not believe in it before but I do have a greater respect for the writers and everyone involved. Thank you Dr. Foster for being creative and I hope that the rest of your mowing the yard days will be as enlightening as in the past.

The Seven Hour Seminar

I was very skeptical about what I would be doing for seven hours on a Friday night. Once the task was introduced, I was still a little unsure of how the class was going to accomplish this in only the amount of time we were provided. As it turned out, I learned a few things.

Not knowing my classmates very well, the project turned out to be somewhat of a "get-to-know-you" project and a unifier. I was especially thankful to be in the group I was. I was able to learn more about particular people even from just observing how they worked in a group. The first impression I had of certain people turned out to be wrong (for both the positive and negative.)

This project also revealed how little I actually know about the Scripture. I realized how difficult oral tradition is for me to pass along. So much of my memory of the birth of Christ is based on more than just Scripture, but also carols and movies. I was convicted that I need to spend more time studying the Bible so that when I'm relaying what Scripture says, I don't include my own personal interpretation.

Overall, this experience was enriching for me. I would do a similar project again if I could be in a group of no more than 10 to do the work (and if I could have the same people in my group again!)

Seminar

To be honest, I was not looking forward to the seminar at all. I did not want to be there and I really did not want to do any work. But after I found out what we were doing and I was exited about the project. I enjoyed the work and thought that it was good practice on what we know about Jesus.
The writing the gospel was very difficult. I had no idea how much work was involved in writing a gospel. I truly admire what the authors have done by giving us a written account of the life and work of Jesus. The project was also very convicting. After we had finished I felt like I needed to go home and study. I know that I could know my stuff a lot better.
I am glad that I took part in the seminar and enjoyed every minute of it!

Seminar-Prodject

What an interesting time. I was nervous about going to this seminar. I expected to sit for hours lessoning to lectures. This project turned out to be something I thoroughly enjoyed. I enjoyed it so much that I shared it with my church Sunday morning and to my surprise the Lord used it to lead into my husbands sermon. I saw the faces of the people questioning as I spoke and even more so as my husband spoke.

The thing that impressed me the most was the fact, I have been in church work for years and do not know the scriptures as well as I need to. I think we as Americans take our lives for granted to much. At anytime things could change very fast and would I, or you, be able to worship the way we do now. What would we do, I do, if all of the sudden we(I) had no Bibles. Could we still share God's word? Or will it be time for Christ return.

seminar

I enjoyed participating in the seminar Friday afternoon. I must admit that I was a little nervous before we got started not knowing what we would be doing. However, once everything was explained by Dr. Foster, I became excited thinking we were part of the "first church" and that the rest of the gospel and history was depending on what took place.
The team work that developed and the seriousness of the occasion was felt. The team that I was on worked very hard to establish a list of parables, miracles, and teachings that we felt were important to pass on to the next generation. Not only did our team work, but every team showed great enthusiasm. You could feel the Spirit of the Lord in that place.
I learned how important it is to learn the Scriptures and how important it is to be able to accurately tell the stories of Scriptures. Most of all, I enjoyed the fellowship with the people I have come to admire and love in the Lord. I thank Dr. Foster for the wonderful working experience.

The [commA]ntiochian Gospel

You could have asked me last week and I would have told you the last thing I would have wanted to do on a Friday night would have been to sit in a classroom. No, I have not changed my mind, but our seminar greatly surpassed my expectations.
If there is something I feel that we as Christian Ministry majors miss out on, it is working with others in a group setting. I know that many CM majors are involved in churches where they do get to work with teams, but there are still many others who do not. In many of our classes (S.M.), we somewhat talk about working with teams, but I think that Friday night we actually got a chance to do this in a hands-on setting. We got to see sides of people we don’t normally see sitting in a classroom and listening to everyone’s thoughts and opinions were particularly interesting. I definitely thought the project brought a sense of camaraderie (at least for me) within the groups.

Evil Spirits

As we read Mark, we find that Jesus does quite a few exorcisms. As you read through the commentary, you come to learn that demons are trying to gain control over the situation by stating Jesus’ name. Nevertheless, Jesus shows his power by shutting up the demons. According to Garland, Jesus used the verb “epitimao”, which is frequently translated “rebuke.” Therefore, Jesus is not telling the spirits to be quite so that people will not know whom he is, but rebuking them and showing his power over the demons. During the lecture the other day, we found that the Jews believed that each demon had an angel that had power over that demon. Jesus, in rebuking the demons shows that he is more powerful than all the angels. In addition, I though it was pretty cool that when Jesus sent out his disciples, he gave them power over the evil spirits. So, does this mean that the since Jesus gave them power over demons, that they are more powerful now than angels who each have power over only a certain demon? Well, there is that one boy they have trouble with after the transfiguration of Jesus on the mountain. Also, today we don’t really see many demons possessions. Is it because we do not recognize it as such or what? Well, I have heard that there are more possessions seen in places where people have never even heard the name of Jesus. So maybe they are too scared to come anywhere near people who have Christ living in them.

The Cosmic Cowboy Rides Again!

Jesus the Demon Challenger

I thought it interesting in how Twelftree discussed the subject of demon possession and exorcism in his article in the Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, which Dr. Foster also went over in class Monday. One part that interested me was the part about the techniques of casting out demons that were commonly used at the time, and comparing Jesus' style with these techniques. For instance the idea of binding a demon. I had always been under the impression that Jesus just simply casts out the demons, and then the focus turns toward the former demoniac, and that was basically the format in the text. I had never thought much about the interaction between Jesus and the demon, other than that they knew each other and one of them was obviously in control. But as Twelftree notes, that by saying "be quiet" it is believed that one is "muzzling" or a form of binding the demon, and thus giving the person "control" over the demon (of course we know that only God has true control of the demons). Once a demon tried to bind Jesus first by declaring who Jesus was, but it had no effect on him. Also the idea of transferring a demon to another object (like pigs in Mk 5:11-13) so that the demon may drown by placing the object in water intrigued me. Then we look at what sets Jesus apart from other exorcists at the time, for one he is God and the Messiah, but other than that he does not use any "devices" or "props". Also he does not pray or use a lot of commands common with casting out demons of exorcists of his day, but instead uses his own authority. Successful exorcism made anyone popular back then (sometimes even the appearance of success), which was not Jesus' goal but rather to help someone in need, but of course word spread anyway and many wanted to see this "Miracle Worker" from Galilee (some also wanted him to leave Mk 5:17). I guess they were drawn to him in part because here was someone who obviously had control over the unexplainable, and people even today do not like not being in control of their lives and are scared of the unknown.

Radical Jesus

I am continually amazed how radical Jesus was. As I study all the reading material, I see that Jesus cut across every grain. He broke the Sabbath. He had complete disreguard for the ritual laws. He claimed to be God, a sure no no in a Jewish society. Little wonder remains whay the religious leaders did not like or accept him. I wonder what Christ would have to say to in our completely carefree society. Would He be unmoved by the lack of concern for God and His commands, or would that be the society He was striving to achieve? I know He was not attempting to destroy the law, but why so radically different?

Insert Interesting Title Here

Temptation is generally something that every person faces on a regular basis. Many of us college students know that temptation creeps up at 8:55 a.m and you have slept longer than your alarm intended for you to sleep and you catch yourself asking the question, "Should I stay or should I go now?" (cheesy music lines are fun). But in all seriousness, that is a question of temptation. I choose the one more appealing to me and that would be sleep, and so I give into my temptation to skip class and continue into my blissful slumber of dreams.

This type of temptation seems real petty compared to what we see Jesus went through in Mark 1:12-13. Jesus faced a much greater temptation. As I continually read these two verses I began to realize the harshness of His temptation. Forty Days!!!! Forty stinkin days!!!!! I fail after 30 seconds or less with some stuff. But again, the severity of Jesus' temptation is much greater than my bed time. Garland states that Mark mention this temptation as one major clash and not a series of temptations like in Luke or Matthew. And I think that better shows the pressure Jesus went through. You can just imagine that Satan tried everythign in his power to get Jesus to sin, yet Satan was unable to prevail. That shows Jesus as human and as authoritative. I think that is an example that we should follow. In just a simple version of allowing ourselves to tell Satan NO.....LEAVE ME ALONE YOU DEVIL YOU!!!!! Jesus truly made a great statement through action. Maybe we should have confidence in ourselves and do the same.

Temptation

When Dr. Foster stated that Jesus understands temptation better than we do because we have never said No to it….I felt a little bit of a slap in the face. Mainly because of all the times I prayed to God moaning and groaning about everything I was being put through, sometimes in order to gain some kind of sympathy. Now, through thinking about it, I see how much of an idiot I can actually be. I talked to God as if he knew nothing about anything I was going through, when in fact, it was totally the opposite. He knows everything I have ever felt, because He, himself, has felt the same way. The difference is…..Jesus didn’t give in; I can really learn a lot from Him!

Mark has a Plot

I had never thought of the book of Mark as a peice of litature. When Professor Foster started talking about plots and settings, it all of a sudden dawned on me that this book and the others in the Bible were all great works of litature. The Cyclical Outline of Mark is a tool like those I had used before in developing children's litature. From looking at this prespective I gained a new knowledge and appreciation for the book of Mark.

To Fast or Not to Fast

Garland’s comments on Jesus’ response to his opponents about the question of why His disciples do not fast intrigued me. The bridegroom was certainly with His disciples so there was no need for them to fast. Jesus does point to a time that He will not be with His disciples. Garland, I believe rightfully, explains that this time points to Christ’s death. The question I pose is since Christ was resurrected to new life and after His resurrection assured His disciples that He would be with them always, what would be the reason for His disciples to fast now? Surely Christ lives in each believer through the person of His Spirit. To fast or not to fast, this is my question.

Jairus and the Woman

I have read this story many times. And every time I think how awesome Jesus is that he has the power to heal and perform great miracles, and I wonder how people could not believe in him after these sort of things...blah, blah, blah. I always thought the usual stuff that comes with being in Sunday School for so many years where just shouting "Jesus" seems to always be the right anwer. But as I read through Garland's commentary on Jairus and the woman God began to reveal many things to me about my own life. I found myself sitting alone, in a dark room, tears falling down my face. Last semester was my most difficult semester since I have been here at Williams...this is to be expected right. After all, I am a senior. But beyond school, life circumstances affected my grades. But more than that...they affected my sleep, my spiritual life, my emotional and mental well-being. And all of these things I could manage to keep hidden within my heart...a part from a few exceptions. As I finished reading I could not help but spend time with God. I realize that ideally we would want to be Jairus. He was a respectable man. Why would Jesus not want to help him...why would Jesus not want to help us if we are like Jairus? But we all have the potential to be the woman. No one wants to be her. She was an outcast. She lived on the fringes of society. But we all have that potential. But the good news is this...Jesus does not care. Jairus...the woman...they were one in the same. They both had needs. Jesus met both their needs....irregardless of who they were and where they had been in life. God's forgiveness knows no bounds....how awesome for those of us who feel we have fallen to far away to be forgiven.

The Moral of the Story

I enjoy reading Jesus' parables in Mark. It's kinda like He understands that if He didn't put the message "in other words" He might not make His message as clear as if He had just said it "outright". The parables take the reader away from the actual life of Christ for a moment to accept the message that He is trying to deliver. I can imagine setting around a blazing campfire like little kids and listening to Jesus tell "the moral of the story" tales. I realize that I am over-simplifying this, but telling a story with another story I was always told was a southern thing, but Jesus did it long before southern traditions were born.

Demon Seed Correlation

I caught an interesting parallel in the parable of the sower (MK 4:1-9) and the story of the demon possessed man (MK 5:1-20). In the parable of the sower Jesus talks about the farmer sowing with reckless abandon seemingly not caring about where to best put his seed. We all know that usually in this parable we are taught that only some people will react correctly to the gospel message (good) and some will not(bad). But notice what takes place in the demoniac story. Jesus healed a man physically and spiritually, right? Was he looking to be saved from his sins? Was he searching the torah looking for the answers of life? NO! Jesus was spreading the gospel (seed) much like the sower had been doing in the parable a few chapters before. I think He was showing us how to put the parable into action. We should be spreading the gospel to people regardless of whether they seem "ready/fertile" or not. I have never heard a comparison between these two stories and I thought I might try to show how I see their relationship. I want to see some comments to see if maybe I am wrong or misguided,
thanx.

Where have all the demons gone?

I have pondered this idea for a while now and it is interesting that we are seeing it as we work our way through Mark. In Ch. 5, we see Jesus, the exorcist, bring supposedly a Legion of demons out of a man and then the man returned to normal. Were demons just around during the biblical times and do we simply blow off the idea of actual demon-possessed people today? I have heard firsthand accounts of demon possessions in other countries, but it seems to be something that we do not acknowledge here. Not that this is the case, but is it possible that we have cleaned up the idea of demon possession and now refer to it as "mentally incompetent" or "mentally handicapped" or "insanity"? Could some of the people on death row who have committed horrendous crimes actually be demon-possessed? Just a thought.

Humanity of Christ

Dr. Foster talked about the temptation that Christ went through, and how it made him understand temptation more than us, and also how Christ is more human than we are. These thoughts just sort of set off thoughts of Christ's humanity, and reflection on how Christ relied on the Father. How he needed the basic things such as food and sleep, and felt fear and pain, and sometimes he needed to pray to the Father for guidance. I guess really it's just made me specifically think about how important the Father's guidance is, considering the fact that Christ needed it also. And though this is a very simple concept and thought, it's something that needs to be reflected on sometimes.

These thoughts of Christ's humanity also led to the thoughts of my lack of understanding of the trinity. That tension that was there when Christ was 100 percent God and 100 percent man at the same time. His inability to know all things, such as the date of his second coming, even while he was God. That separation of the Father and Son, while still being the same. I'm continually confused, and am forced to recognize that these answers will not be found on this earth.

Pigeonholing the Lost: My Life as a Pharisee

Trying to sleep when God is speaking to you is like trying to wrestle a bloody steak from a starving dog. God reminded me of this last week after reading a section of the NIV Application Comm. I had just finished reading about chapter 2 and 3 of Mark, where Jesus was confronted with the rising conflict of the Pharisees and their unending questions. When reading this section, two words jumped off the page and into my mind that would keep me awake for the rest of the night. These words were “pigeonholing others” (pg.113). Before reading this section I held disdain toward the Pharisees, thinking that they had to be the most self-righteous, pompous jerks in the Bible. However, after reading the author’s explanation of how they had constructed oral laws to protect their culture and faith, I began to sympathize. In fact, I identified with them exactly. I began to think back to all the times that I had formed guards around my heart that restrained me from witnessing to others. I began to think of all the mindless clones of myself that I had tried to construct in the name of our Lord. Pigeonholing the Lost in so easy and I believe that we do it so often. I know I do. I cringe at hearing the words of Jesus to the Pharisees, for I know that in the brood of vipers I have slithered. Therefore, before we cast the first stone in the Pharisees’ direction, may we first consider our own practices in order to see if we are also guilty of the same “good intentions.”

More about Jesus in his home town

When I was reading the Garland book something caught my eye that I've never thought of before. I have read and heard the story of Jesus going to his home town and them not being very accepting of Him. As many times as that's been I thought I pretty much knew about all I could about this passage, but as I read Garland I found new things that I've never thought about before. The first thing that I've never really thought about before was how big Jesus was. The Bible says he was a carpenter. Think of the work a carpenter does. A tekton is traditionally translated carpenter this is someone who works with wood, metal, or stone. If Jesus worked with the things all the time he would have been a good size fellow. In movies and pictures he's always this little dude. Sitting and thinking about that changes the way I imagine Jesus might have looked. Another thing I learned was that when the people were talking about him they said isn't this the son of Mary. I never thought about the fact that Mary's name was mentioned not Joseph. Garland gives some reasons why this is the one that he says is most likely is that by this time Joseph was dead. The thing that stuck out most and I guess has always bothered me was the fact that no one in his hometown believed. I'm sure they knew Jesus very well they had probly seen him do miracles before but yet they couldn't get past Jesus outward appearance and see Him as the son of God. Before I get to down on the people in the story. Let's fast forward to our time would we accept Jesus as God's son if he was just a plain old carpenter in our town? Would we be able to get past the outward appearance and look see him as the savior or would we just blow him off as nothing special and miss the chance of fellowshiping with God because we couldn't get past the outward appearance

Miracles and Miracle Stories

My favorite part of the reading material consisted of the miracles. Especially where it stated that a miracle denoted a supernatural event that was the result of supernatural power. It also stated that supernatural events in the Gospels were due to the exercise of God's power.
As stated in the DJG, Jesus was not only a miracle worker, but also the object of miracles. (the virginal conception, baptism, Transfiguration, resurrection, and the ascention. Luke stated the virgin birth (Luke 1), Simeon stated at Jesus' circumcision that Simeon would not die till he had seen the Lord's Christ (Luke 2:36), Anna, the prophetsess praised God about Jesus to those around her (Luke 2), John the Baptist stated that Jesus was the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world (John 1:29), and Nathanael called Jesus the Son of God, The King of Israel (John 1:49).
Jesus said "My teaching is not mine, but his who sent me" (John 7:16) and often refered to God and scripture.
Even the demons recognized Jesus as "The Holy One of God" (Mark 1:24:25), "You are the Son of God." (Mark 3: 11), and "What have you to do with me, Jesus Son of the Most High God?", (Mark 5:7)
Also, the DJG showed that Jesus was an exorcist because of the Holy Spirit; in other words, that God was with him and the exorcism was the Work of God.

A speaker with Authority

There are so many times growing up that we all want to be some one of authority and to become some one who has power. Whether it be in a job or even just have the ability to be told that you are a speaker with authority. In the mark passage where Jesus drives out the demons there is a huge focus on that he is a speaker of authority. I feel that sometimes we also forget that even though he is not here in a physical stand point he lives in side all of us. I am not here saying that we have the same power as God, because we don't he does give us the power and strength to do what ever he has planned for us. And then we can be a speaker of authority if just step out in faith and believe that God can use a common man like us. I firmly believe that God wanted us to understand that side of him because of how he created the earth. What did he do? He spoke everything into existence just as he spoke the evil spirit out of the man.

God Will Provide The Lamb.

Yesterday, I was thinking about what Dr. Foster said in class about how too often we look toward the prophets in the Old Testament to give us answers about Jesus and avoid the Pentateuch. This made me question some things and see if some of the events in the Pentateuch were used as symbolism of the coming Messiah. After thinking of this, one story in particular stuck in my head. This was the story of Abraham and Isaac in Genesis 22 where God commands Abraham to sacrifice Isaac to Him. In my opinion, this story parallels Christ's death in a few ways.

For one, Abraham places the wood on Isaac to carry to the place of the sacrifice, just as Jesus did on the way to be crucified in Jerusalem. Also, God told Abraham to kill his ONLY son. Abraham didn't have many children like other men at the time. In fact, the Bible says that Abraham was around one hundred years old when Isaac was first born. John 3:16 says God loved the world so much that he gave his ONLY son. The thing that most stuck out to me was how Abraham says that God will provide the lamb. I know that Abraham probably was not referring to Jesus being the lamb of God because the title comes from John the Baptist in John where John says "Behold the lamb of God that takes away the sins of the world" and not in Genesis 22 but I still think it is a fairly interesting comparison.

faith and waiting

While reading in Garland I was very interested in the part where he talks about the passage where Jesus heals both the woman that wouldn't stop bleeding and the dead child. Two parts of what he talked about really got to me. 1) The man that came to Jesus first had to wait for Jesus to come heal his daughter because a woman that couldn't stop bleeding came up behind him and touched his clothes. Now I don't know about everyone else but I tended to get a little ticked off sometimes when I see that other people are getting what appears to be what they want from God while I have to wait in the background for something that I want. The fact is this man could have easily blown his top when Jesus stalled in order to recognize this woman. How many times do we Get impatient with God when things don't go our way. 2) The man was shocked by the word of his daughters death, yet Christ told him to have faith. His daughters dead and he has to have faith that she will be alright. Now this man was probably thinking," Okay Jesus you have done some pretty amazing stuff but this is death only God can stop death." But where a man sees defeat God sees and opportunity. The mans view were changed drastically that day when he witnessed his dead daughter rise. What kind of faith do we have? Is it strong enough to face even the most difficult problem?

Another possible explanation of Baptism in the NT

After class on Monday I posed the question to Dr. Foster as to if there was historical precedence for religious or philosophical leaders to immerse their new converts. Dr. Foster explained that before John many leaders did in fact baptize their followers. Even prostylytes to the Jewish faith were commonly baptized as an announcement of their acceptance into the Jewish faith. So maybe baptism is very simple in its New Testament meaning. It is simply the public acknowledgement of someone's intent to follow or be a disciple of a particular sect. The Christians probably just adopted a common practice already instituted in the surrounding cultures (Greek and Jewish). In this respect, baptism becomes more of a ceremony rather than something with deep spiritual significance (other than what it eventually came to symbolize in the early Christian traditions for the death burial and resurrection of the new convert "with Jesus").

Everyone invited

Reading through Garlands' commentary on Mark 2:13-3:6, I found a really interesting story. It was about a man who was staying in a motel and on the elevator door was an invitation to a party. The invitation ends up being a hoax. Before finding out that it was a hoax, the man thought in his might what kind of people might show up- tired salemen, bored vacationers, weary travelers. It was said that in their minds the people thought about a party that might be going on in which all were invited to. In which it did not matter who came in, at what time they came in, or what they did. It said that Jesus is willing to through a party like this were anyone is invited and it is not a hoax. It also says that those who belong to his Church should be willing to do the same. It brought out the fact that too often the church is taking down the sign to invite one and all. I agree with these statements we need to be willing to tell all and invite all to be apart of the fellowship of Christ. If we do not invite all then there must be something wrong with our churches.

Who has more faith?

For years in the church of today we discuss how stupid the people who saw Jesus and the miracles he performed were for not believing in him, specifically his own people. But after reading more about the culture of the Jews and what there understanding of a so called "messiah" was to be, I have really had to ask myself if I would have believed Jesus was who he claimed to be back then. In the DJG the term "messiah" apparently took on more meanings than what the word means to us. The Jews were also expecting this conquering figure to come and rescue them from the oppression of their enemies as well as be this great majestic figure who would sit on a throne as a powerful leader. The fact that he was not a powerful figure in terms of wealth and having an army or an empire was one of the first obstacles I would have had to overcome if I would have grown up in their culture.

How could one not believe if they witnessed the miracles that were performed? After listening to the lecture on Demon possesions and exorcisms I can see where those who witnessed him doing these miracles could have easily seen his power as some sort of sorcery. Based on the fact that they believed in demon possession and powers of demons it could have been easy to associate this guy who did not fit the profile of their awaited messiah off as a false profit who used mystical powers to gain a following. There were also many false messiahs or prophets in that day that the bible doesn't mention that the people had probably encountered before Jesus leading to doubts as well.

When one takes a look at the enviroment that the Jewish people were raised in and accustomed to they can see how hard it would have been to believe this man called Jesus. They were blinded by tradition and believes of their time. It is really not that different today if you look at our society and it huge variety of beliefs. Would we believe if a guy came out of nowhere and started performing miracles and claiming to be the son of God today if it did not fit our idea of what Christ return is to be. I'll end by saying this. The advantage we have today is that we are born into a culture that overwhelmingly promotes Jesus Christ as the Son of God and our Saviour which in turn makes it easier to accept an believe in him. We should just be thankful to have had that opportunity and quit being so judging of another culture until we put ourselves into their shoes. Who really had more faith, those who were with Jesus and believed during that culture or us who have not seen but have been taught from a young age to believe?

Follow Me

In Garland and in class, we looked at how Jesus taught as one with authoriy. Garland writes of how sages never called people to follow them, only for people to follow the Torah, which they can learn from them. Jesus taught people to follow him, this was totally different and some could never get over that and today some still can't. Through out history we can see others who have tried to teach using this same style of authority, but they did not have the power they were proclaiming to have and led people in the wrong direction. It is important for all of us to pay close attention to how we teach, making sure that we point others to follow Jesus and the scriptures. Spelling out to others, that they can see how we follow Jesus and do the same, but clearly showing that we too follow Jesus not our own teaching.

:( Comment below by James was recognized as E-mail of the weAk! No Cheerleaders allowed. -02/16/2005

Am I With Him, or am I WITH Him?

Euthus
Throughout the Bible, and especially the Gospels, we are taught that we have complete authority over the enemy. To see Jesus walk up to a man that can break chains, and tell the spirits to come out of him, is enough evidence that we have the victory. Yet, so many times, when things get rough, “we retreat into a shell of comfortable Christianity” (Gar. 143). So one must ask, do we really understand the hope that we have in Jesus.
Also, in Garland’s discussion about the choosing of the twelve, he writes, “the twelve will have to learn that there is a difference between hanging around with Jesus and truly being with him.” (129). He continues by commenting that they must learn to be involved with Jesus, in his sufferings and harassments.
I believe that these two truths that we see here can be put together. I have found that in the midst of trials or harassments from old friends, if I am simply “hanging out” with Jesus I will retreat or even avoid the conflict. When we are hanging out with our “homeboy,” or naming it but not claiming it, we are more apt to sink into the crowd when the going gets tough, but if we are in communion with our Lord and Savior, we will step up to the challenge and stare the devil in the face because we know that our side has already won.

Forgiveness of Sins

In Mark chapter 2 we find the story of Jesus and the paralytic man. As we read into the chapter we see were Jesus tells this man Son, your sins are forgiven. Wow, what a profound statement. I have never really thought about how much of an impact a statement, such as this, would have made in first century Palestine, but you would have been crazy to make such a statement; unless you are God. I believe this is another way Mark is trying to tell us about who Jesus really is. This was not some man who was good at walking around casting out demons or healing people, but this actually was Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who could forgive the sins of the world.

Temptation

In class yesterday, Dr. Foster said something to the extent of (sorry if it's not a perfect quote--I think I got the idea of it): Jesus knew the true power of sin because he alone was able to overcome it. As I mulled that idea over, I was amazed and convicted. Jesus was tempted by Satan himself, yet he didn't give in.

Although I believe Satan works in lives today, I don't believe many Christians have personally faced his temptings. We, as modern believers, are so quick to pass the blame for our sin on someone else. The truth is that our selfish desires and motives lead us to sin. My biggest fight isn't against Satan and his demons, though that battle is very real; it's against myself. Knowing that Christ overcame temptations of the flesh as well as the face-to-face confrontation with Satan gives me hope that it is possible for me to win over temptations when I allow Christ's power to work through me.

The Mustard Seed

Garland discusses the fact that the Kingdom of God was not compared to the mustard seed, however what happens to the mustard seed. The comparison is thought provoking. The seed is the smallest of all seeds, it grows to maturity as a six to ten foot bush. It is awesome how God used 12 disciples after the ressurection of christ to begin his work. The kingdom moves to 120 disciples to Peter's first sermon and 3000 are saved. Paul begins churches in the known world, which moves the kingdom beyound the Jewish people. Today we have Christians all over the world. I agree with Garland in his statement " We have not however reached the great tree status yet." I am sure the kingdom has not quit growing.

Brian Nagy

NT Citations of Scripture

On January 31, Dr. Foster spoke of the citation techniques of New Testament writers, and he pointed to the prologue of the gospel of Mark to illustrate his teaching. Many would argue that the correct method of interpretation is to discern the meaning of the text in context. Unfortunately, against this exegetical theory seemingly stands the Biblical text. I find this tension nearly unbearable, for I cannot find a way to eliminate the apparent hypocrisy of believing in "proper" exegesis while believing in the inspiration of "improper" New Testament exegesis of the Old Testament.
------
Possible Solutions:
(note: these solutions assume the exegete primarily utilizes the Grammatical-Historical method)

1. One solution might be to reject the inspiration of the New Testament on these matters, but even if the text is not inspired, the answer concerning proper interpretation remains unanswered.

2. Another possible solution is to state that the inspiration of the Holy Spirit granted the writers license to utilize "improper" methodologies in order to express the message of the text, but this solution compounds the problem, leaving the following questions:
A. Why would God use a false (incorrect) method to communicate truth?
B. Why is the method improper for the contemporary Christian if used to express the same divine truth?

3. An alternative, though possibly less palatable, solution is to accept the method of interpretation as valid and potentially useful in the church today. Many, myself included, would find this solution to be incredibly difficult to accept, given the very logical basis of the Grammatical-Historical method of exegesis taught in Biblical Interpretation class.

-----
Personally, I reject option one because I believe in the inspiration of the text. Option two seems to be thoroughly contradictory, since arguing that the only way to interpret a text correctly is to use the Grammatical-Historical method while believing in the inspired text which does not use this method seems to evade logic. Unfortunately, option three is not attractive.

Option three seems to be eerily similar to reader-response criticism of a text. When evaluated using the Gramm.-hist. method, the meaning of the quoted text in Mark 1 appears to be drastically different from the meaning of the words in their original contexts. Does this mean that Mark subconsciously believed that the text only has meaning through the eyes of the reader? The methodology the evangelist used is, after analysis, quite compatible with such a reader-response interpretation of the Old Testament Scriptures. If this understanding is true, the ramifications are tremendous. If valid, reader-response interpretation geared for the uses of the quoting reader would turn conservative exegesis on its head, for its foundations would not lie in a postmodern, liberal view of scripture but in a first-century, conservative view of scripture. Perhaps there is truly nothing new under the sun.

Catching Fish

I do not fish very often but I have found Garland's discussion on the passage on fishing for people interesting. When we become a Christian something drastic has happened and our life will be totally different in the future just like a caught fish's life is totally changed. I have thought about this and wondered how much my life has changed. I can say that I see a difference from that point of conversion. I also think about when people ask me how to know if someone is really a believer or not. The answer should be clear, if a life changing event has taken place then your life should really change. The proof is in the pudding or actions (same thing right?) .

Miracles in Mark

What were the Miracles of Jesus in Mark? Were they just a way of showing that Christ was the Son of God? Were they a way of discouraging early Christian heretics from believing strictly in miracles as a sign of divinity? Or were they more? The miracles of Jesus in Mark were more. The miracles of Christ were very likely a combination of things in the book. It is clear that at times Christ was showing to the crowds that he was the Son of God through His miracles. Who else could have wielded that kind of power? And yet at the same time was he doing more. As was pointed out in the DJG perhaps Christ was ushering in the Kingdom of God. His miracles were primarily preformed on those who already believed in Him. Perhaps Christ was showing us through the miracles that He will take care of those who have faith in Him. He does not do miracles solely to show Himself as the Christ. In fact He does quite the opposite in refusing to preform signs for the Pharisees. Perhaps this is in a way showing us that His miracles had a bigger picture. Christ was beginning the process of building the Kingdom

Authorship of Mark

Like many, I have read through Mark on a number of occasions before. However, when reading through it this time, I was struck by how "choppy" and disjunctive it truely is. Never before had I noticed how it really appears to be simply a grouping of events being retold in no certain order, as opposed to a flowing, chronological recollection of someone's life. I had read before that it was commonly agreed that the Gospel of Mark was really Peter's thoughts written down by Mark. However when reading through Mark this time, this knowledge, along with the "choppiness" that stood out to me, all began to work together. If indeed, the Gospel of Mark is a collection of Peter's memories, then it would make sense for it to be "event-centered." Each of us remember life by its events. The life in between the events gets lost. While all this was yet brewing around in my head, I went to the NIV Applicaton Commentary on Mark to see what I could find. Page 26 of that commentary quotes Eusebius speaking of Papias, "Mark, having become the interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately whatever he remembered of the things said and done by the Lord, but not however in order." Also, "... Peter, who adapted his teachings to the needs of his hearers, but not as though he were drawing up a connected account of the Lord's oracles." The next day Dr. Foster spoke of this very quote in class while lecturing on the authorship of Mark. Its nice to stumble upon something on your own, only to have it conferred upon by others. Reading through Mark's Gospel gives me the impression that Mark wrote every story about Jesus that Peter could remember, then attempted to put them in the most basic order; from Jesus' birth to His ascension.