Part 5: God Becomes King | Gospel According to Mark Semester Discussion Guide

Part 5: God Becomes King | Mark 14:1-16:20

[Return to The Gospel According to Mark Semester Discussion Guide]

The following should be read aloud as a group, with each person reading one paragraph before passing on to the next person. Afterwards, a discussion will follow with the provided discussion questions.

Now the climactic ending to the Gospel of Mark approaches, in which Jesus’ true identity will be revealed to all in his crucifixion and resurrection – assuming, of course, that we have eyes to see him and ears to hear him (cf. Mark 4:9-12).

And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, blessed and broke it, and gave it to them and said, “Take, eat; this is My body.”

Then He took the cup, and when He had given thanks He gave it to them, and they all drank from it. And He said to them, “This is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many. Assuredly, I say to you, I will no longer drink of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God.” (14:22-25)

In the Book of Exodus, liturgical instructions for how to celebrate the Passover are given before the historical event of the Passover is narrated (cf. Exodus 12-14), and similarly, in the New Testament, the liturgical celebration of the new covenant in Christ’s body and blood occurs before the historical sacrifice of the crucifixion of Christ. This also hearkens back to the old covenant God made with the Israelites when he gave them the law of Moses at Mount Sinai:

“And then, taking the book of the covenant, he [Moses] read in the hearing of the people, and they said, ‘We will do everything that the Lord has said, and we will obey!’ And Moses, taking the blood, sprinkled it over the people and said, ‘Look, the blood of the covenant, which the Lord established with you concerning all these matters.’” (Exodus 24:7–8, Lexham English Septuagint)

The early Christians, as do Orthodox Christians today, believed that the bread and wine used for Holy Communion became the body and blood of Christ by Christ’s words of institution and the invocation of the Holy Spirit. St. Ambrose of Milan is representative on this point:

“Do you wish to know how it is consecrated with heavenly words? Accept what the words are. The priest speaks. He says: ‘Perform for us this oblation written, reasonable, acceptable, which is a figure of the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ. On the day before he suffered he took bread in his holy hands, looked toward heaven, toward you, holy Father omnipotent, eternal God, giving thanks, blessed, broke, and having broken it gave it to the apostles and his disciples,’ saying: ‘Take and eat of this, all of you; for this is my body, which shall be broken for many.’ Take note. Before it is consecrated, it is bread; but when Christ’s words have been added, it is the body of Christ.”1

St. Theopylact of Ohrid likewise clarifies: “For the bread is not a mere figure and image of the Lord’s body, but is changed into the very body of Christ.”2

Christ’s comment that he “will no longer drink of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God” is puzzling. St. Theophylact understands this as a confession that we will not experience the fullness of feasting in the kingdom of God until we also receive resurrected bodies as Christ does at his resurrection. He says:

“‘I will not drink of this fruit of the vine’ means until the resurrection. He calls the resurrection the kingdom, as of a king who has contended against death and reigns. Indeed, after the resurrection He both ate and drank with the disciples, proving that He was the same who had suffered. ‘He will drink it new’ means in a new and unusual way; for He no longer had a passible body that needed food, but an immortal and incorruptible one.”3

Peter said to Him, “Even if all are made to stumble, yet I will not be.”

Jesus said to him, “Assuredly, I say to you that today, even this night, before the rooster crows twice, you will deny Me three times.”

But he spoke more vehemently, “If I have to die with You, I will not deny You!”

And they all said likewise. (14:29–31)

Great emphasis is often put on Peter’s promise to not abandon Christ and his subsequent failure to live up to this promise by denying him three times. This emphasis makes sense and is fair given Peter’s status as first among the apostles and as a key narrative figure in the text of the Gospels. However, the detail is often missed that the rest of the apostles “all said likewise,” also promising to not abandon Christ and failing to live up to their promise. The affirmation that all promised to not abandon him is paralleled by the text specifying that all the apostles abandoned him at his arrest: “Then they all forsook Him and fled.” (Mark 14:50). St. Jerome notes that all the disciples forsaking Christ is symbolic of all humanity having gone astray from God:

“We may say, then, that the entire human race was lost. Because it had perished, the complaint of the Lord crucified is: ‘The wine press I have trodden alone, and of my people there was no one with me.’ (Isaiah 63:3). Then was the Psalm fulfilled: ‘Help, O Lord! For no one now is dutiful.’ (Psalm 12:1-2) ‘There is none who does good, no not even one.’ (Psalm 14:1-3). He who has promised: ‘Even if I should have to die with thee, or be imprisoned, I will not deny thee,’ denied him.”4

Then they came to a place which was named Gethsemane; and He said to His disciples, “Sit here while I pray.” And He took Peter, James, and John with Him, and He began to be troubled and deeply distressed. Then He said to them, “My soul is exceedingly sorrowful, even to death. Stay here and watch.” (14:32–34)

Christ here paraphrases Jonah’s words to God when he was waiting for God to destroy Nineveh:

“And God said to Jonah, ‘Are you exceedingly sorrowful over the gourd?’ And he said, ‘I am exceedingly sorrowful, even to death.’” (Jonah 4:9 LXX, translation my own)

The context of this passage is Jonah being upset that God is not destroying the Ninevites despite their wicked deeds. However, the context here of Christ’s words is nearly the exact opposite; Christ is allowing himself to be destroyed by his own people for their salvation. The point of this allusion is that Christ is redeeming Jonah by succeeding where Jonah failed. Jonah wished for God to destroy his enemies on his behalf, whereas Christ allows his enemies to destroy him for their benefit. This becomes even more mind-boggling once one realizes that the figure who appears and speaks to Jonah in the Book of Jonah is “the Word of the Lord” (λόγος κυρίου), that is, the pre-incarnate person of Christ (Jonah 1:1 LXX).

Now a certain young man followed Him, having a linen cloth thrown around his naked body. And the young men laid hold of him, and he left the linen cloth and fled from them naked. (14:51–52)

This passage is incredibly confusing and seems to come out of nowhere. The Church Fathers do not agree on who this young man is; some say it is James the brother of the Lord, while others say it is John or perhaps another disciple.5 St. Jerome notes that a man fleeing naked by leaving behind his garment is reminiscent of the Patriarch Joseph fleeing the temptation of Potiphar’s wife by leaving behind his garment in Genesis.6 While the full meaning of this passage remains elusive to me, I believe the interpretation of modern biblical scholar Joel Marcus to be insightful here:

“…the Markan vignette about the fleeing youth also invokes the sort of apocalyptic framework that is so important for understanding the passion narrative and the Gospel as a whole. The text would probably remind some readers of the eschatological prophecy in Amos 2:16:’“And even the one who is stout of heart among the mighty shall flee away naked in that day’ (RSV alt.). Closer to home, it also recalls the eschatological prophecy in Mark 13:14–16, since the latter includes not only the idea of end-time flight but also the instruction not to turn back to retrieve one’s garment. Although 13:14–16 is an instruction about what one should do in the end-time emergency, whereas 14:51–52 is an example of what one should not do, the overlap between the two passages reinforces the echo of Amos: Jesus’ arrest is part of the eschatological crisis.”7

Again the high priest asked Him, saying to Him, “Are You the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?”

Jesus said, “I am. And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven.”

Then the high priest tore his clothes and said, “What further need do we have of witnesses? You have heard the blasphemy! What do you think?”

And they all condemned Him to be deserving of death. (14:61–64)

After finding no evidence on which to convict Jesus, the high priest asks Jesus a point-blank question: “Are you the Messiah?” Jesus’ response is deliberately formulated to reveal his divine identity, directly answer the high priest’s question, and give the Sanhedrin the evidence needed to convict Jesus of the offense of blasphemy, meriting the death penalty. Jesus’ response is a combining of Exodus 3:14 (where God identifies himself to Moses as “I am the One Who Is”) and Daniel 7:13 (where a human figure called “the Son of Man” is enthroned next to the Ancient of Days/God and is worshipped with God and rules the world with God). In effect, Jesus is saying something like, “Yes, I am the Messiah. I am the one who revealed himself to Moses, and I am the Son of Man in Daniel who has equal power and authority with God.” The high priest, understandably, is shocked by this answer, and declares that there is no further need for witnesses since the blasphemy of a man claiming to be on par with God has been uttered in their presence. Joel Marcus remarks:

“…the high priest’s ensuing charge of blasphemy probably picks up not only Jesus’ implicit affirmation of his divine sonship but also what he says about the Son of Man’s elevation to God’s right hand…The Markan Jesus, then, seems to be affirming, in a way understood by his interlocutor, that he is not only the Son of God but also the Son of Man.”8

Immediately, in the morning, the chief priests held a consultation with the elders and scribes and the whole council; and they bound Jesus, led Him away, and delivered Him to Pilate. Then Pilate asked Him, “Are You the King of the Jews?”

He answered and said to him, “It is as you say.”

And the chief priests accused Him of many things, but He answered nothing. Then Pilate asked Him again, saying, “Do You answer nothing? See how many things they testify against You!” But Jesus still answered nothing, so that Pilate marveled. (15:1–5)

The Sanhedrin had within their legal authority the ability to execute people via stoning, but instead sought to give Jesus a more shameful death by crucifixion, a form of the death penalty that only the Roman rulers were permitted to enact.9 Jesus is therefore brought before Pilate by the Sanhedrin in an attempt to get him convicted of a capital crime against the Roman Empire so that he can be crucified. The crime which Pilate is investigating Jesus for is treason against the Emperor, namely claiming to have kingly or political authority that properly belonged only to Rome. Since Christ/Messiah is a scriptural designation for the coming Davidic king, and Jesus had just affirmed to the Sanhedrin that he was the Messiah, the Sanhedrin thinks this is the best criminal charge to bring before Pilate. This explains Pilate’s opening question to Jesus: “Are you the King of the Jews?” Jesus gives a cryptic answer and then keeps silent: “You say so.” (σὺ λέγεις). St. Augustine of Hippo connects Jesus’ silence after this cryptic answer with his innocence and fulfillment of a prophecy in Isaiah:

“This silence of our Lord Jesus Christ took place more than once. It occurred before the chief priest, and before Herod, and before Pilate himself. So it was not in vain that the prophecy regarding him had preceded: ‘As the lamb before its shearer was dumb, so he opened not his mouth,’ (Isaiah 53:7) especially on those occasions when he did not answer his questioners. Usually he replied to questions addressed to him, but in this case he declined to make any reply. The metaphor of the lamb is used to indicate that his silence does not imply guilt but innocence. When he did not open his mouth as he passed through the process of judgment, it was in the character of a lamb that he did so; that is, not as one with an evil conscience who was convicted of his sins, but as one who in his meekness was sacrificed for the sins of others.”10

Now at the feast he was accustomed to releasing one prisoner to them, whomever they requested. And there was one named Barabbas, who was chained with his fellow rebels; they had committed murder in the rebellion. Then the multitude, crying aloud, began to ask him to do just as he had always done for them. But Pilate answered them, saying, “Do you want me to release to you the King of the Jews?” For he knew that the chief priests had handed Him over because of envy. (15:6–10)

Barabbas most likely was a member of a radical Jewish sect known as the Zealots. This Jewish sect was essentially a group of religious terrorists that believed that violence was necessary to overthrow the Roman occupation of Judea and bring about the appearance of the Messiah. According to New Testament scholar Michael Bird, “For the Zealots, the rule was clear: say your prayers, sharpen your swords, make yourselves holy to fight a holy war, and God will give you a military victory over the hordes of darkness.”11 The choice of the crowd for Barrabas over Jesus, therefore, is symbolic for the choice for a merely political solution to our problems versus the eternal life offered to us in Christ. St. Bede the Venerable also connects the choice of Barrabas over Jesus with the eventual destruction of Judea and the temple by the Romans in the subsequent Roman-Jewish wars:

“Because, when the choice was given to them, they chose a robber instead of Christ, a murderer instead of the Savior, they deservedly lost their salvation and their life, and they subjected themselves to such a degree to robbery and sedition, that they lost their country and their kingdom which they preferred to Christ…”12

Then the soldiers led Him away into the hall called Praetorium, and they called together the whole garrison. And they clothed Him with purple; and they twisted a crown of thorns, put it on His head, and began to salute Him, “Hail, King of the Jews!” Then they struck Him on the head with a reed and spat on Him; and bowing the knee, they worshiped Him. And when they had mocked Him, they took the purple off Him, put His own clothes on Him, and led Him out to crucify Him. (15:16–20)

The irony here lies in the fact that the Roman soldiers treat Jesus like a king in order to mock him for his crime of being “king of the Jews,” when in reality he is the king not only of the Jews but also of the entire universe. Jesus is given a purple robe fitting for a king, and instead of a golden crown he is given a crown of thorns. “Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee,” said God to Adam after the fall (Genesis 3:18 KJV), and now Christ in his own person willingly accepts thorns for the sake of Adam. Jesus in a short while is enthroned as a king not upon a throne, but rather as a criminal upon the cross, from which he reigns as king of all creation. Biblical scholar Thomas Schmidt notes that this description of Jesus’ passion parallels the triumphal entry of a Roman Emperor upon a military victory, with the meaning intended that Jesus, and not the Emperor, is the true ruler of the world. Schmidt, describing the triumph of a Roman Emperor, says the following:

“To summarize Mark’s narrative as now decoded: The praetorian guard gathers early in the morning to proclaim the triumphator. They dress him in the purple triumphal garb and place a crown of laurel on his head. The soldiers shout in acclamation of his lordship (‘Hail, King of the Jews’ [Mark 15:18]) and perform acts of homage to him. They accompany him through the streets of the city. The sacrifice walks alongside a person who carries the implement of the victim’s death. The procession ascends to the place of the (death’s) head, where the sacrifice is to take place. The triumphator is offered ceremonial wine. He does not drink it but pours it out on the altar at the moment of sacrifice. Then, at the moment of being lifted up before the people, at the moment of the sacrifice, the triumphator is again acclaimed as lord (‘The King of the Jews’ [Mark 15:26]), and his viceregents appear with him in confirmation of his glory. The epiphany of the triumphator is accompanied by divine portents (‘The curtain of the Temple was torn in two’ [Mark 15:38]), confirming that he is one with the gods.”13

And Jesus cried out with a loud voice, and breathed His last.

Then the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. So when the centurion, who stood opposite Him, saw that He cried out like this and breathed His last, he said, “Truly this Man was the Son of God!” (15:37–39)

This passage hearkens back to chapter one at Jesus’ baptism. At both Jesus’ baptism and this crucifixion, there is a voice declaring Jesus to be the Son of God (the Father versus the Roman centurion), something being ripped (the heavens versus the veil of the temple), and the presence of the Spirit (the Holy Spirit as a dove at the baptism, and Jesus’ breath/spirit as he dies at the crucifixion). The phrase “breathed his last” is the Greek word ἐξέπνευσε, which is simply a verbal form of the word “spirit,” which can also mean “breath.” It is for this reason that some older translations render this verse as he “gave up the ghost” (Mark 15:39 KJV). Just as Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is revealed in glory at his baptism, so also here it is revealed in humiliation at his crucifixion.

But when they looked up, they saw that the stone had been rolled away—for it was very large. And entering the tomb, they saw a young man clothed in a long white robe sitting on the right side; and they were alarmed.

But he said to them, “Do not be alarmed. You seek Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified. He is risen! He is not here. See the place where they laid Him. But go, tell His disciples—and Peter—that He is going before you into Galilee; there you will see Him, as He said to you.”

So they went out quickly and fled from the tomb, for they trembled and were amazed. And they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid. (16:4–8)

In this passage, the women are told to go and proclaim Jesus’ resurrection, and yet “they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid.” This is an ironic reversal of the earlier pattern in the Gospel of Mark where Jesus would heal someone, tell them not to tell anyone, and then they would tell everyone anyway (cf. Mark 1:40-45). The phrase “go tell his disciples and Peter” can also be rendered “go tell his disciples, even Peter,” which indicates that the women should be sure to include Peter in the announcement of the resurrection despite his thrice-denial of Christ.

Some ancient manuscripts, such as Codex Sinaiticus, a fourth century biblical manuscript housed at St. Catherine’s Monastery on Mount Sinai, have the Gospel of Mark end at 16:8.14 If it is the case that Mark originally ended at 16:8, the implication seems to be that while the women remained silent and afraid for a time and did not openly proclaim the resurrection of Christ, we on the other hand do openly pronounce the resurrection of Christ. This can be seen in our Paschal Matins, where immediately after the Gospel reading of Mark 16:1-8, we begin chanting “Christ is risen.”15 However, regardless of the textual history of the Gospel of Mark, we know that Mark 16:9-20 has been around since at least the time of St. Irenaeus of Lyons (second century) and is considered by the Orthodox Church to be Scripture.16

So then, after the Lord had spoken to them, He was received up into heaven, and sat down at the right hand of God. And they went out and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them and confirming the word through the accompanying signs. Amen. (16:19–20)

This verse is the fulfillment of Jesus’ trial before the Sanhedrin. There he tells them that he is the Son of Man who is enthroned with God and worshipped with God and subsequently executed on blasphemy charges for making this claim. Here, when Jesus ascends into heaven, he sits down at the right hand of God, the right hand being understood as a place of power and authority in the ancient world (this is still evident today when we refer to someone’s “right-hand man”). St. Irenaeus of Lyons says:

“The ascension confirms what had been spoken by the prophet: ‘The Lord said to my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, until I make thy foes thy footstool.’ (Psalm 109 LXX). Thus God who was announced by the prophets is truly one and the same as God who is celebrated in the true gospel, whom we Christians worship and love with the whole heart as the maker of heaven and earth, and of all things within it.”17

We Orthodox Christians, along with Irenaeus and all the saints, await the coming of Jesus Christ, Son of God and Son of Man, who will appear to make sin and death, our enemies, “as a footstool for our feet” (Psalm 109 LXX) and bring us into his resurrection. To him be honor and glory unto the ages of ages.

If you have any questions about this series, please feel free to reach out to me at jsparks@ocf.net. May God bless your study of the Scriptures.

_____

1: St. Ambrose of Milan, “The Sacraments,” Quoted in Mark (Revised), Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture. <https://www.amazon.com/Mark-Ancient-Christian-Commentary-Scripture/dp/0830814183>. 

2: Blessed Theophylact of Ohrid, “The Collected Commentaries of the Gospels.” <https://www.amazon.com/Collected-Commentaries-Gospels-Blessed-Theophylact-ebook/dp/B0GX2SPG4V/146-6451021-4138616?psc=1>.

3: Blessed Theophylact of Ohrid, “The Collected Commentaries of the Gospels.” <https://www.amazon.com/Collected-Commentaries-Gospels-Blessed-Theophylact-ebook/dp/B0GX2SPG4V/146-6451021-4138616?psc=1>.

4: St. Jerome of Rome, “On the Psalms, Homily 54,” Quoted in Mark (Revised), Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture. <https://www.amazon.com/Mark-Ancient-Christian-Commentary-Scripture/dp/0830814183>. 

5: See, for instance, the excerpts from St. Theophylact of Ohrid and St. Gregory the Dialogist in Thomas Aquinas, Catena Aurea: Commentary on the Four Gospels, Collected out of the Works of the Fathers: St. Mark. <https://www.ecatholic2000.com/catena/untitled-54.shtml>.

6: “Just as Joseph left his mantle behind him, and fled naked from the wanton woman; so also let him, who would escape the hands of the evil ones, quit in mind all that is of the world, and fly after Jesus.” Quoted in Thomas Aquinas, Catena Aurea: Commentary on the Four Gospels, Collected out of the Works of the Fathers: St. Mark. <https://www.ecatholic2000.com/catena/untitled-54.shtml>.

7: Joel Marcus, Mark 8-16: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. <https://yalebooks.yale.edu/book/9780300141160/mark-8-16/>.

8: Joel Marcus, Mark 8-16: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. <https://yalebooks.yale.edu/book/9780300141160/mark-8-16/>.

9: Cf. Acts 7 where the Sanhedrin sentences Stephen to death via stoning. For more about ancient crucifixion practices, see Gary Habermas and Benjamin Shaw, “Crucifixion in the Ancient World: A Historical Analysis.” <https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1188&context=eleu>.

10: St. Augustine of Hippo, Tractates on John. Quoted in Mark (Revised), Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture. <https://www.amazon.com/Mark-Ancient-Christian-Commentary-Scripture/dp/0830814183>. 

11: N.T. Wright and Michael Bird, “The Jewish Context of Jesus and the Early Church,” The New Testament in its World.

12: St. Bede the Venerable, quoted in Thomas Aquinas, Catena Aurea: Commentary on the Four Gospels, Collected out of the Works of the Fathers: St. Mark. <https://www.ecatholic2000.com/catena/untitled-55.shtml>.

13: Thomas Schmidt, “Jesus’ Triumphal March to Crucifixion: The Sacred Way as Roman Procession.” <https://library.biblicalarchaeology.org/article/jesus-triumphal-march-to-crucifixion/>.

14: Bruce Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament. <https://archive.org/details/textual-commentary-on-the-greek-new-testament_202005>.

15: I first heard this interpretation from Fr. George Parsensios in a New Testament course I took with him at Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology.

16: James Snapp Jr., “A Case for the Longer Ending of Mark.” <https://textandcanon.org/a-case-for-the-longer-ending-of-mark/>.

17: St. Ireaneus of Lyons, “Against Praxeas.” Quoted in Mark (Revised), Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture. <https://www.amazon.com/Mark-Ancient-Christian-Commentary-Scripture/dp/0830814183>.