Gospel of Mark 10 chapter comments. Interpretation of the Gospel of Mark. Introduction to the Books of the New Testament
1 Departing from there, he comes to the borders of Judah beyond the Jordanian side. Again the people gather to Him, and, according to His custom, He again taught them.
2 The Pharisees came up and asked, tempting him, Is it lawful for a husband to divorce his wife?
3 He answered and said to them, What commanded you Moses?
4 They said: Moses allowed the letter of divorce to be written and divorced.
5 Jesus answered and said to them, Because of your hardness of heart, he wrote you this commandment.
6 At the beginning of creation, God created them male and female.
7 Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother
8 And he shall cleave to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh; so that they are no longer two, but one flesh.
9 So what God has joined together, let no man separate.
10 In the house, His disciples again asked Him about the same thing.
11 He said to them, Whoever divorces his wife and marries another, he commits adultery by her;
12 And if a wife divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.
13 They brought children to him, that he might touch them; but the disciples did not admit those who offered.
14 When Jesus saw [it], he was indignant and said to them, Let the children come to me, and do not hinder them, for of such is the kingdom of God.
15 Truly I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child will not enter it.
16 And he embraced them, laid his hands on them, and blessed them.
17 As he was setting out on his journey, someone ran up, fell on his knees before him, and asked him: Good teacher! what should I do to inherit eternal life?
18 Jesus said to him, Why do you call me good? Nobody is good but God alone.
19 You know the commandments: do not commit adultery, do not kill, do not steal, do not bear false witness, do not offend, honor your father and mother.
20 And he said to Him in answer: Teacher! all this I have kept from my youth.
21 Jesus, looking at him, loved him and said to him, You lack one thing: go, sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me, taking up the cross.
22 But he, embarrassed at this word, went away sad, because he had a large property.
23 And looking around, Jesus said to his disciples: How difficult it is for those who have riches to enter the kingdom of God!
24 The disciples were horrified at his words. But Jesus again says to them in answer: children! How difficult it is for those who trust in riches to enter the Kingdom of God!
25 It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.
26 And they were exceedingly astonished, and said among themselves, Who then can be saved?
27 Jesus looked at them and said, It is impossible for men, but not for God, for all things are possible with God.
28 And Peter began to say to him, Behold, we have left everything and followed you.
29 Jesus answered and said, “Truly I say to you, there is no one who has left home, or brothers, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or land, for my sake and the gospel,
30 And I would not have received now, in this time, in the midst of persecution, a hundred times more houses, and brothers and sisters, and fathers, and mothers, and children, and lands, but in the age to come, eternal life.
31 But many who are first will be last, and the last will be first.
32 While they were on their way, going up to Jerusalem, Jesus went ahead of them, and they were terrified and, following him, were in fear. Calling the twelve, He again began to tell them about what would happen to Him:
33 Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man will be handed over to the chief priests and scribes, and they will condemn him to death, and hand him over to the Gentiles,
34 And they will mock Him, and they will beat Him, and they will spit on Him, and they will kill Him; and rise on the third day.
35 [Then] the sons of Zebedee James and John came up to him and said: Master! we want You to do to us whatever we ask.
36 He said to them, What do you want me to do for you?
37 They said to him, Let us sit by you, one on your right hand and the other on your left in your glory.
38 But Jesus said to them, You don't know what you are asking. Can you drink the cup that I drink and be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized?
39 They answered: We can. Jesus said to them: The cup that I drink you will drink, and with the baptism with which I am baptized you will be baptized;
40 but let me sit on my right hand and on my left - not from me [depends], but to whom it is prepared.
41 And when the ten heard, they began to be angry with James and John.
42 And Jesus called them, and said to them, You know that those who are honored as princes of the nations rule over them, and their nobles rule over them.
43 But let it not be so among you: but whoever wants to be great among you, let us be your servant;
44 And whoever wants to be first among you, let him be a slave to all.
45 For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life a ransom for many.
46 Come to Jericho. And when He went out of Jericho with His disciples and a multitude of people, Bartimaeus, the son of Timaeus, the blind man sat by the road, begging [alms].
47 When he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to shout and say, Jesus, Son of David! have mercy on me.
48 Many forced him to be silent; but he began to shout even more: Son of David! have mercy on me.
49 Jesus stopped and told him to be called. They call the blind man and say to him: do not be afraid, get up, he is calling you.
50 He threw off outerwear got up and came to Jesus.
51 Answering him, Jesus asked, What do you want from Me? The blind man said to Him: Master! for me to see.
52 Jesus said to him, Go, your faith has saved you. And immediately he received his sight and followed Jesus along the road.
. Therefore a man will leave his father and mother
. and he shall cleave to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh; so that they are no longer two, but one flesh.
. So what God has joined together, let no man separate.
The Lord often left Judea because of the hatred of the Pharisees for Him. But now he is coming back to Judea, because the time of His suffering was drawing near. However, He does not go directly to Jerusalem, but at first only “to the borders of Judea”, in order to benefit the innocuous people; while Jerusalem, through the cunning of the Jews, was the center of all wickedness. And look how out of their malice they tempt the Lord, not enduring the people to believe in Him, but each time approaching Him with the intention of placing Him in difficulty and pinning Him down with their questions. They offer Him such a question, which put Him between two abysses: is it permissible, they say, for a man to let his wife go? For whether He says that it is permissible, or says that it is not permissible, in any case, they thought to accuse Him of contradicting the Law of Moses. But Christ, the Self-Existing Wisdom, answers them in such a way that he avoids their snares. He asks them: What commanded them Moses? And when they answered that Moses commanded to let the wife go, Christ explained to them the Law itself. Moses, He says, was not so unmerciful that He could give such a Law, but he wrote it because of your hardness of heart. Knowing the inhumanity of the Jews, such that a husband who did not love his wife could easily kill her, Moses allowed the husband to let go of his unloved wife. But from the beginning it was not so: God combines two persons in the union of matrimony so that they are one, leaving even their parents. Note that the Lord says: God does not allow polygamy, so that one wife could be let go and another taken, and then again left, and combined with another. If it had pleased God, He would have made one man and many wives; but it did not happen like this, but “God created a man and a woman” so that they would be combined - one husband with one wife. In a figurative sense, it can be understood as follows: the word of the Teaching, throwing good seeds into the soul of a believer, has the meaning of a husband for the soul that receives him. He leaves (the word of teaching) his father, that is, a lofty mind, and his mother, that is, decorated speech, and clings to his wife, that is, to the benefit of the soul, adapts to her and often prefers low thoughts and simple speech. And then they both become one flesh, that is, the soul believes that "the Word (of God) has become flesh," and no human thought can separate the soul from such faith.
. In the house, His disciples again asked Him about the same thing.
. He said to them: whoever divorces his wife and marries another, he commits adultery by her;
. and if a wife divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.
So the disciples were offended (regarding the divorce of a husband and wife), then they also come to Him and ask about the same thing. Their way of thinking was not yet completely sound. The Lord answered them: whoever lets go of his wife and understands another, he becomes an adulterer with this second wife; so also a wife who leaves her husband and is married to another becomes an adulteress.
. They brought children to Him that He might touch them; but the disciples did not admit those who offered.
Seeing That Jesus was indignant and said to them, Let the children come to Me, and do not hinder them, for of such is the kingdom of God.
. I tell you truly, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child will not enter it. And he embraced them, laid his hands on them, and blessed them.
Great was the faith of the people when they accepted the laying on of hands by Christ alone as a blessing for those who were brought to Him, and the disciples did not allow those who brought them, thinking that it was unworthy of Him. What is Christ? Teaching His disciples to be humble and to reject worldly arrogance, He accepts and embraces children. By this He shows that he accepts the mild-tempered; therefore he says: "for of such is the kingdom of God". Note that he did not say: these children “are the Kingdom”, but “such”, that is, those who have acquired the same kindness that children have by nature. For a child does not envy, does not remember evil, and, being punished by her mother, does not run away from her, but even though she wore a sackcloth, she prefers it to the queen; so the one who lives virtuously prefers his mother, I mean, to everything and is not carried away by worldly pleasures. Therefore, the Lord embraces such, saying: "Come to me, all you who are weary and heavy-laden"(), and blesses them, saying: "Come, blessed of my Father"(). Here the preaching of the Gospel and the promise of future blessings are called the Kingdom of God. So, whoever accepts the Divine sermon as a child, that is, without any hesitation and without allowing unbelief in himself, he will enter the Kingdom of God and inherit those blessings that he has already acquired by faith.
. When He went out on the road, someone ran up, fell on his knees before Him and asked Him: Good Teacher! what should I do to inherit eternal life?
. Jesus said to him: why do you call me good? No one is good as only one.
. You know the commandments: do not commit adultery, do not kill, do not steal, do not bear false witness, do not offend, honor your father and mother ().
. He said to Him in answer: Teacher! All this I have kept from my youth.
. Jesus, looking at him, fell in love with him and said to him: You lack one thing: go, sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me, taking up the cross.
. He, embarrassed by this word, departed with sorrow, because he had a large estate.
Some falsely represent this young man as a cunning and deceitful tempter. This is not so: he was only a covetous person, and not a tempter. For listen to what the evangelist remarks: "Jesus looked at him and loved him". And why did Christ answer him like this: “No one is good”? Because he approached Christ as a simple person and as one of many teachers. Christ, as it were, says this: “If you consider Me good, as a simple teacher, then in comparison with God, not a single person is good; If you acknowledge Me as good as God, why do you call Me only a teacher? With these words, Christ wants to convey the highest thought about Himself, so that he would know Him as God. In addition, in order to correct the young man, the Lord gives him another lesson: if he wants to talk with someone, then he must speak without flattery, and know only one root and source of goodness - God and give Him proper honor. However, I am surprised at this young man that, when all the others came to Christ for healing from illnesses, he himself asks for the inheritance of eternal life - if only he were not possessed by the passion of greed that was still strong in him. By this passion, having heard the words of the Lord: “Go, sell... and give to the poor", He "departed with sadness". Note at the same time that the Lord did not say: sell in parts what you have and give it away, but sell it all at once and give it out, but only to the poor, and not to caresses and not to debauchees; Then: "follow me", that is, adopt every other virtue, for there are many who, although not acquisitive, are not humble, or humble, but not sober, or have some other vice. Therefore, the Lord does not only say: "sell and give to the poor", But: "and come, follow me, taking up the cross" which means to be ready for His sake. “But he, embarrassed by this word, departed with sadness, because he had a large estate”. It is not in vain that it is added that he had a lot: for it is bad and dangerous to own a little, and the bonds of many acquisitions are completely insoluble. But the one who is young in spirit, frivolous, inattentive in thought, not arranged by reason, let him sell his property in the same way, somehow: anger and lust, with all that vegetates from them, and give it away, throw it to demons, which are poor , deprived of all goodness and wealth, because they fell away from the goodness of God, and then let them follow Christ, for he can only follow Christ who rejects the wealth of sins, which is the property of demons. "Escape, - it is said, - from evil": this means to throw sinful wealth to the poor, that is, to the forces of demons; "and do good": what does it mean to follow Christ and take up His Cross ().
. And, looking around, Jesus said to His disciples: how difficult it is for those who have riches to enter the Kingdom of God!
. The disciples were horrified at His words. But Jesus again says to them in answer: children! How difficult it is for those who trust in riches to enter the Kingdom of God!
. It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God.
. And they were exceedingly astonished, and said among themselves, Who then can be saved?
. Jesus, looking at them, says: it is impossible for men, but not for God, for everything is possible with God.
Not wealth is evil in itself, but those who protect it are evil and worthy of condemnation, because they should not have it, that is, keep it, but use it for good. That is why it is called wealth because it is intended for beneficial use and not for savings. Therefore, it is difficult for those who protect and lock it "Enter the Kingdom of God". And the word "difficult" here means the same thing as impossible. It is indeed too difficult for a rich man to be saved. This is evident from the example that the Lord adds, saying: “It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God.” Under the name of a camel, understand either the animal itself, or a thick rope (rope) used on large ships. So it is impossible for a man to be saved while he is rich. But from God it is possible. Christ said: "Get friends with unrighteous wealth"(). Do you see how everything becomes possible when we hear the Word of God! "It's impossible for humans", that is, it is impossible when we reason like human beings. But why were the disciples so amazed at these words? After all, they themselves were never rich? I think that in this case they cared about all people, since they were already beginning to be philanthropic. Some wonder how Christ said that "All things are possible with God". Can he really make a mistake? To this we answer that when Christ says: “everything,” he means everything that is essential, but is not anything essential: sin is something inessential, inactive, or, in other words, sin is an attribute not of strength, but of weakness, as well as the apostle says: "Christ, while we were still weak... died"(), and David says: "Sorrows multiply their" (). This means that sin, as weakness, is impossible for God. But can God, they say, make the former as well as the former? To this we say: God is the Truth, and to make the former, as though it were not, is a lie. How will the lie do? To do this, He would first have to change His Being. To speak in this way would be to say that God may not be God either.
. And Peter began to say to Him, Behold, we have left everything and followed You.
. Jesus answered and said, “Truly I say to you, there is no one who will leave home, or brothers, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or land, for the sake of me and the gospel,
. and I would not have received now, in this time, in the midst of persecution, a hundred times more houses, and brothers and sisters, and fathers, and mothers, and children, and lands, but in the age to come, eternal life.
. Many will be the first last, and the last first.
Although Peter left little for the sake of Christ, yet even this little he calls "everything." It can be seen that few have the bonds of predilection; wherefore, even he who leaves a little is worthy of appeasement. Peter alone asked Christ, but the Lord gives a general answer for all: anyone who leaves his wife or mother. He says this not so that we leave our parents helpless or be separated from our wives, but teaches us to prefer pleasing God to everything carnal. Since the preaching of the Gospel was to kindle warfare among people, so that the children had to renounce their fathers, the Lord says: whoever leaves carnal kinship and in general everything carnal for the sake of the Gospel, he will receive all this a hundred times more in this age, and in future, eternal life. So won't he get a hundred times more wives? Yes, - although the accursed Julian sneered at it. For tell me, what is the use of a wife in the household of her husband? In general, she takes care of food and clothing for her husband and in this respect fully provides for her husband. See how it was with the apostles. How many women took care of bringing them clothes and food and served them, so that they themselves had no care for anything but the word and doctrine! Likewise, the apostles had many fathers and mothers, as were all those who loved them and cared for them sincerely. Peter left one house, and later had (as his own) all the houses of his disciples. He still has bright houses all over the earth - temples in his name. And more importantly, the saints inherited all this in exile, that is, being persecuted for the faith of Christ, and in severe suffering, but their suffering was not disgrace to them. For they, who seemed to be the last in the present age, because of the tribulations and persecutions they endure, will be the first in the next age because of their strong hope in God. Pharisees former became the last, and those who left everything and followed Christ became the first.
. While they were on their way, going up to Jerusalem, Jesus went ahead of them, and they were terrified and, following Him, were in fear. Calling the twelve, He again began to speak to them about what would happen to Him:
. Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man will be handed over to the chief priests and scribes, and they will condemn Him to death, and hand Him over to the Gentiles,
. and they will mock him, and they will beat him, and they will spit on him, and they will kill him; and rise on the third day.
Why does Jesus tell His disciples what will happen to Him? To strengthen their spirit, so that, having previously heard about it, they courageously endured it when it happens, and were not struck by suddenness; and at the same time they should have known that He suffered according to His will. For whoever foresaw suffering could have avoided it, and if he did not flee, it is clear that he betrays himself to suffering by will. But since only the closest disciples should have revealed about His suffering, He precedes everyone on the path, wishing to separate the disciples from the people. Yet by forestalling everyone and by His haste on His path, the Lord also shows that He hurries to suffering and does not run away from death for the sake of our salvation. All that He expresses in this case, although regrettable, but for all this he consoles with the fact that "on the third day he will rise again."
Then Zebedee's sons James and John came up to him and said: Master! we want You to do to us whatever we ask.
. He said to them, What do you want me to do for you?
. They said to him, let us sit by you, one on your right hand and the other on your left, in your glory.
. But Jesus said to them, You don't know what you are asking. Can you drink the cup that I drink and be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized?
Another evangelist () says that their mother (James and John) approached Jesus. But, probably, it was both: these two apostles, being ashamed of others, sent their mother in advance, and then they themselves approached separately, as the evangelist indicates, saying: "come to Him", that is, they approached especially, moving away from the others. What did they ask for? Ascension of Christ to Jerusalem, about which He talked with the disciples, they understood that He was going to receive the realm of the senses and already upon His accession would endure the sufferings that He predicted. Thinking in this way, they ask to sit on the right and on the left side of Christ. Therefore, the Lord reproaches them, as those who do not understand what they are asking: "You do not know," he says, "what you are asking for." and to sit at my right hand is the greatest work, exceeding even the ranks of angels. Moreover, you dream of glory, and I call you to death. He calls the Cross a cup and Baptism, - a cup because the Cross, like a cup of wine, was soon to bring Him to the sleep of death, - and He was ready to accept the cup of suffering, as a sweet drink for himself, and by Baptism - because by the Cross He accomplished the cleansing of our sins. But the disciples, not understanding the words of the Lord, make a promise on their part, thinking that He speaks of the sensual cup and of the baptism which the Jews had, who washed themselves before eating food.
. They answered: we can. Jesus said to them: The cup that I drink you will drink, and with the baptism with which I am baptized you will be baptized; but let me sit on my right side and on my left - not from me depends but to whom it is destined.
You, - he says, - will enter the feat of martyrdom and die for the truth, “but it’s not up to me to let you sit down”. But there are two confusions here. First, is this seat reserved for whom? Second: Can it be that the universal Lord cannot give this sitting? We answer: no one will sit either on the right hand or on the left. And if you hear that the Scriptures repeatedly speak of such sitting, then do not mean sitting (in the proper sense), but the highest dignity. And the words: "it does not depend on me" have the following meaning: I, the righteous Judge, do not tend to give you such a dignity out of love for you alone; otherwise I would not be just; but such an honor is prepared only for those who strive. It is as if a just king had placed some ascetic above the others, and his favorites, having come, would have said to him: “give us crowns”; then the king, of course, would have answered: “it does not depend on me,” but whoever struggles and wins, the crown is prepared for him. “So you sons of Zebedee can and will be martyrs for Me; but if anyone, along with martyrdom, has every other virtue more than you, he will have an advantage over you.
. and whoever wants to be first among you, let him be a slave to all.. For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.
The disciples, while still reasoning like a human being, fell into envy, and therefore they are indignant at the two apostles. However, when? When they saw that the petition of the latter was not accepted by the Lord, but rejected, then they began to be indignant. While the Lord Himself gave preference to James and John, the other disciples, seeing this, endured; but when those two disciples began to ask for honors for themselves, the others could no longer bear it. So still imperfect were they at that time! But later we will see how each of them gave way to the other. Now, however, Christ heals them, having first pacified them, and for this purpose having brought them closer to Himself, which is signified by the word "calling". Then he shows that to admire the honor of others and to strive for primacy is the work of paganism. For pagan rulers forcefully subject others to their power; but My disciples, he says, are not so: but whoever among them wants to be great, let him serve everyone, because this is also a sign of a great soul - to endure from everyone and serve everyone. There is also an example of this nearby: "For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life a ransom for many". And this is more than service. Indeed, not only to serve, but also to die for the one you serve - what can be higher and more wonderful than this? But such service and humility of the Lord was the height and glory both for Himself and for everyone. For before incarnation He was led only by Angels, and having become a man and endured the Crucifixion, He not only has that glory (heavenly), but also received another, and reigns over the whole universe.
. They come to Jericho. And when He went out of Jericho with His disciples and a multitude of people, Bartimaeus, the son of Timaeus, the blind man sat by the road, asking alms .
. Hearing that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to shout and say: Jesus, Son of David! have mercy on me.
. Many forced him to be silent; but he began to shout even more: Son of David! have mercy on me. . Jesus said to him: go, your faith has saved you. And immediately he received his sight and followed Jesus along the road.
Matthew speaks of two blind men: and perhaps two were healed; but probably one of them attracted more attention, the one that Mark now mentions. But look how the people honor Jesus: they even forbid a blind man to shout, as if some king were passing through here. And Jesus asks the blind man so that they do not say that He does not give what the blind man wanted. And the soul of the blind man was prudent, for after he was healed he did not leave Jesus, but followed Him. And (alegorically) it can be understood as follows: Jericho means a low place (the world); the blind man sitting here is an image of human nature, which was once adopted by God, above all earthly honor; it called out to Christ passing through Jericho, that is, this world. But Christ had mercy on him and saved him by faith when he put off the old garment of sin. Upon receiving salvation, it followed Him (Christ), fulfilling the commandments on its way, that is, in this life. For it is only in this life that one can follow Christ, and after it the doors (of salvation) are already closed, and there will no longer be time for the fulfillment of the commandments of God.
Commentary on the book
Section comment
2-12cm Matthew 5:31-32. "If a wife divorces her husband"- here the influence of Roman law is noticeable; according to Jewish law, the right to divorce belonged only to the husband.
18 "No one is good" - see Mt 19:17.
24 "The disciples were horrified at His words"Wealth and prosperity were usually considered by the Jews as a blessing from God.
25 "Eye of a needle" is a figurative comparison indicating that it is extremely difficult for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. The rich should be understood as a person tied to his wealth.
30 A paradoxical expression indicating the fullness of being in the Kingdom of God.
32 "Ahead of them" - Christ walked separately, and the disciples followed Him in fear. They were horrified by His determination to face danger and at the same time, as Mark 10:35-37 hoped that Jesus would have a royal triumph in Jerusalem.
37 "Sit on the right and left side"when You reign.
38 "Drink the Cup" (cf. Mark 14:36) And " be baptized"- the image of the coming Passion of Christ; letters, the meaning of the Greek verb" baptizw "- to immerse; the Lord will be immersed in the abyss of suffering (see also Mt 26:39).
47 "Nazarite", more precisely the Nazarene (see Matthew 2:23).
1. John, who bore the second, Latin name Mark, was a resident of Jerusalem. Ap. Peter and other disciples of Christ often gathered at his mother's house (Acts 12:12). Mark was the nephew of ap Joseph Barnabas, a Levite, a native of Fr. Cyprus, who lived in Jerusalem (Acts 4:36; Col 4:10). Subsequently, Mark and Barnabas were the companions of St. Paul on his missionary journeys (Acts 12:25), and Mark, as a young man, was destined "for service" (Acts 13:5). During the trip of the apostles to Perga, Mark left them, probably because of the difficulties of the journey, and returned to his homeland in Jerusalem (Acts 13:13; Acts 15:37-39). After the Apostolic Council (c. 49), Mark and Barnabas withdrew to Cyprus. In the 60s, Mark again accompanies St. Paul (Philm 1:24), and then becomes the companion of St. Peter, who calls him his “son” (1 Peter 5:13).
2. Papias of Hierapolis reports: “Mark, the translator of Peter, accurately wrote down everything that he remembered, although he did not adhere to the strict order of the words and deeds of Christ, because he himself did not listen to the Lord and did not accompany Him. Subsequently, however, he was, as it was said, with Peter, but Peter expounded the doctrine in order to satisfy the needs of the listeners, and not in order to convey the Lord’s conversations in order ”(Eusebius, Church. History. Ill, 39). According to Clement of Alexandria, “while the Apostle Peter was preaching the gospel in Rome, Mark, his companion, ... wrote ... the Gospel, called the Gospel of Mark” (cf. Eusebius, Church. Ist. 11, 15).
St. Justin, quoting one passage from Mk, directly calls it "Peter's Memoirs" (Dialogue with Trypho, 108). St. Irenaeus of Lyon reports that Mark wrote his Gospel in Rome shortly after the martyrdom of Peter, whose "disciple and translator" he was (Against Heresies, III, 1,1). An Peter was crucified in all likelihood in 64 (or in 67), and, therefore, the Gospel of Mk must be dated to the end of the 60s.
3. Mark is speaking to Gentile Christians living mainly in Rome. Therefore, he expounds to his readers the geography of Palestine, often explains Jewish customs and Aramaic expressions. Everything related to Roman life, he believes known. For the same reason, there are far fewer references to the OT in Mark than in Matthew. Much of Mark's narrative is similar to that of Matthew, and therefore comments on parallel texts are not repeated.
4. the main objective Mark is to establish in converted Gentiles faith in the divinity of Jesus Christ. Therefore, a significant part of his gospel is occupied by stories of miracles. In doing them, Christ at first hides His Messiahship, as if expecting that people would first accept Him as a Wonderworker and Teacher. At the same time, Mark, more than Matthew, paints the image of Christ as a person (eg Mk 3:5; Mk 6:34; Mk 8:2; Mk 10:14-16). This is explained by the closeness of the author to an Peter, who conveyed to his listeners the living image of the Lord.
More than other evangelists, Mark pays attention to the personality of the head of the apostles.
5. The plan of Mark: I. The period of hidden messianism: 1) The preaching of the Baptist, the baptism of the Lord and temptation in the wilderness (Mark 1:1-13); 2) Ministry in Capernaum and other cities of Galilee (Mark 1:14-8:26). II. The Mystery of the Son of Man: 1) Peter's confession, transfiguration and journey to Jerusalem (Mk 8:27-10:52); 2) preaching in Jerusalem (Mark 11:1-13:37). III. Passion. Resurrection (Mark 14:1-16:20).
INTRODUCTION TO THE BOOKS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT
The Holy Scriptures of the New Testament were written in Greek, with the exception of the Gospel of Matthew, which is said to have been written in Hebrew or Aramaic. But since this Hebrew text has not survived, the Greek text is considered the original for the Gospel of Matthew. Thus, only the Greek text of the New Testament is the original, and numerous editions in various modern languages all over the world are translations from the Greek original.
Greek language in which it was written New Testament, was no longer a classical ancient Greek language and was not, as previously thought, a special New Testament language. This is conversational everyday language first century A.D., spread in the Greco-Roman world and known in science under the name "κοινη", i.e. "common speech"; yet the style, and turns of speech, and way of thinking of the sacred writers of the New Testament reveal the Hebrew or Aramaic influence.
The original text of the NT has come down to us in a large number of ancient manuscripts, more or less complete, numbering about 5000 (from the 2nd to the 16th century). Before recent years the most ancient of them did not go back beyond the 4th century no P.X. But lately, many fragments of ancient manuscripts of the NT on papyrus (3rd and even 2nd c) have been discovered. So, for example, Bodmer's manuscripts: Ev from John, Luke, 1 and 2 Peter, Jude - were found and published in the 60s of our century. In addition to Greek manuscripts, we have ancient translations or versions into Latin, Syriac, Coptic and other languages (Vetus Itala, Peshitto, Vulgata, etc.), of which the oldest existed already from the 2nd century AD.
Finally, numerous quotations from the Church Fathers in Greek and other languages have been preserved in such quantity that if the text of the New Testament were lost and all ancient manuscripts were destroyed, then specialists could restore this text from quotations from the works of the Holy Fathers. All this abundant material makes it possible to check and refine the text of the NT and classify it. various forms(the so-called textual criticism). Compared with any ancient author (Homer, Euripides, Aeschylus, Sophocles, Cornelius Nepos, Julius Caesar, Horace, Virgil, etc.), our modern - printed - Greek text of the NT is in an exceptionally favorable position. And by the number of manuscripts, and by the brevity of the time separating the oldest of them from the original, and by the number of translations, and by their antiquity, and by the seriousness and volume of critical work carried out on the text, it surpasses all other texts (for details, see "The Hidden Treasures and new life”, Archaeological Discoveries and the Gospel, Bruges, 1959, pp. 34 ff.). The text of the NT as a whole is fixed quite irrefutably.
The New Testament consists of 27 books. They are subdivided by the publishers into 260 chapters of unequal length for the purpose of providing references and citations. The original text does not contain this division. The modern division into chapters in the New Testament, as in the whole of the Bible, has often been attributed to the Dominican Cardinal Hugh (1263), who elaborated it in his symphony to the Latin Vulgate, but it is now thought with great reason that this division goes back to Stephen the Archbishop of Canterbury. Langton, who died in 1228. As for the division into verses now accepted in all editions of the New Testament, it goes back to the publisher of the Greek New Testament text, Robert Stephen, and was introduced by him into his edition in 1551.
The sacred books of the New Testament are usually divided into law-positive (Four Gospels), historical (Acts of the Apostles), teaching (seven epistles and fourteen epistles of the Apostle Paul) and prophetic: the Apocalypse or Revelation of St. John the Evangelist (see the Long Catechism of St. Philaret of Moscow).
However, modern experts consider this distribution outdated: in fact, all the books of the New Testament are law-positive, historical, and instructive, and there is prophecy not only in the Apocalypse. New Testament science pays great attention to the exact establishment of the chronology of the gospel and other New Testament events. Scientific chronology allows the reader to follow the life and ministry of our Lord Jesus Christ, the apostles and the original Church according to the New Testament with sufficient accuracy (see Appendixes).
The books of the New Testament can be distributed as follows:
1) Three so-called Synoptic Gospels: Matthew, Mark, Luke and, separately, the fourth: the Gospel of John. New Testament scholarship devotes much attention to the study of the relationship of the first three Gospels and their relation to the Gospel of John (the synoptic problem).
2) The Book of the Acts of the Apostles and the Epistles of the Apostle Paul ("Corpus Paulinum"), which are usually divided into:
a) Early Epistles: 1 and 2 Thessalonians.
b) Greater Epistles: Galatians, 1st and 2nd Corinthians, Romans.
c) Messages from bonds, i.e. written from Rome, where ap. Paul was in prison: Philippians, Colossians, Ephesians, Philemon.
d) Pastoral Epistles: 1st to Timothy, to Titus, 2nd to Timothy.
e) The Epistle to the Hebrews.
3) Catholic Epistles ("Corpus Catholicum").
4) Revelation of John the Theologian. (Sometimes in the NT they single out "Corpus Joannicum", i.e. everything that ap Ying wrote for a comparative study of his Gospel in connection with his epistles and the book of Rev.).
FOUR GOSPEL
1. The word "gospel" (ευανγελιον) in Greek means "good news". This is how our Lord Jesus Christ Himself called His teaching (Mt 24:14; Mt 26:13; Mk 1:15; Mk 13:10; Mk 14:9; Mk 16:15). Therefore, for us, the "gospel" is inextricably linked with Him: it is the "good news" of salvation given to the world through the incarnate Son of God.
Christ and His apostles preached the gospel without writing it down. By the middle of the 1st century, this sermon had been fixed by the Church in a strong oral tradition. The Eastern custom of memorizing sayings, stories, and even large texts by heart helped the Christians of the apostolic age to accurately preserve the unwritten First Gospel. After the 1950s, when eyewitnesses to Christ's earthly ministry began to pass away one by one, the need arose to record the gospel (Luke 1:1). Thus, the “gospel” began to denote the narrative recorded by the apostles about the life and teachings of the Savior. It was read at prayer meetings and in preparing people for baptism.
2. The most important Christian centers of the 1st century (Jerusalem, Antioch, Rome, Ephesus, etc.) had their own gospels. Of these, only four (Mt, Mk, Lk, Jn) are recognized by the Church as inspired by God, i.e. written under the direct influence of the Holy Spirit. They are called "from Matthew", "from Mark", etc. (Greek “kata” corresponds to Russian “according to Matthew”, “according to Mark”, etc.), for the life and teachings of Christ are set forth in these books by these four priests. Their gospels were not brought together in one book, which made it possible to see the gospel story from different points of view. In the 2nd century, St. Irenaeus of Lyon calls the evangelists by name and points to their gospels as the only canonical ones (Against Heresies 2, 28, 2). A contemporary of St. Irenaeus, Tatian, made the first attempt to create a single gospel narrative, composed of various texts of the four gospels, the Diatessaron, i.e. gospel of four.
3. The apostles did not set themselves the goal of creating a historical work in the modern sense of the word. They sought to spread the teachings of Jesus Christ, helped people to believe in Him, correctly understand and fulfill His commandments. The testimonies of the evangelists do not coincide in all details, which proves their independence from each other: the testimonies of eyewitnesses are always individual in color. The Holy Spirit does not certify the accuracy of the details of the facts described in the gospel, but the spiritual meaning contained in them.
The minor contradictions encountered in the presentation of the evangelists are explained by the fact that God gave the clergymen complete freedom in conveying certain specific facts in relation to different categories of listeners, which further emphasizes the unity of meaning and direction of all four gospels (see also General Introduction, pp. 13 and 14) .
Hide
Commentary on the current passage
Commentary on the book
Section comment
1 (See Matthew 19:1) Ev. Mark notes that Christ is after a rather long interval (cf. 9:30 ) again, as he used to do before, began to teach the whole masses of the people who followed Him (ὄχλοι ).
2-12 Talk about the indissolubility of marriage in ev. Mark in general is a repetition of what is contained in Ev. Matthew ( Matthew 19:3-12). Only some sayings of Christ in Ev. Mark placed in other places than the Ev. Matthew.
2 Is it permissible for a husband and wife to divorce? Ev. Mark conveys the question of the Pharisees without the addition found in Heb. Matthew: for every reason ( Matthew 19:3). It can be thought that he does this with the aim of raising the question not on Jewish, but on Christian soil: he had in mind his Christian readers from the Gentiles, who were undoubtedly interested in the question of the permissibility of divorce in Christianity.
3 He told them. Ev. Matthew relates the case in such a way that Christ first drew the attention of the Pharisees to the heavenly law on marriage, and then to the law of Moses, meanwhile Ev. Mark conveys Christ's instructions in reverse order. Obviously, both evangelists wanted to convey only the essence of Christ's conversation with the Pharisees, not keeping to a strictly chronological order.
10 In the house, His disciples again asked Him about the same. In the house, the Lord was now approached with the same question as the Pharisees (this is the meaning of the expression “again”: the disciples had not asked Christ about divorce before ...), the disciples of Christ.
12 If a woman gets divorced. Since the Apostle Mark wrote his Gospel for pagan Christians, and among the pagans - Roman - there were cases when women divorced their husbands, he withheld from Christ's speech the mention of this case, which is not mentioned by Ev. Matthew. Generally ev. Mark had in mind the general Christian interests, and therefore in him almost always the instructions of Christ have a more general application.
13-16 (See Mt 13:15) Ev. Mark says that children were "brought" to Christ. This indicates that by children he means infants at a very early age. From "touching" Christ, the children who brought them, according to belief, were to receive health (cf. 1:41 ; 3:10 ).
14 Christ was indignant with the disciples because they did not understand that even children should not be excluded from the number of members of the Kingdom of God.
15 Who will not receive the Kingdom of God as a child, that is, who will not now accept the sermon about the coming Kingdom with childish credulity, who will not believe in Christ with all their heart.
He won't get in, i.e., into the future glorious Kingdom of God, which will open at the end of time.
16 And embraced them. More correctly: He took them in His arms, laid His hands on others and blessed them.
This place has rightly been recognized from ancient times as the main point in the evidence that was cited in favor of the custom of baptizing and babies.
17-27 (See Matthew 19:16-26) Ev. Mark in this section completes the story of the Jews. Matthew. He reports that someone (in Matthew - "a young man") ran up to Christ and fell on his knees before Him, thus testifying to his sincere desire to learn from Christ the whole truth on the question that occupied him and about his trust in Christ.
19 Do not offend . This expression, in all likelihood, is a summary of the content of the 10th commandment, which deals with various insults caused by people to their neighbors.
21 Looked at him, fell in love with him. Christ was pleased with the thirst with which the young man strove to achieve the truth, his desire to look into the depths of the law, not limited to its external, literal fulfillment.
You are missing one. What? By this “one” one cannot understand what Christ lists below: the sale of property, distribution to the poor, and research after Christ, because these are no longer one, but three things. According to the context of the speech, it is best to see here the designation of repentance or turning, like a child, to Christ.
Taking the cross - cf. 8:34 . However, this expression is absent in the best codes.
23 How difficult it is for those who hope for wealth. In the best codices, the words "hoping for wealth" are not available (Tischendorf, 8th ed.). The Lord says that access to the Kingdom of Heaven is difficult in general.
28-31 (See Matthew 19:27-30) Ev. Mark defines more precisely the reward that awaits faithful followers of Christ. He says that this reward is twofold—temporal and eternal (Heb. Matthew speaks only of an eternal reward, in the Hereafter). Here the believer will receive a hundred times more than what he refused for the sake of Christ, and there, beyond the grave, eternal life, or eternal bliss. Of course, by new houses, fathers, brothers, etc., one must understand the spiritual blessings and ties that one who follows Christ and breaks for this connection with his relatives according to the flesh finds in the new life. However, Christ adds that Christians must at the same time endure persecution (in the midst of persecution): they will not be delivered from the persecution of their enemies in this age ( ἐν τω̨̃ καιρω̨̃ τούτω̨ ). In the mention of receiving rewards on earth, there is no mention of compensation for separation from the “wife”. Bliss. Theophylact reports that the wicked Julian deliberately inserted such a mention here, as if accusing Christians of the fact that, according to the teaching of their Savior, they can have as many wives as they like, having parted with the wives they had when they were pagans. Thus, the Lord deliberately did not mention, did not repeat this expression “wife” in the promise of a reward ... The fulfillment of Christ's prophecy regarding earthly rewards to a follower of Christ can be read in the book. Acts 2:44ff. , 4:32,37 ; Rom 16:13; 1 Tim 5:2 and in other places apost. messages, where elders are recommended to be revered as fathers, old women as mothers, etc.
32-34 (See Matthew 20:17-19) Ev. Mark notices that when Christ and the apostles ascended to Jerusalem, where Christ was to taste martyrdom, Christ walked ahead of the apostles, as if encouraging them, and they were horrified, i.e., were in extreme surprise at His boldness.
32 And, following him, were in fear. According to the best reading: and those that followed ( οἱ ἀκολουθου̃ντες ), that is, people who sympathized with Christ (not the apostles) and went with Him to Jerusalem. They were very afraid, hearing the speeches of Christ about the death awaiting Him in Jerusalem.
34 They spit on him - as a sign of contempt for Christ ( Mt 26:67).
35-45 (See Matthew 20:20-28) Ev. Mark says that the sons of Zebedee themselves turned to Christ with a request. By this he explains that the request of their mother, about which Ev. Matthew, was caused by the suggestion of James and John, who themselves were embarrassed to turn directly to Christ.
37 In thy glory, see Matthew 19:28 .
46-52 (See Matthew 20:30-34) Ev. Mark mentions only one blind man, and Matthew mentions two. Perhaps Mark only mentioned the one of the two that was more famous in the Christian Church. That is why he probably calls him by his first name - Bartemeus. It can be assumed that this name was composed of two words: the Hebrew Var, which means "son" and the Greek Timaeus - an abbreviation of the name Timothy. Yev himself. Mark translates this name as meaning "son of Timaeus."
50 He took off his outerwear. Outerwear, a rather wide cloak, prevented the blind man from running to Christ.
51 Ravbouni. The blind man uses an expression that in Hebrew literature had a particularly lofty meaning and was almost always applied only to God.
52 your faith saved you- cf. 5:34 And Mt 15:28 .
Biblical data on the personality of St. Mark. The proper name of the writer of the second gospel was John - Mark (Μα ̃ ρκος) was his nickname. The latter was accepted by him, probably, when Barnabas and Saul, returning from Jerusalem (Acts 12:25), took him with them to Antioch to make him their companion on missionary journeys. Why John adopted such a nickname, some answer can be found in the similarity of the initial three letters of this nickname with the three initial letters of his mother's name, Mary.
For a long time John Mark was on friendly terms with St. Peter. When this apostle was miraculously freed from prison, he came to the house of Mary, the mother of John, called Mark (Acts 12:12). Shortly before his death, the apostle Peter calls Mark his son (1 Peter 5:13), showing by this that he converted Mark to faith in Christ. This conversion took place early, because Mark is a companion of the apostles Barnabas and Paul around Pascha 44. In the autumn of that year, he settled in Antioch and, perhaps, was engaged in preaching the gospel. However, he did not stand out for anything special at that time - at least his name is not mentioned in the 1st verse of the 13th chapter. Acts, where there is a list of the most prominent prophets and teachers who were at that time in Antioch. Still, in the 50th year, in the spring, Barnabas and Paul took Mark with them on their first missionary journey as a servant (υ ̔ πηρέτης — Acts 13:5). From Colossians (Colossians 4:10) we learn that Mark was Barnabas's cousin (α ̓ νεψ ιός). But if the fathers of Barnabas and Mark were siblings, then we can assume that Mark belonged to the tribe of Levi, to which, according to legend, Barnabas belonged. Barnabas introduced Mark to Paul. However, in Perga, and maybe even earlier, when departing from Paphos on about. Cyprus, Mark separated from Paul and Barnabas (Acts 13:13). Probably, further participation in their “work” seemed difficult to him (Acts 15:38), especially the journey through the mountains of Pamphylia, and his very position as a “servant” under the apostles could seem somewhat humiliating to him.
After this, Mark returned to Jerusalem (Acts 13:13). When Barnabas, after the apostolic council and, it seems, after a short stay in Antioch (about the year 52, Acts 15:35), wanted to take Mark again on a second missionary journey, which he undertook again from St. Paul, the latter opposed the intention of Barnabas, considering Mark incapable of making long and difficult journeys in order to spread the gospel. The dispute that arose between the apostles ended (in Antioch) with the fact that Barnabas took Mark with him and went with him to his homeland - Cyprus, and Paul, taking Silas as his companion, went with him on a missionary journey through Asia Minor. But where did Mark stay between his return to Jerusalem and his departure from Barnabas to Fr. Cyprus (Acts 15:36), unknown. The most likely assumption is that he was at that time in Jerusalem and was present at the apostolic council. From here he could be taken with him to Cyprus by Barnabas, who had previously parted ways with ap. Paul precisely because of Mark.
From now on, Mark disappears from sight for a long time, namely from the 52nd year to the 62nd. When Paul, about the year 62 or 63, wrote from Rome to Philemon, while conveying greetings to him from various men, whom he calls his co-workers, he also names Mark (v. 24). From the same Mark, he sends a greeting in the letter to the Colossians written simultaneously with the letter to Philemon (Colossians 4:10). Here he calls Mark "cousin" of Barnabas (according to the Russian text - "nephew". This is an inaccurate rendering of the Greek word α ̓ νεψιός) and adds that the Colossian church received certain instructions regarding Mark, and asks the Colossians to accept Mark when he will come. It is significant that Paul here names Mark and Justus as his only co-workers for the Kingdom of God, who were his comfort (Col. 4:11). From here it can be seen that Mark was under St. Paul during his Roman bonds and assisted him in the work of spreading the gospel in Rome. When his reconciliation with Paul took place is unknown.
Then we see Mark together with the apostle Peter in Asia, on the banks of the Euphrates, where Babylon used to stand and where the Christian church was founded under the apostles (1 Peter 5:13). It can be concluded from this that Mark indeed went from Rome to Colossae (cf. Col. 4:10) and met St. Peter, who kept Mark for some time with him. Then he was at ap. Timothy in Ephesus, as can be seen from the fact that St. Paul instructs Timothy to bring Mark with him to Rome, saying that he needs Mark for the ministry (2 Tim 4:11), - of course, for the preaching ministry, and maybe also to get acquainted with the mood of the 12 apostles, with whose representative, Peter, Mark was on the most friendly terms. Since 2 Timothy was written around the year 66 or 67, and Mark, according to Col 4:10, was supposed to go to Asia around the year 63-64, it follows that he was away from the an. Paul for about three years, and, most likely, traveled with St. Peter.
In addition to these, one might say, direct evidence about the life of Martha, in his gospel itself one can also find information about his personality. So it is very probable that he was the young man who followed the procession in which Christ was taken in Gethsemane, and who fled from those who wanted to seize him, leaving in their hands the veil with which he wrapped himself (Mark 14:51). Perhaps he was also present at Christ's last Paschal supper (see comment on Mark 14:19). There are also some indications that the evangelist himself was present at some of the other events in the life of Christ that he describes (eg, Mark 1:5 et seq.; Mark 3:8 and Mark 3:22; Mark 11:16).
What does St. the tradition of Mark and his gospel. The oldest testimony about the writer of the second Gospel is found by Papias, Bishop of Hierapolis. This bishop, according to Eusebius of Caesarea (Church. Historian III, 39), wrote: “The presbyter (i.e., John the Theologian - according to the generally accepted opinion) also said: “Mark, the interpreter (ε ̔ ρμηνευτη ̀ ς) of Peter Mark, through the compilation of his work, became the "interpreter" of Peter, that is, he conveyed to many what the apostle said. Peter became, as it were, the mouth of Peter. It is erroneous to assume that Mark is characterized here as a “translator”, whose services were allegedly used by ap. Peter and who was needed by Peter in Rome to translate his speeches into Latin. First, Peter hardly needed an interpreter for his sermons. Secondly, the word ε ̔ ρμηνευτη ̀ ς in classical Greek often denoted a messenger, a transmitter of the will of the gods (Plato, Republic). Finally, the blessed Jerome (letter 120 to Gedibia) Titus is called the interpreter of Paul, as is Mark the interpreter of Peter. Both indicate only that these co-workers of the apostles proclaimed their will and desires. Perhaps, however, Titus, as a natural Greek, was a collaborator of St. Paul in writing epistles; as an experienced stylist, he could give the apostle an explanation of some Greek terms., wrote down with accuracy, as far as he remembered, what the Lord taught and did, although not in order, for he himself did not listen to the Lord and did not accompany Him. Afterwards, it is true, he was, as I said, with Peter, but Peter expounded the doctrine in order to satisfy the needs of the listeners, and not in order to convey the Lord's discourses in order. Therefore, Mark did not at all err in describing some events as he recalled them. He cared only about how not to miss something from what he heard, or not to change it. ”
From this testimony of Papias it is clear: 1) that ap. John knew the Gospel of Mark and talked about it in the circle of his disciples - of course, in Ephesus; 2) that he testified that St. Mark reported those memories that he kept in his memory about the speeches of St. Peter, who spoke about the words and deeds of the Lord, and thus became a messenger and mediator in the transmission of these stories; 3) that Mark did not follow the chronological order. This remark suggests that at that time there was a condemnation of ev. Mark on the fact that it has some shortcomings in comparison with other Gospels, which carefully took care of the "order" (Luke 1:3) in the presentation of the gospel events; 4) Papias, for his part, reports that Mark was not personally a disciple of Christ, but - probably later - a disciple of Peter. However, this does not negate the possibility that Mark communicates something from what he himself experienced. At the beginning of the Muratorian fragment there is a remark about Mark: “he himself was present at some events and reported them”; 5) that Peter adapted his teachings to modern needs listeners and did not care about a coherent strictly chronological presentation of the gospel events. Therefore, Mark cannot be blamed for deviations from a strictly chronological sequence of events; 6) that Mark's dependence on Peter in his writing extends only to certain circumstances (ε ̓́ νια). But Papias praises Mark for his thoroughness and accuracy in the narrative: he did not hide anything and did not at all embellish events and persons.
Justin Martyr in Conversation with Trypho (chap. 106) mentions the existence of "sights" or "memoirs of Peter", and quotes a passage from Mark 3:16 et seq. It is clear that by these "sights" he means the Gospel of Mark. St. Irenaeus (Against Heresies III, I, 1), also knows for certain that Mark wrote the Gospel after the death of Peter and Paul, who, according to the chronology of Irenaeus, preached in Rome from 61 to 66, wrote exactly as Peter proclaimed the gospel. Clement of Alexandria (hypot. on 1 Peter 5:13) reports that Mark wrote his gospel in Rome at the request of some notable Roman Christians. In his Gospel, he set forth the oral sermon he heard from St. Peter, who himself knew about the desire of the Roman Christians to have a monument of his conversations with them. To this testimony, St. Clement Eusebius of Caesarea adds that St. Peter, on the basis of the revelation that had been given to him, expressed his approval of the Gospel written by Mark (Church. Hist. VI, 14, 5 et seq.).
On the further fate of Mark, Eusebius reports a legend that Mark appeared as the first preacher of the Gospel in Egypt and founded christian church in Alexandria. Thanks to Mark's preaching and his strictly ascetic lifestyle, Jewish therapists were converted to faith in Christ (Mk 2:15). Although Eusebius does not call Mark the bishop of Alexandria, he begins counting the bishops of Alexandria precisely from Mark (Mk 2:24). Having installed Anian as bishop in Alexandria and made several persons presbyters and deacons, Mark, according to the saying of Symeon Metaphrastus, withdrew from the persecution of the pagans to Pentapolis. After two years he returned to Alexandria and found the number of Christians greatly increased there. He himself then begins to preach again and work miracles. On this occasion, the pagans charge him with magic. During the celebration of the Egyptian god Serapis, Mark was seized by the pagans, tied with a rope around his neck and dragged out of the city. In the evening they threw him into prison, and the next day a mob of pagans killed him. It happened on April 25th (year - unknown Assumptions prof. Bolotov "on the day and year of the death of St. Mark ”(63 - April 4) (Christ. Reading 1893 July and the next book) do not agree with what is obtained from familiarization with the biblical data on the death of Mark.). His body rested for a long time in Alexandria, but in the year 827 Venetian merchants took him with them and brought him to Venice, where Mark, with his lion symbol, became the patron of the city, in which a magnificent cathedral with a wonderful bell tower was built in his honor. (According to another tradition, Mark died in Rome.)
At St. Hippolyta (refut. VII, 30) Mark is called fingerless (ο ̔ κολοβοδάκτυλος). This name can be explained by the testimony of one ancient preface to the Gospel of Mark. According to this introduction (prologue), Mark, as a descendant of Levi, had the title of a Jewish priest, but after his conversion to Christ, he cut off his thumb to show that it was not suitable for correcting priestly duties. This, according to the author of the introduction, did not prevent, however, Mark from becoming the Bishop of Alexandria, and thus the mysterious destiny of Mark to serve God in the holy dignity was fulfilled ... However, it can be assumed that Mark lost his thumb sometime in the time of the tortures to which he was subjected by his pagan persecutors.
Purpose of writing the gospel of Mark. The purpose of writing the Gospel of Mark is revealed already from the first words of this book: “The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God” is an inscription that clearly indicates the content and purpose of the Gospel of Mark. How ev. Matthew, by the words: “the book of Genesis (βίβλος γενέσεως in Russian translation inaccurately: “genealogy”) of Jesus Christ, the Son of David”, etc., wants to say that he intends to give the “history of Christ”, as a descendant of David and Abraham, who in His activity He fulfilled the ancient promises given to the people of Israel, and so did ev. In the first five words of his book, Mark wants to let his readers know what they should expect from him.
In what sense ev. Mark used the word "beginning" (α ̓ ρχη ̀) here, and in which one did he use the word "Gospel" (ευ ̓ αγγελίον)? The last expression in Mark occurs seven times and everywhere means the good news brought by Christ about the salvation of people, the proclamation of the coming of the Kingdom of God. But in conjunction with the expression "beginning" the word "Gospel" of Mark is no longer found. App comes to the rescue here. Paul. In the last to the Philippians he uses the same expression in the sense of the initial stage of the gospel preaching, which he offered in Macedonia. “You know, Philippians,” says the apostle, “that at the beginning of the gospel (ε ̓ ν α ̓ ρχη ̨̃ του ̃ ευ ̓ αγγελίου), when I left Macedonia, not a single church showed me any part in giving and receiving, except you alone. ” (Philippians 4:15). This expression: “the beginning of the Gospel” can only have the meaning here that the Philippians then knew only the most necessary things about Christ - His words and deeds, which were the usual subject of the initial preaching of the evangelists about Christ. Meanwhile, now, eleven years after the apostle's sojourn in Macedonia, of which he speaks in the passage quoted above, the Philippians undoubtedly stand much higher in their understanding of Christianity. So the Gospel of Mark is an attempt to give an elementary description of the life of Christ, which was caused by the special condition of those persons for whom the Gospel was written. This is also confirmed by the testimony of Papias, according to which Mark wrote down the missionary conversations of St. Peter. And what these conversations were about - a rather definite concept of an gives us about this. Paul in the letter to the Hebrews. Addressing his readers, Jewish Christians, he reproaches them for having lingered for a long time at the initial stage of Christian development and even took a certain step back. “Judging by the time, you should have been teachers, but you again need to be taught the first principles of the word of God, and you need milk, not solid food” (Heb 5:12). Thus the apostle distinguishes the beginnings of the word of God (Τα ̀ στοιχει ̃ α τη ̃ ς α ̓ ρχη ̃ ς τ . Χρ . λογ .) as "milk" from the solid food of the perfect. The Gospel of Mark or the sermon of St. Peter and represented this initial stage of the gospel teaching of the facts from the life of Christ, offered to Roman Christians who had just entered the Church of Christ.
Thus, “the beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ” is a short designation of the entire content of the further proposed narrative, as the simplest presentation of the gospel story. With such an understanding of the purpose of writing the Gospel of Mark, the brevity, conciseness of this book agrees, which makes it look like, one might say, a “reduction” of the Gospel story, most suitable for people who are still at the first stage of Christian development. This is evident from the fact that in this Gospel, in general, more attention is paid to those facts from the life of Christ, in which the divine power of Christ, His miraculous power was revealed, and, moreover, the miracles performed by Christ over children and youths are reported in sufficient detail, while the teaching Christ says relatively little. As if the evangelist had in mind to give Christian parents a guide for presenting the events of the gospel story when teaching children the truths of the Christian faith ... It can be said that the Gospel of Mark, mainly drawing attention to the miracles of Christ, is perfectly adapted to the understanding of those who can be called “children in the faith”, and perhaps even for children of Christians in the proper sense of the word... Even the fact that the evangelist likes to dwell on the details of events and, moreover, explains everything almost in detail - and this may indicate that that he had in mind to offer precisely the initial, elementary presentation of the gospel story for people who needed this kind of instruction.
Comparison of the Gospel of Mark with the testimony of church tradition about him. Papias reports that the "presbyter", that is, John the Theologian, found that the Gospel of Mark does not follow a strict chronological order in the presentation of events. This is indeed seen in this gospel. So, for example, reading the first chapter of Mark Mk 1:12.14.16, the reader remains at a loss as to when the “tradition” of John the Baptist happened and when Christ appeared in public service, in what chronological relation to this speech is the temptation of Christ in the wilderness and within what framework the history of the calling of the first two pairs of disciples should be set. — The reader also cannot determine when the Lord calls the 12 apostles (Mark 3:13 et seq.), where, when and in what sequence Christ spoke and explained His parables (ch. 4).
Then the tradition calls the writer of the Gospel John Mark and presents him as a disciple of St. Peter, who wrote his gospel from his words. In the Gospel of Mark we find nothing that could contradict the first message of tradition, and very much that confirms the latter. The gospel writer is obviously a native of Palestine: he knows the language spoken by the Palestinian inhabitants at that time, and he apparently takes pleasure in sometimes giving a phrase in his own language, accompanying it with a translation (Mk 5:1; Mk 7:34; Mark 15:34 etc.). Only the most famous Hebrew words remained without translation (Rabbi, Abba, Amen, Gehenna, Satan, Hosanna). The entire style of the Gospel is Hebrew, although the entire Gospel is undoubtedly written in Greek (the tradition of the original Latin text is a fiction that does not have any sufficient basis).
Perhaps from the fact that the writer of the Gospel himself bore the name John, one can explain why, speaking of John the Theologian, he does not simply call him "John", but adds to this in Mark 3:17 and Mark 5:37 the definition: "brother of Jacob." It is also remarkable that Mark reports some characteristic details that define the personality of the Apostle Peter (Mk 14:29-31.54.66.72), and on the other hand, omits such details from the history of St. Peter, who could overly exalt the significance of the personality of St. Peter. So, he does not convey the words that Christ said to St. Peter after his great confession (Matthew 16:16-19), and in the enumeration of the apostles does not call Peter "the first", as Ev. Matthew (Mt 10:2, cf. Mark 3:16). Is it not clear from here that the Evangelist Mark wrote his Gospel according to the memoirs of the humble ap. Peter? (cf. 1 Peter 5:5).
Finally, tradition points to Rome as the place where the Gospel of Mark was written. And the Gospel itself shows that its writer dealt with Latin Christians from pagans. Mark, for example, incomparably more often than other evangelists, uses Latin expressions (eg centurion, speculator, legion, qualification, etc., of course, in their Greek pronunciation). And most importantly, Mark sometimes explains Greek expressions through Latin and specifically Roman terms. Rome is also indicated by the designation of Simon of Cyrene as the father of Alexander and Rufus (cf. Rom 15:13).
Upon closer acquaintance with the Gospel of Mark, it turns out that he wrote his work for Gentile Christians. This can be seen, for example, in the fact that he explains in detail the practices of the Pharisees (Mark 7:3 et seq.). He does not have those speeches and details that the Jews have. Matthew and which ones could have meaning only for Jewish Christian readers, and for Gentile Christians, without special explanations, would even remain incomprehensible (see, for example, Mark 1:1 et seq., the genealogy of Christ, Mt 17:24; Mt 23 ; Mt 24:20 ; nor on the Sabbath, Mt 5:17-43).
Relation of the Gospel of Mark to the other two synoptic gospels. Bliss. Augustine believed that Mark in his gospel was a follower of the Jews. Matthew and abbreviated only his Gospel (On acc. Heb. I, 2, 3); there is undoubtedly a correct idea in this opinion, because the writer of the Gospel of Mark, obviously, used some kind of more ancient Gospel and actually abbreviated it. Critics of the text agree almost on the assumption that the Gospel of Matthew served as such a guide for Mark, but not in its current form, but in its original form, namely the one that was written in Hebrew. Since the Gospel of Matthew in Hebrew was written in Palestine in the early years of the 7th decade, Mark, who at that time was in Asia Minor, could get his hands on the Gospel written by Matthew and then take it with him to Rome.
There were attempts to divide the Gospel into separate parts, which, by their origin, were related to different decades of the first century and even to the beginning of the second (First Mark, second Mark, third Mark, etc.). But all these hypotheses about the later origin of our current Gospel of Mark from some later remodeler are shattered by the testimony of Papias, according to which, already around the year 80, John the Theologian apparently had in his hands our Gospel of Mark and talked about it with his students.
The division of the Gospel of Mark according to content. After the introduction to the Gospel (Mk 1:1-13), the evangelist in the first section (Mk 1:14-3:6) depicts in a number of separate artistic pictures how Christ preached first in Capernaum, and then throughout Galilee, teaching, gathering the first disciples around Himself and performing miracles that aroused astonishment (Mk 1:14-39), and then, how the defenders of the old order begin to rise up against Christ. Christ, although he actually keeps the law, nevertheless takes seriously the attacks on him by the adherents of the law and refutes their attacks. Here He expresses a very important new doctrine about Himself: He is the Son of God (Mark 1:40-3:6). The next three sections - the second (Mk 3:7-6:6), the third (Mk 6:6-8:26) and the fourth (Mk 8:27-10:45) depict the activity of Christ in the north of the holy land, for the most part especially in the first period, in Galilee, but also, especially in the later period, and beyond the borders of Galilee, and finally His journey to Jerusalem through Perea and Jordan all the way to Jericho (Mark 10:1ff.). At the beginning of each section, there is every time a narrative referring to the 12 apostles (cf. Mark 3:14; Mark 5:30): narratives about their calling, their sending to preach and their confession on the question of the Messianic dignity of Christ, the evangelist obviously wants to show how Christ considered it his indispensable task to prepare his disciples for their future calling as preachers of the gospel even among the Gentiles, although, of course, this point of view cannot be considered exclusive here. It goes without saying that the face of the Lord Jesus Christ, as a preacher and miracle worker, the promised Messiah and Son of God, stands here in the foreground. - In the fifth section (Mk 10:46-13:37) the activity of Christ in Jerusalem is depicted as a prophet, or rather, as the Son of David, who should fulfill the Old Testament predictions about the future kingdom of David. Along with this, the growth of hostility towards Christ on the part of the representatives of Judaism is described to its highest point. Finally, the sixth section (Mk 14:1-15:47) tells of the suffering, death and resurrection of Christ, as well as His ascension to heaven.
A look at the gradual unfolding of the thoughts contained in the Gospel of Mark. After a brief inscription in which readers are given an idea of what the book is (Mk 1:1), the evangelist in the introduction (Mk 1:2-13) depicts the speech and activity of John the Baptist, the forerunner of the Messiah, and, above all, his baptism of the Messiah Himself. Then the evangelist makes a brief remark about Christ’s sojourn in the wilderness and about His temptation there from the devil, pointing out that at that time the angels served Christ: by this he wants to signify the victory of Christ over the devil and the beginning of a new life for mankind, who will no longer be afraid of all the forces of hell (figuratively represented by the "beasts of the wilderness" who no longer harmed Christ, this new Adam). Further, the evangelist consistently depicts how Christ subdued humanity to Himself and restored the communion of people with God. - In the first section (Mk 1:14-3:6), in the first part (Mk 1:14-39, Art. 1st chapter), the evangelist first gives a general picture of the teaching activity of the Lord Jesus Christ (Mk 1:14-15) and at the end (v. 39) His deeds. Between these two characteristics, the evangelist describes five events: a) the calling of the disciples, b) the events in the Capernaum synagogue, c) the healing of Peter's mother-in-law, d) the healing of the sick in the evening in front of Peter's house, and e) the search for Christ, who retired in the morning for prayer, by the people and, chiefly, way, Peter and his associates. All these five events took place during the time from Friday afternoon to Sunday morning (in Hebrew, the first day on Saturday). All events are grouped around Simon and his associates. It can be seen that the evangelist received from Simon information about all these events. From here the reader gets a sufficient idea of how Christ, who revealed His activity after taking John the Baptist into prison, performed His ministry of Teacher and Wonderworker.
In the second part of the first section (Mk 1:40-3:6), the evangelist depicts the gradually growing enmity towards Christ on the part of the Pharisees and mainly those Pharisees who belonged to the number of scribes. This enmity is explained by the fact that the Pharisees see in the activity of Christ a violation of the law given by God through Moses, and therefore a number of, one might say, criminal offenses. Nevertheless, Christ treats all Jews with love and compassion, helping them in their spiritual needs and bodily illnesses, and at the same time revealing Himself as a being that exceeds ordinary mortals, standing in a special relation to God. It is especially important that here Christ testifies of Himself as the Son of man, who forgives sins (Mk 2:10), who has authority over the Sabbath (Mk 2:28), who even has the rights of the priesthood, as similar rights were once recognized for His ancestor David (eating the sacred bread). Only these testimonies of Christ about Himself are not expressed directly and immediately, but enter into His speeches and deeds. Here we have before us seven stories: a) The story of the healing of a leper is intended to show that Christ, in carrying out the works of His high calling, did not violate the direct decrees of the Mosaic law (Mk 1:44). If he was reproached in this regard, then these reproaches were based on a one-sided, literal understanding of the Mosaic law, of which the Pharisees and rabbis were guilty. b) The story of the healing of the paralytic shows us in Christ not only the physician of the body, but also the sick soul. He has the power to forgive sins. The Lord reveals the attempt of the scribes to accuse Him of Blasphemy before everyone in all its insignificance and groundlessness. c) The history of the calling of the publican Levi as a disciple of Christ shows that even the publican is not so bad as to become Christ's helper. d) Christ's participation at the feast arranged by Levi shows that the Lord does not disdain sinners and tax collectors, which, of course, incites even more Pharisees' scribes against Him. e) Christ's relations with the Pharisees become even more aggravated when Christ came out as a principled opponent of the old Jewish fasts. f) and g) Here again Christ appears as the enemy of the Pharisees' one-sidedness in relation to the observance of the Sabbath. He is the King of the Heavenly Kingdom, and His servants may not fulfill the ritual law where necessary, especially since the law on the Sabbath is given for the good of man. But such a statement of Christ brings the irritation of His enemies to the extreme, and they begin to plot against Him.
b) the teaching of the Lord Jesus Christ, preached by Himself and His apostles about Him as the King of this Kingdom, the Messiah and the Son of God ( 2 Cor. 4:4),
c) all New Testament or Christian teaching in general, primarily the narrative of events from the life of Christ, the most important ( 1 Cor. 15:1-4), and then an explanation of the meaning of these events ( Rome. 1:16).
e) Finally, the word "Gospel" is sometimes used to refer to the very process of preaching the Christian doctrine ( Rome. 1:1).
Sometimes the designation and content of it is attached to the word "Gospel". There are, for example, phrases: the gospel of the kingdom ( Matt. 4:23), i.e. the joyful news of the Kingdom of God, the Gospel of the world (), and for the majority of believers, oral stories about Christ were much more important than written ones. Thus the apostles and preachers or evangelists "transmitted" (παραδιδόναι) stories about the deeds and speeches of Christ, while the believers "received" (παραλαμβάνειν), but, of course, not mechanically, only by memory, as can be said about the students of rabbinic schools, but whole soul, as if something living and giving life. But soon this period of oral tradition was to end. On the one hand, Christians must have felt the need for a written presentation of the Gospel in their disputes with the Jews, who, as is known, denied the reality of the miracles of Christ and even claimed that Christ did not declare Himself the Messiah. It was necessary to show the Jews that Christians have authentic stories about Christ of those persons who were either among His apostles, or who were in close communion with eyewitnesses of Christ's deeds. On the other hand, the need for a written presentation of the history of Christ began to be felt because the generation of the first disciples was gradually dying out and the ranks of direct witnesses of the miracles of Christ were thinning out. Therefore, it was necessary to fix in writing individual sayings of the Lord and His whole speeches, as well as the stories about Him of the apostles. It was then that separate records of what was reported in the oral tradition about Christ began to appear here and there. Most carefully they wrote down the words of Christ, which contained the rules of the Christian life, and were much freer in the transfer of various events from the life of Christ, retaining only their general impression. Thus, one thing in these records, due to its originality, was transmitted everywhere in the same way, while the other was modified. These initial notes did not think about the completeness of the narrative. Even our Gospels, as can be seen from the conclusion of the Gospel of John ( In. 21:25), did not intend to report all the words and deeds of Christ. This is evident, among other things, from what is not included in them, for example, such a saying of Christ: “it is more blessed to give than to receive” ( Acts. 20:35). The Evangelist Luke reports such records, saying that many before him had already begun to compose narratives about the life of Christ, but that they did not have the proper fullness and that therefore they did not give sufficient "confirmation" in the faith ( OK. 1:1-4).
Evidently, our canonical gospels arose from the same motives. The period of their appearance can be determined at about thirty years - from 60 to 90 (the last was the Gospel of John). The first three gospels are usually called synoptic in biblical science, because they depict the life of Christ in such a way that their three narratives can be easily viewed in one and combined into one whole narrative (forecasters - from Greek - looking together). They began to be called gospels each separately, perhaps as early as the end of the 1st century, but from church writing we have information that such a name was given to the entire composition of the gospels only in the second half of the 2nd century. As for the names: “The Gospel of Matthew”, “The Gospel of Mark”, etc., then these very ancient names from Greek should be translated as follows: “The Gospel according to Matthew”, “The Gospel according to Mark” (κατὰ Ματθαῖον, κατὰ Μᾶρκον). By this, the Church wanted to say that in all the Gospels there is a single Christian gospel about Christ the Savior, but according to the images of different writers: one image belongs to Matthew, the other to Mark, etc.
four gospel
Thus the ancient Church looked upon the depiction of the life of Christ in our four gospels, not as different gospels or narratives, but as one gospel, one book in four forms. That is why in the Church the name of the Four Gospels was established behind our Gospels. Saint Irenaeus called them "the fourfold Gospel" (τετράμορφον τὸ εὐαγγέλιον - see Irenaeus Lugdunensis, Adversus haereses liber 3, ed. A. Rousseau and L. Doutreleaü Irenée Lyon. Contre les hérésies, livre 3, vol 2, Paris, 1974, 11, 11).
The Fathers of the Church dwell on the question: why did the Church accept not one gospel, but four? So St. John Chrysostom says: “Is it really impossible for one evangelist to write everything that is needed. Of course, he could, but when four people wrote, they did not write at the same time, not in the same place, without communicating or conspiring among themselves, and for all that they wrote in such a way that everything seemed to be pronounced by one mouth, then this is the strongest proof of the truth. You will say: "However, the opposite happened, for the four Gospels are often convicted in disagreement." This is the very sign of truth. For if the Gospels were exactly in agreement with each other in everything, even regarding the very words, then none of the enemies would believe that the Gospels were not written by ordinary mutual agreement. Now, a slight disagreement between them frees them from all suspicion. For what they say differently about time or place does not in the least impair the truth of their narration. In the main thing, which is the foundation of our life and the essence of preaching, not one of them disagrees with the other in anything and nowhere - that God became a man, worked miracles, was crucified, resurrected, ascended into heaven. ("Conversations on the Gospel of Matthew", 1).
Saint Irenaeus also finds a special symbolic meaning in the quaternary number of our Gospels. “Since there are four parts of the world in which we live, and since the Church is scattered throughout the earth and has its affirmation in the Gospel, it was necessary for her to have four pillars, from everywhere emanating incorruption and reviving the human race. The all-arranging Word, seated on the Cherubim, gave us the Gospel in four forms, but imbued with one spirit. For David also, praying for His appearance, says: "Seated on the Cherubim, reveal Yourself" ( Ps. 79:2). But the Cherubim (in the vision of the prophet Ezekiel and the Apocalypse) have four faces, and their faces are images of the activity of the Son of God. Saint Irenaeus finds it possible to attach the symbol of a lion to the Gospel of John, since this Gospel depicts Christ as the eternal King, and the lion is the king in the animal world; to the Gospel of Luke - the symbol of the calf, since Luke begins his Gospel with the image of the priestly service of Zechariah, who slaughtered the calves; to the Gospel of Matthew - a symbol of a person, since this Gospel mainly depicts the human birth of Christ, and, finally, to the Gospel of Mark - a symbol of an eagle, because Mark begins his Gospel with a mention of the prophets, to whom the Holy Spirit flew, like an eagle on wings "(Irenaeus Lugdunensis, Adversus haereses, liber 3, 11, 11-22). In other Church Fathers, the symbols of the lion and calf are moved and the first is given to Mark, and the second to John. Starting from the 5th c. in this form, the symbols of the evangelists began to join the images of the four evangelists in church painting.
Reciprocity of the Gospels
Each of the four Gospels has its own characteristics, and most of all - the Gospel of John. But the first three, as already mentioned above, have extremely much in common with each other, and this similarity involuntarily catches the eye even with a cursory reading of them. Let us first of all speak of the similarity of the Synoptic Gospels and the causes of this phenomenon.
Even Eusebius of Caesarea in his "canons" divided the Gospel of Matthew into 355 parts and noted that all three forecasters have 111 of them. IN modern times exegetes worked out an even more precise numerical formula for determining the similarity of the Gospels and calculated that the total number of verses common to all weather forecasters goes up to 350. Matthew then has 350 verses peculiar only to him, Mark has 68 such verses, and Luke has 541. Similarities are mainly seen in the transmission of the sayings of Christ, and differences - in the narrative part. When Matthew and Luke literally converge in their Gospels, Mark always agrees with them. The similarity between Luke and Mark is much closer than between Luke and Matthew (Lopukhin - in the Orthodox Theological Encyclopedia. T. V. C. 173). It is also remarkable that some passages of all three evangelists go in the same sequence, for example, the temptation and speech in Galilee, the calling of Matthew and the conversation about fasting, the plucking of ears and the healing of the withered hand, the calming of the storm and the healing of the demoniac of Gadarene, etc. The similarity sometimes extends even to the construction of sentences and expressions (for example, in the citation of the prophecy Mal. 3:1).
As for the differences observed among weather forecasters, there are quite a few of them. Others are reported only by two evangelists, others even by one. So, only Matthew and Luke cite the conversation on the mount of the Lord Jesus Christ, tell the story of the birth and the first years of Christ's life. One Luke speaks of the birth of John the Baptist. Other things one evangelist conveys in a more abbreviated form than another, or in a different connection than another. The details of the events in each Gospel are different, as well as the expressions.
This phenomenon of similarity and difference in the Synoptic Gospels has long attracted the attention of interpreters of Scripture, and various assumptions have long been put forward to explain this fact. More correct is the opinion that our three evangelists used a common oral source for their narrative of the life of Christ. At that time, evangelists or preachers about Christ went everywhere preaching and repeated in different places in more or less extensive form what it was considered necessary to offer to those who entered the Church. In this way a well-known definite type was formed oral gospel, and this is the type we have in writing in our synoptic gospels. Of course, at the same time, depending on the goal that this or that evangelist had, his gospel took on some special features, only characteristic of his work. At the same time, one cannot rule out the possibility that an older gospel might have been known to the evangelist who wrote later. At the same time, the difference between synoptics should be explained by the different goals that each of them had in mind when writing his Gospel.
As we have already said, the synoptic gospels are very different from the gospel of John the Theologian. Thus they depict almost exclusively the activity of Christ in Galilee, while the apostle John depicts mainly the sojourn of Christ in Judea. In regard to content, the synoptic gospels also differ considerably from the gospel of John. They give, so to speak, a more external image of the life, deeds and teachings of Christ, and from the speeches of Christ they cite only those that were accessible to the understanding of the whole people. John, on the contrary, omits a lot of the activities of Christ, for example, he cites only six miracles of Christ, but those speeches and miracles that he cites have a special deep meaning and extreme importance about the person of the Lord Jesus Christ. Finally, while the synoptics portray Christ primarily as the founder of the kingdom of God and therefore direct their readers' attention to the kingdom he founded, John draws our attention to the central point of this kingdom, from which life flows along the peripheries of the kingdom, i.e. on the Lord Jesus Christ Himself, whom John depicts as the Only Begotten Son of God and as the Light for all mankind. That is why the ancient interpreters called the Gospel of John predominantly spiritual (πνευματικόν), in contrast to synoptic ones, as depicting a predominantly human side in the person of Christ (εὐαγγέλιον σωματικόν), i.e. bodily gospel.
However, it must be said that weather forecasters also have passages that indicate that, as weather forecasters, the activity of Christ in Judea was known ( Matt. 23:37, 27:57 ; OK. 10:38-42), so John has indications of the continuous activity of Christ in Galilee. In the same way, weather forecasters convey such sayings of Christ, which testify to His divine dignity ( Matt. 11:27), and John, for his part, also in places depicts Christ as a true man ( In. 2 etc.; John 8 and etc.). Therefore, one cannot speak of any contradiction between the synoptics and John in the depiction of the face and deed of Christ.
Reliability of the Gospels
Although criticism has long been expressed against the authenticity of the Gospels, and recently these attacks of criticism have become especially intensified (the theory of myths, especially the theory of Drews, who does not at all recognize the existence of Christ), however, all objections of criticism are so insignificant that they are shattered at the slightest collision with Christian apologetics. . Here, however, we will not cite the objections of negative criticism and analyze these objections: this will be done when interpreting the text of the Gospels itself. We will only speak about the main general grounds on which we recognize the Gospels as completely reliable documents. This is, firstly, the existence of the tradition of eyewitnesses, of whom many survived until the era when our Gospels appeared. Why should we refuse to trust these sources of our gospels? Could they have made up everything that is in our gospels? No, all the Gospels are purely historical. Secondly, it is incomprehensible why the Christian consciousness would want - so the mythical theory asserts - to crown the head of a simple rabbi Jesus with the crown of the Messiah and the Son of God? Why, for example, is it not said about the Baptist that he performed miracles? Obviously because he did not create them. And from this it follows that if Christ is said to be the Great Wonderworker, then it means that He really was like that. And why could one deny the authenticity of the miracles of Christ, since the highest miracle - His Resurrection - is witnessed like no other event ancient history(cm. 1 Cor. 15)?
Bibliography of Foreign Works on the Four Gospels
Bengel J. Al. Gnomon Novi Testamentï in quo ex nativa verborum VI simplicitas, profunditas, concinnitas, salubritas sensuum coelestium indicatur. Berolini, 1860.
Blass, Gram. - Blass F. Grammatik des neutestamentlichen Griechisch. Göttingen, 1911.
Westcott - The New Testament in Original Greek the text rev. by Brooke Foss Westcott. New York, 1882.
B. Weiss - Wikiwand Weiss B. Die Evangelien des Markus und Lukas. Göttingen, 1901.
Yog. Weiss (1907) - Die Schriften des Neuen Testaments, von Otto Baumgarten; Wilhelm Bousset. Hrsg. von Johannes Weis_s, Bd. 1: Die drei alteren Evangelien. Die Apostelgeschichte, Matthaeus Apostolus; Marcus Evangelista; Lucas Evangelista. . 2. Aufl. Göttingen, 1907.
Godet - Godet F. Commentar zu dem Evangelium des Johannes. Hanover, 1903.
Name De Wette W.M.L. Kurze Erklärung des Evangeliums Matthäi / Kurzgefasstes exegetisches Handbuch zum Neuen Testament, Band 1, Teil 1. Leipzig, 1857.
Keil (1879) - Keil C.F. Commentar über die Evangelien des Markus und Lukas. Leipzig, 1879.
Keil (1881) - Keil C.F. Commentar über das Evangelium des Johannes. Leipzig, 1881.
Klostermann A. Das Markusevangelium nach seinem Quellenwerthe für die evangelische Geschichte. Göttingen, 1867.
Cornelius a Lapide - Cornelius a Lapide. In SS Matthaeum et Marcum / Commentaria in scripturam sacram, t. 15. Parisiis, 1857.
Lagrange M.-J. Études bibliques: Evangile selon St. Marc. Paris, 1911.
Lange J.P. Das Evangelium nach Matthäus. Bielefeld, 1861.
Loisy (1903) - Loisy A.F. Le quatrième evangile. Paris, 1903.
Loisy (1907-1908) - Loisy A.F. Les evangeles synoptiques, 1-2. : Ceffonds, pres Montier-en-Der, 1907-1908.
Luthardt Ch.E. Das johanneische Evangelium nach seiner Eigenthümlichkeit geschildert und erklärt. Nürnberg, 1876.
Meyer (1864) - Meyer H.A.W. Kritisch exegetisches Commentar über das Neue Testament, Abteilung 1, Hälfte 1: Handbuch über das Evangelium des Matthäus. Göttingen, 1864.
Meyer (1885) - Kritisch-exegetischer Commentar über das Neue Testament hrsg. von Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer, Abteilung 1, Hälfte 2: Bernhard Weiss B. Kritisch exegetisches Handbuch über die Evangelien des Markus und Lukas. Göttingen, 1885. Meyer (1902) - Meyer H.A.W. Das Johannes-Evangelium 9. Auflage, bearbeitet von B. Weiss. Göttingen, 1902.
Merckx (1902) - Merx A. Erläuterung: Matthaeus / Die vier kanonischen Evangelien nach ihrem ältesten bekannten Texte, Teil 2, Hälfte 1. Berlin, 1902.
Merckx (1905) - Merx A. Erläuterung: Markus und Lukas / Die vier kanonischen Evangelien nach ihrem ältesten bekannten Texte. Teil 2, Hälfte 2. Berlin, 1905.
Morison J. A practical commentary on the Gospel according to St. Morison Matthew. London, 1902.
Stanton - Wikiwand Stanton V.H. The Synoptic Gospels / The Gospels as historical documents, Part 2. Cambridge, 1903. Toluc (1856) - Tholuck A. Die Bergpredigt. Gotha, 1856.
Tolyuk (1857) - Tholuck A. Commentar zum Evangelium Johannis. Gotha, 1857.
Heitmüller - see Jog. Weiss (1907).
Holtzmann (1901) - Holtzmann H.J. Die Synoptiker. Tubingen, 1901.
Holtzmann (1908) - Holtzmann H.J. Evangelium, Briefe und Offenbarung des Johannes / Hand-Commentar zum Neuen Testament bearbeitet von H. J. Holtzmann, R. A. Lipsius etc. bd. 4. Freiburg im Breisgau, 1908.
Zahn (1905) - Zahn Th. Das Evangelium des Matthäus / Commentar zum Neuen Testament, Teil 1. Leipzig, 1905.
Zahn (1908) - Zahn Th. Das Evangelium des Johannes ausgelegt / Commentar zum Neuen Testament, Teil 4. Leipzig, 1908.
Schanz (1881) - Schanz P. Commentar über das Evangelium des heiligen Marcus. Freiburg im Breisgau, 1881.
Schanz (1885) - Schanz P. Commentar über das Evangelium des heiligen Johannes. Tubingen, 1885.
Schlatter - Schlatter A. Das Evangelium des Johannes: ausgelegt fur Bibelleser. Stuttgart, 1903.
Schürer, Geschichte - Schürer E., Geschichte des jüdischen Volkes im Zeitalter Jesu Christi. bd. 1-4. Leipzig, 1901-1911.
Edersheim (1901) - Edersheim A. The life and times of Jesus the Messiah. 2 Vols. London, 1901.
Ellen - Allen W.C. A critical and exegetical commentary of the Gospel according to st. Matthew. Edinburgh, 1907.
Alford - Alford N. The Greek Testament in four volumes, vol. 1. London, 1863.
1 Departing from there, he comes to the borders of Judah beyond the Jordanian side. Again the people gather to Him, and, according to His custom, He again taught them.
2 The Pharisees came up and asked, tempting him, Is it lawful for a husband to divorce his wife?
3 He answered and said to them, What commanded you Moses?
4 They said: Moses allowed the letter of divorce to be written and divorced.
5 Jesus answered and said to them, Because of your hardness of heart, he wrote you this commandment.
6 At the beginning of creation, God created them male and female.
7 Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother
8 And he shall cleave to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh; so that they are no longer two, but one flesh.
9 So what God has joined together, let no man separate.
10 In the house, His disciples again asked Him about the same thing.
11 He said to them, Whoever divorces his wife and marries another, he commits adultery by her;
12 And if a wife divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.
13 They brought children to him, that he might touch them; but the disciples did not admit those who offered.
14 Seeing That, Jesus was indignant and said to them: Let the children come to Me and do not hinder them, for of such is the Kingdom of God.
15 Truly I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child will not enter it.
16 And he embraced them, laid his hands on them, and blessed them.
17 As he was setting out on his journey, someone ran up, fell on his knees before him, and asked him: Good teacher! what should I do to inherit eternal life?
18 Jesus said to him, Why do you call me good? Nobody is good but God alone.
19 You know the commandments: do not commit adultery, do not kill, do not steal, do not bear false witness, do not offend, honor your father and mother.
20 And he said to Him in answer: Teacher! All this I have kept from my youth.
21 Jesus, looking at him, loved him and said to him, You lack one thing: go, sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me, taking up the cross.
22 But he, embarrassed at this word, went away sad, because he had a large property.
23 And looking around, Jesus said to his disciples: How difficult it is for those who have riches to enter the kingdom of God!
24 The disciples were horrified at his words. But Jesus again says to them in answer: children! How difficult it is for those who trust in riches to enter the Kingdom of God!
25 It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.
26 And they were exceedingly astonished, and said among themselves, Who then can be saved?
27 Jesus looked at them and said, It is impossible for men, but not for God, for all things are possible with God.
28 And Peter began to say to him, Behold, we have left everything and followed you.
29 Jesus answered and said, “Truly I say to you, there is no one who has left home, or brothers, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or land, for my sake and the gospel,
30 And I would not have received now, in this time, in the midst of persecution, a hundred times more houses, and brothers and sisters, and fathers, and mothers, and children, and lands, but in the age to come, eternal life.
31 But many who are first will be last, and the last will be first.
32 While they were on their way, going up to Jerusalem, Jesus went ahead of them, and they were terrified and, following him, were in fear. Calling the twelve, He again began to tell them about what would happen to Him:
33 Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man will be handed over to the chief priests and scribes, and they will condemn him to death, and hand him over to the Gentiles,
34 And they will mock Him, and they will beat Him, and they will spit on Him, and they will kill Him; and rise on the third day.
35 Then Zebedee's sons James and John came up to him and said: Master! we want You to do to us whatever we ask.
36 He said to them, What do you want me to do for you?
37 They said to him, Let us sit by you, one on your right hand and the other on your left in your glory.
38 But Jesus said to them, You don't know what you are asking. Can you drink the cup that I drink and be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized?
39 They answered: We can. Jesus said to them: The cup that I drink you will drink, and with the baptism with which I am baptized you will be baptized;
40 but let me sit on my right hand and on my left, not from me depends, but who is destined for.
41 And when the ten heard, they began to be angry with James and John.
42 And Jesus called them, and said to them, You know that those who are honored as princes of the nations rule over them, and their nobles rule over them.
43 But let it not be so among you: but whoever wants to be great among you, let us be your servant;
44 And whoever wants to be first among you, let him be a slave to all.
45 For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life a ransom for many.
46 Come to Jericho. And when He went out of Jericho with His disciples and a multitude of people, Bartimaeus, the son of Timaeus, the blind man sat by the road, asking alms.
47 When he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to shout and say, Jesus, Son of David! have mercy on me.
48 Many forced him to be silent; but he began to shout even more: Son of David! have mercy on me.
49 Jesus stopped and told him to be called. They call the blind man and say to him: do not be afraid, get up, he is calling you.
50 He took off his outer garment, got up and came to Jesus.
51 Answering him, Jesus asked, What do you want from Me? The blind man said to Him: Master! for me to see.
52 Jesus said to him, Go, your faith has saved you. And immediately he received his sight and followed Jesus along the road.
Departing from there, he comes to the borders of Judea beyond the Jordanian side. Again the people gather to Him according to His custom, He again taught them. The Pharisees came up and asked Him, tempting Him: Is it permissible for a husband to divorce his wife? He answered and said to them, What did Moses command you? They said: Moses allowed a letter of divorce to be written and divorced. Jesus answered and said to them, Because of your hardness of heart, he wrote you this commandment. At the beginning of creation, God created them male and female (Genesis 1:27). Wherefore a man shall leave his father and mother, and cleave unto his wife, and the two shall be one flesh; so that they are no longer two, but one flesh. So what God has joined together, let no man separate.
The Lord often left Judea because of the hatred of the Pharisees for Him. But now he is coming back to Judea, because the time of His suffering was drawing near. However, He does not go directly to Jerusalem, but at first only “to the borders of Judea”, in order to benefit the innocuous people; while Jerusalem, through the cunning of the Jews, was the center of all wickedness. And look how out of their malice they tempt the Lord, not enduring the people to believe in Him, but each time approaching Him with the intention of placing Him in difficulty and pinning Him down with their questions. They offer Him such a question, which put Him between two abysses: is it permissible, they say, for a man to let his wife go? For whether He says that it is permissible, or says that it is not permissible, in any case, they thought to accuse Him of contradicting the Law of Moses. But Christ, the Self-Existing Wisdom, answers them in such a way that he avoids their snares. He asks them: What commanded them Moses? And when they answered that Moses commanded to let the wife go, Christ explained to them the Law itself. Moses, He says, was not so unmerciful that He could give such a Law, but he wrote it because of your hardness of heart. Knowing the inhumanity of the Jews, such that a husband who did not love his wife could easily kill her, Moses allowed the husband to let go of his unloved wife. But from the beginning it was not so: God combines two persons in the union of matrimony so that they are one, leaving even their parents. Note that the Lord says: God does not allow polygamy, so that one wife could be let go and another taken, and then again left, and combined with another. If it had pleased God, He would have made one man and many wives; but it did not happen like this, but “God created a man and a woman” so that they could be combined - one husband with one wife. In a figurative sense, it can be understood as follows: the word of the Teaching, throwing good seeds into the soul of a believer, has the meaning of a husband for the soul that receives him. He leaves (the word of teaching) his father, that is, a lofty mind, and his mother, that is, decorated speech, and clings to his wife, that is, to the benefit of the soul, adapts to her and often prefers low thoughts and simple speech. And then they both become one flesh, that is, the soul believes that "the Word (of God) has become flesh," and no human thought can separate the soul from such faith.
In the house, His disciples again asked Him about the same thing. He said to them: whoever divorces his wife and marries another, he commits adultery by her; and if a wife divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.
So the disciples were offended (regarding the divorce of a husband and wife), then they also come to Him and ask about the same thing. Their way of thinking was not yet completely sound. The Lord answered them: whoever lets go of his wife and understands another, he becomes an adulterer with this second wife; so also a wife who leaves her husband and is married to another becomes an adulteress.
They brought children to Him that He might touch them; but the disciples did not admit those who offered. Seeing this, Jesus was indignant and said to them: Let the children come to Me and do not hinder them, for of such is the kingdom of God. I tell you truly, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child will not enter it. And he embraced them, laid his hands on them, and blessed them.
Great was the faith of the people when they accepted the laying on of hands by Christ alone as a blessing for those who were brought to Him, while the disciples did not allow those who brought them, thinking that it was unworthy of Him. What is Christ? Teaching His disciples to be humble and to reject worldly arrogance, He accepts and embraces children. By this He shows that he accepts the mild-tempered; therefore he says, "for of such is the kingdom of God." Note that he did not say: these children “are the Kingdom”, but “such”, that is, those who have acquired the same kindness that children have by nature. For a child does not envy, does not remember evil, and, being punished by her mother, does not run away from her, but even though she wore a sackcloth, she prefers it to the queen; so the one who lives virtuously prefers his mother, I mean the Church, to everything and is not carried away by worldly pleasures. Therefore, the Lord embraces such people, saying: “Come to Me, all you who labor and are heavy laden,” and blesses them, saying: “Come, you blessed of My Father.” Here the preaching of the Gospel and the promise of future blessings are called the Kingdom of God. So, whoever accepts the Divine sermon as a child, that is, without any hesitation and without allowing unbelief in himself, he will enter the Kingdom of God and inherit those blessings that he has already acquired by faith.
When He went out on the road, someone ran up, fell on his knees before Him and asked Him: Good teacher! what should I do to inherit eternal life? Jesus said to him: why do you call me good? Nobody is good but God alone. You know the commandments: do not commit adultery, do not kill, do not steal, do not bear false witness, do not offend, honor your father and mother (Ex. 20, 12-17). He said to Him in answer: Teacher! All this I have kept from my youth. Jesus, looking at him, fell in love with him and said to him: You lack one thing: go, sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me, taking up the cross. He, embarrassed by this word, departed with sorrow, because he had a large estate.
Some falsely represent this young man as a cunning and deceitful tempter. This is not so: he was only a covetous person, and not a tempter. For listen to what the evangelist remarks: "Jesus, looking at him, loved him." And why did Christ answer him like this: “No one is good”? Because he approached Christ as a simple person and as one of many teachers. Christ, as it were, says this: If you consider Me good as a simple teacher, then in comparison with God, not a single person is good; if you recognize Me as good as God, then why do you call Me only a teacher? With these words, Christ wants to convey the highest thought about Himself, so that he would know Him as God. In addition, in order to correct the young man, the Lord gives him another lesson: if he wants to talk with someone, then he must speak without flattery, and know only one root and source of goodness - God and give Him proper honor. However, I am surprised at this young man that, when all the others came to Christ for healing from illnesses, he himself asks for the inheritance of eternal life - if only he were not possessed by the passion of greed that was still strong in him. Due to this passion, having heard the words of the Lord: "Go, sell and give to the poor," he "departed with sorrow." Note at the same time that the Lord did not say: sell in parts what you have and give it away, but sell it all at once and give it out, but only to the poor, and not to caresses and not to debauchees; then: “follow me,” that is, learn every other virtue, for there are many who are willing and not acquisitive, but not humble, or humble, but not sober, or have some other vice. Therefore, the Lord does not only say: “Sell and give to the poor”, but: “Come, follow Me, taking up the cross”, which means to be ready for death for His sake. “But he, embarrassed by this word, departed with sorrow, because he had a large estate.” It is not in vain that it is added that he had a lot: for it is bad and dangerous to own a little, and the bonds of many acquisitions are completely insoluble. But the one who is young in spirit, frivolous, inattentive in thought, not arranged by reason, let him sell his property in the same way, somehow: anger and lust, with all that vegetates from them, and give it away, throw it to demons, which are poor , deprived of all goodness and wealth, because they fell away from the goodness of God, and then let him follow Christ, For he can only follow Christ who rejects the wealth of sins, which is the property of demons. “Turn away,” it is said, “from evil”: this means throwing sinful wealth to the poor, that is, to the forces of demons; - “and do good”: what does it mean to follow Christ and take up His Cross.
And, looking around, Jesus said to His disciples: how difficult it is for those who have riches to enter the Kingdom of God! The disciples were horrified at His words. But Jesus again says to them in answer: children! How difficult it is for those who trust in riches to enter the Kingdom of God! It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God. And they were exceedingly astonished, and said among themselves, Who then can be saved? Jesus, looking at them, says: it is impossible for men, but not for God, for everything is possible with God.
Not wealth is evil in itself, but those who protect it are evil and worthy of condemnation, because they should not have it, that is, keep it, but use it for good. That is why it is called wealth, because it is intended for useful use, and not for saving. Therefore, it is difficult for those who protect and lock it "to enter the Kingdom of God." And the word "difficult" here means the same thing as impossible. It is indeed too difficult for a rich man to be saved. This is evident from the example that the Lord adds, saying: “It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God.” Under the name of a camel, understand either the animal itself, or a thick rope (rope) used on large ships. So it is impossible for a man to be saved while he is rich. But from God it is possible. Christ said, "Get yourselves friends with unrighteous wealth." Do you see how everything becomes possible when we hear the Word of God! “It is impossible for humans,” that is, it is impossible when we reason like human beings. But why were the disciples so amazed at these words? After all, they themselves were never rich? I think that in this case they cared about all people, since they were already beginning to be philanthropic. Some wonder how Christ said that "all things are possible with God." Can he really make a mistake? To this we answer that when Christ says “everything,” he means everything that is essential, but sin is not something essential: sin is something inessential, inactive, or, in other words, sin is an attribute not of strength, but of weakness, as and the apostle says: “Christ died while we were still weak” (Rom. 5:6), and David says: “Their sorrows multiply” (Ps. 15:4). This means that sin, as weakness, is impossible for God. But can God, - they say, - make the former, if not the former? To this we say: God is the Truth, and to make the former, as though it were not, is a lie. How can Truth make a lie? To do this, He would first have to change His Being. To speak in this way would be to say that God may not be God either.
And Peter began to say to Him, Behold, we have left everything and followed Thee. Jesus answered and said, “Truly I say to you, there is no one who has left home, or brothers, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or land, for the sake of me and the gospel, and has not received this day, in this time, in the midst of persecution, is a hundred times more than houses, and brothers and sisters, and fathers, and mothers, and children, and lands, but in the age to come, eternal life. Many will be the first last, and the last first.
Although Peter left little for the sake of Christ, yet even this little he calls "everything." It can be seen that few have the bonds of predilection; wherefore, even he who leaves a little is worthy of appeasement. Peter alone asked Christ, but the Lord gives a general answer for all: anyone who leaves his wife or mother. He says this not so that we leave our parents helpless or be separated from our wives, but teaches us to prefer pleasing God to everything carnal. Since the preaching of the Gospel was to kindle warfare among people, so that the children had to renounce their fathers, the Lord says: whoever leaves carnal kinship and in general everything carnal for the sake of the Gospel, he will receive all this a hundred times more in this age, and in future - eternal life. So won't he get a hundred times more wives? Yes, - although the accursed Julian sneered at it. For tell me, what is the use of a wife in the household of her husband? In general, she takes care of food and clothing for her husband and in this respect fully provides for her husband. See how it was with the apostles. How many women took care of bringing them clothes and food and served them, so that they themselves had no care for anything but the word and doctrine! Likewise, the apostles had many fathers and mothers, as were all those who loved them and cared for them sincerely. Peter left one house, and later had (as his own) all the houses of his disciples. He still has bright houses all over the earth - temples in his name. And more importantly, the saints inherited all this in exile, that is, being persecuted for the faith of Christ, and in severe suffering, but their suffering was not disgrace to them. For they, who seemed to be the last in the present age, because of the sorrows and persecutions they endure, will be the first in the next age because of their strong hope in God. The Pharisees who were the first became the last, and those who left everything and followed Christ became the first.
While they were on their way, going up to Jerusalem, Jesus went ahead of them, and they were terrified and, following Him, were in fear. Calling the twelve, He again began to speak to them about what would happen to Him: behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man will be handed over to the chief priests and scribes, and they will condemn Him to death, and hand Him over to the Gentiles, and they will mock Him, and they will beat him, and spit on him, and kill him; and rise on the third day.
Why does Jesus tell His disciples what will happen to Him? To strengthen their spirit, so that, having previously heard about it, they courageously endured it when it happens, and were not struck by suddenness; and at the same time they should have known that He suffered according to His will. For whoever foresaw suffering could have avoided it, and if he did not flee, it is clear that he betrays himself to suffering by will. But since only the closest disciples should have revealed about His suffering, He precedes everyone on the path, wishing to separate the disciples from the people. Yet by forestalling everyone and by His haste on His path, the Lord also shows that He hurries to suffering and does not run away from death for the sake of our salvation. All that He expresses in this case, although regrettable, but for all this he consoles with the fact that "on the third day he will rise again."
Then the sons of Zebedee James and John came up to Him and said: Master! we want You to do to us whatever we ask. He said to them, What do you want me to do for you? They told Him; let us sit by You, one on your right hand and the other on your left, in Your glory. But Jesus said to them, You don't know what you are asking. Can you drink the cup that I drink and be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized?
Another evangelist (Matt. 20:20) says that their mother (James and John) approached Jesus. But, probably, it was both: these two apostles, being ashamed of others, sent their mother in advance, and then they themselves approached separately, as the evangelist means, saying: “approached Him,” that is, they approached separately, moving away from the others. What did they ask for? Ascension of Christ to Jerusalem, about which He talked with the disciples, they understood that He was going to receive the realm of the senses and already upon His accession would endure the sufferings that He predicted. Thinking in this way, they ask to sit on the right and on the left side of Christ. Therefore, the Lord reproaches them, as those who do not understand what they ask: “You don’t know,” he says, “what you ask.” You think that My Kingdom will be sensible, and therefore ask the sensible to sit; no, it is not so: it is higher than the human concept, and to sit at my right hand is the greatest thing, exceeding even the angelic ranks. Moreover, you dream of glory, and I call you to death. He calls the Cup and Baptism the Cross, - the Cup because the Cross, like a cup of wine, was soon to bring Him to the sleep of death - and He was ready to accept the cup of suffering, like a sweet drink for himself; but by Baptism, because by the Cross He made the cleansing of our sins. But the disciples, not understanding the words of the Lord, make a promise on their part, thinking that He is speaking about the cup of the senses and about the baptism that the Jews had, who were washed before eating food.
They answered: we can. Jesus said to them: The cup that I drink you will drink, and with the baptism with which I am baptized you will be baptized; but to let me sit on my right hand and on my left - it does not depend on me, but for whom it is destined.
You, - he says, - will enter the feat of martyrdom and die for the truth, "but it does not depend on Me to let you sit down." But there are two confusions here. First, is this seat reserved for whom? Second: Can it be that the universal Lord cannot give this sitting? We answer: no one will sit either on the right hand or on the left. And if you hear that the Scriptures repeatedly speak of such sitting, then do not mean sitting (in the proper sense), but the highest dignity. And the words: “it does not depend on Me” have the following meaning: It is not my nature, the righteous Judge, to give you such a dignity out of love for you alone; otherwise I would not be just; but such an honor is prepared only for those who strive. It is as if a just king had placed some ascetic above the others, and his favorites, having come, would have said to him: “give us crowns”; then the king, of course, would have answered: “it does not depend on me,” but whoever struggles and wins, the crown is prepared for him. - So, you, sons of Zebedee, can and will be martyrs for Me; but if anyone, along with martyrdom, has every other virtue more than you, he will have an advantage over you.
And when the ten heard it, they began to be angry with James and John. And Jesus, calling them, said to them: You know that those who are honored as princes of the nations rule over them, and their nobles rule over them. But let it not be so among you: but whoever wants to be great among you, let him be your servant; and whoever wants to be first among you, let him be a slave to all. For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.
The disciples, while still reasoning like a human being, fell into envy, and therefore they are indignant at the two apostles. However, when? When they saw that the petition of the latter was not accepted by the Lord, but rejected, then they began to be indignant. While the Lord Himself gave preference to James and John, the other disciples, seeing this, endured; but when those two disciples began to ask for honors for themselves, the others could no longer bear it. So still imperfect were they at that time! But later we will see how each of them gave way to the other. Now, however, Christ heals them, first pacifying them, and for this reason bringing them closer to Himself, which is signified by the word "calling". Then he shows that to admire the honor of others and to strive for primacy is the work of paganism. For pagan rulers forcefully subject others to their power; but My disciples, he says, are not so: but whoever among them wants to be great, let him serve everyone, because this is also a sign of a great soul - to endure from everyone and serve everyone. There is an example of this nearby: "For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many." And this is more than service. Indeed, not only to serve, but also to die for the one you serve - what can be higher and more wonderful than this? But such service and humility of the Lord was the height and glory both for Himself and for everyone. For before incarnation He was led only by Angels, and having become a man and endured the Crucifixion, He not only has that glory (heavenly), but also received another, and reigns over the whole universe.
They come to Jericho. And when He went out of Jericho with His disciples and a multitude of people, Bartimaeus, the son of Timaeus, a blind man was sitting by the road, begging for alms. Hearing that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to shout and say: Jesus, Son of David! have mercy on me. Many forced him to be silent; but he began to shout even more: Son of David! have mercy on me. Jesus stopped and told him to call. They call the blind man and say to him: do not be afraid, get up, he is calling you. He threw off his outer garment, got up and came to Jesus. Answering him, Jesus asked: What do you want from Me? The blind man said to Him: Master! for me to see. Jesus said to him: go, your faith has saved you. And immediately he received his sight and followed Jesus along the road.
Matthew speaks of two blind men: and perhaps two were healed; but probably one of them attracted more attention, the one that Mark now mentions. But look how the people honor Jesus: they even forbid a blind man to shout, as if some king were passing through here. And Jesus asks the blind man so that they do not say that He does not give what the blind man wanted. And the soul of the blind man was prudent, for after he was healed he did not leave Jesus, but followed Him. And (alegorically) it can be understood as follows: Jericho means a low place (the world); the blind man sitting here is an image of human nature, which was once adopted by God, above all earthly honor; it called out to Christ passing through Jericho, that is, this world. But Christ had mercy on him and saved him by faith when he put off the old garment of sin. Upon receiving salvation, it followed Him (Christ), fulfilling the commandments on its way, that is, in this life. For it is only in this life that one can follow Christ, and after it the doors (of salvation) are already closed, and there will no longer be time for the fulfillment of the commandments of God.
Interpretation of Blessed Theophylact, Archbishop of Bulgaria
