How Is Mark’s “Light Under a Basket” Different Than Matthew and Luke?

Mike Leake

pexels-david-bartus-366791

My favorite thing about going to the doctor as a child was partaking of their subscription of Highlights Magazine. It was filled with puzzles and jokes and all things entertaining to a budding nerd like myself. One of my favorite games to play was Spot the Difference.

Let’s play that game. Can you spot the difference in these three verses?  

Is a lamp brought in to be put under a basket, or under a bed, and not on a stand? Mk 4:21.

Nor do people light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on a stand, and it gives light to all in the house. Mt 5:15.

No one after lighting a lamp covers it with a jar or puts it under a bed, but puts it on a stand, so that those who enter may see the light. Lk 8:16.

This might prove more difficult than a Highlights puzzle. Look closely at Matthew 5:15 and Luke 8:16. Notice that in both Matthew and Luke the lamp is in the objective case. And the point, especially in Matthew, seems to be something like, “You’re the light of the world, don’t be quiet about Jesus.”

But Mark is doing something different. In Mark the lamp is the subject of the sentence. It’s about the lamp, not the one lighting the lamp. What he’s doing here is balancing what he said in 4:10-12. Contrary to what it might seem through his speaking in parables, Jesus hasn’t come to be put under a basket. He is there to be found.

A Treasure Hunt

Why is Mark speaking this way? It’s because for the time being—and this theme carries on throughout Mark—the identity of Jesus is largely hidden. It seems as if Jesus is hiding under a basket. But it’s important for Mark’s readers to understand that Jesus is not actually hidden. He’s there if we have eyes to see.

Think of it like a treasure hunt.

My wife and I like to watch The Curse of Oak Island. Well, we used to avidly watch it. Now we catch a few episodes here and there. The Curse of Oak Island is all about this fabled treasure that was hidden off the coast of Nova Scotia. And for 10+ seasons a couple brothers and their friends have been digging expensive holes, metal detecting, sniffing wood, and unearthing history.

After a decade of watching, we’re less enthused. I’m not exactly convinced that there is anything there anymore. But the Lagina brothers and company must still believe there is a treasure there—or at least they’ve found that the search in itself is a cash cow.

That’s the nature of treasure hunts. If you truly believe something is there then you’ll spare no expense to unearth it. But if you’re standing on the sidelines you must not believe the treasure is worth the hunt.

This is what Jesus is saying about parables. All of the talk in this section about soil and lamps and seeds is about how you respond to the message of Jesus. It is a reflection of your heart. If the message of Jesus means little to you—whether you’re hard-hearted, fickle, or distracted makes no difference—then you won’t jump into the treasure hunt.

You Get What You Put Into It

Mark’s point, then, is that the light of Christ is shining. He hasn’t put it under a basket. But it’s also the type of light that we need eyes to see. This is why Jesus says, “Pay attention to what you hear”. He is telling us to heed the Word.

If you discovered an old diary that was rumored to hold the secrets to the location of this vast treasure, you’d scour every word for clues. Unless, that is, you thought the treasure hunt was a wild goose chase. The same is true of the Word of God. We’ll take heed to the Word if we believe it applies to us, if we believe that herein is found treasure. 

That is what this text is saying. If you hear with intent then you are going to get something out of it. Not that you’ll put meaning into a text that isn’t there. Nor that there is some secretly deposited message in an archaic code. It’s plain as day, if you but look.

If you find the message of the kingdom to be dull then it’s going to be dull. If you listen with the intention of trying to find fault then you’ll find fault. With the measure you use it will be measured to you. And so pay attention to what you hear.

The light shines. This gives us hope.

—

Photo source: here

Why Does Jesus Speak in Parables?

Mike Leake

eric-masur-tUOIiJqulQU-unsplash

66 At daybreak the council of the elders of the people, both the chief priests and the teachers of the law, met together, and Jesus was led before them. 67 “If you are the Messiah,” they said, “tell us.”

On one hand, I understand their frustration. If Jesus is the Messiah why doesn’t he campaign under that banner. Why doesn’t He just clearly say, “I am the Messiah”?

On the other hand, their question exposes their foolishness and stubbornness. If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it’s probably a duck. The duck doesn’t need to say “I’m a duck” for us to give it that moniker.

And it’s a bit disingenuous to say “He didn’t give enough evidence” when I never truly put the evidence under a microscope.

I think there is an assumption here that if Jesus is truly the Messiah, then it ought to be easy. It should be undeniable, slap you across the face with a board, kind of clarity. But that’s really not taking into account what Jesus said about parables in Mark 4.

Mark 4:1-20 is another one of those Markan sandwiches. The top bun is the parable of the soils. The bottom bun is the explanation of that parable. (Don’t you just love it when Jesus explains his parables?) The meat, though, is tricky.

10 When he was alone, the Twelve and the others around him asked him about the parables. 11 He told them, “The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those on the outside everything is said in parables 12 so that,

“‘they may be ever seeing but never perceiving,
and ever hearing but never understanding;
otherwise they might turn and be forgiven!’”

I’ve heard it said before that Jesus speaks in parables because they are like sermon illustrations. They are heavenly truths given to us in earthly garb. That sounds great, but it’s not what Jesus said about parables. Parables are invitations. They aren’t obvious. They aren’t explicit. They require a bit more digging. They aren’t easy.

And Jesus tells us why by quoting Isaiah 6:9-10. He says that parables are given so that things aren’t obvious or easy. Now why does he do this? Why not just make things easy? I mean, if this is life or death type stuff why play around here with difficult parables that could be misunderstood?

Because it’s really not about understanding as much as it is about the desire to understand. The kingdom of God isn’t about getting all the right answers on a trivia question. It’s about having a heart that desires God.

Parables Are Windows

I’ve always been small of stature. That means that if a crowd gathers around to see something, I either need to be near the front or I need to pull a Zacchaeus and climb a sycamore tree. But that’s only if I want to see what all the commotion is about.

If I’m at the zoo and I see a crowd of people huddled up and excitedly viewing the monkey exhibit, I figure they must be doing something awesome or horrifyingly disgusting. Because that’s what monkeys do. Monkeys are worth watching. And so, I’ll put in the effort to see.

At the same time, if a group of people are huddled up at the capybara exhibit, I’m probably not going to put in the effort to squirm my way to the front. It’s a capybara. It might be cute in its weirdness but it’s probably not going to put on much of a show.

Parables are windows into the kingdom of God. They open up for us what God is like. They tell us about reality. They paint a picture what life is like both now and in the future for those who dwell with God.

But they are also windows into our own hearts. A parable is a bit like that line forming outside the exhibit. It will expose whether or not I think its a monkey or a capybara exhibit. Parables reveal to us whether or not we want to know the kingdom of God. Do we have the kind of heart that peers into the window.

Why Not Make It Easy?

But we must came back to our core question. Why not make it easy? If you’re the Messiah why not put that on a placard for all to see? Why does it feel like Jesus is playing hide and seek with us?

It’s because we’re broken.

We’ve turned an invitation of delight into a hurdle to overcome. Jesus is shining but our eyes have grown dim. We don’t see as we ought. And so the Lord must work differently with our desires. He speaks in parables not only as a window but also as invitation.

There are people huddled around the exhibit…do you care to see? Will it grab your attention?

—

Photo source: here

Did Jesus’ Family Think He Was Crazy?

Mike Leake

st,small,507x507-pad,600x600,f8f8f8

20 Then he went home, and the crowd gathered again, so that they could not even eat. 21 And when his family heard it, they went out to seize him, for they were saying, “He is out of his mind.”

These verses are unique to Mark. In fact, this is the first time that we would have been introduced to Jesus’ family. There is no birth narrative in the gospel of Mark. Why does Mark do this? Why does it seem that Jesus’ family think Him to be out of his mind?

The problem of language

If you read Mark 3:20-21 in your King James Bible it’ll read a bit differently. Rather than having his family trying to seize him, the KJV reads that it was “his friends” who went to lay hold of him, because he was “beside himself”.

Which is it? Family or friends?

Mark’s language here is ambiguous. Literally it reads “those of him”. This could mean his associates, his followers, his friends, his kin, or his family. The context alone will help us determine meaning.

It is the context which has caused some to see this as family. The family appears again in verse 31. They have arrived and they are looking for Jesus. The words used there are similar to verse 21, and this appears to be another Markan sandwich—where he combines two stories and has a main point in between them.

If verse 21 is someone other than the family, then it doesn’t work for Mark’s sandwich. The context seems to lean us toward it being the family.

But such a view is not without its problems.

The problem of Christmas

This is not a problem for Mark, but it is for those of us desiring to harmonize the Gospels. If Luke and Matthew are correct in what happened with Mary (and there is no reason to believe they are not) then Mary would have known about Jesus’ identity as the Messiah. How would she have had the experiences that she had in the birth narrative and then 30 years later, think that Jesus was a crazy loon for doing the things which Messiah would do?

But this isn’t a problem only for Mark. There are instances in each of the gospels where it seems that Jesus was rejected even by his immediate family. Certainly, it would not be strange for us to imagine Mary having a certain image in her mind of what Messiah would do. And she too might have experienced some level of consternation when her son doesn’t match up to expectations.

But perhaps we shouldn’t be so quick to reject other options for translation. Maybe the reference is to his disciples—and they don’t think he’s crazy, but it means something entirely different.

Other Possible Explanations

The immediate context might suggest the disciples other than Jesus’ family. After all, he has just introduced the calling of the twelve disciples. Why would we so quickly move to thinking “those of him” is a reference to family and not his disciples? But what would be the meaning of the passage if it is the disciples?

One explanation is that Jesus was absolutely exhausted—he couldn’t even eat. He isn’t “mad” as much as he is “overwhelmed.” And his disciples are doing what kinfolk ought to do in such a situation—they are taking care of their vulnerable.

A similar line of argument is put forth where Jesus’ disciples don’t think the Jesus is insane but rather the crowd. Here, you end up with a translation like that of H. Wansbrough1: ‘When they heard it, his followers went out to calm it [the crowd] down, for they said that it was out of control with enthusiasm.”

Creative, but not entirely plausible. For one, it would destroy the Markan sandwich—and for what? What point in the context would this make? That Jesus is tired and needs his disciples to watch out for Him? How would that thrust us into a conversation about the strong man?

A suggested interpretation

I believe the traditional interpretation—that his family were the ones desiring to seize/control/bind him—is the correct translation. But I wonder if “out of his mind” might give us the wrong impression. What if, rather than a comment on His psychological well-being it is a comment on His social well-being?

In their book, Misreading Scripture with Individualist Eyes, Richards and James labor to help us Westerners understand the concept of honor. And in particular how honor relates to things like kinship. In one particular section, the authors interact with John 6. Why are the religious leaders so off put by Jesus’ claim of being bread from heaven? They explain:

Like the manna that God miraculously provided, Jesus would need to be ascribed this honor by God. They point to his known ascribed honor—his family of origin. His claim doesn’t match his ascribed honor, in their view. In this case, the court of opinion began to rule against Jesus. (Richards, 163)

What if something similar is happening here? Jesus’ family doesn’t think he’s a loon—not in the same way that we would think that—but rather that His claims, His gathering disciples, etc. is causing difficulty for the family. It’s giving them a bad reputation and they are losing honor.

What they attempt to do is to seize Jesus. To control Him, and bound Him. To put Him back into proper order befitting his station in society.

This fits with the middle of the sandwich as well. The point there is that there is a strong man (Satan) who needs bound. Only a Stronger Man (Jesus) is able to do this. But what is happening is that Jesus’ family, friends, and the religious leaders are attempting to bind Jesus. It’s as if they are attempting to make Jesus submit to societal and kinship rules—which He supersedes.

His family tries to bind him by their assumption that they have a special relationship with him. The scribes try to use authority and accusation. Both are attempting to bind up the Stronger Man.

But Jesus will not be bound. He has come to destroy the works of the devil—he’s binding up this strong man—and nobody will bind up Him. Nobody will dictate what Jesus says or what Jesus does. He is sovereign. He is the authority.

Conclusion

Did Jesus’ family think He was crazy? Probably. But not quite in the way we might make this accusation today. They thought He was placing Himself outside the bounds of normal society. This is a “crazy” act. And so they are trying to reign Jesus back in.

But Jesus will not be reigned in—Jesus will reign!

—

1 H. Wansbrough, NTS 18 (1971/2) 233–35

Review of Bright Hope For Tomorrow By @RevChrisDavis

Mike Leake

71T3C1BrShL._AC_UF1000,1000_QL80_I’ll confess that when the topic of Jesus’ return comes up, I get slightly triggered. Sadly, this is a topic which brings more argument than hope.

When I heard that my friend, Chris Davis, was going to be writing a book on the topic I had two thoughts. First, I was worried for his safety (I’m only partially kidding—you can get some pretty nasty letters if you don’t toe the line on eschatology in some quarters). Secondly, I was excited because I knew that Chris would handle this topic with great care and that he would point us to Jesus.

I was not disappointed at all. Through each chapter Davis wades through the quagmire of questions and timelines and charts and gets to the central tenet of the Second Coming: hope.

When you analyze the letters of the New Testament in regards to the second coming what you find is that the topic was not centered upon debate or speculation but given to us for practical living. The Second Coming was a fuel for Christian living.

There was a meme circulating a few years ago with a picture of “Jesus” and the phrase “Jesus is coming look busy”. That’s not what is meant by the return of Christ fueling Christian living. But Christ coming as a judge is also an important aspect of His return. Chapter Six of Bright Hope for Tomorrow focuses upon this aspect. 

This, in my opinion, was one of the strongest chapters in the book. The author doesn’t mince words or beat around the bush. He boldly declares:

…if you are hiding something now, it will not be hidden when Jesus returns in his brilliance. So expose it now through confession to God and to others whose presence in those hidden places can prepare you for the light of Jesus on the final day. (Davis, 86)

But it’s not only hard-hitting, it is also hope-filled. He notes that this judgment means that we will be revealed for who we actually are. For Paul, and for any of those who are in union with Christ, this will be a day of blessing. It will reveal our overall character.

There are also a few chapters on how the Second Coming influences our spiritual disciplines as well. This is where the book really shines. That is not the type of thing you typically find in a book on the Second Coming, but it’s certainly what was in the mind of the biblical authors.

For these reasons, this book is a needed addition in your library and an important resource for any discussion of the Second Coming. If this doctrines doesn’t impact our day to day life then we aren’t “using” it the way the biblical authors did. Chris has done good work here in restoring that biblical aim.

—

Buy it here.