In a week or so, the new "Survivor" series will begin. Usually, they have at least one person on the show that claims to be a Christian. In fact, this is not something unique to survivor, many reality (game) shows seek a Christian contestant to throw in the mix. But this raises an interesting question for me: On a reality game show, like Survivor, is it okay for Christians to use lying and deceit as tools that might help them win the game? 
Thanks to the great folks over at Augsburg Fortress Press for sending me the fresh-off-the-press copy of Mark & Method: New Approaches in Biblical Studies. This looks like a great book. Here are the essays in it:
If I had to vote today, I would vote for Ron Paul! Here's why:
This morning I received my copy of Thomas Söding’s Der Markus-Evangelium (Exeges Und Predigt series) in the mail—shipped directly from Belgium. It is my first German commentary on Mark to work through. Because my German is not impeccable, I decided that I’d start off with something a bit more practical and easier to read than some of the other, more in-depth German works. I think that, just for my sake, I’m going to start a short series of some sort on this book. Perhaps it will just be quotes from the book with definitions to follow or grammar tips, etc. We’ll see. I’m excited, though, to finally have a Kommentar to be able to read alongside my German copy of Die Bibel.
"Jesus was not a 'homosexual baptizer'...his own sexuality remains a mystery--but he was someone for whom love between men could embody some of the highest ideals of humanity. Like Plato before him, 'Jesus considered the love of comrades qualitatively different from that of other relationships...For Jesus, the love of friends is the 'greater love' because it is voluntary. Nothing demands or requires that friends love each other; they can love without conditions...As shocking as it may seen to today's conservative Christians, Christian ideals of love are rooted in a philosophical tradition inspired by homosexual desire. According to the Gospel of Mark (14:51-52), when Jesus was arrested in the Garden of Gethsemane in Jerusalem 'a certain young man was following him, having thrown a linen cloth around his naked body. And the young men caught him. But he, leaving behind the linen cloth, fled from them naked. Though the canonical Gospel of Mark says nothing more about this wayward youth, in a 'Secret Gospel of Mark' which, though no longer available was quoted extensively by Bishop Clement of Alexandria (150-215 ce). Though the Bishop's letter 'conveniently' vanished after it was re-discovered in the monastery of Mar Saba, scholar Morton Smith (who found the letter) quoted it for posterity. It speaks of a young man, whom Jesus raised from the dead, who 'loved him [Jesus] and began to implore that he might be with him...When evening arrived, the young man came to him, having wrapped a linen cloth around his naked body, and he remained with him that night. Jesus taught him the mystery of the kingdom of God.' That this can have sexual connotations there is no doubt, for Bishop Clement goes out of this way to point out that this 'mystery' did not involve 'naked man with naked man.'"
Several posts back I mentioned my friend Daren's endeavor to walk across the world, a walk which will raise funds and awareness for the Blood:Water Mission. I've decided to add his blog to my list. He will be leaving in less than two months and will keep the world informed of his travels, experiences and whereabouts via his blog. I would encourage you to add his blog to your list as well. Here's the link: Earth Expedition Blog.
In this table, we see that in verses 12 and 13 statements about Elijah come first. After that, Jesus refers to Himself and the Malachi passage where these things are written of (or the Malachi passage and Himself). Either way, Jesus is giving the Malachi verse a new spin. Let’s connect the dots in a very summarized manner: Before going on to the mountain to witness the transfiguration, Peter had rebuked Jesus for misunderstanding the resurrection. After coming down from the mountain, Peter still thinks Jesus has the resurrection wrong. So, Peter challenges Jesus because a one-man resurrection goes against everything Peter has ever heard. Having just seen Elijah, Peter asks, “Oh yeah, Jesus, isn’t Elijah—as my teachers have always said—supposed to come back and turn people to God before a general resurrection can happen? And from what I just saw on the mountain, he didn’t do that. So, you’re talking about a resurrection but Elijah hasn’t even returned to preach repentance. Doesn’t this suggest that the resurrection is far off and that you’re view of the resurrection is indeed, wrong?” Jesus answers by putting a twist on the Malachi passage. Jesus says that John has come in the tradition of Elijah—thus, the attempt to turn people to God has already happened. Moreover, Jesus says that because many have not repented, a curse must be placed upon Him—just as the Malachi passage says. Jesus then goes on to say once again that Elijah has come (that is, John has come in the tradition of Elijah) and as for Himself, people are already plotting to kill Him and are doing whatever they please to Him. In short, Jesus has taken the curse of sin upon Himself, just as it was spoken of in Malachi, that if people didn’t turn to God, He (God) would send a curse. (This comes terribly close to what Paul speaks of in Galatians 3.10 where Jesus has the curse placed upon Him.)
In this post I have argued for a bit of a new reading of Mk. 9.10-3. Among other things, one of the suggestions I have made is that the Malachi passage must be borne in mind for this whole episode, not just part of it. In addition to this, I have suggested that Jesus gives a radical new reading of those verses, a reading Peter could never have imagined. In fact, it is so far from anything Peter had ever heard that he just couldn’t go without challenging Jesus’ view of the resurrection once again (immediately after Jesus says to keep quiet about it, Peter decides to say something to Jesus about it). Peter’s reply is both a challenge and a rebuke, though this rebuke is a bit softer than the one offered in the previous episode at Caesarea Philippi.
From the standpoint of application, one of many things that this story suggests to me as a modern reader is that in the wake of the transfiguration, there is no need for trying to develop eschatological timelines. Peter had his timeline (e.g. Elijah then resurrection) and so did others. Still today, people like developing charts and timelines (e.g. Dispensationalists like John Hagee or others like Perry Stone or Michael Rood). The fact is, anyone who has ever tried to predict the Day of the Lord has been wrong. When it comes to this subject, there is a 100% failure rating. Indeed, we should quit “debating” (συζητεω) these things and get busy sharing and living the Gospel. Furthermore, we should not only take the message of Moses, Elijah, John and Jesus—the message of repentance—to the ends of the earth but we should heed to it and practice it ourselves. Besides, I have found that when I’m striving to live a life of holiness, when I have to repent as little as possible, I’m not at all eager for the day of judgment. Finally, I share the conviction of Jesus and the prophets that if people will only turn to God, His judgment might be delayed and because of that, we’ll have more time to share the love of Christ with those who need it most.
In my undergrad days I was not nearly as concerned with academics as I was with being a college student. I loved being the class clown and I loved hanging out, writing and singing music. I hated work but I loved playing soccer. During one of my college soccer seasons I actually made the all-region team, which was a pretty good accomplishment, I think. Anyways, one of my team and classmates was a fellow by the name of Daren Wendell. If you listen to K-Love, perhaps you've heard his name recently--he just did an interview with them.
Copyright © 2011
Pisteuomen - πιστευομεν - T. Michael W. Halcomb
