Source: http://www.malankaraworld.com/Library/Sermons/Sermons_1st-sunday-after-shunoyo-exegenical-notes-brian-stoffregen.htm
Timestamp: 2019-04-24 18:52:25+00:00

Document:
After Jesus announces (again) his upcoming passion, the disciples "were amazed" and "afraid." The word for "amazed" (thambeomai) is found only in Mark in the NT (1:27; 10:24), as is a more intensive form, (ekthambeomai -- 9:15; 14:33; 16:5, 6). The "amazement" may be at either positive or negative events. It would seem that their "amazement" or "shock" in this context is that fact that Jesus is going up to Jerusalem. He has already told them that he will "be rejected by the elders, the chief priests, and the scribes, and be killed" (8:31). Although it hasn't been stated explicitly that this will happen in Jerusalem, the disciples have probably figured it out. If Jesus knows they will do this to him, why does it persist on going to Jerusalem? The disciples might have been dense about Jesus' mission, but they knew enough to be alarmed.
In contrast to many congregations, Jesus was certain about the mission God had sent him to do -- the purpose of his life and death -- and nothing would keep him from fulfilling it. He also presents himself as an example in our text.
Related to this aspect of our text, some years ago I received a short article adapted from Herold Percy, "Good News People," which makes a contrast between "maintenance" and "mission".
2. When contemplating some form of change, the maintenance congregation says, "If this proves upsetting to any of our members, we won't do it." The mission congregation says, "If this will help us reach someone on the outside, we will take the risk and do it."
3. When thinking about change, the majority of members in a maintenance congregation ask, "How will this affect me?" The majority of members in the mission congregation ask, "Will this increase our ability to reach those outside?"
4. When thinking of its vision for ministry, the maintenance congregation says, "We have to be faithful to our past." The mission congregation says, "We have to be faithful to our future."
7. The maintenance congregation seeks to avoid conflict at any cost (but rarely succeeds). The mission congregation understands that conflict is the price of progress, and is willing to pay the price. It understands that it cannot take everyone with it. This causes some grief, but it does not keep it from doing what needs to be done.
8. The leadership style in the maintenance congregation is primarily managerial, where leaders try to keep everything in order and running smoothly. The leadership style in a mission congregation is primarily transformational, casting a vision of what can be, and marching off the map in order to bring the vision into reality.
9. The maintenance congregation is concerned with their congregation, its organizations and structure, its constitutions and committees. The mission congregation is concerned with the culture, with understanding how secular people think and what makes them tick. It tries to determine their needs and their points of accessibility to the Gospel.
10. When thinking about growth, the maintenance congregations asks, "How many Lutherans live within a twenty-minute drive of this church?" The mission congregation asks, "How many unchurched people live within a twenty-minute drive of this church?"
11. The maintenance congregation looks at the community and asks, "How can we get these people to support our congregation?" The mission congregation asks, "How can the Church support these people?"
12. The maintenance congregation thinks about how to save their congregation. The mission congregation thinks about how to reach the world.
I know that whenever such a "paradigm shift" (changing "the correct way of viewing the world") is introduced in a church, most of the people just don't get it -- like the disciples in our text.
How is their request that Jesus would do for them whatever they ask different from Jesus' statement about serving others? Sometimes the concept of serving others is defined as "doing whatever the other wants done." There are some things that Jesus won't or can't do for other people, e.g., give them the places of honor when he comes into his glory. Jesus clearly indicates that his power is limited.
Remember also that James and John had seen Jesus transfigured before them. They had a glimpse of Jesus' glory with Moses and Elijah perhaps at his right and left (9:2-8).
There is a time of Jesus' glory which is related to the parousia.
Mark uses two different words for "left" (aristeros in v. 37 and euonumos in v. 40). They are synonymous. Matthew uses eunonumos in both places in the parallel passage (20:21, 23). Mark uses the second word for the bandits at Jesus' right and left at the crucifixion (15:27) as does Matthew (27:38), but Luke uses aristeros for the position at the crucifixion (23:33).
When there are people at Jesus' right and left in Mark, they are bandits and it is at their crucifixions. Is that the time of Jesus' glory? Are they the ones for whom God has prepared the honor?
DO THEY OR DON'T THEY KNOW WHAT THEY ARE ASKING?
In v. 38, the verbs are present tense -- Jesus is presently drinking his cup and being baptized with his baptism. Perhaps some of his greatest suffering was caused by these dense disciples who never seem to get the picture of what Jesus is going to do. They are the blind ones, but unlike Bartimaeus, they don't wish to have Jesus give them new sight.
The image of "drinking from a cup" is used in the OT to refer to receiving [God's] wrath and the sorrow that comes with that (Pss 11:6; 75:8; Is 51:17, 22; Jer 25:15; 51:7; Ezek 23:33-34).
Does Jesus come under God's wrath -- which all of us deserve? Or does "the cup" simply symbolize suffering?
There are also some positive uses of "cup" in the OT.
Our text: 10:38-39 = suffering?
It is used in the Last Supper where the cup (actually its contents) symbolizes "The blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many" (14:23-24). Is this another reference to Jesus' suffering?
Lowe & Nida suggest that the phrase "to be baptized with a baptism" is an idiom that means "to be overwhelmed by some difficult experience or ordeal." Given that baptizo can mean "to immerse," the image of being immersed in water is used as a symbol of great distress. "Save me, O God, for the waters have come up to my neck (Ps 69:1 see also vv. 2, 14-15).
... While the term "baptism" could be employed in Greek literature to speak about being overwhelmed by catastrophe, the awkwardness of the phrase may suggest that it is chosen because of its place in the church's technical vocabulary. In Paul's letters, the rite of Christian Baptism is interpreted as sharing Christ's death (Rom. 6:1-5; in Ephesians 2 and Colossians 2, sharing in his resurrection as well).
In both vv. 38 & 39, ego is used, stressing the "I" of the drinking and being baptized. Perhaps to indicate this stress we could translate it: "The cup which I myself am drinking, you will drink and the baptism which I myself am being baptized, you will be baptized. It is clear that Jesus is going through these ordeals.
If the drinking and being baptized are things that are happening (present tense) to Jesus, they mean more than just martyrdom. Perhaps, as I suggested above, it is the suffering of "putting up" with those who don't get it -- those who fail to capture the vision of Jesus' (or a congregation's) mission.
Jesus indicates in v. 40 that he does not know all or have the power to do everything. He does not know for whom his right and left have been prepared and he does not have the power to give it to James and John (even if he might have wanted to). Matthew makes it clear that these places have been prepared by the Father (20:23).
The reaction of the ten in v. 41 suggests a couple of things.
(1) Seeking power is divisive for a community.
(2) Are they angry because they wanted these positions for themselves? Are they just as bad as the two?
Verse 42 Jesus presents the prevailing cultural control system. I suggested in a sermon that there can be a great difference in the words "power" and "overpower". That difference is part of a couple of Greek words in this verse, which are translated "lord it over" and "be tyrants over."
The root of the first word (katakyrieuo) is kyrios or "lord". Jesus is Lord. God is Lord, yet they do not lord it over people. It is the prefix kata that turns it into a power over other people.
The root of the second word (katexousiazo) is exousia = "power," "right," "authority." This attribute was also frequently applied to Jesus. He taught as one having authority (Mk 1:22). It is the kat- prefix that turns it into a power over people.
It is not necessarily bad to be in a position of power and authority. Jesus certainly had that. Clergy and council members are in positions of power, but there is a difference between having power and overpowering others.
This was the assigned text soon after I had been to a workshop on Native Americans. They built round teepees. We build square or rectangular houses. They organized their communities in a circle. We have square blocks. They build round sweat lodges. We build square saunas. They talk about the circle of life -- that all living things are on this circle -- equal to one another.
It struck me that there is no hierarchy in a circle. A round table has no head. Rectangular tables have a "head" (and "foot") to the seating arrangements. There are places of honor at a rectangular table that are not found at a round one. At fancy banquets, there is often a "head" table where the really important people sit.
A major contrast in our text is the way of the world with its positions or rank and privilege and the way of Jesus' followers. The Greek prefix kata mentioned earlier as "over people" can also imply "looking down" on others -- being higher up. In Jesus' community -- in Jesus' body -- all are equal. Each person will have different gifts in his/her service to/for the community, but all are equal.
The word also occurs in v. 51 when Jesus asks blind Bartimaeus, "What do you want me to do?" It is essentially the same question Jesus asks James and John in v. 36 -- literally, "What are you wishing that I will do for you?"
There doesn't seem to be anything wrong with wanting to be great or first among the disciples (or "to see again"); but it has to be done Jesus' way and not according to the world's way.
Jesus makes it clear at the beginning of v. 43 that the "power-tripping" way of the world is not the way things are to be among the disciples. How is it to be among us? We are to be servants and slaves.
I find a significant change in the parallelism of the second part of these two verses.
It would seem that for Mark, our servanthood is not limited to the group -- your servant, but to the world, to all. This is stated earlier in 9:35 when Jesus tells the twelve, "Whoever wants to be first must be last of all and servant [diakonos] of all.
Matthew's parallels do not have "of all," but "your".
It would seem that discipleship in Mark has a greater emphasis on serving all people and not just those within the believing community.
Although Jesus says in v. 45 that he did not come to be served but to serve, every other time this word [diakoneo] is used in Mark it is Jesus who is being served! After the temptation he is served by angels (1:13). After healing Peter's mother-in-law, she serves them (1:31). The women at the crucifixion are described as those who "used to follow him and provided for him when he was in Galilee (15:41).
The service Jesus offers, though, goes far beyond what was given to him. He gives his life as a ransom for all. [Note the "for all" again, which also occurs in Mt 20:28].
The word for ransom (lytron) occurs only here and the Mt parallel. It refers to the price paid to free a slave. Related words are frequently translated "redemption" or "redeemer".
He also suggests a couple of other ways of approaching the ransom aspect.
While we are not called to be a ransom for many, are we as individuals and congregation's called to be self-sacrificing (not maintaining ourselves) in our mission to serve each other and be slaves to all?

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.