Mark 10:38

“You do not know what you are asking,” Jesus said to them. “Can you drink the cup that I am to drink? Or receive the baptism that I am to receive?” 

of all the questions
this is the most mistaken

point 8 of my 16 point plan
clearly included a cross

you don’t get vicarious glory
there is no virtual reality here

if this is your question
a review is in order

baptism’s and Socrates’ cup
are specifically monogrammed

your pregnant behavior is yours
your acts of commitment are yours

we teach and learn assured accountability
copying answers to different settings fails

did you not read your notes
before setting up this appointment

What the …! Did you do any of the reading? Attend any class?

The sense of bewilderment comes out of the unwitting return to individual aggrandizement at the expense of mutuality. There is no sense of service in the request James and John bring. Their hearts have not been softened enough.

With that immediate response expressed, Jesus seems to shake his head and attempt to bring the brothers back to the point he has been making.

In the Hebrew scriptures, the figure of a cup is often used to indicate suffering. One example is Isaiah 51:17-22. In The New Revised Standard Version we read about a cup aptly described as a “bowl of staggering”. Suffering can stagger us.

Baptismal liturgies still carry Paul’s understanding from Romans 6:3, “Don’t you know that all who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?”

In these two questions we have a prompting to remember the first two points of Jesus’ latest sermon: “Suffering, Death, and Resurrection”. This reminder is given in hope that popular images of resurrection or heaven will be critiqued rather than extending their current weakened understanding of both to a zero-sum game of winners and losers. To revisit suffering and death gives opportunity to recast resurrection away from triumph to ordinary relationships with one another.

Mark 10:37

“Grant us this,” they answered, “to sit, one on your right, and the other on your left, when you come in glory.” 

well Don Jesus
when on others you are judging
do not fail to let us in
on the fun of a last kiss

we will gladly offer
our thumbs added to yours
once in awhile raised in mercy
just to raise a false hope or two

these minions are always falling
short an irredeemable lot
they love to feast
but never pick up after themselves

when healed they freely blab
what is to be a family secret
they are only to move
when you preface with Jesus Says

so when gloriously judging
we want in on the gory act
of separating saint from sinner
and saint from saint

Mark’s grammar gives us the content of what is being asked but doesn’t reveal the intent or motivation.

The crassness of the ask assists us in finally coming clear. Privilege and ease are deep within our first nature. These refuse to acknowledge suffering and death. Finding or making-up loopholes to avoid them is our vocation, our entire métier.

This request is as old as the fantasy in Eden that there is a shortcut to privilege (open eyes able to correctly interpret all things) and ease (being G*D). If we can just eat the right food all else will fall into place. If we can just get pre-approval of our desire we can do what we want.

One way or another, our participation in the biggest triumph imaginable will be—not just squeaking into “eternal life” but directing it from a glorious position—high and lifted up.

It is helpful to consider this from a variety of cultural viewpoints. Bratcher332 makes a helpful connection with our desire to be gloriously lifted and blessed.

In Eastern Otomi the only equivalent is “greatness” and in Mazahua a phrase “where you are in command” has been used. At first thought this latter term would not seem to be adequate, but a man’s glory or distinction is generally spoken of in terms of his commanding position or authority, in which case the phrase seems to fit the context quite well.

How easily our desire for command and control is unmasked.

Mark 10:36

“What do you want me to do for you?” he asked.

when about to be played
for the Oke-Doke
clarity is your friend

you may still be played
but the field is evener
when the deal is on record

when asking for a world
not available
what part crystallizes your request

when we get the terms straight
we’ll see if a deal can be struck
or if you’ll strike out

This same question will be used in a different setting (10:51) when blind Bartimaeus cries out for “mercy”. Whether the situation is a manipulative one (internally with James and John) or an up-front ask (externally with Bartimaeus), there is wisdom in clarifying what is being asked.

Parents quickly learn to ask this question when their children are trying to wheedle something out of them or have a naïve question that doesn’t need a yard-long answer complete with footnotes.

This is a question that honors even unhonorable inquiries. This begins to put us in a partnership relationship rather than one where the privileged party is able to make assumptions about what the request really is about and become compromised and trapped by their response. This would have been a good question for Herod to ask rather than venturing forth with a grand gesture.

Having read Mark this far, it is a good time to ask this question of ourself. Simply in terms of Chapter 10, we might wonder: What or whom are we trying to separate from and find the easiest way to achieve our goal? Why are we not experiencing being picked up and blessed? What currency or current ideation do we hold dearer than a larger integrity? How controlling are our fears of suffering and death? How might we guarantee a privileged place in a better place? What aspect of mercy are we specifically in need of?

Even though Mark’s Greek has some difficulties, the import is clear enough. In both matter and spirit (knowing they cannot be neatly separated) “the devil is in the details”.

Spending a few extra moments in clarifying what is at stake for all the parties involved goes a long way to keeping our intentions in accord with our behavior. This is particularly important around “spiritual” matters where it is all too easy to say more than we know.

Mark 10:35

James and John, the two sons of Zebedee, went to Jesus, and said, “Teacher, we want you to do for us whatever we ask.” 

first get a vague agreement
then let your punch go

once you asked us
to follow where you lead

now we ask you
to follow where we lead

partnership is a big deal
and is to go both ways

we’ve agreed to partner with you
now we need your agreement with us

if you’re going to work through us
we need a little something from you

so what do you say anyway
do we have a deal or not

After each of the major announcements of suffering, death, and resurrection there is a response from someone that reveals they have jumped to resurrection without ever having to deal with its reality of only arriving after suffering and death.

After 8:31, Peter rebukes Jesus for even mentioning suffering. After 9:31, the Twelve were caught arguing about which of them was the greatest (would be least likely to have to suffer). Now, after 10:33, James and John claim a privileged place (jumping from this moment to eternal life).

Children always attempt this same gambit of getting a pre-agreement for something they want. This ploy is as old as the hills. It should be able to be seen through as the “looking for something for nothing” that it is.

There is also an on-going blood family issue happening here. Peter, James, and John are obviously the three with the closest ties with Jesus. They all had ring-side seats at the healing of Jairus’ daughter and the appearance of Moses and Elijah. If there were going to be two honored after this successful journey to rule from heaven, two to sit at Jesus’ right and left, how could either James and John be left out. Far better to be proactive this side of heaven and cut Peter out now.

These family issues seem not to go away. Remember back to 2:31-35 when Jesus’ mother and siblings came asking for him, and the redefinition of family he gave. The focus given then on what it means to be partnered with G*D comes back here with a question: Will there be any top place in a new heaven? Not even for Jesus?

Mark 10:34

who will mock him, spit on him, and scourge him, and put him to death; and after three days he will rise again.”

see what I did there
I took your last straw
and turned it to gold

when you saw only defeat
a new glimmer shines
all may or may not be lost

if it is it is
if it isn’t it isn’t

ridicule turned despair
torture ends in death
all may or may not be regained

if it is it is
if it isn’t it isn’t

at some point seas change
polarity shifts around
all may or may not be transformed

if it is it is
if it isn’t it isn’t

your golden boy
became a disposable
see what I did there

It is one thing to have a sense of being condemned and the finality of death. It is another to drill down through those into specific actions that will be occurring along the way leading to death. The specifics of the suffering before death often capture our imagination so strongly that we are put off from acting in such a way that they might come our way. Self-censorship that keeps us from acts of redemption or healing is all too real.

This is particularly true thousands of years after our exemplar. The Church has so been captured by social norms and a substitution of politeness for prophecy that it seems to take a super-human effort to willingly accept taunting and torture. For these it takes an extended journey into the wilderness to not allow them to determine the outcome of what it means to partner with G*D and Neighb*r.

Since this Jerusalem journey is for both Jesus and the Twelve, we can keep ready to find a series of responses to the threats of mockery, ritual dismissal, physical pain, and, finally, death. In these responses there will be plenty of material to see how deeply toward a wilderness retreat the various persons have traveled. These will range from a pre-emptive giving up (betrayal), to varieties of denial, to holding steady with a good news that goes beyond news cycles.

Mark 10:33

“Listen!” he said. “We are going up to Jerusalem; and there the Son of Man will be betrayed to the chief priests and the teachers of the Law, and they will condemn him to death, and they will give him up to the Gentiles,

look we’re going
to our heart’s desire
but are doing so
through the back door

we’ll walk right in
and sit right down
a stumbling block
to a blind automaton

when they catch on
it will be too late
to avoid a consequential
news of good results

our heart ache
will not be a loss
even death
but miscondemnation

our heart joy
revealing a better basis
for larger partnering
through nonindifference

Indeed, recognizing a corner has been turned and we are on our way to the center of all things “first” and that we will deal with as though they were “last” raises our best hopes and darkest nightmares. This recognition comes even before making a final turn to ascend to Jerusalem from low-lying Jericho.

Beyond recognition of a directional shift is the stating of it.

Readers may have been able to slide by the first two announcements of the consequences of partnering with (loving) both G*D and Neighb*r (8:31; 9:31). Now, taken aside with the Twelve, we are essentially a Thirteenth who is being trained, should one of the Twelve not be able to be present.

Three announcements of suffering, death, and resurrection become the frame by which the Journey to Jerusalem and subsequent consequences of all that has gone before comes clear. Now we are able to review all that has gone before the first announcement in 8:31 to see what it means to be human, to live again in relationship to all of creation and one another. This includes calming storms, external and internal, and healing a variety of brokennesses.

What it might mean to be “handed over” is not yet clear. Except for its foreshadowing of a deliberate act, there is value in not going beyond the already known antagonism of the chief priests and scribes. Here Bratcher329 suggests the use of an equivalent phrase, “the Son of man will come under the control of”. This leads to another shift with the unhelpful identifier of “Gentiles”. The reference is more specifically oriented to the foreign occupiers, the Romans.

Mark 10:32

They were on the road going up to Jerusalem, with Jesus walking in front of them. The disciples were filled with awe, while those who were following behind were overwhelmed with fear. Gathering the Twelve around him once more, Jesus began to tell them what was about to happen to him.

on a journey upward
eyes are differently oriented

in the front range possibilities
to be chased for touching

in the pack we search each other
amazed to be along for the pilgrimage

finally the past pulls a glance
over a fearful salty shoulder

into this normal system’s scattergram
a self-reflective moment arises

a pause along a path
to clarify and refresh

possibilities take on probabilities
shifting amazement to participation

The social order has been overturned with the recognition that there is no correlation between greater wealth and ease of entry into that which can only be described as “eternal”. Though Mark doesn’t say it as directly as Matthew (6:19), wealth will only be eaten by moth and rust and stolen away, but this is what happens to the “first”. This is as amazing and fear producing as the resurrection will be as Jesus leads the terrified and fearful disciples to Galilee (16:8).

To carry within us this revolutionary announcement of good news, that will not feel like good news to those invested in power and privilege, and turn toward Jerusalem or Washington, D.C. or Wall Street (nexus of power and privilege) can only set us on edge—amazed that we are actually going there and fearful of actually going there. This is direct action beyond that found in relation to individuals or even crowds of individuals. Amazement and fear are constituent of this kind of action.

Note that μέλλω (mellō, about to happen) is not simply about something that might happen in some undesignated future, but contains a sense of compulsion, necessity, or certainty as in an expected consequence.

To go toward Jerusalem with an understanding that the first will be last is revolutionary business and neither the leaders of the Jerusalem Temple or the Roman State can abide this and continue in place.

Mark 10:31

But many who are first now will then be last, and the last will be first.”

sticking to business
no R&D invested
is a quick ride to obsolescence

there is no holding on
when a pendulum reversed
our momentum flies on to nothing

we swing back to a previous setting
or anticipate a next swing
acrobatedly placed for landing

pumping a swing
for a next launch
takes all our attention

first to last
rhythms our way
linear to circular

and back again
and forth again
in joy always

Small words are often the pivot of a sentence. One example is the indiscriminate use of the particular article “the” when all that can really be said is “a” or “an” when talking about an incident or experience. Our tendency to universalize gets us in trouble.

Here is Bratcher327 on the very first small word in this verse:

…as [Vincent] Taylor says, it is impossible to dogmatize whether the particle is here adversative ‘but’ or explanatory ‘for’. The interpretation of the saying is vitally affected by the question. Almost without exception commentators and translations adopt the adversative meaning ‘but’; Lagrange, however, understands it to mean ‘for’ and thus interprets the saying.

A second small word is the next one, “many”. The Jesus Seminar reports:

Mark has taken the edge off the aphorism by limiting the reversal to “many” of the first. In this he is followed by Matt 19:30. The Markan version drew a gray designation because it has been softened, while the categorical form in Matt 20:16 was designate pink as something Jesus might plausibly have said. ~Funk94

Rather than see this as a warning (‘but’) or something generalized, so maybe a camel can get through a needle’s eye, the stronger and more parabolic assertion reads as a more complete conclusion to this scene. — For the first will be last; and the last first. End of a resurrection story that follows living, suffering, and dying.

Mark 10:30

who will not receive a hundred times as much, even now in the present – houses, and brothers, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and land, though not without persecutions – and in the age that is coming, eternal life.

what proportion gain
will satisfy your desire

now we can bargain
twice thrice hundreds

whatever your imagination limit
there is still more available

don’t stop with the imaginable
that hopeful stretch

when we are satisfied
a difference will be made

a too-soon bargain
leaves unborn scars

our mark on history
will fade from view

leaving basic frustrations
alive and well for next generations

changing the ground rules
goes beyond reasonable progress

Oh, good, we had hoped for a return on our investment of 30 or 60 times. Now we hear about 100 times. All the seeds we have sown will leave us sitting pretty.

Note how slyly the phrase, “with harassment” or “persecution” was slid in. This is parallelism with a kicker.

We might imagine Jesus crooning this as a lullaby to soothe Peter and the others. With this quieting the disturbing phrase is in an even quieter, soto voce.

This subliminal message hearkens back the long-range question of the one we now know as wealthy. What investment is needed for a desired outcome? Or, “What must I do that in the resurrection from the dead eternal life will be my lot?” ~Bratcher317

This message essentially says that the wrong question is being asked. Instead of trusting some spiritual portfolio, the question is one of being trustworthy. Not what will we get out of our investment, but how can we not invest even if the consequence is that of suffering and death. Only after dealing with these can a third consideration of resurrection find its appropriate place.

There will have to be more assurance given than this long convoluted response. It’s internal contradiction needs to be dealt with.

Mark 10:29

“I tell you,” said Jesus, “there is no one who has left house, or brothers, or sisters, or mother, or father, or children, or land, for my sake and for the good news,

an incomplete verse
set up a yet unknown
reversal of fortune
unless of course
it is a fulfillment

assurance is one thing
that can be offered
and not received
until its time has come
and become beside the point

what we mean by everything
is always conditioned
in light of economics
valuing tomorrow’s innovations
over and above today’s limits

for person and cause
we commit our resources
in expectation of more
than mere replacement
an extravagant eternity more

There is translational trouble with the Greek that comes not only from the length of the rebuttal, but its double negative construct. Still, the variants in Matthew and Luke indicate that this is not a direct quote but a list that simply points a direction and can be added to with friends or hometown or political party or ….

The last phrase can get played a couple of ways. The word “because” above ἕνεκα (heneka, for the sake of, for the cause of) can be “treated either as causal ‘because of me…’ or purposive ‘for the benefit of…’ In some instances for my sake and for the gospel may be combined as ‘to help me and good news’.” ~Bratcher327

This soft response to a very hard question can be seen to first diffuse the anger at having been caught out about why Peter and others agreed to sign on in the first place. It wasn’t just the charisma of Jesus or a trusting response to a call or a way out of current situation. This self orientation can go a long way in explaining the apparent obtuseness of the disciples in regard to the healings, teachings, and signs Jesus has presented in their presence.

When our expectations are that our investment will be returned many times over, more than FICA guaranteed, there is no need to work at discerning how the presence of Life differs from the necessities of living. It is all going to be taken care of. And, then, along comes a winsome, wealthy, person and he is the cause of a pronouncement that discounts our expectation.

Well, it’s just not fair! Such an assurance is not believable.