The journey to God's mountain, 6:1-10:52

2 Growing faith, 8:22-10:52

ii] Jesus teaches suffering and true discipleship #1


Following the confession of Peter at Caesarea Philippi, Jesus speaks of his coming suffering and then goes on to speak on the issue of cross-bearing discipleship.


Jesus' call to commitment is a call for identification with his perfect self-renunciation / humiliation, possessed through the instrument of faith.


i] Context: See 8:22-30.


ii] Structure: The cost of being a disciple:

Episode 1:

The healing of the blind man at Bethsaida, v22-26;

Episode 2:

The confession of Peter, v27-30;

Jesus foretells his death and resurrection, v31-33;

Rebukes all round, v32-33;

Jesus' call to cross-bearing, v34-9:1.

Saying #1: Take up your cross, v34;

Saying #2: To save one's life is to lose it, v35;

Saying #3: What good is it to gain the whole world? v36;

Saying #4: What can one exchange for their soul? v37;

Saying #5: Being ashamed of the Son of Man, v38;

Saying #6: Seeing the kingdom come with power, 9:1.


The division of this passage at 8:31 is somewhat arbitrary, given the close link Peter's confession has with what follows. Following the two question-answer form of v27-30, Mark records Jesus' first passion prediction, v31, along with the twin epitimaw, "rebuke" of Peter and Jesus, v32-33. Then follows Jesus' cross bearing saying, v34, along with three related sayings stitched together with an explanatory gar, "for", v35-38. This cluster of sayings concludes with an independent eschatological saying concerning the coming of the Son of Man en dunamei, "in power", 9:1.


iii] Interpretation.

Following Peter's confession, Jesus speaks of his coming death and goes on to address the issue of self-sacrifice. Mark will repeat this pattern two more times, 9:30-37, and 10:32-45.

When it comes to denying self and taking up one's cross, v34ff, the bulk of commentators see these images as illustrations of self-denial, of self-sacrifice in the terms of Jesus' cross. Of course, commentators vary in the way they apply cross-bearing discipleship, with some sidestepping the issue altogether, and others into the business of weighing their readers down with an impossible load.

Sherman Johnson says of the images of discipleship in this passage that they serve to deny our "own ambitions and interests." A.M. Hunter, always a valuable source of potted theology, paraphrases Jesus' words as "you must be willing to live as men on the way to the gallows." Discipleship involves "the self-renunciation of the true missionary, one who like Paul 'counts not life dear' - a glad St.Francis, Livingstone or Schweitzer." William Lane writes of this call to discipleship: it permits "no turning back and if necessary, a willingness to submit to the cross in pursuance of the will of God." Hugh Anderson says of denial that it is "forsaking one's selfish pretensions and worldly securities for the sake of Jesus." Of cross-bearing Cranfield says, it calls for a discipleship that "must be ready to face martyrdom." Earle Ellis, addressing the Lucan passage says, "the requirement to enter the kingdom is utter and ultimate commitment to the way of Jesus. The suffering messiah means also a suffering messianic community. In its original context to take up his cross meant only one thing, to die with Jesus in Jerusalem."

The problem with this cross-bearing discipleship approach is that it runs counter to both experience and divine grace. Few believers ever come close to the devotion of St.Francis. We have moments of renewal, of rededication, but most of the time we struggle with the bare essentials of discipleship. So, the more a theologian stresses cross-bearing discipleship, the more they reinforce failure and so undermine grace.

If this passage is not ethical, is not demanding of disciples a life of cross-bearing self-sacrifice, a life of self-denial, of giving up our time, talent and tinkle for the kingdom, then what is its intention?

It could be argued that Jesus is doing nothing more than illustrating a Biblical principle, namely, God's ways are not our ways, such that when we are weak then we are strong, 2Cor.12:10. Christ lived this pattern, and set it as the pattern of life for his people as they too work to usher in the new age of the kingdom. In simple terms, the realisation of the kingdom is "not by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit, says the LORD Almighty", Zech.4:6. Such is true, but is this the intent of Jesus' words here? Probably not!

Another possibility is that Jesus is making this radical demand in order to expose the sinful condition of his disciples, and so prompt their dependence on divine grace for salvation. Jesus often employs this tactic with the Law, as Paul puts it, "the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ that we might be justified by faith", Gal.3:24. Jesus sets a standard of righteousness that only he can meet - a perfect holiness, or as here, perfect cross-bearing. When confronted with the righteous demands of God, a disciple is forced to admit their own condition of loss and turn to God for mercy. In an act of grace, resting on the perfect obedience of Christ, the disciple who rests on Christ in faith is identified with Christ and therefore, treated by God as if they are that righteous person. Thus, in Christ, we stand justified - JUST IF I'D never sinned. Again, such is profoundly true, but is this the intent of Jesus' words here? Probably not!

We have not heard the last word on this very difficult passage, but it seems likely that the cross we are to carry is not our own, it is Christ's cross, a light load indeed; "my yoke is easy and my burden is light." Jesus, having spoken to his disciples about his death and resurrection, "called the crowd to him, along with his disciples", and to this mixed gathering, believers, seekers and unbelievers, he speaks about denial of self and cross-bearing, v34. This is a call for commitment to the gospel, not a call for sacrificial discipleship. This is a call for faith in a standing before God which is vicariously realised through an identification with the perfect self-renunciation of Jesus. A person's acceptance of Jesus will involve embarrassment, given that Jesus is a humiliated messiah, and yes, it may even involve danger (cf., Gundry for his take on this issue). So, Jesus employs figurative language to describe commitment to, and thus identification with, the suffering but glorified Christ (the Son of Man who suffers, is rejected and killed, but is rises on the third day). What we have here is a call to commitment, a call to rely on the cross-bearing of Jesus.


Eschatology: "There are some standing here who will not taste death until they see that the kingdom of God has come in power", NAB, Mk.9:1. Numerous interpretations are proposed for this prophecy: the transfiguration, crucifixion, resurrection, ascension, coming of the Holy Spirit, mission of the church, the destruction of Jerusalem, Christ's second coming. Schweitzer argued that Jesus thought the kingdom would dawn in his generation, but was wrong. This false assumption was even held by the disciples. Dodd pushed in the same direction, but with a greater respect for scripture (arguing for a realised eschatology [the kingdom was present in the ministry of Jesus, but unrecognised]. We may be on safer ground if we view the coming kingdom as both realised and inaugurated - now / not yet). More extreme views have been posited, eg., "the saying is probably best understood as an independent logion pronounced as a saying of the risen Jesus by an early Christian prophet - a word of consolation in view of the delay of the Parousia, which promises that at least some of the first generation will live to see it", Boring.

Although the interpretation of this eschatological saying of Jesus is anything but settled, we are best to understand his words in the terms of Daniel's coming / reigning Son of Man, 7:13. The kingdom's "coming" in judgment (the great assize), is exercised by Jesus at the right hand of the Ancient of Days (Stephen's vision, Acts 7:56), and is evidenced in all the expressions of this "coming" / judgment, past, present and future. Easter, Pentecost and mission, all display the kingdom's coming in power. Even the transfiguration, which follows this prediction, images the kingdom's coming in power. Most commentators think that the particular focus in mind is the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD. This event certainly serves as the essential paradigm of that final day when the Lord will fold up the Monopoly Board and say, "Game's over!" Yet, for those with eyes to see, generation by generation, "the kingdom of God has come with power"; the game is over, it's just that some of the players haven't realised it yet.

However we handle this time / space conundrum, the mixed audience with Jesus this day faces a decision of commitment, and this in the knowledge that in the realisation / inauguration, now / not yet, of the kingdom of God, only some will get to experience it - those who commit to the Committed One; those who identify with the cross-bearing one.


iv] Synoptics:

Matt16:21-28, Lk.9:22-27. The record of these linked independent sayings is very similar, so either, someone followed someone, or they were already a set tradition before our gospel writers got to them (which may well be the case). As already noted, most scholars opt for Markan priority. Luke leaves out the Peter / Jesus exchange, v32-33. Interestingly, Luke has Jesus addressing "all", while Matthew has him addressing the "disciples". This would imply Markan priority, because obviously Matthew has missed the point and assumed that Jesus' words are for "disciples", rather than "the crowd with his disciples." This also implies that Luke is following Mark, rather than Matthew, but of course, he may just be following the extant oral tradition of his day. Note that Matthew adds a negative thrust to the eschatological warning, Matt.16:27


v] Exposition: A simple exposition of this passage can be found in the pew-level sermon notes The cost of being a disciple.

Text - 8:31

Suffering and discipleship: i] Jesus foretells his death and resurrection, v31-33. Having heard the disciples confess him as a messiah, Jesus now tells them that he will be a suffering messiah. In fact, his suffering, which will involve rejection and death at the hands of his own people, is necessary. It is necessary in that it is God's will, but because it is God's will, Jesus will break the bonds of death and rise again. Peter is not willing to accept the idea of a suffering messiah and so takes Jesus aside to straighten him out - as a friend (in love) of course! The trouble is that the other disciples have most likely overheard Peter's rebuke and so a public dressing-down is in order. From the beginning of his ministry, Satan has offered a way of gaining a kingdom apart from suffering and humiliation. Peter unwittingly becomes Satan's agent and repeats the temptation, and so Jesus tells him to get back with his fellow disciples where he belongs.

didaskein (didaskw) pres. inf. "to teach" - [and he began] to teach [them]. The infinitive is complementary, completing the sense of the verb "he began." This form of words is used to break from the proceeding episode and introduce a new point. Increasingly, Jesus' teaching is to the disciples as here, although note the change in v43. "And he proceeded to teach them", Moffatt.

oJti "that" - that. Introducing a dependent statement of indirect speech expressing what Jesus taught them. This is the first of thee similar predictions, 9:31 and 10:33-34, the last being the most detailed one.

tou anqrwpou (oV) gen. "[Son] of man" - [the son] of man. The genitive is relational. For the messianic title "Son of Man", see 2:10.

dei + inf. "must" - it is necessary. This verb is often used to express divine compulsion, implying that it is God's will and that therefore, the outcome will be for the best. "It was inevitable that", Phillips.

paqein (pascw) aor. act. inf. "suffer " - to suffer [much]. This infinitive, along with "to be rejected" and "to be killed", together form a nominal construction subject of the verb "is necessary." The adjective polla, "many things, serving as a substantive, could be taken as an adverb, so Gundry, "suffer greatly." Note Jesus' shift to "Son of Man" as the suffering one. The notion of a suffering messiah is not an easy idea for the disciples to come to grips with. In the face of identity problems, Jesus often moves to his favoured self identification - the mysterious Son of Man. The messianic "Son of Man" is glorious, rather than suffering - an interesting twist! The extent of Jesus' suffering is emphasised - rejection and death

apodokimasqhnai (apodokimazw) aor. pas. inf. "rejected" - [and] to be rejected. The infinitive, as above. Note that Mark lists the three groups involved in Jesus' humiliation, but it is interesting that Jesus' main opponents, the Pharisees, are not mentioned. Of course, the scribes were usually Pharisees.

uJpo "by" - by [the elders and the chief priests and the scribes]. Expressing agency, as NIV.

apoktanqhnai (apokteinw) aor. pas. inf. "he must be to be killed" - [and] to be killed. The infinitive, as above. In a reading back of tradition, the word crucifixion would be used, but Mark is preserving the original sense of the words held in the apostolic oral tradition.

meta + acc. "after" - [and] after [three days]. Temporal used of the preposition. This "after" causes a timing difficulty (actually after a day and half) and so in Matthew and Luke it is th/ trith/, dat., "on the third day." The difficulty underlines its originality, given the normal practice of counting part of a day as a day. The number three, of course, is dictated by Old Testament precedence, eg., Jonah in the big fish.

anasthnai (anisthmi) aor. pas. inf. "rise" - to rise. The infinitive, as above. This verb can be transitive or intransitive, and since the Son of Man is the subject, it is obviously intransitive here; "rise". Jeremias treats the passive as theological - God does the raising. Marcus has Jesus raising himself, while Boring simply has "rise", without any thought as to who does the raising, as NIV.


elalei (lalew) imperf. "he spoke" - [and] he was speaking. An imperfective / durative sense may be intended, although the imperfect is often used of speech; "he kept telling them this", Barclay.

parrhsia/ (a) dat. "plainly" - [the word] with boldness, frankness, openness. The dative is adverbial, expressing manner; "with boldness", "outspokenly", Gundry. Emphasising that Jesus made a point of telling his disciples about his coming death and resurrection. "He said all this quite openly", NJB.

proslabomenoV (proslambanw) aor. part. "took [him] aside" - [and peter] having taken aside [him]. The participle is adverbial, probably best viewed as temporal; "At that point, Peter took him aside ....," Why take Jesus aside? Is Peter embarrassed with what he is about to say, or what Jesus has just said?

epitiman (epitamaw) inf. "to rebuke" - [began] to sternly warn, rebuke. The infinitive is complementary, completing the sense of the verb "began". The word is used of the casting out of a demon, so it is quite strong. Peter tries to set Jesus straight; "Peter took hold of him and sternly forbade him to talk like that", Barclay.

autw/ dat. pro. "him" - him. Dative of direct object after the epi prefix verb "to rebuke."


oJ de "but" - but/and. Transitional, indicating a step in the dialogue, a change in subject from Peter to Jesus.

epistrafeiV (epistrefw) aor. pas. part. "when [Jesus] turned" - having turned around [and having seen the disciples of him]. As with "looking", possibly just an attendant circumstance participle expressing action accompanying the main verb "rebuked." The NIV, as with CEV, etc. treats it as adverbial, temporal. Descriptive of Jesus observing that the other disciples have most likely overheard Peter's words and therefore, a public admonition is necessary. "At that, Jesus turned round, and when his eyes fell on his disciples, he remonstrated with Peter", Cassirer.

Petrw/ (oV) dat. "Peter" - [he rebuked] peter. Dative of direct object after the epi prefix verb " to rebuke"; "he corrected Peter", CEV.

opisw + gen. "[get] behind [me]" - [and says, go away] after, behind [me]. Here probably being used adverbially, "get behind me." "Out of my sight", BAGD, is far too strong. Jesus is telling Peter to get back with the disciples and accept his authority, rather than tell him what he should, or should not say. Jesus is certainly not saying, "cease to be my disciple."

satana (aV) "Satan" - Vocative. Aligning Peter with Satan is extremely harsh, although it is most likely that the temptation which has come through Peter's words is Satanic in origin. Peter has unwittingly promoted the temptation that the kingdom can come by means other than the "cup" of suffering, a temptation that Jesus has constantly faced.

oJti "-" - that / because. Either recitative, introducing direct speech, as NIV, or causal, "because your thoughts are not God's."

ou froneiV (fronew) "you do not have in mind" - you are not thinking about. "To take someone's side", Cranfield. Peter is lit. "not thinking the things of God, rather the things of human beings."

tou qeou (oV) gen. "of God" - [the things] of god. The genitive is adjectival, possessive, "the things" = "the truths that belong to God", or ablative, source / origin, "that are from / originate from God." The "things of God", in the context, is the idea that glory comes through the suffering of God's messiah. The "things of human beings" is the idea that glory for the messiah can come apart from suffering. As "all the kingdoms of the world" are Satan's domain, it is obvious that humanity will promote Satan's way to glory through power (evidenced in modern management, marketing etc.) rather than God's way to glory through humiliation (love, forgiveness, mercy, compassion ..... leading to suffering). "Your thoughts are not God's thoughts, but man's", Weymouth.

alla "but" - but [the things of men]. Strong adversative standing in a counterpoint construction; "not ......, but ....".


ii] Jesus' call for commitment, v34-9:1. Saying #1: Jesus now calls for decision, v34. To those who really want to be disciples, Jesus calls for an acceptance that will likely bring with it embarrassment and shame. Three images of "coming after", serve to exegete the nature of a decision for Christ. It involves: a) denial - a loss of status through an association with a messiah in conflict with the world; b) cross-bearing - the consequent shame of identification with a humiliated, rather than a glorious, messiah; c) and following - taking the lead from a gentle and humble man.

proskalesamenoV (proskalew) aor. mid. part. "then he called [the crowd] to [him]" - having called together, called to oneself, summoned [the crowd]. The participle is adverbial, probably forming a temporal clause, as NIV. It is important to note that Jesus calls the crowd to him, while the disciples tag along. The point is that Jesus now speaks to the crowd, as well as his disciples. The implication is that Jesus is calling people to commitment (identification with Christ and his cross), rather than calling people to cross-bearing discipleship. The focus is on Jesus and his suffering, not the suffering of the disciple. If we would follow Christ, we must be willing to accept a suffering messiah, which suffering, of course, we may well have to share. "[Then] Jesus called both the crowd and his disciples to him", Barclay.

sun + dat. "along with" - with [the disciples of him, he said to them]. Expressing accompaniment.

ei + ind. "if" - if [anyone / someone wishes / desires]. Introducing a conditional clause, 1st class, where the condition is assumed to be true; "if, as is the case, .... then ....." Here the condition is emphasised: "if anyone really does want to follow behind me..." Gundry.

akolouqein (akolouqew) pres. inf. "[would] come" - to follow. The infinitive is complementary, completing the sense of the verb "to wish, will, desire". Follow as a disciple, ie., commit to an association with Jesus.

opisw + gen. "after" - after [me]. Spatial.

aparnhsasqw (aparneomai) aor. imp. "he must deny [himself]" - then let him deny, renounce [himself]. The aorist, as with "take up", may specify the action and make it prior to the durative present "follow me." The word is commonly taken to mean self-denial in varying degrees of selflessness. It may just mean the shame of accepting a messiah facing death, a messiah in conflict with the world. Such acceptance prompts a confrontation with the world, but not necessarily a renunciation of the world. "He must give up all claims upon himself", TH.

autou gen. pro. "his [cross]" - [and let him take up the cross] of him. The genitive is possessive. It is hard not to see Christ's cross in this image, although, at this point of time, the image would conjure up the cross-bearing criminal who is shamed in the presence of neighbours and friends. Jesus has not said how he is to be "killed", and so rather than reflecting Jesus' suffering, the image may simply illustrate the shame involved in accepting a humiliated messiah who is executed as a common criminal.

moi dat. pro. "me" - [and let him follow after] me. Dative of direct object after the verb "to follow after."


With four stitched sayings, Mark provides four reasons for deciding in favour of Jesus. As is often the case with sayings in the New Testament, the sayings are stitched together with the conjunction gar. It is often translated to express reason, "for", as NIV, and here reason is implied, but its primary role is that of a stitching device.

Saying #2: The person who seeks to protect themselves from the shame of an association with Jesus will inevitably lose life itself, whereas the person who decides for Jesus, accepts Jesus, who accepts the gospel, will gain eternal life. Mark's additional words "and for the sake of the gospel" strengthens the sense of commitment, rather than sacrificial service, cf., Matt.16:25, Lk.9:24.

oJV ... ean + subj. "whoever" - [for] whoever. Introducing an indefinite relative clause which is conditional; "whoever, as may be the case, ....., then they will lose it"

qelh (qelw) subj. "wishes" - wills, wants desires. The person who wants to protect their security and their standing now, rather than accept Jesus, will find they lose eternal life.

swsai (swzw) inf. "to save" - to rescue, save, preserve, keep. The infinitive is complementary, completing the sense of the verb "wishes". Mark has "wants to save", Luke has "seeks to preserve", and Matthew has "finding". Mark emphasises decision for unbelievers in radical terms: "to cling to the things of life, the things which humanity naturally values most, is the way to forfeit true life", France. Clinging to one's physical life is the perfect example of this clinging, but it obviously extends to a loss of privilege, advantage, reputation and comfort.

thn yuxhn (h) "life" - the soul, being, life [of him]. The Greek sense "soul" is probably not intended, either here or in v36, 37. Possibly "spiritual life", as opposed to life in the physical body; "a life which is his true life, his soul, himself", Lagrange. The Hebrew sense of the word meant the whole self, and thus the mortal self, of "being alive." It seems more than likely that Jesus / Mark is using the word to mean the perishable body, the whole self, thus "life". It is pushing too far to suggest that a person who saves the mortal body at the cost of denying their faith forfeits eternal life, so Boring. If this were the case, then only John, out of the twelve, is saved.

apolesei (apollumi) fut. ind. act. "will lose" - he will ruin, lose, destroy [it]. "Whoever will lose their life", in the sense of commit to Christ, rather than just be willing to lose, will save their life, ie. whoever makes the decision to follow Jesus ("for me and for the gospel"), will save their life (rescue their being for eternity). "If you want to save your life you will destroy it", CEV.

d (de) "but" - but/and. The contracted form of de; Transitional, indicating a step to a contrasting point.

o}V ... an "whoever" - whoever [loses the life of him]. Introducing a conditional clause, as above.

eJneken + gen. "for " - for the sake of [me]. Causal; "for the sake of."

tou euaggeliou (oV) gen. "the gospel" - [and] the important news, gospel, [will save it]. Some texts do not have "for me", but only "for the gospel." A demand for loyalty to Jesus and his message.


Saying #3: This, and the next saying, supports the point made in saying #2: "There is no one who would choose to keep all the wealth of the world at the expense of his or her own life, and there is nothing, no matter how valuable, that one can offer in exchange for one's own life", Boring.

tiv "What .... for ..." - [for] what. Interrogative pronoun. The sense of the clause is "In what way does gaining the whole world and forfeiting their life profit a person?" As with the next saying, "What would a person give in exchange for his life?" the answer is implied; there is nothing more precious than life. Thus, taken with v35, the point is that deciding for Jesus has its downside, but its upside is far greater.

wfelei (wfelew) pres. "good is it for" - does it profit, benefit, gain [a man]. "What does anyone gain by winning the whole world at the cost of his life?" REB.

kerdhsai (kerdainw) aor. inf. "to gain" - to gain [the whole world]. The infinitival construction "to gain the whole world and to forfeit the soul of him" serves as the subject of the verb "to profit"; "What does to gain .......... profit a man?"

autou gen. pro. "his" - [and to forfeit, lose the life, soul, being] of him. The genitive is adjectival, possessive.


Saying #4.

doi (didwmi) aor. subj. "give" - [for what] may [a man] give. Deliberative subjunctive.

antallagma (a atoV) "in exchange" - in exchange, something given in return, recompense, purchase price. Accusative complement of the direct object tiv, "what", standing in a double accusative construction and stating a fact about the object. "For what could a man give that was an equal exchange for his life?" Barclay.

thV yuchV (h) gen. "for [his] soul" - of the life [of him]. The genitive is adjectival, verbal, objective, "what could a person give that would be a fair recompense for their life?"


Saying #5. A salutary warning concerning the inevitable day of judgment. A person who is ashamed of Jesus today will find themselves on God's wrong side on the day of judgment.

o}V ... ean + subj. "if anyone ...." - [for] whoever. Again introducing an indefinite relative clause which happens to be conditional here; "whoever, as the case may be, ..... then the Son of Man will also be ashamed of him when he comes ......" Unlike Matthew, 16:27, Mark (so also Luke) uses the indefinite "whoever". The saying warns believers, and unbelievers alike, that they should not allow the shame of an association with Jesus, the humiliated messiah, to bar their acceptance of him. To do this is to bring upon themselves eternal rejection.

epaiscunqh/ (epaiscunomai) aor. pas. subj. "is ashamed" - would be ashamed of [me]. In the sense of "ashamed to acknowledge his relation to me", TH.

emouV adj. "my [words]" - [and] my [words]. "Words" is absent in some texts, so "mine" = "my people." "My words" is most likely original.

en + dat. "in" - in. Local, expressing sphere.

th/ moicalidi adj. "adulterous" - [this] adulterous [and sinful generation]. Taking the religious meaning "faithless / godless / apostate / disloyal". "Among these unfaithful and sinful people", CEV.

kai "-" - [the son of man will be ashamed of them] and = also. Here adjunctive; "the Son of Man will also be ashamed of them."

oJtan + subj. "when" - whenever = when [he comes]. This construction forms an indefinite temporal clause. "When he comes back (returns)", Williams, misses the mark somewhat. There are many comings of the Son of Man and it is dangerous to assume that references to his coming are to his coming back to earth at the end of the age. The Daniel image of the coming of the Son of Man is of his coming to the Ancient of Days to receive his glorious kingdom, Dan.7:13. It is a coming to heaven, to the right hand of the Father, to exercise rule, and as a consequence, judgment. This coming is imaged as a coming in the clouds. It is the "coming" seen by Stephen in his vision. The coming of Christ to the Ancient of Days to enact judgment, always raises a continuity problem in relation to time on earth, but of course, God is not bound by created time. We live within a divine eschatological now / not yet moment; Christ is come and is enacting judgment, and he is coming and will enact judgment. This moment is best described as a moment of grace, a moment of opportunity, a kindness from a gracious God. Anyway, Mark's point is that the coming judgment is a good reason to overcome fear and shame and so respond in trust to Jesus. Do we want to be found on God's wrong side on the day of judgment?

en + dat. "in" - in. The dative is adverbial, modal, expressing the manner of Christ's coming; "with the Father's glory."

tou paroV (hr roV) gen. " Father's" - [the glory] of the father [of him]. The genitive is adjectival, idiomatic / verbal, subjective, "the glory that radiates from / is exhibited by his Father."

meta + gen. "with" - with [the holy angels]. Expressing accompaniment, "in association with."


Saying #6. Christ's call for commitment is reinforced with a reminder that only some of his audience, those whom the Son of Man is not ashamed of, will pass through the great assize unscathed and see the glory of the coming kingdom. Matthew makes the point more clearly by tying together sayings #5 and 6 with the words "then he will repay everyone for what he has done", Matt.16:27b. Saying #6 has prompted endless debate, due to the statement that the committed ones will not actually die before they see the kingdom come in glory; see Eschatology in "Interpretation" above. Apart from the complexities of this verse, its message is simple enough: the coming kingdom brings with it either blessing or cursing (judgment), and now is the hour for decision.

outoiV "to them" - [and he was saying] to them. Dative of indirect object. An indication that the words are a continuation from v38 and therefore are to the crowd as well as the disciples.

uJmin dat. "[I tell] you [the truth]" - [truly i say] to you. Dative of indirect object. This statement serves to underline the importance of the following words. "I can assure you", CEV.

oJti "-" - that. Here introducing a dependent statement of indirect speech expressing what Jesus wants to say to them.

tineV pro. "some" - [there are] some [here]. Predicate nominative.

twn eJsthkotwn (iJsthmi) gen. perf. part. "who are standing" - of the ones having stood. The participle serves as a substantive, the genitive being adjectival, partitive. Used in the sense of "existing"; "some of those who are alive here today."

ou mh geuswntai (geuomai) aor. subj. "not taste" - [who] will by no means taste. The double negative + the subjunctive forms a subjunctive of emphatic negation. Semitic expression for "die", so "will not die", CEV.

qanatou (oV) gen. "of death" - of death. Genitive of direct object after the verb "to taste."

wJV an + subj. "before" - until [they see]. This construction introduces an indefinite temporal clause of time up to; "until". "Until" they see the coming kingdom in power, see the exercise of Christ's reign come in power during their lifetime, see the Son of Man coming in judgment. "See" in the sense of "be aware of", "experience".

tou qeou (oV) gen. "of God" - [the kingdom] of god. Often classified as a subjective genitive, but ablative, source / origin, or adjectival, possessive, is also possible; see 1:15. This reference to the coming of the kingdom is found in Luke 9:27, missing "come in power", and Matthew 16:28, with "the Son of Man coming in his kingdom", "Son of Man" being a possible variant. A similar image is found in 13:26, "see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power" (Lk.21:27, Matt.24:30) + "this generation will not pass away until all these things have happened", v30 (Lk.21:32, Matt.24:34). The coming of the Son of Man and the coming of the kingdom may refer to different events, although this is unlikely. It is more likely that both refer to the coming of the Son of Man to the Ancient of Days to take up his royal authority in the kingdom, to reign in glory and power, cf. Dan.7:13, = the great assize, judgment.

elhluquian (ercomai) perf. part. "come" - having come. The participle is probably adjectival, attributive, limiting "kingdom", a kingdom which comes in power. Given the aorist "see", and the perfect participle "having come", the kingdom is impacting now, and culminating then; "near, at hand".

en + dat. "with" - in [power]. Here adverbial, modal, expressing the manner of the kingdom's coming, as NIV.


Mark Introduction.



[Pumpkin Cottage]