I dove right in...

I was talking with someone about a security concern she had and realized that I had not done all I could to protect myself from my failing memory.  First, I put text alerts on all my credit cards, not just the main one that I use.  Then, I signed up to remove myself from pre-screened credit card and insurance offers.  Finally, I called all my of credit card companies and requested to stop all balance transfer checks mailings.  I hope that means I did a better job of covering my financial bases.

Today, I also went ahead and tried the Roasted Rutabaga and Parsnips Beer Cheese Soup that had been frozen (one of the TWELVE servings I still have).  I am very, very, very happy to report that the soup thawed well and was, in my opinion, even thicker and tastier having been frozen for a while.  I am, needless to say, already looking forward to the other eleven servings.

The other day, I also had the Black Bean Soup with Roasted Bell Peppers.  I thought that it froze well, but I was not all that worried about it.  Maybe I had thoughts about the roasted bell peppers, but not to the point of really stressing about it.

What have I been anxious about?  Well, clearly, I have been about longing to read those Gospel commentaries.  I could barely sleep last night thinking about them.  I had hoped that Mary would read my blog and post a comment, but school has started for her and she is being disciplined and exercising will power and all those good things so had not read my entry.  So, I called her.  After stumbling around in great nervousness, I told her about them and asked if it would be okay for a confused person to be reading something not written based on Lutheran doctrine.  I was certain she would have caution for me, but her response was enthusiastic.

I hunger for the Word.
Deeply.

Then, I had this most wonderful remembering:  I have been working really, really, really hard to be as conservative as possible with my utilities.  I mean, I have even trained myself to use the power saver button on the microwave whenever I am not using it.  Progress has been made, and my utilities for this month are ~$74 under budget.  Myrtle Math means that I could go ahead and get the Kindle version of the commentaries without guilt, because whilst the credit card bill will be greater, my bottom line still will be slightly less.  I promptly ordered them and had them downloaded into my Kindle.

For a brief moment, I wondered if I should read them in the order they appear in the New Testament. But then the intrigue over what I read in the preview of Mark called out and I dove right into that one.  BLISS.

The few things that I have learned (re-learned) in the "story" of the Gospel:

• Mark was a close companion of Peter and likely recording Peter's testimony of Jesus.
• Mark was Barnabas' cousin, who was the first to believe Paul's conversion and with whom Mark traveled for part of Paul's ministry.
• Mark is the only Gospel where the author does not mention his own name.
• Mark is the only Gospel where Jesus' voice is recorded in His native Aramaic.
• Mark was writing after this great fire (and trauma) Rome experienced, most likely at the hand of Nero.
• Mark and Peter die in the first wave of persecution after the fire.
• Mark uses more adjectives to describe the emotions of Jesus than the other Gospels; Mark has 15 separate scenes with multiple adjectives describing Jesus' emotions. Mathew uses four adjectives in six scenes; Luke uses just seven scenes, but has 34 scenes where he is describing the emotions of others; and John has just four adjectival references.  
• Mark's "passion" for the story he is recording is also evidenced in the frequent use of historical present tense (over 150 instances), by the repeated use of the word "immediately," and by his frenetic use of "and" (kai) to string together his ideas.
• Mark is the first evangelist to refer to his work as "a Gospel" (Mathew and John use the word in their writings, but do not refer to their books as such).  Paul, Matthew, and John always say "the gospel," but Mark is the first to present "A Gospel," in effect creating a new literary form. 

I really liked reading the background, especially with the points of comparisons made with the other gospels and the writings of Paul and Peter with a gazillion references.  I don't think I ever knew about the devastation of Rome in the fire.  Talking about this is something Michael Card brings up again when noting that Mark only states that Jesus baptizes with the Holy Spirit (as opposed to John's baptism of water) instead of the Holy Spirit and fire, the way the other gospels record.  That makes sense.  If you are writing in a time of great fearfulness and uncertainty following such devastation, omitting the use of the word "fire" would make sense and would not, as I would agree, mean that you are denying Jesus baptized with fire, as well as spirit.

Part of me wanted to go study up on Nero, but mostly I just wanted to dive into the first chapter of Mark.  That's what I did.

I am not sure if I wish to write through what I am reading, but already I have learned so much that I did not know or do not remember about the actual text of Mark, about the Gospel.  Michael Card teaches a lot about John the Baptist, noting that all four Gospels begin Christ' ministry with him and that each Gospel author honors John the Baptist in different ways, teaching us about him.

I liked learning about John the Baptist and especially how Michael Card describes him:  John is all that is old and everything that is new.  He stands with one foot in the Old Testament and the other planted firmly in the New.  He also noted:  The prophetic voice of God, silent for four hundred years, has begun to speak once more in him.

I read that part to Becky and she mused about what folk thought.  God had been speaking to them for all of history.  His voice directly and His voice through His prophets.  Then.  Then silence.  Silence for four hundred years.  That's sobering to think about.  And it makes Christ's arrival and the beginning of His ministry all the more ... surprising, eh?

There is ever so much more to write about what I learned about John the Baptist.  Mostly, I would just say, "Go read the book!"

I also learned that, at Christ's baptism, you have the appearance of the Trinity.  Okay, so, probably the whole world knows that, but it never occurred to me. Or at least I don't remember ever putting the fact that you have 1) Jesus, 2) God's voice, and 3) the Holy Spirit's arrival.  Call me childish, but I find that to be ever so cool.  The most irreverent thought popped into my mind:  The gang's all here!

What I found intriguing was Michael Card asking the question what it means when the Holy Spirit descends "like a dove."  He asks if that might mean a white bird landed on Jesus' shoulder.  But then he also points out that in Acts 2 the Holy Spirit is described as a flickering flame.  The imagery of flapping wings and flickering flames evokes an evanescence that is hard to pin down to words or metaphorical language.  So, it isn't that the Holy Spirit is an actual dove.  We don't know.  The Scripture isn't clear.

Of course, then I suddenly wondered if the Acts 2 reference is why the logo for the Methodist Church looks like a red flame flickering around a cross!!!  Man, am I ... stupid ... or what??

There was all this most wonderful stuff about wilderness ... about John coming from there and Jesus going there and Jesus retreating back there and Jesus really remaining in one wilderness or another  His whole ministry.  That made me think about how Christians are referred to as aliens and how life in a fallen world really is like wandering about in a wilderness, waiting and longing to arrive home.

There are most interesting thoughts about Jesus' first words and about fishers of men and about the only miracle performed on the Sabbath without conflict and about Simon's mother-in-law and how the cleansing of the leper is the first time in recorded history that the flow of cleanliness is reversed (the clean person is not made unclean) and about the purpose of Jesus' ministry.

Michael Card uses the word "gift" several times, which intrigues me. By this I mean, he talks about Jesus' healing being a gift.  But then notes that Jesus has not come to give gifts, but to give Himself.  If all Jesus wanted was to heal folks, to restore sight and sound, to make the lame walk, He wouldn't have journeyed inexorably toward His own crucifixion.  I like how Michael Card put it here, following the discussion of healing the leper (which I think would fall under Michael Card's stance of "informed imagining"):

As Jesus sees the man's skin clearing, his sores beginning to vanish, the sickening smell staring to fade, he realizes what will inevitably follow:  a more adamant mob, a more demanding herd of hangers-on with no interest in listening to or being transformed by his luminous words.  The best of Jesus' call to preach the good news is being eclipsed by the good of his ability to heal.

I did not italicize the quote to show the emphasis in it.  Jesus' best was not His ability to heal but the good news He brought ... the good news Christ effected in His crucifixion and resurrection.

I also like Michael Card's frequent use of the word "luminous" to describe the Word.  The Word of God is sweet, sweeter than honey.  And, yes, it is also luminous, glowing brightly here and dimly there, but all the while lighting our way.  I can see myself co-opting that word.  Good stuff there ... to me, for me.

I am not sure if I want to admit this, but after finishing the first chapter, I sat and wept for a long while.  I have yearned so deeply to regain at least some of the understanding I had about the Bible, about the Gospel.  I mean, folk will say, "Remember how so and so did this?" and I will mostly give the lie by nodding or murmuring nonsensical words to imply that I do.  But I don't.

I do not expect that I will remember this first chapter by the time I get to the last chapter of Mark, but I suppose I could hope.  [Try not to laugh at that.]  But at least I have a resource I can go back to and read again and again, the way I do the Book of Concord, that makes sense to me, that I don't find confusing in the least.

Mary posited that maybe Michael Card is good at Myrtle Speak, at using words I can understand.  Maybe that is why I was so eager to read more of what I saw in the preview.  That's why she thought it would be okay to read, knowing nothing about his commentaries and little about the man himself.

I wonder, too.  I wonder if my remembering that I had actually saved money on utilities and could make the purchase without going over budget was another sort of ... approval.  Of course, I do believe that Mary, at least, credits me with far more discernment that I actually have in this compromised brain of mine.  And I do hold great fears of reading something that leads me further away rather than brings me closer.  Closer to the Word.

Anyway, I lay there weeping like a baby, clutching the Kindle to my chest.  And then ... and then I fell asleep for a long time. You see, hope is terrifying.  And having hope is exhausting.