Next Step(s)

It's appropriate that our next step on this journey with the Gospel of Mark is serving at the Next Step Shelter.

Below is our virtual sign up sheet (I'll update the chart regularly).  You can let me know in the comment section below which day you'd like to volunteer or you can email me at:

brandon-duran@centralunionchurch.org.

Each meal service can accommodate about 4-6 people from the "Marking the Way" group.  We're partnering with the Community Ministry of CUC as they have a steady relationship with the Next Step Shelter.  There are several members of the "Marking the Way" group who have served at the shelter before so they have help show others the ropes.

The meal starts at 6:30p and it would be good to arrive sometime between 5:30p and 6:00p.  Let me know if and when you can serve or if you have any ideas or questions.

2/9/16 - Val, Carl
3/8/16 - Brandon, Anuhea
4/12/ 16 - Brandon, Val

(last updated 1/13/16)

Directions from Ken:

The monthly meal takes place in the OHA Warehouse, located on a huge barren lot between the UH Medical School and the Foreign Trade Zone on the makai side of Ala Moana Blvd.; easiest to enter from the east-side, through the oceanside extension of Ward Avenue, so keep going past JABSCOM (med school) on the left, and take the last open entry drive on the left, just prior to the exit street on the right, going back to Ala Moana Blvd.

Go all the way to the end of the large Warehouse, located close to the ocean rock barrier, and circle around the building counterclockwise, and come back toward the mountains; you'll no doubt see our white CUC van and parked cars next to a large industrial-sized loading area; be careful of children playing in the paved area.

Session 13: Class Notes

Wow!  I have really enjoyed this journey with you all.  Thank you for your wisdom, your wit, your inquiries and offerings of food and ideas.

Here are the notes from Mark 16, our final session of "Marking the Way."

--

Mark 16:1-7 - Women at the Tomb

The ones who remainder at the cross are the ones who come first to the tomb after the Sabbath.  Here are a few insights to consider as we approach the tomb with the Mary, Mary, and Salome (sounds a little like a band).

• Mark (and the other three canonical gospels) report that it was the women who first discovered the empty tomb.  This is significant as the women were told to testify to what they had seen.  Many teachers in first century Judaism considered a woman's testimony to be inadmissible in court as it was not considered trustworthy.  The spirit makes a special point in chipping away at patriarchy and elevating the role and status of women.

  

  "The Empty Tomb" by He Qi

• The women brought spices to anoint the body properly for burial.  Does this imply that Joseph of Arimathea did not bury Jesus properly?  If so it would be a final insult and humiliation in that Jesus' body is not even given a proper burial.
• Who is Salome?  Is this the same Salome that danced before Herod and had John the Baptist beheaded?  Salome is only mentioned twice in the gospel of Mark, present at the crucifixion in 15:40 and here in chapter 16 (the girl who danced for Herod is never named, we assume that her name was Salome because the historian Josephus tells us that Herod had a stepdaughter named Salome).  The text itself tells us little about this woman.  The Gospel of John says that present at the crucifixion was the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus.  Some traditions have interpreted Salome therefore to be Jesus' aunt.  In the Gospel of Matthew it says that the mother of James and John (the sons of thunder) was present at the crucifixion so another tradition sees Salome as Zebedee's wife and the mother of James and John.  Short answer, we don't know.

The Man in White

The women come to the tomb expecting to find the body of Jesus and instead they encounter a young man.  Who is this guy hanging out in a tomb?  Two prominent theories:

An Angel

While the character is never called an angel there are several good reasons for applying the label.

• His dress seems to mirror the shining other worldly clothes of Jesus at the transfiguration.
• The gospels of Matthew and John both directly refer to the one at the tomb as an angel.
• The young man has a message and the word angel literally means "messenger."
• The young man greets the women with the words, "Do not be alarmed" which is the first sentence of most angelic appearances in the scripture.

The Naked Guy

Mark doesn't shy away from talking about spiritual beings so if this was an angel why doesn't he just say it?  Maybe he is something else.  Well the phrase "young man" only appears twice in Mark.

• Remember the "young man" who gets scared when Jesus is arrested and runs away so fast that he loses his clothes?  In that story we see the young man as a symbol of all of the disciples and the shame they carry in deserting Jesus.  Is what we're seeing here a restoration of that disciple (and by extension all disciples) not by his own doing but by the resurrection of Jesus?
• The young man who lost his linen cloth is now wearing white robes.  The purification or changing of clothes was a common symbol of God's holiness restoring or sanctifying a person.

The Message

Whatever the identity of our young man in white, his message has a few insights for reflection.

• The Nazarene: Once again we see Mark's focus on the geographical area of Jesus' hometown.  He is not called Jesus, the Messiah, or Jesus the Son of Man or God, but Jesus the Nazarene.  Mark is very clear that Jesus was rooted in a particular time and place.
• The Disciples and Peter: Why single Peter out?  Perhaps it was to mirror the desertion narrative.  In a general way it says that the disciples left but in a very specific way it outlines Peter's denial and desertion.  Perhaps this is an intentional restoration.  Another theory is that Mark was a companion of Peter and this was a way of singling out his friend and companion.  While the name Mark pops up a few times in the new testament (eg Acts and 2 Timothy) none of these seem to be referring to a companion of Peter and there is no evidence that any of the Mark's referenced were the author of this gospel.
• Begin Again: The young man instructs the women to go to Galilee.  Galilee is not only the hometown region of Jesus, it is also symbolically the beginning.  The young man is sending them back to where it all started and says that there, at the beginning they will see Jesus.  Mark 1 speaks of the beginning with a simple invitation from Jesus, "Follow me."

Choose Your Own Adventure!

Do you remember the choose your own adventure books where the story presented you with choices and the story changed based on the decisions you made?  Well, this isn't quite like that but there is a sort of choice here.

Check out Mark 16:8

"So they (the women) went out and fled from the tomb, for terror and amazement had seized them; and they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid."

And scene!  Wait what...?

Is that really how the book ends, with a reversal of the Messianic Secret (ie when Jesus told people not to talk about him that's all they ended up doing and now that the women are told to talk about Jesus they totally clam up?!)?

Well, there are actually a couple different ending options.

• Option 1: Yep, verse 8 is the end of the book.  The oldest and most trustworthy source texts (Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus) end at verse 8.
• Option 2: Well...verse 8 is the ending we have but really Mark either intended on writing more or did write more and it was lost somehow.
• Option 3: One ancient source (again not as old as the main sources for Mark) includes an 8b which says the women did say something and includes a final charge from Jesus that sounds very similar to the Great Commission in Matthew.
• Option 4: A couple of sources (yep younger) include a longer ending of Mark that includes some post resurrection appearances by Jesus (one that sounds a lot like the Road to Emmaus story in Luke), some odd promises about poison and snakes, and an ascension story.

I'm partial to Option 1, here's why:

• Option 2 doesn't seem very helpful.  If the real ending was lost there isn't much we can do about it now.
• The shorter ending in Option 3 seems a little too neat and tidy for me, plus the Greek diction doesn't quite match the rest of the book of Mark.
• So much of the material in Option 4 does not match thematically or in language to the rest of Mark.  Some parts, like the thing about the snakes and the poison, is a direct contradiction to other parts in Mark (see 8:11-12).

While I find flaws in the other options, the main reason I like Option 1 is because of the question it asks.

Will the women go and tell the disciples?  Will they go back to Galilee, back to the beginning?  Will they see Jesus there?  And what will happen when he invites them yet again to come and follow?  Now that they know how the life of Jesus plays out; now that they see what it means to drink from the cup he drinks; now that they know what the Messiah is all about and how one lives as God's beloved; now that they see where the path of Jesus goes and the people you meet along the way; and now that they know what it means to follow him, will they do it?  The invitation is to begin again and it is to begin anew.

All throughout the Gospel of Mark we've heard the theme of discipleship echoed in the familiar refrain, "Come follow me."  In each narrative scene the invitation has been extended to various characters and also to us.  Each time we've read the words of Jesus to a person in the story, the Holy  Spirit has echoed those words to us.  When we read the Bible, the Bible reads us.

The hanging question for the women is turned and presented to us.  Will we go back to where it began with a simple invitation?  Will we tell others of what we've heard and seen and experienced?  Now that we have a better picture of what it means to follow Jesus, to live as the beloved, to walk in his steps, to do and act as he did, will we follow?

Mark ends with a question, an invitation, to start the journey again, to start it anew.

Session 12: Class Notes

Aloha everyone! I have hijacked the blog for a week to post the notes from our last session on Mark 15.

We started the night comparing Christmas and Easter and how it felt discussing the Passion of Christ in the midst of the Christmas season. Some of you said that it had a sense of continuum and they both were seasons of reminders. We passed around the myrrh (which to me smells a little like almond extract) and remembered that it's both a gift of the wise men and mixed with wine for Jesus at the crucifixion to dull the pain (Mark 15:23). They are also two times in the Bible when God is very near.

Pastor Brandon also had me bring up the brakes Mark puts on for Chapter 15. Mark 14:72 is the last "immediately" we hear, and in Mark 15 it seems we have our answer as to what Mark was hurrying us to, all along. He wanted us to stop for the betrayal, arrest, and passion, because ultimately as we agreed on, without the crucifixion, we wouldn't be Christians. How is the crucifixion important specifically through the eyes of Mark?

I'm going to break the hours of the day down into sections, and focus on what happened during each section, as seen in The Last Week by Marcus J. Borg and John Dominic Crossan (a book I used to help prepare for this week's Bible study- borrow today from Pastor Brandon!).

6am-9am

We focused here on Pilate questioning Jesus, and you all had some great questions right off the bat: Why did Pilate let him go? Why was Pilate so conflicted that he had to then have the crowd decide?Why didn't Pilate just decide himself (since he had so much power)? Why was Pilate amazed at Jesus' behavior during the questioning? Was it His demeanor and ability to keep composure while being threatened?

The chief priests and Pilate's questions don't seem to be genuine questions, they almost seem like they are talking 'at' Jesus rather than 'to' Jesus, and only care about an answer if it would justify their desires to kill Him. Pastor Brandon had mentioned that when they mock Jesus, the words they say ring with truth; we see this later in the chapter as well.

We then looked at a comparison of Jesus and Barabbas, the insurrectionist prisoner that Pilate releases instead of Jesus (Mark 15:6-15).

Barabbas
-Name literally means "son of the father" (Bar-son, abba- father)
-Possibly zealot, liberated people by killing (against Rome)
-Violent
-Does he really exist (Mark's invention to further story?)
-Hero (to the Jews)

Jesus
-Actual Son of the Father
-Liberated people with his own death
-Peaceful
-Died so Barabbas could live
-Hero (to the Jews)

We spoke again about the "crowd" in the courtyard who lobbied against Jesus and set Barabbas free. If the crowd had been the average Jew there for the festival and not hand picked by the high priests and scribes, who would the people have released?

9am- Noon

There are more people taunting Jesus as He is on the cross, mocking Him with words that end up being the truth: temple being rebuilt, He can't come down and save Himself, but if He does then will He truly be able to save others? Different from other Gospels, not much is said about those on the crosses next to Him, except they too insult Him (Mark 15:32). They are truly the ones on His right and left side drinking from the same cup of suffering that bring to mind the request of James and John in Mark 10:35. This is truly Jesus' coronation day when He comes into His kingdom and who are the ones who are still there with Him? Many of his followers have deserted but the women are still there with Him at the cross and even follow Him to the grave. They play such an important role in Mark's story from here on out; they are the last to see Jesus before he dies, first to see him resurrected. What is Mark trying to tell us about women in his time?

Noon-3pm

Darkness falls over the land. Is it the earth or just the region? Do they mean supernatural darkness or just clouds, or could this be figurative?

3pm- 6pm

We read parts of Psalm 22 (Psalm 22:1-8, 16-18), a Psalm ultimately of deliverance brought out of great suffering. Much of this Psalm is referenced in Mark 15, from the piercing of feet, and mocking, to the casting of lots for garments, and most obviously the words that Jesus cries from the cross "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?', the opening words of Psalm 22.

We talked about Jesus saying these words and what it meant. In saying the first lines, He brings to mind the whole scripture which many would have known. In the book Mark by William Placher (Part of a series entitled Belief: A Theological Commentary on the Bible) it notes that it is the first time in the Gospel that Jesus doesn't call God "Father" but instead addresses Him as "my God." Was it a message to those around Him? Was it a statement of "Here I am, I am the Messiah"? Was it truly said out of anguish? Was God doubting God?

The centurion (Mark 15:39) finally exposes the Messianic secret! It is amazing that a Roman solider, someone high up in rank who has a boss who is considered a "son of god" (Caesar) would be the first person in the gospel to actually utter the words "Son of God" in reference to Jesus. Some of us mentioned that it seemed like he sounded like a narrator in a play and he might have been the first Roman conversion. In any case, his statement would have been considered treasonous to his job position. Whether the centurion fully understands what he is saying, or even if he is saying it in jest, it is a victorious moment in the book of Mark. The Messianic secret is finally exposed, and it is not in His deeds that He is discovered, but His death.

A question was brought up that echoed my own: How did the centurion know He was the Son of God? Was it the dark that came over the land earlier? Was it the loud cry that Jesus used in saying His last words that would have been nearly impossible for someone being hung on a cross? Was it the strangely quick way Jesus died that even shocked Pilate in 15:44? (Persons crucified usually took several days to die slowly and painfully.)

6pm and Evening

We spoke briefly about Joseph of Arimathea's involvement and motivation for burying Jesus. The group had lots of good ideas about him, mentioning he was the equivalent of a church council member (15:43), he was a Jew following Jewish burial laws, and he may have been a secret disciple of Jesus. I also appreciated the ideas expounding on Mark 15:43  "who was himself waiting for the kingdom of God",  taking it to mean he was older in years and waiting to go home to God (another reason to have a tomb prepared).

One of my favorite Paintings

Forgiven by Thomas Blackshear II

We ended with the weighted question of Who Killed Jesus? There were a lot of answers, from "it was a collaboration of church leadership/Roman leadership/God's will", to "it's a mystery (judgment + mercy = fulfillment of prophesy)". One of the answers was "Us/our sins", which led to my posting the painting above. This answer also led to a question based discussion of, "Why does God need a sacrifice to forgive us?" When did this start? Jesus is the lamb that paid for our sins, but in the Old Testament (and even before Jesus died) they sacrificed animals, so where did this start, the animals taking the stain of our sin and having to pay the blood price? Maybe I will defer to Pastor Brandon on this one.

It was a blessing and honor to have this opportunity, and I hope you all learned as much as I did. I am looking forward to our last week together studying Mark, see you on Tuesday, and Happy New Year!

Session 11: Class Notes

A short class on Christmas week means more material for the blog.  Chapter 14 continues Mark's whirlwind pace as the final hours unfold.  It's a powerful story I encourage you to read it slowly in order to allow the scenes to develop in your minds eye.

--

Plans and Preparations - Mark 14:1-16

Mark 14 opens with plans and preparations overlapping and intersecting.

Annas and Caiaphas

Chief Priests and the Scribes:  Actively seeking a way to capture and kill Jesus.  They wanted to avoid a riot.  As we've noted Jerusalem is a packed house during the time of the Passover and given the anti-occupation sentiment the city is a powder keg.  The Jewish religious establishment is in an uneasy alliance with the Roman political leadership.  Jewish High Priests were appointed and deposed by Roman political leadership.  If a Jewish rebellion breaks out that needs to be quashed by Roman force then the Jewish religious leadership lose face with the Roman leadership (as they were unable to help keep their people peaceable) and they lose clout with the Jewish people (as they won't be able to truly support any rebellion).

Woman with the Alabaster Jar: The anointing of Jesus with the costly perfume is an image that hearkens the ritual of appointing a new king.  Throughout Israel's history a new king was designated and deemed blessed by God when a high priest or prophet anointed an individual.  The anointing is also the tangible expression of Jesus' title.  Messiah (translated as Christ in Greek) literally means "Anointed One."  Jesus turns the image though by interpreting it as preparation for his death (we'll see later that his coronation is his death).  Jesus' interpretation of the anointing speaks to a very different vision for what kind of King and Messiah he is.

SIDE NOTE:  In this story some of Jesus' disciples complain that ointment should have been sold and the money given to the poor.  In his response Jesus says, "The poor will always have with you."  What do we do with this?  It sounds a bit discordant from the other words and work of Jesus.  Here are a few interpretations of this statement.

• Jesus has previously made the analogy that this time of his ministry is like a wedding party.  He is the bridegroom and since he is near now is a time of rejoicing.  The woman's act is appropriate for it is a celebratory act.
• The woman's gift is an act of worship and as such it was an appropriate gesture.
• The Gospel of John contends that it was Judas who complained about the woman's gift.  The gospel says that Judas kept the common purse for the disciples and would steal from it.
• Jesus was poor and so such a gift to the poor was perfectly acceptable.
• "Poor" does not have to be limited to a definition of economic condition.  "Blessed are the poor in spirit for theirs in the kingdom of heaven"
• "The poor you will always have with you" is not a statement of resignation but an exhortation to live and work among the poor.

Judas:  Judas makes a deal to betray Jesus and begins plotting for an opportunity to do so.  Why does Judas decide to betray Jesus

1. It's in his nature.  From the beginning Judas was an untrustworthy character and he was destined to betray.  Acts 1:16 seems to imply this (by the way, here are the two accounts of what happened to Judas, threw away the money and died by hanging AND bought a field and died by falling in his field)

2. He was a true believer that Jesus would save them from the Romans.  Because of this belief Judas thought he might be able to force Jesus' hand to act by betraying him to the Romans.

3. Judas became disillusioned with Jesus.  It was becoming increasingly clear that Jesus was not the Messiah Judas thought him to be and in his disappointment and anger (he did just invest three years of his life with this guy) he makes a bad call.

The Disciples:  Jesus instructs the disciples to set up the room for a celebration of the Passover feast.  The instructions sound very similar to the instructions given in preparation for the Triumphal Entry.  There is also a clandestine sense to the plans.  Interesting note, the plans do not outline instructions for the procurement and preparation of the Passover lamb, a central aspect of the meal that would have necessitated a sacrifice at the temple.

--

The Last Supper - Mark 14:17-25

Before diving into the table the group present responded to the question, "What does Holy Communion mean for you?  What do you appreciate about that act of worship?"  Here's what I heard:

• Reminder of sacrifice for all
• Appreciate taking communion weekly
• Physical reminder that Jesus gave his life for us
• Renewal, it's like going out with friends
• Trouble with Transubstantiation
• It's still a mystery
• Feel fulfilled, makes my day, enjoyable
• Remembrance (of the life of Jesus and the gift of his life), Acceptance (God's acceptance of us and our acceptance of Christ as our savior), Fellowship (with other Christians)
• Appreciate walking to the front, there is an affirmative act that we partake in
• Appreciate breaking the bread as a community, reminder of sharing, of togetherness, and of equality

I believe that Holy Communion (or the Eucharist, or the Lord's Supper) is a beautiful act of worship that is many layered in symbol and significance.  It is a beautiful mystery that is worthy of our continued exploration.  I celebrate the responses above and below I'll offer what I hear in the ritual as explored in the Gospel of Mark.

The Last Supper took place during the heavily symbolic Passover meal.

Passover is the celebration of when the angel of death passed over the Hebrews, killed the first born of the Egyptians, and convinced the pharaoh to free the Hebrews from slavery.  Passover is a celebration of deliverance, of liberation.  The people of God were free from oppression and free to worship.  Passover was a meal of identity.  The story of God's deliverance was a core story for the people of God and it was a key way of understanding YHWH.  The God of Israel is a God of liberation.  The meal itself helped tell this story and reinforce this identity.  For example:

• The unleavened bread, the bread of affliction, was a reminder of suffering endured and survived.
• Vegetable or herb dipped in salt water serves as a reminder of the tears shed while enslaved and how the people cried out to God for deliverance.
• Bitter herbs reminded people of the bitterness of servitude.
• Lamb shank reminds the celebrants of the lamb that was slain on the night of the first Passover.  The Hebrews were to paint lamb's blood over their door frame as a sign to the Angel of Death to pass over that house.

Over the years elements have been added and symbols have been reinterpreted.  Deuteronomy 16:1-8 outlines the core elements of the celebratory meal, the bread and the lamb.  In the celebration of the Lord's Supper Jesus reinterprets the symbols of the meal, specifically the bread and the lamb.

Now wait, you may say, "I remember Jesus talking about the bread ("this is my body"), but we don't have lamb at communion."  Jesus doesn't mention lamb in Mark 14.  In fact, it's kind of odd that they are celebrating Passover, yet this central element is missing.  Mark 14:12 specifically states that this is the time the Passover lamb is sacrificed right before it talks about the disciples going out to make preparations for the meal.  So, what happened?  Did they forget that part?  I see two theories:

1. This is once again a dig at the Temple complex.  The Passover lamb was to sacrificed the day before the meal at the temple.  The scriptures state clearly that the lamb has to be offered at "the place God will choose as a dwelling for his name".  By not having the lamb were they shunning the temple and making the implicit accusation that the temple was no longer the dwelling place for the name of God?  Or...
2. The lamb was present at the Lord's Supper in the person of Jesus.  Perhaps, this is what Jesus is referencing when he says about the cup, "This is my blood of the covenant which is poured out for many."  The image of Jesus as the "Lamb of God" was prevalent in Johannine literature (ie Gospel of John and Revelation) and thus had a place in the early church.  Was Jesus layering metaphors by referring to himself as both the lamb and the new temple, the place God had chosen for his name to dwell (Mark 14:58)?

Perhaps it's a combination of both theories.  Whatever the case it's clear that Jesus is taking existing tradition and setting it in a new direction.

It's important to note that the Passover meal is not only a meal of remembrance but a meal of identification.  The meal was a means but which those who partake share in the experience.  It is not simply a case of "this is what happened to others long ago" but  broadened to mean, "this is what happened, and happens, to me/us."  Jesus refers to this idea when he asks James and John, "Are you able to drink from the cup I drink" (Mark 10:38).  This makes the supper scene ironic in the moment (all the disciples share the common bread and the common cup identifying themselves with Jesus yet all desert Jesus on the night of betrayal) and sets up redemption in the story of Pentecost (the disciples finally live into their role as ambassadors of the gospel).

"OK, everybody get on this side of the group picture!"

The church celebrates the Lord's Supper as a table of remembrance ("Do this in remembrance of me").  Yet we also need to celebrate it as a table of identification.  A place where we affirm our desire to walk the way of Christ, to see his story become our story.  The Apostle Paul puts it beautifully when he says,

"I want to know Christ and the power of his resurrection and the sharing of his sufferings by becoming like him in his death, if somehow I may attain the resurrection from the dead." - Philippians 3:10-11

This is my "so what" of Mark 14.  Each time I'm offered communion, I ask myself, "Is this true for me?  Do I want to know Christ and the power of his resurrection and the sharing of his sufferings?"  I wish I could say that the answer is always a confident, "Yes!".  I cannot.  What I can say is that the invitation from Christ to come and follow is always there, regardless of my response.  And that the offer of the bread and the cup is grace that I can claim with confidence. 

Mark 12: Q & O with the Tracy & Bruno

Hi friends, I love the fact that Tracy and Bruno are taking their connection with the group to another level with their questions and observations.  It's awesome!

Here's their offering for Mark 12.  I've responded to some of their questions in blue below
--
Parable of the Tenants - Mark 12:1-12

Comment made that “they were afraid of the crowd”(v.12) so what was happening that the crowd could threaten the appointed leaders?  As we've noted Jerusalem is a packed house during the time of the Passover and given the anti-occupation sentiment (and the "Messiahs" of recent past), the city is a powder keg.  The Jewish religious establishment is in an uneasy alliance with the Roman political leadership.  If a Jewish rebellion breaks out that needs to be quashed by Roman force then they lose face with the Roman leadership (as they were unable to help keep the peace) and they lose clout with the Jewish people (as they won't be able to fully support the rebellion).

Is this the same crowd who said, “Crucify him” several days later?  Not sure.  Maybe, but likely not.  The courtyard wherein Pilate would have asked about what to do with Jesus was a relatively small space and likely only accessible by the Jewish religious leadership.  The "Crucify him!" crowd was more than likely less than 100 people, the majority of whom would have been looking to get rid of Jesus for some time now.

Paying the Imperial tax to Caesar   Mark 12:13-17
The coin with Caesar’s face can be returned to Rome but what was God’s that needed to be returned? Check out my session notes on this section.

Warning Against the Teachers of the Law   Mark 12: 38–40
Who are teachers of the law today?  Great question.  Literally, I think it would be priests, pastors, perhaps also Deacons.  I think though that the concept could be justifiably broadened to include anyone that is given deference because their role in society is based upon healing, protecting, guiding, and/or helping.

What was their job and role in the community? Check out my session notes on this section.

Why pinpoint the teachers of the law vs. others?  I think it's because the basis of their power is their supposed understanding of God and the ways of God.  James 3:1 says, "My brothers and sisters, not many of you should become teachers, because we know that we teachers will be judged more strictly."  By using authority derived from association with God to undertake actions opposed to the heart of God is to take the Lord's name in vain.  There are plenty of people not teachers of the law who are equally arrogant.

Bruno and Tracy's Thoughts:
The wrong kind of knowledge can make people arrogant, judgmental and self-righteous.  Today we often hear that “knowledge is power” which doesn’t seem so different from Jesus’ time.  But much of that knowledge is likely not ‘true knowledge of the divine’.

Note that Jesus observed these men.  He didn’t just glance at them and then judge them.  So looks like the Scribe’s punishment is due to their arrogance and not humbleness to do the Will of God.

The Widow’s Offering  Mark 12:41 – 44

1. Jesus watched what people put in the offering plate.
2. Offering was money and not the  “things that belong to God” 
3. Somehow by dress or appearance, Jesus knew who was “rich” and who wasn’t Check out my session notes on this section.
4. Copper coins then are like pennies today?? – the smallest denomination at least in the USA
5. If the money is Caesar’s and going to the Temple’s treasury then anyone giving offering is misguided?  Good question.  Roman money would have needed to be exchanged for Temple approved coinage, yet I think your question also leads to a deeper reflection on the offering.  Check out my session notes.

Tracy and Bruno’s Thoughts:
Copper coins used since 600BC.  Romans saw use of copper for coinage – easy to mold, reusable.  It’s the smallest denomination in the USA and England (per Copperalliance.org.uk).

Isn’t the widow doing what Bartimaeus did i.e. gave all he owned?  Kind of.  The significant difference is to whom (or to what) each of them are giving all that they owned.

Did Jesus “google” this woman and knew she was a widow, not remarried?  Not sure, perhaps because she was there giving the offering instead of a male in her family which would have been expected.  Did her clothing reveal her marital status (more on clothing later)?  Was two coins all she had?  Did Jesus surmise this because in his time an unmarried widow was penniless?

If people can tell who is rich and who isn’t by their appearance, does this matter?  Maybe? Dressing humbly but not with the intent to deceive will convey our more authentic selves as appearance does not impress God.  But on the flip side, going to the Temple or church could be entering sanctified space of Heaven on Earth.  In this case, wouldn’t attendees want to clothe themselves in their “Sunday’s best”?

Do we ask ourselves the question, what are we poor in and what can we offer that would make us feel like we gave all of ourselves?  How do we seek for an answer?  Prayer?  Other?

Crowds are faceless and unpredictable.  They will follow a leader only to condemn him if an event triggers rage or fear.  Think of Mussolini (Italy) in the 1940s, Ceaușescu (Romania) in the 1980s and of course, Jesus in the 30s.  Jesus was “playing with fire” sandwiched between crowds that followed him for the wrong reasons (Jesus was not going to destroy the Roman empire) and the “establishment” (high priests, scribes, Roman authorities).  Really interesting connections!

Only money was being offered.  This put the Temple in the same place as Rome, i.e. a center of wordly power.  Yes, exactly! Jesus’ metamessage: the Temple becomes irrelevant re communicating with God.  In Mark 13 Jesus predicts the physical destruction of the Temple.

Session 10: Class Notes

Trying to cover two chapters in one night is rough.  We dove into several stories in chapter 12 and gave a tip of the hat to chapter 13.  If you have any questions or observations from sections we didn't cover in either of those chapters please put it in the comment section below.  I may not have anything worthwhile to say in response but I believe wisdom will be heard from among the group.

--

Mark 12 opens with Jesus telling a parable that is a direct response to the religious leadership's challenge of Jesus' authority.  The parable Jesus tells has a striking resemblance to a illustrative prophecy told by Isaiah.

Mark 12:1-9 Then he began to speak to them in parables. “A man planted a vineyard, put a fence around it, dug a pit for the wine press, and built a watchtower; then he leased it to tenants and went to another country. When the season came, he sent a slave to the tenants to collect from them his share of the produce of the vineyard. But they seized him, and beat him, and sent him away empty-handed.  And again he sent another slave to them; this one they beat over the head and insulted.  Then he sent another, and that one they killed. And so it was with many others; some they beat, and others they killed. He had still one other, a beloved son.  Finally he sent him to them, saying, ‘They will respect my son.’ But those tenants said to one another, ‘This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and the inheritance will be ours.’ So they seized him, killed him, and threw him out of the vineyard.  What then will the owner of the vineyard do? He will come and destroy the tenants and give the vineyard to others.

Isaiah 5:1-8 Let me sing for my beloved my love-song concerning his vineyard: My beloved had a vineyard on a very fertile hill.  He dug it and cleared it of stones, and planted it with choice vines; he built a watchtower in the midst of it, and hewed out a wine vat in it; he expected it to yield grapes, but it yielded wild grapes. And now, inhabitants of Jerusalem and people of Judah, judge between me and my vineyard.  What more was there to do for my vineyard that I have not done in it?  When I expected it to yield grapes, why did it yield wild grapes? And now I will tell you what I will do to my vineyard. I will remove its hedge, and it shall be devoured; I will break down its wall, and it shall be trampled down.  I will make it a waste; it shall not be pruned or hoed, and it shall be overgrown with briers and thorns; I will also command the clouds that they rain no rain upon it. For the vineyard of the Lord of hosts is the house of Israel, and the people of Judah are his pleasant planting; he expected justice, but saw bloodshed; righteousness, but heard a cry!  Ah, you who join house to house, who add field to field, until there is room for no one but you, and you are left to live alone in the midst of the land!

Not all of the parables are meant to be interpreted as allegories but this one by Jesus seems particularly pointed given: his past condemnation of the religious leaderships practices (Mark 7:6-9); his confrontation of the religiously sanctioned practices at the temple (Mark 11:12-23); the fact the religious leaders took the parable as aimed directly at them (Mark 12:12).  So how might we break this allegory down?  Let's look at the principle figures:

• The Owner of the Vineyard = I think the Isaiah 5 reference says clearly that this is God.
• The Messengers Sent by the Owner = Both Luke 13:34 and Matthew 23:31 make it clear that the messengers are the prophets.  Nehemiah 9:26 also points to this as an established pattern of the Israelite's response to the prophets.
• The Son of the Owner = Jesus seems to be referencing himself here particularly given the next verse where he quotes Psalm 118, again seemingly referring to himself.
• The Land = Again the Isaiah passage points us to a particular conclusion.  The land is the people of Israel.
• The Tenants = If the land is the people of Israel then those meant to care for the land are the religious leadership.  The condemnation of the tenants and the offence the religious leaders took also points to the conclusion that they are symbolized by the tenants.  Fun Fact: The chief priests and the scribes referenced in this section would have been wealthy absentee landlords.  Jesus flips the script on this reality by referring to them not as owners of land but as merely tenants on God's property.

The judgement is clear.  Those with social, economic, and political power (the religious leadership) are consuming the people of God (particularly the poor) by their greed ("Ah, you who join house to house, who add field to field, until there is room for no one but you" - Isaiah 5:8).  And they are doing so in the name of God.

--

A Roman Denarius inscribed,
"Caesar, son of the Divine"

Mark 12:13-17

This story contains the oft quoted line, "Render to Caesar what is Caesar's and render to God what is God's."  Another faithful way to translate that phrase from the Biblical Greek would be to say, "Pay back to Caesar what you own him and pay back to God what you owe him."  If we were to flip it into a question it'd be, "Who are you indebted to?  Where does your allegiance lie?"

The story begins with a tag team duo that embodies the old Sanskrit proverb, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend."  The Herodians (socially elite and wealthy Jews who were puppet political rulers propped up the Roman empire and thus had a vested interest in seeing Rome's domination endure) paired up with Pharisees (religious leaders more commonly associated with the hoi polloi who wanted to see God kick Rome out of the land of Israel) to ask Jesus a question.  "Should we pay taxes to Caesar?"  It's a great trap.

• If Jesus says yes...Then he would lose favor in the eyes of the crowd who were at the moment the only thing preventing the religious leaders from moving against Jesus (Mark 12:12).  The taxes levied by Rome and by their Jewish proxies (such as the late Herod the Great  who built the temple by heavily taxing the poor) were despised by the Jewish people.  Taxation was one of the issues that led to consistent uprisings among the people of Jerusalem.
• If Jesus says no...He'd win points with the people but the Herodians would have clear justification to have him arrested by the Roman authorities for inciting dissension and treason.

Jesus does neither.  Instead, he flips the script.  In asking for a coin he exposes that they were guilty of idolatry as they were carrying a graven image (a no-no particularly by the religious leadership in the temple).  His response further exposes their hypocrisy by the clear implication that they are in fact beholden to the kingdom of domination and oppression (symbolized by Rome) rather than to God and God's kingdom vision for Israel and for all.

--

Mark 12:38-44

Your Bible may insert headings that imply these are two separate stories, yet I contend that it is one story.  When studying the Bible it's important to keep in mind that headings, chapters, and verses are not sacred scripture.  They are later additions:

• Chapters, as we know them, came about in about the 13th century (nearly a millennium after the Bible in it's current state was formed).
• Verses came about in the 16th century.
• Headings are mostly created by the publishers of any given version of the Bible.

The Greek Text of John 1:1

Often these additions have a subtle way of shaping the way we understand the text.  It's not malicious by any means, but it does unconsciously point us along the interpretive path of someone we've never met.

Back to the story at hand.  Jesus has made it pretty clear that he is frustrated, disgusted, brokenhearted, at what the Temple has become.  The symbol of God's presence has become wedded to and infected by a system of domination and oppression.  Many of the religious leaders seem to have abandoned God's repeated call to care for and protect the marginalized and vulnerable among the community.  In verse 38 Jesus again goes directly at the injustice and hypocrisy paraded before him.

"Beware of the scribes, who like to walk around in long robes, and to be greeted with respect in the marketplaces, and to have the best seats in the synagogues and places of honor at banquets! They devour widows’ houses and for the sake of appearance say long prayers."

Scribes were those who copied the Hebrew scriptures (aka the Tanakh).  This was an esteemed profession that garnered them respect as experts on the Torah.  As experts on the law they were sought after as teachers, arbiters, trustees, and executors of estates (it was in this capacity that they would have been able to "devour widow's houses").

Mosaic of the Widow's Mite in the
Basilica of Sant'Apollinare Nuovo, Italy

After condemning the scribes, Jesus turns to face the Temple Treasury.  At the treasury, those making an offering would have to declare publicly the amount and the reason for the offering.  He watched the show as those with wealth came proclaiming their large gifts.  He watched as a poor widow came and gave all that she had to the Temple because of the offerings required during the celebration of the Passover.  Keep in mind Jesus attitude towards the Temple and his recent condemnation of the religious leaders who are "devouring" the livelihood of widows as you listen to his words.

"Truly I tell you, this poor widow has put in more than all those who are contributing to the treasury.  For all of them have contributed out of their abundance; but she out of her poverty has put in everything she had, all she had to live on."

Is he commending her faith?  Or is he illustrating his condemnation of the way the religious system has followed the ways of the world in oppressing the poor?

I think the scriptures give clear teaching on giving from a place of faith (2 Corinthians 9:6-8; Proverbs 11:24-25; 1 Kings 17:7-16) but I don't think that's Jesus' main point in this passage.  There stories do seem to contrast intentions of the heart, the proud and the humble, and the oppressor and oppressed.  Jesus is illustrating his point that the widow is being devoured right before their eyes.  Jesus saved his harshest critiques for those who used religion as a means to disenfranchise and demean others.

--

Mark 13:1

Josephus was a Romano-Jewish historian both in Jerusalem in the first century.  He initially fought against the Roman occupation but later defected becoming a friend of Rome.  He became a historian of the Jewish - Roman conflicts in the first century.  Hear his description of the Temple during the time of Jesus:

… The exterior of the building wanted nothing that could astound either mind or eye. For, being covered on all sides with massive plates of gold, the sun was no sooner up than it radiated so fiery a flash that persons straining to look at it were compelled to avert their eyes, as from the solar rays. To approaching strangers it appeared from a distance like a snow-clad mountain; for all that was not overlaid with gold was of the purest white... - Josephus from The Jewish War

Now listen to one of the disciples (my money's on Peter) in Mark 13

"As he came out of the temple, one of his disciples said to him, “Look, Teacher, what large stones and what large buildings!"

The disciples response seems appropriate given Josephus' description.  Yet remember Jesus' illustration of the withered fig tree?  Jesus ceases speaking in images and implications.

“Do you see these great buildings? Not one stone will be left here upon another; all will be thrown down.”

Some see this as evidence that Mark was written after the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple by Rome in 70 AD.  Others contend that since the temple was burned and not torn down completely that this is a clear indication that Mark was written before the fall of the temple.  Either way, in our narrative, Jesus' claim points to an end and a new beginning for the people of God.  If the temple was not to be the center of life then what would be?  Where would humanity seek God?  What sign would point to God's presence in our midst?

--

So what?

The words of Jesus remind me again of the "So What?" I posted in last week's notes under the section entitled, "True Religion".  It also causes me to reflect on the daily little choices.

Mr. Burns from the Simpsons
perfected the evil laugh.

I'm convinced that none (or at least very, very few) of the scribes and the chief priests woke up in the morning with an evil laugh and a plot to fleece the poor.  I think that they even began with (and perhaps still possessed at some level) good intentions.  Yet what happened along the way?  My guess, the maintenance and growth of the institution eclipsed the simple initial vision God gave his people.  How does such a switch take place?  The daily little choices.  The ways we respond to hurt, disappointment, fear, and success.  Kingdoms are built a brick at a time.  It's passages like those in Mark 12 that invite me to pause, reflect, ask others, and take stock of the kind of kingdom I'm building in my heart.

Session 9: Class Notes

Hi friends!

Mark 11 holds another significant shift in the unfolding of the good news of Jesus the Christ.  Here we enter Jerusalem during the Passover celebration.  Chapter 11 focuses on two events, Jesus' dramatic entry and Jesus' confrontation in the Temple.  Before we enter the city, let's retrace our steps and get a feel for our surroundings.

1. Approximately a third of Mark's book is devoted to this one week in Jerusalem.
2. Until this point, Jesus seems to have spent most of his time around the small towns nestled against the sea of Galilee.  He has made notable excursions to "unclean" lands to the north, east, and south yet it appears he has not visited any major city.
   
3. It is believed that Jerusalem held a population of roughly 40,000.  During the week of Passover the number in the city ballooned to any where between 200,000 to 400,000 people.  Jews and Godfearers and others came pouring into the city.  The Temple in Jerusalem was an ancient marvel and this was a prominen time for the Temple.  The mass influx of people meant increased business, heightened tensions, and more spectacle.
4. Passover was the celebration to commemorate God's deliverance from oppression in Egypt (specifically the night when the angel of death passed over the Hebrews, killed Egyptians, and convinced the pharaoh to release the Hebrews).  The rules for observing the Passover are outlined in Deuteronomy 16:1-8.
5. Jesus has been very clear with the disciples about what will happen in Jerusalem.  He has told them at least three times that, "the Son of Man will be handed over to the chief priests and the scribes, and they will condemn him to death; then they will hand him over to the Gentiles; they will mock him..and kill him; and after three days he will rise again."

Dueling Parades - Mark 11:1-11
As with most of Jesus' actions, there are layers of meaning to his entry into Jerusalem.

Religious

Riding on a colt upon which no one previously had ridden is a direct enactment of Zechariah 9:9-10

"Rejoice greatly, O daughter Zion!  Shout aloud, O daughter Jerusalem!

 Lo, your king comes to you; triumphant and victorious is he, humble and riding on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey.

He will cut off the chariot from Ephraim and the war-horse from Jerusalem; and the battle bow shall be cut off, and he shall command peace to the nations; his dominion shall be from sea to sea,and from the River to the ends of the earth."


The entry into Jerusalem feels very much like a prophetic drama.  The Old Testament is replete with examples of prophets engaging in dramatic acts as a way to illustrate truth, awaken the imagination, and direct people to the way of God.  Sometimes miraculous, sometimes mundane, and often odd, the prophetic drama is a common element of the ministry of Jewish prophets.  We have already seen examples of the prophetic drama in Jesus ministry in the feeding of the multitudes.  Perhaps Jesus knew about the colt because of his divine nature and/or perhaps he knew about the colt because he had been planning this dramatic entry.

Political

The first day of the Passover celebration was a big deal.  Think of it like the Opening Ceremonies of the Olympics, everyone was there.  It's the kickoff to a massive week.  Jesus entry into the city would not have been the only arrival that day, in fact it is likely that there would have been another parade with much more pomp and circumstance.  The Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate would likely have also entered Jerusalem that day.  Pilate's entry would have been much different.  Astride a war house and amidst columns of Roman Centurions, Pilate's parade would have been a show of force, a demonstration of the vast power of the Roman empire (read Zechariah's prophecy above again).

When Jesus enters he is hailed as a king (the throwing of robes on the ground was reserved for the return of a conquering king), and the crowds exalt him as an ancestor of David (under King David's reign Israel reached the zenith of it's military might).  Their cries of "Hosanna" literally translate to "Save now" yet might be more figuratively translated as, "Long live the king!"  Yet what kind of king arrives on a donkey with a motley crew of dense disciples?  Jesus' entry mocks the pomp of Pilate and proclaims that his reign is unlike any earthly ruler that has gone before him.  With two would-be rulers entering Jerusalem who will be crowned as king?

The comparisons between the two entries, the imagery conveyed by the animal ridden, and the political overtones hearken to an interesting historical reference.  Tracy and  Bruno made this fascinating connection.  They noted,

Napoleon Crossing the Alps
Jacques-Louis David

Napoleon Crossing the Alps
Paul Delaroche

"The unridden beast (colt or donkey) is one reserved for kings but why an eques?  Why not a camel?  Perhaps the mule/donkey was known as a beast of burden, a very sure-footed one.  It’s like God, very sure-footed.  Reminds us of a famous painting, “Napoleon Crossing the Alps”(left) by Jacques-Louis David painted in 1805 which pictures Napoleon riding a white stead.  However, he actually rode a mule (right) because he needed a sure-footed animal to cross the Alps.  Napoleon is crossing the mountain i.e. the Temple to fight the Austrians in the Battle of Marengo.  Likewise, Jesus’ battle is against the merchants in the Temple then the priests.  Both had a clear vision of their mission and how they would accomplish it.  PS: we are drawing parallels in history, not comparing Jesus with Napoleon as individuals!"

Many thanks to the Bovals for this insight!

The jubilant entry ends oddly.  Jesus enters the temple, looks around, and leaves without any fanfare.  Was the crowd dispersed so soon (the text does say that it was late)?  Was the lack of action an intentional strategy to make the people wonder what kind of Messiah he was?  Or perhaps Jesus was simply doing a little reconnaissance work, getting ready for the next big show.

Temple Showdown - Mark 11:12-26
The Second Temple was the impressive creation of Herod the Great (or as many contemporary Jews called him, Herod the Monstrous).  The temple was more than beautiful architecture, it was also the center of religious, political, and economic life for Jews in Jerusalem.  It was where the throne of God was kept.  Artisans, builders, fabricators, would have benefited from the business the temple generated.  The wealthy leaders of the temple, the Sanhedrin, would sway incredible power over the lives of people in Jerusalem (and beyond) and thus would be in a continual dance with the Roman authorities.  This is the center and this is where Jesus seems to go berserk.

What has Jesus so wound up?

• High Prices?  Pilgrims to Jerusalem for Passover would likely have not brought the necessary sacrifices with them.  Instead, they would come to the temple and purchase the sacrificial animals before the ritual.  Also, only temple coins were accepted forms of currency.  The coinage of other peoples typically revealed the imagery of kings or animals and was not permitted on the temple mount.  During Passover there was high demand for these goods and services.  Were these small business owners taking advantage of the religious holiday and the out-of-towners with jacked up rates?  While Jesus doesn't come out and condemn them for price gouging he does quote Jeremiah chapter 7 wherein the God refers to the people as "robbers"for the ways they take advantage  and hurt others.  Some historical sources reveal other rabbi's condemning the gross markup on goods necessary for worship.  Was Jesus upset at the economic exploitation?

  

  A Model of the Temple During the First Century

• Exclusion?  In the Gospel of Mark, we've seen Jesus upset.  In Mark 10 Jesus was indignant when the disciples shamed the mothers and attempted to prevent the children from coming to him.  In Mark 3 Jesus was angry when some refused to acknowledge the inherent value of a crippled man but instead sought to use the crippled man as a means to trap Jesus.  It seems like one of the things that got his goat was the exclusion and/or devaluing of others.  During the temple scene we only hear Jesus say one thing, "Is it not written, 'My house will be called a house of prayer for all nations’? But you have made it ‘a den of robbers."  Here Jesus is smashing together two prophets (Isaiah 56:7 & Jeremiah 7:11).  The money changers and the merchants would have been plying their craft in the section of the Temple known as the "Court of the Gentiles".  This area of the Temple was specifically meant as a place for Godfearers, those ritually deemed unclean, or any non-Jew to gather.  It was meant to be a place of inclusion where all could gather and seek God.  Was Jesus angry because it had become a place of commerce, that the merchants had taken over the space (a market place and a house of prayer can look and feel very different)?  Was he angry that the merchants were specifically overcharging the non-Jews on the margins?
• You've changed?  The prophets Jesus quotes (and really most of the prophets) give their harshest critiques of worship and of the temple when Israelite people engage in willful and/or complicit oppression of the vulnerable.  Perhaps the issue for Jesus was that the Temple had changed.  The Temple (originally the Tent of Meeting) was a place originally focused on communion with God; a tangible expression of the covenant God made with the Hebrews.  But in the first century something felt different.  In the first century, the Temple was not only the center of religious life but also of economic and political life for the Jew.  What happens to faith when it becomes allied to power?  It seems here that the Temple became an agent of reinforcing a social hierarchy that solidified power in the hands of a few and did so in the name of God.  In flipping the tables Jesus was calling for more than a reform, he was dramatically calling for a completely new vision.

Don't Like Figs?
The dramatic scene at the temple is book ended by a strange scene with a fig tree.  Often when Mark encapsulates a story with another story the idea is that the stories are meant to interpret each other.  Figs were often used as a symbol of the success and prosperity of the Israelite people.  They were a sign of blessing.  With that in mind, and holding onto the story of Jesus shutting down the Temple, let's look at the fig story again.

The next day as they were leaving Bethany, Jesus was hungry.  Seeing in the distance a fig tree in leaf, he went to find out if it had any fruit. When he reached it, he found nothing but leaves, because it was not the season for figs.  Then he said to the tree, “May no one ever eat fruit from you again.” And his disciples heard him say it.
In the morning, as they went along, they saw the fig tree withered from the roots.  Peter remembered and said to Jesus, “Rabbi, look! The fig tree you cursed has withered!”
“Have faith in God,” Jesus answered. “Truly I tell you, if anyone says to this mountain, ‘Go, throw yourself into the sea,’ and does not doubt in their heart but believes that what they say will happen, it will be done for them

I am convinced that the fig is a symbol for the Temple and for what the Temple had become.  What had been a symbol of the success and blessing of the Israelite people (remember the Temple was not only an architectural wonder its true greatness came because it spoke of God's presence with the people) had become corrupt, shriveled, and dead.  It was time to toss what was broken (the temple is built upon a mountain is the highest point in the city) and Jesus is calling on his disciples to pray for a new way to emerge.

OK, So What?
For me the entry into Jerusalem and the Temple scene raise two simple points.

1. The Way.  The early communities that coalesced around the life and teachings of Jesus referred to themselves as followers of "The Way".  They saw that Jesus invited people to, "Come, follow me."  It was this invitation into discipleship, into a way of life that inspired them.  I love using this kind of language and imagery to talk about Christianity.  Of course, following Jesus, or the way of Jesus, always leads me to the question, "Where does this way go?  Where will it take me?"  Ultimately the story of the resurrection says that the way of Jesus leads to life.  The story of Jesus entry in Jerusalem with all of it's symbolism and with all that happens there has something powerful to say about where "The Way" will lead us before we come to the resurrection.
2. True Religion (not the jeans).  Jesus action at the temple reminds me of a simple and profound scripture.  James 1:27, "Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world."  "Orphans and Widows" is the Bible's way of saying, "the vulnerable, voiceless, and powerless in your society".  I think the phrase, "keep oneself from being polluted by the world" raises the question, "What does it mean to be polluted by the world?"  Well, to answer what James meant about being polluted by the world, we should probably look first at the book of James.  The context of verse 1:27 in the book of James talks about integrity, humility, and how we treat others, particularly those with wealth and those without.  Something tells me that this would be a good place to begin looking for our answer.