Showing posts with label Mark 8:27-38. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mark 8:27-38. Show all posts
9/12/2021
Adversary - Mark 8:27-38 - Pentecost 17 - 9-12-21
9/17/2018
Adversary
Sermon podcast from yesterday at St. Paul's UCC in Downers Grove, IL. Mark 8:27-38. That time Peter called Jesus the Messiah and Jesus called Peter Satan.
video sermon preview
"Adversary" podcast
video sermon preview
"Adversary" podcast
9/09/2018
Repent
Sermon podcast from today at St. Paul's UCC in Downers Grove, IL. Mark 8:27-38
video sermon preview
"Repent" podcast
video sermon preview
"Repent" podcast
9/13/2015
Answer
Today's sermon at St. Paul's UCC in Downers Grove, IL is more about pondering the questions than coming up with the right answer.
"Answer" podcast
"Answer" podcast
9/14/2012
Openly
This week's Bible reflection (Storming the Castle) starts asking the questions. There are more questions in Sunday's sermon at St. Paul's United Church of Christ in Downers Grove, IL.
"Openly" text
"Openly" podcast
"Openly" text
"Openly" podcast
9/10/2012
Storming the Castle
Peter finally got it right. Rocky had stumbled over other questions and might have been a little discouraged, but this time, he could pat himself on the back.
In this week's Bible reading from Mark 8:27-38, Jesus asked, "Who do you say that I am?" and Peter answered the question correctly. I am sure he was proud of himself for finally getting it. And then he was confused-- again. The question is, was his answer really correct to begin with?
I think folks generally read this part -- before Jesus called Peter "Satan!" (Adversary) and told about how he (Jesus) was going to suffer and die and rise again -- as a time where Peter really "got it."
But Peter was confused.
When Peter called Jesus "the Christ" (Greek), Peter used the same term as "Messiah". (Hebrew) Both words mean "anointed one" and usually were used to refer to the Kings of Israel. The Kings were powerful and they ruled absolutely. Weakness was not something people associated with a King -- an anointed one. Suffering and death would certainly not go with the title.
Peter called Jesus "the Christ" and "The Son of God" (Hmmm . . . a title given to the Egyptian Pharaohs, no less) in a way that called on Jesus to take over and maybe even set things right with military coup. Peter wanted Jesus to storm the castle!
Jesus called Peter out and set the disciples back on course.
Do the followers of Jesus still get it?
In this week's Bible reading from Mark 8:27-38, Jesus asked, "Who do you say that I am?" and Peter answered the question correctly. I am sure he was proud of himself for finally getting it. And then he was confused-- again. The question is, was his answer really correct to begin with?
I think folks generally read this part -- before Jesus called Peter "Satan!" (Adversary) and told about how he (Jesus) was going to suffer and die and rise again -- as a time where Peter really "got it."
But Peter was confused.
When Peter called Jesus "the Christ" (Greek), Peter used the same term as "Messiah". (Hebrew) Both words mean "anointed one" and usually were used to refer to the Kings of Israel. The Kings were powerful and they ruled absolutely. Weakness was not something people associated with a King -- an anointed one. Suffering and death would certainly not go with the title.
Peter called Jesus "the Christ" and "The Son of God" (Hmmm . . . a title given to the Egyptian Pharaohs, no less) in a way that called on Jesus to take over and maybe even set things right with military coup. Peter wanted Jesus to storm the castle!
Jesus called Peter out and set the disciples back on course.
Do the followers of Jesus still get it?
9/12/2009
Christ
This week's Bible study blog entry for i.ucc (When the right answer is wrong) is now expanded as it has become Sunday's sermon at Union Congregational United Church of Christ in Somonauk, IL
"Christ" text
"Christ" podcast
"Christ" text
"Christ" podcast
9/08/2009
When the right answer is wrong
Here's this week's Bible study blog entry for i.ucc:
Topic for conversation:
Jesus asked them, “But who do you say that I am?”
Peter answered him, “You are the Messiah” or “You are the Christ” (Messiah=Christ – Hebrew-Greek)
And even though he made the mistake of rebuking Jesus and denying even knowing Jesus within a very short time, he at least understood whom he served Jesus was the one!
But Peter was confused -- Messiah (anointed one) is a term loaded with ‘conquering king’ ideas. Peter expected Jesus to be the king who would come and take charge by force. In the scriptures Peter knew, Messiah would be powerful and rule absolutely. Suffering and death would not go with the title Messiah.
It's no wonder Jesus called Peter out (‘Satan’ is another loaded term for us, but in this case it means “Adversary” and doesn’t have the same implications our minds add to it today.) and set the disciples straight about what was coming. Jesus was going to suffer and die and rise again. And further -- Jesus followers were going to have to deny themselves and be authentic followers of Jesus.
When we call Jesus the Messiah or the Christ today, we understand about one who suffered and died and rose again. We understand that Jesus isn’t about military takeovers and force. We understand that Jesus really wants us to authentically and truly follow him and to continue to follow the greatest two commandments of loving God and loving our neighbor?
Right?
Topic for conversation:
Jesus asked them, “But who do you say that I am?”
Peter answered him, “You are the Messiah” or “You are the Christ” (Messiah=Christ – Hebrew-Greek)
And even though he made the mistake of rebuking Jesus and denying even knowing Jesus within a very short time, he at least understood whom he served Jesus was the one!
But Peter was confused -- Messiah (anointed one) is a term loaded with ‘conquering king’ ideas. Peter expected Jesus to be the king who would come and take charge by force. In the scriptures Peter knew, Messiah would be powerful and rule absolutely. Suffering and death would not go with the title Messiah.
It's no wonder Jesus called Peter out (‘Satan’ is another loaded term for us, but in this case it means “Adversary” and doesn’t have the same implications our minds add to it today.) and set the disciples straight about what was coming. Jesus was going to suffer and die and rise again. And further -- Jesus followers were going to have to deny themselves and be authentic followers of Jesus.
When we call Jesus the Messiah or the Christ today, we understand about one who suffered and died and rose again. We understand that Jesus isn’t about military takeovers and force. We understand that Jesus really wants us to authentically and truly follow him and to continue to follow the greatest two commandments of loving God and loving our neighbor?
Right?
9/12/2006
Maybe you'd get the Jeopardy answer right, but . . .
I got my act together and composed a new post for the "Opening the Bible" blog at i.ucc. It's about Peter's answer to Jesus' question, "Who do you say that I am?" and how I think we give Peter some undue credit for "getting it." Here's: But didn't I get the answer right?
Peter answered the question correctly. He was proud of himself for finally getting it. And then he was confused-- again. Was his astounding answer really correct to begin with?
In this week's focus Bible passage from Mark 8:27-38, Jesus asked the disciples what the "word on the street" was when it came to who he was. They gave the standard answers about Jesus being John the Baptist or Elijah or one of the prophets.
That's not bad company to be compared to.
But then Jesus asked who the disciples said that he was.
Peter called him the Christ -- the Son of God. (The Son of God part is in Matthew 16 -- but not Mark 8)
We generally read this part -- before Jesus called Peter Satan and told about how he (Jesus) was going to suffer and die and rise again -- as a time where Peter "got it" and identified Jesus as he really was. (and is.)
I think Peter was confused, however.
When he called him "the Christ" (Greek), Peter used the same term as "Messiah". (Hebrew) Both words mean "anointed one" and usually were used to refer to the Kings of Israel. The Kings were powerful and they ruled absolutely. Weakness was not something people associated with a King -- an anointed one. Suffering and death would certainly not go with the title.
Peter called Jesus "the Christ" and "The Son of God" (Hmmm . . . a title given to the Egyptian Pharaohs, no less) in a way that called on Jesus to take over and maybe even set things right with military coup. (Hey -- David did it -- why not you, Jesus?)
It's no wonder Jesus called Peter out and set the disciples straight about what was coming. No military action -- no storming the castle either. (I love that movie "The Princess Bride") Jesus was going to suffer and die and rise again. And further -- Jesus followers were going to have to deny themselves and be authentic followers of Jesus.
Do we expect the same of Jesus today -- for him to come in and take over things and make everything better? What if Jesus has something different in mind? What if what Jesus really wants us to do is to authentically and truly follow him and to continue to follow the greatest two commandments of loving God and loving our neighbor?
What if in our search for the right answers and the right way to do things we're missing the point just like Peter did?
Peter answered the question correctly. He was proud of himself for finally getting it. And then he was confused-- again. Was his astounding answer really correct to begin with?
In this week's focus Bible passage from Mark 8:27-38, Jesus asked the disciples what the "word on the street" was when it came to who he was. They gave the standard answers about Jesus being John the Baptist or Elijah or one of the prophets.
That's not bad company to be compared to.
But then Jesus asked who the disciples said that he was.
Peter called him the Christ -- the Son of God. (The Son of God part is in Matthew 16 -- but not Mark 8)
We generally read this part -- before Jesus called Peter Satan and told about how he (Jesus) was going to suffer and die and rise again -- as a time where Peter "got it" and identified Jesus as he really was. (and is.)
I think Peter was confused, however.
When he called him "the Christ" (Greek), Peter used the same term as "Messiah". (Hebrew) Both words mean "anointed one" and usually were used to refer to the Kings of Israel. The Kings were powerful and they ruled absolutely. Weakness was not something people associated with a King -- an anointed one. Suffering and death would certainly not go with the title.
Peter called Jesus "the Christ" and "The Son of God" (Hmmm . . . a title given to the Egyptian Pharaohs, no less) in a way that called on Jesus to take over and maybe even set things right with military coup. (Hey -- David did it -- why not you, Jesus?)
It's no wonder Jesus called Peter out and set the disciples straight about what was coming. No military action -- no storming the castle either. (I love that movie "The Princess Bride") Jesus was going to suffer and die and rise again. And further -- Jesus followers were going to have to deny themselves and be authentic followers of Jesus.
Do we expect the same of Jesus today -- for him to come in and take over things and make everything better? What if Jesus has something different in mind? What if what Jesus really wants us to do is to authentically and truly follow him and to continue to follow the greatest two commandments of loving God and loving our neighbor?
What if in our search for the right answers and the right way to do things we're missing the point just like Peter did?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)