Sermon: Ecstasy and Awe

The Risen Christ

Lectionary: Easter Sunday (B)

Text: Mark 16:1-8

Introduction

Most current scholars conclude that the gospel of Mark ends at verse 8 (where our reading ends). The two endings that are found added on past verse 8 have very little evidence to suggest that they belong there. But what it shows is the discomfort, even among the early Christians, to have a gospel account end in such a seemingly abrupt manner.

One of the common explanations for accepting the abrupt ending is to describe how the gospel of Jesus spread, and so the ending is not really and ending. After all, the very first sentence of the gospel account explains that what you are about to read and hear is “The beginning of the good news about Jesus Christ, God’s Son…” (Mark 1:1 CEB) And the very fact that you are reading and hearing it means that it didn’t end with the women being silent about the empty tomb.

What do we make of this strange ending then? Did the ending of the gospel get lost, as is sometimes suggested?

Translations

In her commentary on Mark, Reopening the Word: Reading Mark as Theology in the Context of Early Judaism, Marie Noonan Sabin suggest an alternate explanation. She provides details on how many of the words and images found in the final eight verses of Mark have ties that go into the rest of the gospel account. When those earlier themes are used as lenses to read the final verses, a different image appears. One that is both consistent with the gospel’s themes and one which allows the gospel to end at 16:8.

All translations are interpretations, and some translations are better than others. And not infrequently, the better translations depart from traditional ones as scholars become better informed about literature, history, religion, politics, and social practices of antiquity.

Echoes and Allusions

Mark 16:1

When the gospels were written, they would likely have been read in their entirety in a short span of time such that the audience would have fresh in their minds narrative what came earlier. But with our interrupted readings, we need to take frequent pauses to remind ourselves of what came before. Let’s once again go through Mark 16:1-8, but this time pause to look for major connections to passages that are found earlier in the gospel text.

¹ When the Sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices so that they could go and anoint Jesus’ dead body.

The central characters in all the gospel resurrection accounts are women. A key point to raise is that they are named in these accounts. In a time when women were devalued and literature frequently omits their names, the gospel accounts raise them up to be seen as full human beings.

The next point to note is the stated purpose of the women to go and anoint Jesus’ body. Just a few days earlier, probably about Wednesday in Bethany, Jesus was at the house of Simon. It was here that a woman had poured out outlandishly expensive perfume on Jesus’ head. When others who were there criticized this “waste” Jesus defended the woman and gave the act an interpretation that she had anointed him beforehand in preparation for his death.[1]

There was, then, two anointings that bookend the final four or so days of Jesus’ Passion account in Mark. One was for burial, but the second anointing never takes place. Rather, Sabin writes that this might correspond to the closing of the Jewish Sabbath liturgy “where the distribution of spices accompanies a prayer that the Sabbath-time will continue to hallow and sweeten the ‘ordinary time’ of the week. The liturgy for death has become a liturgy of for hallowing ordinary life.”[2]

Mark 16:2-4

Next, we read 16:2-4.

² Very early on the first day of the week, just after sunrise, they came to the tomb. ³ They were saying to each other, “Who’s going to roll the stone away from the entrance for us?” ⁴ When they looked up, they saw that the stone had been rolled away. (And it was a very large stone!)[3]

The presence of the tomb and stone recollects the story of the man possessed by an evil spirit encountered in Mark 5. Here the man is said to be living among the tombs, coming out of the tombs to meet Jesus, and said to cut himself with stones. We will return to this story in just a bit.

Mark 16:5-6

But first, let’s continue to 16:5-6.

⁵ Going into the tomb, they saw a young man in a white robe seated on the right side; and they were startled. ⁶ But he said to them, “Don’t be alarmed! You are looking for Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified. He has been raised. He isn’t here. Look, here’s the place where they laid him.

There are several points to observe with this verse. First, the mention of a “young man” who is wearing “a white robe”. Sabin notes that in the account of Jesus’ arrest, a young man is specifically mentioned who is almost captured but leaves his linen cloth behind and flees naked.[4] She suggests that although the two are different individuals, this might metaphorically represent the rehabilitation of the disciple(s) that ran away.

The white robes also remind the listener of the appearance of Jesus during the transfiguration event.[5]

We now return to the story of the man possessed by demons. Towards the end of this narrative, he is described as fully dressed, fully sane, and sitting.[6] The kind of transformation seen in the man formerly possessed by a demon but transformed may be representative of the kind of change that occurs when people witness and experience the resurrection.[7]

Finally, we come to the reaction of the women when they see the empty tomb and the young man. They are “startled”. This same word is found in the reaction of the crowd when they witness the first exorcism by Jesus that Mark records in chapter 1. In the CEB, it uses the phrase “everyone was shaken” to describe the reaction.[8] The same word is also found when Jesus comes down from the mount of transfiguration and encounters the crowd below. The CEB uses “overcome with excitement” to translate their reaction.[9] Here the crowd has been witnessing the failure of Jesus’ disciples to deal with an unclean spirit that had possessed a boy. Based on these usages, it might be suggested that this idea of startled, shaken, and excited has something to do with overcoming dark and supernatural powers. There is also, however, a degree of uncertainty about the nature of the power that can exorcise unwanted spirits. Perhaps that is why in 16:6 the young man needs to assure the women that all is well.

Mark 16:7

Moving to verse 7 we read,

⁷ Go, tell his disciples, especially Peter, that he is going ahead of you into Galilee. You will see him there, just as he told you.”

As many recent commentators have noted, it is the women who are the first apostles, the ones sent to bear witness to the resurrection. A key takeaway is that the resurrection affirms the equality of all peoples: in being, in purpose, and in function.

The apostle Paul would later write to the Galatians, “All of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. ²⁸ There is neither Jew nor Greek; there is neither slave nor free; nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”[10] This saying may have been a part of a very early baptismal formula.[11]

Mark 16:8

We now reach what is probably the most problematic verse, verse 8.

⁸ Overcome with terror and dread, they fled from the tomb. They said nothing to anyone, because they were afraid. (CEB)

A more literal translation renders it this way.

⁸ They went out and fled from the tomb, for trembling and astonishment had gripped them; and they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid. (NASB)

“Seized”

The words “overcome” and “gripped” are found in other translations as “seized”. This same word occurs in the story of the boy possessed by an unclean spirit. He “has a spirit” is how the word is translated. One commentary observes that,

Many readers have written on the Gospel of Mark as a series of exorcisms… Jesus commands demons and spirits and illnesses to “come out” of those they have possessed, but Jesus’ baptism reads like the reverse of an exorcism. At the beginning of his ministry, while he is watching and listening and coming up out of the water, he is possessed by the Spirit and a divine “occupation” begins.[12]

When the entirety of Mark’s gospel account is considered, perhaps one of its messages is that every person is “possessed” or “has” kind of spirit or the other. No one can be entirely free of possession: the choice is of what kind.

“Trembling”

Next let’s briefly consider the word we see as “terror” or as “trembling”. This same word is found in the context of the healing of the woman who had been bleeding for twelve years.[13] It is used in describing the reaction of the woman when Jesus discovers that healing power had gone out from him. She is described as “full of fear and trembling”.

“Ecstasy”

The next word to consider is “dread” or “astonishment”. The Greek here is ekstasis. As you might guess, the English words ecstasy and ecstatic have origins in this Greek term. When we hear “ecstasy” we generally associate somewhat more positive ideas into it than dread or astonishment. The term ekstasis has some of these connotations:

Ecstasis (also spelt ekstasis) is a moment of insight; it is a moment of total immersion in being. Your inner critic goes quiet and you are dissolved in a state of awe and wonder when everything seems to click… We seek ecstasis because it is transformative.[14]

Places in Mark where this word ekstasis or a related word is utilized include: what his family thinks about Jesus, the disciples’ reaction when they see Jesus walking on the water, the crowd’s response after Jesus heals a paralyzed man, and the reaction of the people when Jesus resurrects Jairus’ daughter.[15] It is also the word used in the Greek LXX translation of Genesis 2:21 where it reads that God put Adam into a “deep sleep”. How interesting to think of the creation of woman as occurring in an ecstatic state!

“Awe”

The final word to examine is what is translated to “they were afraid”. This same word is found in the reaction of the disciples after Jesus calms a storm, the reaction of the woman who is healed from twelve years of bleeding, and the reaction of the disciples when they see Jesus transfigured. “Awe” is probably a better translation to convey the meaning of this word in these places, including in 16:8. It is not terror, but a kind of fear that inspires awe, reverence, and even silence as one tries to apprehend and comprehend what they have just witnessed.

Conclusion

Mark 16:8 combines all these ideas, which are rationally indescribable, but still tries to describe them. And I think that is one reason why literal translations have difficulties making sense of the words here. The resurrection is beyond anything that can be described rationally, using human words.

Sabin takes a stab at translating it using her own words: “And going out they fled the tomb, for trembling and ecstasy possessed them, and they said nothing to anyone, for they were filled with awe.”[16]

She continues with an explanation,

So translated, this verse represents a climax in the motif of transformation. Each part of it, in fact, bears symbolic weight. The women’s fleeing from the tomb not only mirrors the change in the healed demoniac but also Jesus’ own release from the tomb. Their sense of being possessed by holy ecstasy is the reverse of possession by the devil. The word ekstasis points to the trance-like state of a new creation. Their silence is not a dumb of fearful silence; their speechlessness comes from being “filled with awe”.[17]

The gospel account is “the beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ”. The resurrection ushers in the beginning of a group of transformed believers of Jesus Christ. Mark’s gospel doesn’t have a strong closure because the gospel story is still ongoing. With every celebration of Easter, we are reminded that resurrection and transformation is an ongoing process. We can be possessed by divine ecstasy yet simultaneously be silent in divine awe. The empty tomb is just that: empty. It is not where we are meant to be. We are to flee from the power of death and embrace the living Christ.

Christ is risen!

He is risen!

In the name of God who Creates,

In the name of God who Lives,

And in the name of God who Breathes life into us,

Amen.

References

Cussen, J. (n.d.). Ecstasis & Catharsis: The Makers of Meaning. Retrieved from The Living Philosophy: https://www.thelivingphilosophy.com/ecstasis-and-catharsis/

Garcia Bashaw, J. (2022). Scapegoats: The Gospel through the Eyes of Victims. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press.

Jarvis, C. A., & Johnson, E. E. (2014). Feasting on the Gospels: Mark (A Feasting on the Word Commentary). Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press.

Sabin, M. N. (2002). Reopening the Word: Reading Mark as Theology in the Context of Early Judaism. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

 

 

---

[1] Mark 14:3-9.

[2] (Sabin, 2002, p. Kindle location approximately 3219)

[3] I find it quite curious that this observation was left in the text. Just so future readers know that three women could not have possibly moved it by themselves…?

[4] Mark 14:50-52.

[5] Mark 9:2-3.

[6] Mark 5:15.

[7] (Sabin, 2002, p. Kindle location approximately 3227)

[8] Mark 1:27.

[9] Mark 9:15.

[10] Galatians 3:27-28.

[11] (Garcia Bashaw, 2022, p. 267)

[12] (Jarvis & Johnson, 2014, p. 42)

[13] Mark 5:25-34, specifically v. 33.

[14] (Cussen, n.d.)

[15] Mark 3:21, 6:51, 2:12, 5:42.

[16]  (Sabin, 2002, p. Kindle location approximately 3272)

[17] Ibid.

Book Review: Encountering God in Tyrannical Texts

Encountering God in Tyrannical Texts: Reflections on Paul, Women, and the Authority of Scripture by Frances Taylor Gench
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

This book packages three different, but related topics into one. The first is the subject of the authority of scripture and what that looks like in practice. The first two chapters deal with its ins and outs using two passages as case studies. The second subject is what to do with the so-called "tyrannical" texts that minimize and subjugate women. Five of the six chapters deal with examples of such "tyrannical" texts. (The sixth chapter discusses a non-tyrannical passage, Romans 16, which discusses women in church leadership, but also discusses how the church has sought to erase their memories.) The third subject is the controversy regarding Pauline authorship of some of these tyrannical texts, and whether authorship should be a consideration in scriptural authority.

The question of what to do with troubling texts has vexed Christian readers of the Bible throughout its history. In the present day one of its manifestations is in regards to what the Bible "really says" about women and, more importantly, women in church leadership. For traditionalists, "the Bible is clear" that women are not to hold teaching positions and perhaps even remain silent in church. For progressives this is at odds with the overall trajectory of God's plan of restoration and at odds with Jesus' example and Paul's teaching, particularly of Galatians 3:28. Progressives are tempted to minimize troublesome teachings, try to explain it away, or even throw it out altogether.

Frances Gench shows her readers another set of options. The first chapter discusses 1 Timothy 2:8-15 and then suggests five recommendations for reading and handling tyrannical texts. The intent is to take seriously the canonical authority (as opposed to authority based on presumed authorship) of the biblical text.

For me the fourth recommendation - Learn from the dangers as well as the insights - was a revelation. This recommendation acknowledges that biblical authors are human, even when inspired, that they are writing within their various contexts and with various motivations - some which may not be altogether pure or praiseworthy. This recommendation allows for errors and even bad theology to have been recorded in the pages of the Bible. What it does is allows us to wrestle with the problems and see where the authors and the communities they were writing to went off track so that we can learn from their mistakes. For me, this was the book's most important contribution.

Gench provides exegesis and discusses various interpretations of some of the common tyrannical texts employed against women. She frequently disagrees with even some commonly supplied progressive interpretations and provides alternatives that she suggests are more faithful to keeping to the text and its authority.

For progressive Christians, this book can provide a way to reconcile a Bible that is less than perfect with divinely inspired authority of said writing. It is a progressive apologetic to a way of interpreting and using scripture that remains faithful to its intent and to two millennia of church history.

This book is also a fine resource for exploring biblical feminism and gender roles in the family, church, and society.

View all my reviews

A.D. The Bible Continues (TV - NBC) - "The Tomb Is Open" (1/12)

Observations

I came to this with VERY low expectations. So anything other than a complete and utter catastrophe (e.g., “The Bible” miniseries) would rate fairly decently. And it turns out that, at least this first episode, wasn’t that bad. It was quite watchable for the most part. It takes dramatic and narrative liberties, yet much of it remains within the realm of plausibility.

If this first episode is an indication of the approach to the entire series, I think it is quite viewable (without all the cringing and grinding of teeth that often accompany “Bible” dramas).

Motifs

I came away with three major motifs that I felt this episode wanted to establish for its audience:

1. That Jesus really, really, really died.
2. That Jesus’ crucifixion was a result of a confluence of many complicated political and religious factors, and that early Christians will continue to face issues in this realm.
3. The role of women in ancient society.

Jesus Really, Really Died

In regards to the first point, the dramatizations of the brutality of the crucifixion, the Romans coming to break the crucifieds’ legs, the spear thrust, the burial witnessed by multiple individuals, (I think it was) Caiaphas examining the cross, Cornelius (the Centurion) confirming Jesus’ death in front of Pilate and Caiaphas, are all designed to show dramatically that there is no way Jesus could have been merely unconscious.

Politics and Religion Cause Jesus’ Death

Caiaphas’ and Leah’s (his wife) primary motivation as dramatized is to preserve the Temple and its systems. They see nothing wrong with the sacrificial rituals, and the pilgrims who come to offer them. Their concern is to preserve the traditions and peace with Rome. They see Jesus’ teachings as challenging the very foundations of their society and culture, and by extension, a challenge to Rome. Thus Jesus is not merely a troubler of their religion and way of life, but an insurrectionist. Caiaphas will stop at nothing to do what he believes is right, even if that means bringing in Rome. There are hints that this will eventually cause the Jewish nation problems.

As a foil to Caiaphas and Leah, Joseph of Arimathea is presented as a high-ranking priest, perhaps in line to become High Priest someday. But his actions in regards to Jesus will become a problem if greater priestly authority is the subject. Joseph questions Caiaphas’ actions and Leah’s approval of Jesus’ execution. Joseph questions whether Jesus really was that dangerous as Caiaphas believes him to be. Thus two powerful members of the priestly family are shown to be coming to odds.

Pilate and his wife, Claudia, are the other party. Pilate represents the political and military might of Rome. His main concern is to maintain the peace at all costs. He intentionally (but quietly) pits Caiaphas and Joseph against one another because infighting among the Jews means less of them fighting the Romans. He does not want to involve himself with Jewish squabbles and intervenes only when his position is threatened.

The dream Claudia had about Jesus defines who she is. She believes there is far more to Jesus than Pilate thinks there is. She is shown as one who is spiritual, who believes in omens from dreams. Pilate, on the other hand, is strictly pragmatic.

The Role of Women

Women take a prominent place in the first episode. Mary, Jesus’ mother, is the only one who continues to believe in Jesus and comes out scolding the disciples for their lack of faith. Leah, Caiaphas’ wife, is outspoken about her opinions about Jesus and the right-ness of how Jesus was handled. Claudia directly challenges her husband, Pilate, until he threatens her with his right and authority as political ruler and husband. Mary Magdalene seems to almost believe Mary, the mother’s, belief that Jesus will rise again. She confronts Peter about his denial. Taken as a whole, the women, on whichever “side” they place themselves, are strong-willed and confident; they know what they believe.

Nonviolence

I don’t think this was presented as a major motif (but it could become one later). But I mention it because it was intentionally developed. When Peter is invited by his Zealot acquaintance, Boaz, to join him, Peter refuses because, in spite of Jesus’ death, Peter still believes in the nonviolent way of love that Jesus taught. Boaz proclaims freedom; Jesus taught love. Peter chooses love. Peter has realized that the way of the sword only leads to death. Does love lead to life? He’s uncertain, but that is what he will put his faith in.

Quibbles

My major quibble is with Mary, Jesus’ mother, fully confident that Jesus will rise in three days. It makes for interesting interpersonal drama, but I don’t see where this is supported in scripture.

My next major quibble is why nearly all modern dramatizations of Jesus’ crucifixion have to concentrate so much on its brutality? The gospels don’t really put down a whole lot of ink. Granted the original audience knew all too well what crucifixion involved, and perhaps we need images to show what happened. On the other hand, maybe the gospels weren’t so concerned with the process of crucifixion and more with that mere fact that it happened and Jesus died.

Next, the resurrection where Jesus (Or was this the angel that came down in what looked like a comet? I’m still a bit confused here. I think the rest still applies.) seems to be shown as a conquering warrior with a drawn sword. I understand how imagery from particularly Revelation contributes to this, but it seems to run counter to the message of nonviolence.

And were wives and women that outspoken? This may be the correct trajectory of the gospel, but seems like an anachronistic portrayal.

Finally, why do so many of the disciples (and other Jewish men) look like hippies?

Synopsis

This was typed while watching, so I’m sure there are mistakes and omissions.

Opens with Jesus' trial before the Sanhedrin. Charge of blasphemy. Transfer to Pilate. Pilate tries to dismiss charges. Gives in to Jewish religious leaders' demands. Sentences Jesus to crucifixion. Peter is in the crowd. Golgotha - crucifixion. Graphic pounding of spikes - three of them. Women near the cross. Raising and dropping of cross.

Temple scene - blood being poured out onto an wall. Passover. Jerusalem. Priests (incl. Joseph, Annas, Caiaphas) - discuss the need to maintain sacrificial system. Jesus was a direct challenge to the system. Discussion includes the high priest's wife (Leah). Assembly line sacrificial scene at the temple with pilgrims.

 

Back to Jesus on the cross. "My God, My God. Why have you forsaken me?"

 

To Pilate. Request to expedite the death of Jesus. A request by Joseph of Arimathea to take the body. Pilate orders Cornelius to finish Jesus off. He grants Joseph's request. Justification: as long as the Jews are fighting amongst themselves, they won't become a serious threat. Pilate's wife, Claudia. Speaks of her dream. Pilate dismisses her dream - can't govern based on a woman's dreams. Pilate tries to justify his decision by claiming that Jesus was a threat to Rome. Claudia states that killing Jesus won't be the end of him.

 

Back to the cross. "It is finished." Jesus dies. Mourning by some of the bystanders. Peter way of in the distance looking toward the hill. Darkness over the land, storm, and earthquake. Chaos. Tearing of the temple veil.

 

Jerusalem, then cross. Mourning women. Detachments of soldiers to break legs. Mary (mother) implores the soldier to not break Jesus' leg. Spear thrust. Joseph arrives to claim the body and offer a tomb.

 

Judas hangs himself. Interspersed with returning blood money and Jesus' burial. Closing of the tomb. Peter still looking from a long distance away. Mary and John return to a room and joined by Mary Magdalene. Mary Magdalene thinks Mary (mother) believes Jesus will rise from the dead.

 

Caiaphas residence. Children and wife. Joseph arrives. Joseph doesn't believe Jesus posed a threat. Caiaphas' wife believes Jesus was a threat. Joseph reveals that his tomb holds Jesus. Caiaphas refers to Isaiah's prophecy, alarmed at its implications. Argument between them. Caiaphas is sure Jesus' teachings will not survive.

 

Peter comes to John. The other disciples are not around. Mary Magdalene confronts Peter about his whereabouts during the ordeal. Peter asks if Jesus is dead. John confirms. Peter is resigned to all this being over. Mary Magdalene speaks of various foretellings of Jesus: Judas' betrayal, Peter's denial. She asks if Peter did or did not deny Jesus. Peter admits failure. Mary Magdalene repeats Mary's (mother) belief that Jesus will rise.

 

Jerusalem, next day. A Zealot (Boaz) draws a dagger and eyes Romans trying to provoke confrontation. Soldiers are distracted and walks away.

 

Caiaphas returns to Pilate. Pilate denies any hidden intent of causing friction amongst the Jews by allowing Jesus to be buried in the tomb of a prominent elder. Caiaphas claims prophecies to state that his followers will attempt to steal the body to claim a resurrection. He demands Roman guards for the tomb. Pilate wonders why this "nobody", a single individual is so much trouble for the Jews. He sends a detachment to keep the peace.

 

Back to Jerusalem. A couple of disciples of Jesus return to Jerusalem, are recognized by the Romans, and run. They are taken by a couple of Zealots (incl. Boaz) and explain who they are.

 

Back at the cross. Caiaphas(?) examines the cross and says, "He bled like a man." As he leaves, says to the Romans to remove the cross and break it up.

 

Peter and Boaz are old acquaintances. Boaz wants Peter and the rest to join the Zealots. Jesus preached love; the Zealots preach freedom. Boaz claims the Romans will come after each of them, one by one. Peter cannot join the Zealots or employ their means.

 

Pilate and his wife. Pilate is annoyed by Claudia's obsession with Jesus. Cornelius arrives and confirms that Jesus was dead. (Lots of dialogue in this and earlier scenes about confirmation of Jesus' death.) Pilate threatens Claudia to never again speak of Jesus or of dreams about him.

 

The disciples debate leaving Jerusalem. Some think they are being targeted. Others don't think they matter anymore and are being ignored. Mary (mother) enters to remind them of Jesus' prophecy that he will rise again. Duty to family is that they save their lives. Peter convinces them to wait three days.

 

Back to Caiaphas. A messenger arrives with news of Judas Iscariot. Caiaphas thinks (not yet hearing the Judas is dead) wants to use Judas to go after the other disciples. Now gets news that Judas has killed himself.

 

The tomb. Roman detachment of soldiers. Before dawn. Jerusalem. Disciples. John describes the trial, torture, and crucifixion to the other disciples. Caiaphas and wife - she commends him for his political savvy in maintaining peace, for using Pilate to achieve his ends. Flashback to trial. Pilate - flashback to "What is truth?" Peter - flashback to denial.

 

Earthquake. Tomb. An angel (comet-like) descends from the heavens to a sealed tomb that is starting to glow. Stone is rolled away. Jesus (or an angel, I lost track) is portrayed as a sword-wielding conqueror. The soldiers look away. Soldiers come to Caiaphas to report the event. Jesus is gone.

 

End of episode 1.