10<\/strong>. questioning one with another<\/em> ] St Mark alone mentions the perplexity which this language of their Lord occasioned to the Apostles. It was not the question of the resurrection generally, but of His<\/em> resurrection, and the death<\/em>, so abhorrent to their prejudices, that rendered it possible and necessary, which troubled them.<\/p>\n Mar 9:10<\/span><\/p>\n What the rising from the dead should mean.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n The Resurrection: its moral meanings<\/strong><\/p>\n Men heard them gladly, because they preached the resurrection; and because the truth was so purely human as well as purely Divine, it overran and mastered the world.<\/p>\n I. <\/strong>It seems to explain mans place is the creation. Mans position at the head of this creation places him on the threshold of a higher creation, in which the true sphere of his royalty lies. Such a world as this is too small, too poor, to be the home and the realm of his manhood; its true function is to train him for his royalty beyond. The risen man, by rising, enlarged quite infinitely the field of mans vision, activity, interest, and hope. The risen man explained every propulsive movement and yearning in mans nature-all his kinglike form and instinct: while the weakness, the poverty, the pain, the dread, belonged to his mortal and transitory sphere. Men heard the doctrine gladly, for they saw the true form and stature of the human in the man Christ Jesus; in the risen Christ Gods idea of humanity was for evermore unveiled.<\/p>\n II. <\/strong>It seemed to unfold the meaning of the mystery of matter-the mortal body in which the soul finds itself enshrined, or, as it is ceaselessly tempted to cry, entombed. The mystery of embodiment is the essential mystery which perplexes and bewilders the world. Men found it hard to see how there could be fair room for the flesh in any scheme of the world which should include the rule of a wise, righteous, and beneficent Lord. The gospel of Jesus and the resurrection flashes at once a flood of light on man and on his constitution. There is One, a man, bone of our bone, flesh of our flesh, who has borne the body through death, who took it again joyfully when death had slain its mortality, and bore it with Him to the spiritual and eternal world. The revelation of a glorified human body in the world behind the veil was the sanctification, not of the body only, but also of all material things on this side the veil; it was the sign from heaven that they were originally and essentially not of the devil, but of God. We cannot in these days measure the range of that emancipation-man freed from the tormenting thought that he bore a devilish part about with him, a body which could never be tamed to a true subjection, never trained to a Divine use.<\/p>\n III. <\/strong>It seemed to cast light on the still deeper and darker mystery of evil; it explained the meaning by unveiling the end of mans moral discipline. It proclaimed, as nothing else that we can conceive of could proclaim, Gods mastery over all that was dark and malign in nature and in life. Thenceforth man could fight the battle in hope, and was saved. It was the flashing out of a victorious force over sin and death, which lit up the world and made it radiant with hope, when the apostles preached through Jesus the resurrection from the dead. (J. B. Brown, B. A.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n Questionings concerning the resurrection set at rest<\/strong><\/p>\n I see the force of all this; I admit that the death and burial of a seed, while it suggests the bare possibility of man surviving that dissolution which we call death, by no means raises the presumption that it is so to the height of a proof. All we can say is that there are certain analogies for it from plant life, and other analogies against it from animal life; and who can tell which way it will ultimately turn? It is at this stage of the argument that the resurrection of Jesus Christ comes in to decide our wavering minds. Until Easter day we stand with the disciples, questioning what the resurrection of the dead should mean; but now we question no longer. In this respect we are as the contemporaries of Columbus were when he boldly set sail from Palos in August, 1492, and in less than three months set at rest the problem of ages. His return from the voyage to the Bahamas turned presumption into proof. It was no longer a question on which sides might be taken. In a sense it was now set at rest. It admitted no further argument. Those who continued obstinate, and held out for the old opinion, as some of Columbus contemporaries did, in spite of evidence to the contrary, could only be left to their own obstinacy. (J. B. Heard, M. A.<\/em>)<\/p>\n Verse 10<\/span>. And they kept that saying<\/B><\/I>] This verse is wanting in two MSS. and one of the Itala<\/I>.<\/P> <\/P> What the rising from the dead should mean.<\/B><\/I>] , When he should arise from the dead<\/I>, is the reading of D, six others, Syriac<\/I>, all the Persic, Vulgate<\/I>, all the Itala<\/I>, and Jerome<\/I>. Griesbach approves of it.<\/P> <\/P> There is nothing that answers to this verse either in Matthew or Luke.<\/P> <\/p>\n And they kept that saying with themselves<\/strong>,…. “They retained it in their own mind”, as the Persic version renders it; “they kept [it] close”, as Luke says, Lu 9:36<\/span>, among themselves, and acquainted no man with it: and which refers either to the whole of Christ’s charge, relating to the vision on the mount; or else only to what he said about his resurrection from the dead; and which they took notice of particularly, and laid hold upon, as the word will bear to be rendered; and so the Ethiopic version does render it, “and they observed his saying”; what he last said concerning the son of man’s rising from the dead;<\/p>\n questioning with one other what the rising from the dead should mean<\/strong>: they inquired, disputed, and reasoned with one another, what should be the meaning of such an expression: not that they were ignorant of the general resurrection of the dead; for this was the hope of Israel, and the general sense of the Jewish nation: but they did not know what he meant by his particular rising from the dead: whether he meant it in a literal sense, which supposed his death; and that though he had lately told them of, they knew not how to reconcile to the notions they had of a long and flourishing temporal kingdom of the Messiah; or whether he meant a and interest, in such manner as they expected.<\/p>\n They kept the saying <\/B> ( <\/SPAN><\/span>) to themselves as Jesus had directed, but<\/P> questioning among themselves <\/B> ( <\/SPAN><\/span>). Now they notice his allusion to rising from the dead which had escaped them before (Mr 8:31<\/span>). <\/P> <\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n 1) “And they kept that saying with themselves,”<\/strong> (kai ton legon ekratesan pros heautous) “And they kept in confidence, held or guarded the word, (of what had happened in the mountain) to themselves,” among the three of them, in secret.<\/p>\n 2) “Questioning one with another,”<\/strong> (suzetountes) “Debating repeatedly among themselves,” when to themselves, away from the other of the twelve, to keep faith with the charge of Jesus to them, “to tell no man till His resurrection.<\/p>\n 3) “What the rising from the dead should mean.”<\/strong> (ti estin to ek nekron anastenai) “What is in the meaning of His promise to rise out of the dead,” Deu 29:29<\/span>. Would it be real? And if so, what would the consequence be?<\/p>\n (10) And they kept that saying with themselves.<\/strong>We again note what we may describe as a characteristic touch, analysing the mental condition of the disciples in relation to their Masters teaching.<\/p>\n 10<\/strong>. <\/strong> Should mean <\/em> Will he literally die, or is it a figure of speech? If figurative, what does it mean? If real, why should it take place, and what will become of us? Will he truly rise again? What if he should not? What then becomes of his past miracles and teachings? And how are we to explain this dazzling transfiguration? It is wonderful how completely the crucifixion of Jesus swept from the disciples’ minds all hope of his resurrection, so that they could scarce believe it when it took place. See notes on Mar 16:10-11<\/span>.<\/p>\n ‘And they kept the saying, questioning among themselves what the rising again from the dead should mean.’<\/p>\n So they kept what they had seen to themselves, and when alone discussed what exactly Jesus had meant when He spoke of rising again from the dead, and what it could possibly mean. But they no doubt thought that hopefully it was a long time ahead.<\/p>\n Mar 9:10<\/span><\/em><\/strong>. <\/strong>With themselves,<\/em><\/strong><\/strong> To themselves. And they kept the matter secret; yet they questioned, <\/em>or debated, <\/em>&c. Heylin. Dr. Doddridge renders it, And they laid hold on that word, disputing among themselves, <\/em>&c. See Mat 9:25<\/span>; Mat 14:3<\/span>. Mar 12:12<\/span> and Rev 20:2<\/span>. Sir David Dalrymple observes, that it should not be here, “what the <\/em>rising of the dead should mean,”for in those days that tenet was received; but “what this <\/em>resurrection signified;”what was meant bythis rising of the Son of man from the dead. Being much surprised at the sudden departure of Elias, and of their Master’s ordering them to keep this transaction a secret, the disciples had no sooner finished their dispute about what the rising from the dead should mean, than, addressing themselves to Jesus, theyproposed this doubt, Mar 9:11<\/span>. “Since Elias is so soon dismissed, and since thou hast ordered us to keep his appearance a secret, how come the scribes to teach on all occasions that Elias must appear, before the Messiah erects his kingdom?” Supposing that Elias was to have an active hand in modelling and settling the kingdom, they never doubted that he would have abode awhile on earth; and knowing that the scribes affirmed openly that Elias was to appear, they could see no reason for concealing the thing. That this is the connection of the disciples’ question is plain from Mat 17:9-10<\/span>. Jesus not only acknowledged the necessity of Elias’s coming before the Messiah according to Malachi’s prediction; but he assured his disciples, that he was already come; and described the treatment that he had already met with from the nation in such a manner as to make them understand that he spake of John the Baptist, Mar 9:12-13<\/span> and Mat 17:13<\/span>. At the same time he told them, that though the Baptist’s ministry was excellently calculated for producing all the effects ascribed to it by the prophets, they needed not be surprised to find, that it had not had all the success which might have been expected from it, and that the Baptist had met with much opposition and persecution, since both the person and preaching of the Messiah himself was to meet with the same treatment. Our Saviour, in the 12th verse, alludes to Mal 4:6<\/span> where see the note. What is meant by the restoring of all things, <\/em>is shewn by the angel, Luk 1:16-17<\/span> and that this was the true restoration of all things, to be accomplished by Elias, is evident from the LXX, who, in translating the original passage, make use of the word found here in the Evangelists, , Reducet Cor, He will restore the heart. <\/em>Nevertheless, by the restoration of all things, <\/em>the Jews seem to have understood the revival of the kingdom of David in their nation, to be accomplished by the assistance of Elias. Hence the Apostles’ question to Jesus before his ascension into heaven, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore<\/em> the kingdom to Israel? <\/em>Act 1:6<\/span>. Some render the 12th and 13th verses thus:ver. 12. It is true, Elias is to come first, to rectify all things; and it is written, &c. <\/em>Mar 9:13<\/span>.Elias is indeed come as it is written of him; and they have done unto him whatsoever they listed, <\/em>Dr. Heylin renders the 12th verse, He answered, it is true that Elias must first come, and set all things to right; and that he must suffer much, and be despised, as it is also written concerning the Son of man. <\/em>See Wetstein. <\/p>\n 10 And they kept that saying with themselves, questioning one with another what the rising from the dead should mean. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n Ver. 10. And they kept that saying<\/strong> ] With much ado they kept it (as the word imports), for the rest of the disciples were very inquisitive, likely, what was said and done in the mount. A friend that can both keep counsel and give counsel is worth his weight in gold. <\/p>\n 10. <\/strong> <\/strong> . <\/strong> <\/strong> . <\/strong> <\/strong> .<\/strong> ] Not, ‘ they kept the command<\/em> :’ for <\/strong> .<\/strong> explains it to mean kept secret the saying,<\/strong> as in ref. Dan.<\/p>\n <\/strong> . <\/strong> <\/strong> .<\/strong> does not refer to the Resurrection generally<\/em> , for it was an article of Jewish belief, and connected with the times of the Messiah; but to His Resurrection as connected with His Death; the whole<\/em> was enigmatical to them.<\/p>\n Mar 9:10<\/span> . , they kept the word; i.e.<\/em> , if the verb be taken in the sense of Mar 7:3-4<\/span> ; Mar 7:8<\/span> , gave heed to the Master’s prohibition of speech concerning what had just happened, at least till after the resurrection strictly complied with His wish. If we connect with ., the meaning will be: they kept the saying to (with) themselves (A. V [73] ), or rather, taking in the sense of “thing,” they kept the matter<\/em> what had happened to themselves: did not speak about it. The sense is the same in effect, but the latter is perhaps the better connection of words, as if . were intended to go with it would more naturally have come after it. , etc.: the reference to the resurrection in the prohibition of the Master puzzled and troubled the three disciples: resurrection His own, and soon, in our time; but that implies death<\/em> ; whereof, indeed, He lately spoke to us, but how hard to receive! Peter’s resistance, sympathised with by his brethren, not yet overcome. They speak of it to one another, though not again to the Master.<\/p>\n [73] Authorised Version.<\/p>\n kept = laid hold of and kept. <\/p>\n with = to. Greek. pros. App-104. <\/p>\n should mean = is: i.e. “What is the rising from among [other] dead [people]? “<\/p>\n 10. . . .] Not, they kept the command:-for . explains it to mean kept secret the saying, as in ref. Dan.<\/p>\n . . does not refer to the Resurrection generally, for it was an article of Jewish belief, and connected with the times of the Messiah;-but to His Resurrection as connected with His Death; the whole was enigmatical to them.<\/p>\n Mar 9:10. , they laid hold of) They received with attention, and did not treat with neglect.- , what is) They did not so much feel difficulty respecting the thesis [the position or conclusion], as they did respecting the hypothesis [the foundation or assumption on which the conclusion was made to rest]. [In fact, to those who had no idea that Christ must die, any discourse concerning His resurrection seemed out of place.-V. g.]<\/p>\n they: Gen 37:11, Luk 2:50, Luk 2:51, Luk 24:7, Luk 24:8, Joh 16:17-19 <\/p>\n what: Mar 9:32, Mat 16:22, Luk 18:33, Luk 18:34, Luk 24:25-27, Joh 2:19-22, Joh 12:16, Joh 12:33, Joh 12:34, Joh 16:29, Joh 16:30, Act 17:18 <\/p>\n Reciprocal: Mat 16:7 – they Mat 17:9 – Jesus Mat 26:32 – I am Mar 16:6 – he is risen Luk 9:36 – And they Luk 9:45 – General Luk 24:6 – remember Joh 20:9 – they Act 17:20 – what<\/p>\n THE RISING OF THE DEAD<\/p>\n Questioning one with another what the rising from the dead should mean.<\/p>\n Mar 9:10<\/p>\n The resurrection from the dead was not realised by even the very chiefest of the Apostles. Their difficulty was substantially the same with that which was afterwards felt by some of the Corinthian Christians, and to a certain extent is now felt by many and many a Christian of our own days. The difficulty lies centred, not in the conception of a continued existence after death, but in the conception of a bodily existence when our present bodily existencewhich observe, makes up the sum total of all that we know of such a form of existencehas come utterly to an end.<\/p>\n I. The teaching of Scripture.In respect of all such questions even Scripture is either silent or reserved. Holy Scripture mentions only the blessed facts of the future, but gives no indication of the manner it which they will take place. It teaches us plainly and clearly that we shall rise again with our own bodies; and it teaches us this by the great object-lesson that is ministered by Gods book of Nature, by the seed that is placed in the earth, and the plant that rises out of it. This resurrection parable shows:<\/p>\n (a) That the perishing of our mortal body is like the perishing of the grain of corn that is put into the earth: it sets free the germ that is designed to become the body of the future. So with our mortal bodies. No eye can ever see it; but we cannot doubt that it is here, in the body of each one of us, and that death will set it free to become, how, we know not, the body of glory or the body of shame.<\/p>\n (b) That as the plant differs from the seed from which it sprang, so widely will the body that is to be differ from the earthly body.<\/p>\n But on these deep mysteries we do not presume to speculate. All that it is right for to know, we know. We shall all be changed, but we shall all be ourselves.<\/p>\n II. The appeal to fact and truth.The doctrine of the resurrection of the body is easy when viewed in connection with the Resurrection of the Lord, We here appeal to no parable; we appeal to a factthe Resurrection of Christ; and to a truththat Christ is the firstfruits of them that slept.<\/p>\n Bishop Ellicott.<\/p>\n Illustration<\/p>\n For Christians the belief in another life rests on the Resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. He came to show man what God is, but also to show what man himself is, and should be, and shall be. He is spoken of as the firstfruits of the dead, which means that all mankind shall rise some day as He rose. Further, the power which raised Him will raise us, and the change which passed over His body is the change which will pass over ours. St. Paul rests his teaching of the life of the world to come very plainly on the actual fact of our Lords Resurrection, which he describes in a very solemn way as having been specially received by him. Furthermore, we are to believe, not merely in the immortality of the soul, but in the resurrection of the body. We do not regard our bodies as evil things to be thrown off some day as a snake casts its slough, but as destined to share in our future. As He ascended with our whole nature to heaven, so our whole nature, body, soul, and spirit is to be redeemed. The spirit of which we always think as associated with our body is not in that other world to be left naked, but to be clothed upon, to have, as it were, a dwelling-place, a body, which body, though in wholly changed condition, will yet have some mysterious relation to the bodies which we have now.<\/p>\n 0<\/p>\n The restriction Jesus placed on them which was connected with the resurrection confused the apostles. They discussed the subject among themselves and then decided to ask Jesus a question.<\/p>\n Mar 9:10. And they kept the saying. Probably this particular saying about the resurrection as the limit of their silence about what they had seen on the mount. Obedience to the command of Mar 9:9, is assumed in the account of Matthew, and asserted in that of Luke, and is of course implied here.<\/p>\n Questioning among themselves, etc. The perplexity was about this Resurrection, What is the shall have risen again from the dead, would be a literal rendering. However much they believed in a general resurrection, it was difficult for them to conceive of a resurrection after which they could tell of these things.<\/p>\n The unexampled fact, now the basis of our faith in a Living Saviour, could not be understood in advance. They doubtless continued wondering when and how the time would come when they could speak. Mark derived his exact information from Peter, who also alludes to this event in his second Epistle.<\/p>\n Verse 10 <\/p>\n Questioning, &c. It seems that they did not very distinctly understand, after all, what Jesus had disclosed to them in Mark 8:31.<\/p>\n 9:10 And they {d} kept that saying with themselves, {e} questioning one with another what the rising from the dead should mean.<\/p>\n (d) Though just barely as it were.<\/p>\n (e) They did not question together concerning the general resurrection, which will be in the latter day, but they did not understand what he meant when he spoke of his own special resurrection.<\/p>\n The Old Testament taught a resurrection of the dead (Psalms 16; Isa 26:19; Dan 12:2; cf. Joh 11:24), but the disciples could not harmonize that revelation with Jesus’ statement that He would rise three days after He died (Mar 8:31). The whole idea of Messiah dying was incomprehensible to them.<\/p>\n And they kept that saying with themselves, questioning one with another what the rising from the dead should mean. 10. questioning one with another ] St Mark alone mentions the perplexity which this language of their Lord occasioned to the Apostles. It was not the question of the resurrection generally, but of His resurrection, and … Continue reading “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Mark 9:10”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-24535","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24535","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=24535"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24535\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=24535"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=24535"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=24535"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Greek Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Church Pulpit Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"