Mark 10:35-45

This passage is found in the Revised Common Lectionary Year B (Most recently Oct 20, 2024)

Summary:  Don't get too lost in the Greek in this week's passage. The point is that two key disciples are asking really silly questions.  It proves Jesus an opportunity to say to them directly what he has been suggesting to them all along:  While they do not need to be crucified, to be a follower of Jesus means following him to the cross, to the suffering of the world, to the surrender of our will and to the death of sinner.  I focus a fair amount on the word "ransom," hopefully opening a different way of thinking about this.

ποτηριον ("poterion" (pottery!), meaning "cup", 10:38)  There are three cups in Mark's Gospel!  Can you name them?  The first is when Jesus says the one giving a glass of cold water will not lose their reward (9:41).  The second is here.  The third is the communion cup.  The cup which Jesus refers to here is following Christ.  This seems to be a good sermon, something like:  The first cup of discipleship is doing small things for others; the second cup is living/giving of our whole life; the third is receiving communion with Christ, as he comes to forgive us.  As Luther says in the small catechism: All this he did that I may be his own.

βαπτίζομαι vs  βαπτισθηαι ("baptize", 10:38)  I want to point out a distinction in verb tenses here.  When Jesus refers to the baptism of the disciples, he uses the aorist tense, suggesting a one-time event.  When Jesus refers to his own baptism, he uses the present tense, suggesting an on-going and present event.  Jesus literally says, "which I am being baptized right now"; he is in the midst of his baptism as he begins his long road to the cross.  Our Baptism may be a one time event, but living out of our baptism is an on-going process.

κατακυριευουσιν ("literally over-lord", 10:42)  Just a little note for preachers personally rather than for a sermon.  This verb shows up rarely in the New Testament, but it does show up in 1 Peter 5:3, as an admonishment to pastors not to Lord over their power!

οι δοκουντες ("the ones who think", 10:42)  Jesus does not say the rulers actually rule.  He says the think or seem.  

[Really geeky thought: For those paying a bit more attention, this is the same word 'seem' (δοκεω) that was used to describe a group of chief early heretics:  the Docetics, who said that Jesus only "seemed" to die.)

δουλος ("servant" or "slave", 10:44) This word appears repeatedly in the New Testament as a model for Christian life and service.  As the Thayer Greek Lexicon reminds us, δουλος του χριστου (servants of Christ) are those whose service is used by Christ in extending and advancing his cause among [others]:  used of apostles, Rom. 1:1; Gal. 1:10; Phil. 1:1; 2 Tim. 2:24; Titus 1:1; James 1:1; 2 Pet. 1:1; of other preachers and teachers of the gospel, Col. 4:12; 2 Tim. 2:24; Jude 1:1; of the true worshipers of Christ.
Do we articulate, model and challenge our people enough to adopt a posture of servant-hood?

λυτρον ("redemption", 10:45).  This word is a loaded term.  It is often suggested that Jesus was the ransom whose death serves as the payment rendered for our sins, thus freeing us from this deserved punishment.  Both Exodus 21:30, 30:12 convey this sense of λυτρον.  I am not going to argue here against substitutionary atonement.   

However, the Old Testament also puts forward another sense of λυτρον that I think works just as well, if not better, in this case.  In Numbers 3, there is the (for most of us) relatively unknown story of the consecration of the Levites to the priesthood and how they are offered as a redemption (λυτρον).  A surprisingly helpful commentary summarized the logic:

"...when God slew the first born of man and beast among the Egyptians, he consecrated the first-born of Israel to himself as a memorial of the deliverance.  First-born animals were to be sacrificed to the Lord, but first-born sons were to be redeemed by the substitution of a payment of money.  Now the Levites are taken by the Lord as the redemption of all the first-born males in Israel, and their very office becomes a perpetual sign of Israel's deliverance.  The ministry of the Levites proclaimed to Israel the fact that all belong to the Lord, because he has delivered them.  (75, Mays; 1963 Layman's Bible Commentary.")

In short, in the consecration of the Levites, God turns the sacrificial system on its head.  God does not want sacrifices of first-born humans (and never did), rather, God wants the Levites to take the place of the first-born, not for death, but for service to God. 
I am still fleshing this out, but I think you can make the argument that "ransom" can be utilized in a way where Jesus frees us to serve God without needing God to be angry with Jesus.

Perhaps it is something like this:  Jesus is put forward as a ransom, but not simply for death, but for service to God.  What God wants - in the ransom sense - is not the death of Jesus, but the life, the service (which in his case, will include death).  As we are baptized into Jesus' death and drink his cup, we too are put forward, not as a substitute punishment, but as something precious to God, namely, servants of God, becoming the new priesthood, in fact, a very proclamation that the Lord has delivered us.  

Mark 10:17-31

This passage is found in the Narrative Lectionary Year 2
This passage is found in the Revised Common Lectionary Year B after Pentecost (Most recently October 13, 2024)

Summary:  "Clouded up" -- That is literally the words used to describe the rich young man's reaction to Jesus.  Jesus loves the man, but the man's love of his possessions obscure his vision so greatly, he cannot even embrace the love of God!  We may not be able to buy our way into heaven but today's passage suggests we can buy our way out of heaven!

Some words that might open preaching possibilities:

[added 2024] προσδραμὼν ("run" or "exert", form of προστρέχω; 10.17) The man is running to Jesus.  This can be seen in a positive light -- the man is eager to meet Jesus.  It can also be seen as "busy man", the person always moving, always climbing, yet not getting anywhere.

ζωην αιωνουν ("life eternal"; zoo of the eons, literally; 10.17 and 30):  It is interesting that eternal life enters into Mark's Gospel by way of a non-disciple (and practicing Jew).  Obviously this appears in John's Gospel numerous times, but makes a cameo or two in the other Gospels as well.  Perhaps one of the great misnomers of Christian thinking is that eternal life only begins after our physical death.  The love and fellowship of Jesus was available here, on earth, for the man (see note below).

κληρονoησω ("inherit"; 10:17):  The man may not understand that eternal life is a gift, but he does understand one thing: it is going to take a death to bring about life -- you only get the inheritance when someone dies!

αποστερεω ("defraud"; 10:19)  The NET Bible suggests Jesus inserts this because of the OT's injunctions about this, for example, Deut 24:14.  I would maintain that the word defraud is not accidental, but a great insight into the text. Jesus adds this commandment because he knows the rich young man is guilty of it -- the 11th commandment!  As my internship pastor preached on this passage -- what is the commandment that finally trips you or me up??  I don't murder...but what finally brings me to my knees in confession?

αγαπαω ("love"; 10.21)  This word means real, genuine, nearly, if not truly, divine love.  This man is the first one whom Jesus loves in the whole Gospel of Mark!  How sad then that the man cannot love Jesus back nor follow him!

κτημα ("possessions"; 10:22)  Our American context is very different than ancient Greece, where a very small number owned most things.  Yes, yes, the rich grow richer, but the average American still has enough possessions and toys at their disposal to last them for years.  We can make this passage about demonizing the truly wealthy, or realize the nature of our own possessions that cloud our own vision.  Side note:  The NET Bible

στυγναζω ("sad" or "cloud up"; 10.23):  The word for "sad" here is a less common Greek word, but it means gloomy, or clouded over, like the sky.  The man's love of possessions cloud up his vision.

τεκνα ("children", 10.24). Right after Jesus has told them they must accept the kingdom as a child, he calls them children.  Perhaps a sign of love?  Perhaps a call to humility?  I think it is fair to say that, at least within Mark's Gospel, the driving point is that the only way into the Kingdom is to realize we cannot get there out of our own power, as a child!

Jesus can both εμβλεπω (in-look)  (vs. 21, 27) and περιβλεπω (around-look) (vs. 23).  In short, Jesus has insight (literally) and around sight (literally).  Jesus can both look into people but also take a step back and look at the situation.  A rare skill.

καμηλον ("camel", 10.25)  The word "camel" here has been subject to all sorts of translation attempts to soften the meaning.  Some scribes changed the word to "rope"! (similarly spelled in Greek); others have said this sequence refers to a gate in Jerusalem.  No!  Jesus is trying to say that a) our wealth blocks us from God and b) we ain't getting into heaven our own merit.  Jesus is driving us to ask "How is this possible!"

[added in 2024] πλούσιον ("rich", 10.25)  In Greek, the word literally reads "rich."  We can't do in English what can be done here in Greek, namely, make a singular noun out of an adjective.  We can create a word like "the rich" to mean lots of people who are rich, but we cannot simply say "I don't like rich" and mean "I don't like that one individual who is rich."  Why does this matter?  Because Jesus does not say, as the NIV translates it as "someone who is rich."  He says "rich" as a singular noun.  What is at stake?  The truth is that when we are no longer a someone or somebody who is rich, but we are entirely identifiable by our possessions and wealth, then we have a problem with God's Kingdom!  We define ourselves and others by their wealth.  I don't think that Jesus sees us this way.  Still contemplating...

Some grammar tid-bits worth considering:

Subjunctive mood:
The subjunctive mood, which Greek uses to indicate various hypothetical situations, is difficult to translate. In 10.17 we find the filled-with-subjunctive phrase "What must I do to inherit eternal life?"  The Greek does not use the word "must" but simply uses the subjunctive mood. Luther's German translation, "What should I do" is probably a better understanding of what is meant here.

Imperfect tense:
The imperfect tense suggests repeated action.  In 10.17 The rich young man does not "ask" but in fact "asks," repeatedly -- the imperfect tense is used.  He really wants to know!

Future as perfect tense?
In 10.30, Jesus talks about the age "that is coming."  It is not "the age that came" or the "age that will come" or even "the age to come" but "the age that is coming."  Greek, like English, can use the present to suggest an indeterminate future.  "Coming" can mean "on the way" or "coming soon."  There is an ambiguity.  So the question is, does the eternal life age arrive after we die or while we live?  It seems that Jesus is referring to a pre-natural death event...but perhaps one that requires our spiritual death and resurrection.

It is also worth noting that Jesus says in that the present age the will receive things.  Again, all of the Gospels indicate that things will be made new/reversed/restored in their fullness in the age to come, but Jesus promises that the Kingdom breaks into this age as well.

Mark 10:2-16

This passage occurs in the Revised Common Lectionary, Year B (Most recently Oct 6, 2024).

Summary:  This is a very difficult passage, causing shame for many and perhaps even smugness for some.  Many commentaries have been written about it.  I'd like to focus on a few Greek words, especially some "απο" words, that might provide a framework for considering divorce and preaching about it.  Again, very tough because everyone brings so much personal experience and heartache on this topic.
 
Side comment:  Another helping tool for looking at these passages is to compare the words of Jesus in Matthew 19 and Luke 16 (if not 1 Cor 7).

πειραζοντες ("test or tempt", from πειραζω, 10:2)  We see this come up often in the Gospels, where the Pharisees (or some other group) are trying to test Jesus.  This case is a bit different.  John the Baptist was imprisoned because he spoke out against the marriage practices of Herod.  The Pharisees questions are intended to have Jesus imprisoned, if not killed.  Our society has great culture wars going on now about marriage; perhaps each one of us will face persecution for our views.  Lastly, if we wonder why Jesus is so harsh in his words, it is because the Pharisees are inviting him to his death.

αποστατιον ("divorce", 10:4)  This word "explodes" off the page if you look at it in the Bible or in the Greek language.  First, in Greek, this word meant leave one's station ("απο" means away; just read the letters in the word: a-p-o-s-t-a-t-i-o-n!).  It meant a military defection from your captain, the one ahead of you in rank.  Moses gave permission to write a certificate of defection!!  What if we started calling divorce defection??  Ouch.

Jesus actually changes the law here.  If you look up the word, you are taken to Deuteronomy 24:1, where a man is given permission to kick out his wife if she doesn't please him.  Jesus today is calling men to a greater level of faithfulness than previous generations ever did; men cannot simply leave their wives because they don't please them!  Jesus also even admits the reality that women might leave their husbands on their own accord, something unthinkable.  In this way, Jesus alters the law (a radical concept), even enfranchising women, but finally asks for greater commitment.  (Note however, that even though the Bible's teaching divorce shifts over time, the teaching on marriage remains the same).

απολυω ("free"; 10:4)  This word can mean "release" or even finally "divorce" but it is worth looking simply at what the word means:  to set free.  As a pastor, I have seen this, where divorce is a freeing of someone from an abusive and unfaithful relationship plagued by addiction and anger. 

So here is the million dollar question:  When is the divorce "αποστατιον", namely, a defection?  And when is it a απολυω, a freeing?

σκηλροκαρδια ("hardness of hearts"; 10:5)  The word here contains the root "σκηλρος" which means hardness -- an awful disease is "multiple sclerosis", the hardening of certain body parts until finally the person cannot move.  In a downward spiraling relationship, there is a hardening of the heart, until finally the person cannot love.  As Christians, we believe that God creates new hearts (Psalm 51); however, Jesus admits (see also Matt 19) that certain conditions, like adultery, grow out of, but also create such a hard heart, that the two are permitted not to be yoked any more.  I would add abuse and addiction, both forms of adultery, you could argue, to this list of permissible divorces.

αρχη ("beginning"; 10:6)  Jesus affirms that marriage is a long-long, committed relationship between a man and a woman, grounded in creation and the particular creation accounts we have in the Bible.  This means that marriage has a few purposes:  to offer companionship, to create new families and bring a couple into full intimacy, even union.  I think one could further argue that marriage is a tool of God's sanctification in us, in that we discover our sinfulness very clearly, need forgiveness and become of great use to God through the love given to us by our spouse.  Jesus returns the focus to God's goodness and intentions for marriage.

My haunch:  The Christian church needs to spend a great deal of time and teaching on what marriage truly is and what it is for.

PS  κατευλογεω means to bless -- literally a form of "good speaking."  What is interesting is that Jesus' blessing, like just about every biblical blessing, includes a laying on of hands.  To bless someone is not an abstraction, but a tangible entity.  When we bless a union, we do not simply offer words, but we should also lay on hands!

Mark 9:38-50

This passage occurs in the Revised Common Lectionary (RCL), year B (Mark/John), most recently September 29, 2024.  I have another post looking at this passage, focusing on hell.

Summary:  This passage does seem like two different smaller passages, but perhaps they are linked in that they both deal with how interact with other people's faith.  In a day of partisan and even tribal politics if not religion, this passage can serve a powerful reminder of the need to be generous to other people's faith.  If someone else is serving other people; if someone else is following Jesus, then they are on our team!

Key words
τινα ("someone", 9:38)  The translations generally say "someone" or "a man" was trying to cast out demons. However, the Greek is a bit more vague. It simply is "tina" which can mean, someone, something, any, certain, a -- generally an indefinite marker.  In other words, the disciples have dehumanized their opponents!  The disciples did not stop to get the person's name or know his story!

εκωλυομεν (imperfect form of κωλυω, meaning "prevent", 9:38; 9:39)  The tense of this verb is imperfect, indicating on-going action:  "we continued to stop" or "we kept preventing." (The verb ηκολουθει "follow" is also in the imperfect tense).  The disciples are really putting effort into stopping this man.

[[Greek grammar: One thing worth noting is that the participle for cast out is in the present tense. In translation though, its tense is governed by the finite verb, in this case "we saw" which is in the aorist. So the action of the casting out is present relative to the action of seeing.]]

μη κωλυετε ("no longer hinder", 9:39) Another lesson on Greek imperatives; the "μη" + present imperative construction suggests that the person was doing this action already (as in "do not be afraid" implies that the person was already afraid]. To translate then, "No longer hinder..."

υμιν ("us", 9:38)  The pronoun is worth noting here: "υμιν" -- "not following us"!  It is not about following Jesus, but about following the disciples.  This can be a big trap for churches and denominations, worrying more about following us than about following Jesus!  We are called not to hinder the faith of others and there are times when other people can believe things that are false or incredibly unhelpful.  However, we must always ask ourselves -- not whether they have the doctrine all right -- but if they are following Jesus.

Note:  I get it that this is complicated.  Doctrine helps us make sure that when I say "I am following Jesus" that what we mean by "following" and who we mean by "Jesus" bear a) correlation to Scripture and b) have a common ground.  Some days, I honestly wonder if my co-religionists are actually my co-religionists.  

But I have also realized over time that most doctrinal disputes are really reflections of culture cloaked in fancy language.  People's different individual and communal experiences with life and other humans profoundly shapes their understanding and imagination around God.  To the extent this is true, this means that if I disagree with someone theologically, the issue is unlikely simply what books I've read, but what kind of home, neighborhood and church I grew up in.  To that extent then, when I begin to say that a certain Christian isn't a true Christian, I may simply be saying -- their economic, political and social background provides them with lenses on Scripture that produce a vastly different image of Jesus than my own.

κακαλογεω ("renounced", 9:39) The word for "speak against" is a great one: κακαλογεω, from κακα (bad) and λεγω (speak).  The word is more akin to blaspheme/renounce than simply slander.  I wonder how much time we spend as Christians κακαλογεω-ing each other!

σκωληξ ("worm"; 9:48)  The use of a worm here might seem like simply part of the grand hyperbole that fills this entire section of Scripture.  However, there is an old testament reference to a worm that eats the flesh of the humans that have been judged - the last verse of Isaiah.  While this is gruesome and terrifying, it sheds light on what Jesus is doing here -- promising that the vision of Isaiah will come to pass.  And this is a beautiful thing, for the center of this vision is not worms, but lions and lambs.  Remember -- Biblical Hebrew makes it main point in the middle, not at the end!!

εχετε εν εαυτοις αλα, και ειρηνευετε εν αλλήλοις (9:50):  Have salt in yourself and have peace among yourselves.  There is a bit of a parallel structure here:  εν εαυτοις and εν αλλήλοις; in yourself; in each other.  The second time the word εν is used it almost has to be translated as "among."  This doesn't change the meaning, I just wanted to show you how pithy Jesus made this ;-)  But here is the deal, salt by itself is fairly useless, in fact, it is caustic.  When it is used in proper doses with other things, it can be incredibly useful and flavorful.  Don't be a big salt block by yourself :-)  Share the love!

Some other little tid bits that one day I may work into a more coherent post:

9:43 The word for life (ζωη) has an article before it: "The life."  Interestingly Jesus here equates "the life" with "the kingdom of God."

9:39 Here we have a little play on words. The word for "deed of power/wonder" is "dynamis." The word for "able" is "dynamai" -- same root. If you do power in Jesus name, you do not have the power to speak evily of him.

9:41 The Greek text as "give a cup of water in name." What is missing? Jesus! It should read "name of Jesus" or "name of mine," which a good number of manuscripts have, including the classic case where editors were scribbling out each other's work. I think it is implied though!

9:41 Here we have the word from early in the call to discipleship: "Lose your life" (apollu-mi).

9:42 Both 9:41 and 9:42 describe to conditional events, namely, what happens to non-believers (or believers) based on their interaction with believers. Both cases are the "hos an" + subjunctive construction.

9:47 There are some fun words in here in these verses (skandaliz-oo; apokopt-oo) worth noting in this one is that Jesus returns to the exorcism and tells them that they should "cast out" (exball-oo) their own eyes...

Mark 9:30-37

This passage is found in the Revised Common Lectionary Year B (Most recently: Sept 22, 2024) 
 
Summary:  "Serving others" sounds like an exciting idea in high school - volunteering is "in" these days.  But serving others is actually quite difficult.  Jesus even ups the ante by commanding that we should be servant to all!  Here is what I find beautiful and hopeful in this passage:  Jesus follows this command to serve everyone by touching one particular person.  A reminder that service to world means service to individuals, often the very individuals the world forgets.

Key Words:
διακονος:  ("servant", 9:35)  The meaning of this word has come under great fire in the last generation.  Some background:  In post-Vatican II Catholicism and post-Holocaust Protestantism, there reemerged a strong desire and need for the church to serve the needy. (Not that this had ever gone away totally!)  This lead to surge in the interest of what it meant to "serve" under various forms, offices and theology related to "διακονος."  διακονος came into English as "deacon"; this office, often started or renewed in Western churches, came to embody the need for the church to serve the poor, especially those outside of its walls.  Often this idea of serving others became discussed and conceived of as a ministry born of the Word, perhaps sustained by the Word, but not tied to proclamation of the Word.  A generation or two later, some, including the previous Pope, have become concerned that we have replaced the ministry of the Word with charity.  If you research "Collins diakonia" you can read all about it.  Within the Lutheran context a rather pointed and academic article is here: http://www.ctsfw.net/media/pdfs/donfriedministry.pdf

The word διακονος does have a variety of meanings, from "waiter" as in someone who waits on tables, but also someone who acts as an agent on behalf of someone.  In Mark's Gospel the word describes angels and women who attend to Jesus.  In this way, Mark's usage attests to the idea of service to the needy, but the service always involves Jesus.

Without being overly argumentative, you can assert this: διακονος did not simply mean service to the poor but also service on behalf of Christ.  This week's passage shows a beautiful example of what διακονος might entail:  bringing the least in society to the arms of Jesus.  I think this is a challenge for any congregation and ministry -- how do we serve the needy, not just as a service agency, but in a way that leads them to Christ's embrace?

παιδιον ("child", 9:36, 37)  The word here can mean "kid" but can also mean "child" (as in my kid) or "slave."  In our culture, we have seen this passage almost exclusively in light of the idea of "my child," a precious offspring of someone.  We live in the era of "intense parenting" in which parents devote great resources to raising their children, often in smaller families.  However, the social context of the Gospels ought not to be lost -- children did not have great social status and were not the focus of parental energy.  In this sense, Jesus is acting toward the "least", namely, the people without voice, vote, income or status.

εναγκαλισμενος ("hug", 9:36 and 10:16)  This word is only used twice in the whole New Testament, both times in Mark!, when Jesus takes children into his arm.  This is also a reminder of what it means to welcome someone in the name of Christ, to bring them close enough that you can see their beauty, but also their warts, stinky breath and dirty fingernails.

Less important, but interesting

ηγνοουν ("be unaware", from αγνοεω, 9:31)  This word is literally: agnoeoo, which comes into English as "agnostic."  The disciples were agnostic toward the Word.  A reminder that Jesus words about death and resurrection have always been puzzling.

Grammar:  "αν"
This word is nearly impossible to translate.  It sort of means "if" but not really.  It is best just to learn all the ways in which it is used (ie, consult a grammar aid when you come to it).  In verse 37, it is used with ος, which always gets translated "Whoever."  This might not make sense, but this combination is a bit like:  "Who, who?,..." to make a "whoever."

Mark 8:27-38 (Confession of Faith)

Over time I've worked on three posts related to this passage.
- First, a smattering of Greek tid-bits that will one day become a more coherent post
- Second, an investigation into the brilliance of Mark's Greek tenses
- Third, an reflection on Mark's Greek to highlight the nature our confession (This post!)

I also have a longer post on this passage from Matthew's Gospel  that goes into more detail on Caesarea Philippi and the claim of Messiah.

Summary:  Mark masterfully uses Greek to emphasize the dramatic nature of our confession of Christ.  Our confession of Jesus as the Christ, the Messiah, the Son of God, will consume our life and finally consume us.

The Greek behind Jesus' question:
* Use of tenses: Mark carefully selects his tenses in this passage. When Jesus asks the question, he is using the imperfect tense, which implies repeated action.  Jesus repeatedly asks them:  "Who are people saying that am?" and "Who do you say that I am?"  In our life, we will repeatedly be asked who Jesus is.
* Use of pronouns:  In Greek, the verb conjugation contains the subject pronoun.  Thus, it is not necessary and it used primarily for emphasis.  Here Jesus adds in the pronoun "You"; as if to say, "You - I mean you -- who do you say that I am?"  In our life, we cannot simply say, "Christianity teaches XYZ" but each will have to say, "I believe..."
* Use of a town name:  Mark could have just told us about this confession, but he adds in the detail of its location.  Casearea Philippi was a major center of pagan worship:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caesarea_Philippi

To put all these together, Mark lets us know about the confession of faith:  Where it will be done (in the face of paganism), when it will be done (again and again), and who will do it, we the disciples of Christ.

The Greek of Jesus demand:
* Play on words: οπισω ("after", verses 33 and 34).  Jesus has just told Peter to get behind him.  Now he commands Peter once again to get behind him.  Earlier Peter was told to get behind Jesus and become a fisher of men (8:33).  The invitation to get out of the boat (kind of fun and scary) leads to the invitation to die (very scary).
* Use of tenses:  The verb tenses are helpful here -- deny (απαρνησασθω) and carry (αρατω) are in the aorist tense, but follow (ακολουθειτω) is in the present tense.  Following Jesus is an on-going task.  So, to the Greek it probably sounded like: "If any of you want to follow after me, let him deny himself, pick up his cross and day-after-day follow me," (Okay day-after-day is a bit of a Lutheranism...)
* Use of verbs:  To translate απολλυμι in verse 35 as "lose" is perhaps one of the most watered down translations possible. The verb can mean lose but more likely it means destroy (as in Herod wanted to destroy the child). Something more active is called for here than simply misplacing our life.  (2024 addition:  Perhaps the fact that the word means both lose and destroy is fitting.  Few people seek to destroy their lives, but we can through our choices end up pretty lost pretty quickly).

2024 add on:  I find it interesting that both the words shame and honor show up in this passage

• ἐπαισχύνομαι - "upon-shame" meaning "ashamed", vs 38
• ἐπιτιμάω - "upon-honor" meaning "assessed", ultimately rebuked, vs 30, 32 and 33

I acknowledge that I was trained to see things within a sin-guilt-forgiveness framework, but I am coming more and more to understand how much of the world sees things within a shame-honor framework.  Peter believes that Jesus will bring shame to himself (and Peter!) by following his path.  Jesus shames Peter for thinking incorrectly.  

How much shame do we endure for things that actually don't matter?  How much more shame should we feel for the things that actually matter!  What does it mean to have honor restored by Jesus, in the case of Peter, but also our lives?

Grammar: Accusative cases in the infinitive
8:27 and 8:31 contain infinitive clauses.  Notice how the subject is in the accusative?  This is especially complex in 8:27

Mark 8:27-38 (Study of tenses)

Over time I've worked on three posts related to this passage.
- First, a smattering of Greek tid-bits that will one day become a more coherent post
- Second, an investigation into the brilliance of Mark's Greek tenses
- Third, a Tour de Force (haha!) on Mark's Greek to highlight the nature our confession

This is the second.
 
Summary:  Mark offers us a Greek 101 clinic in the power of verb conjugation.  He changes tense, voice and mood to portray key concepts.  Alas, because he writes in Greek (as opposed to English) he needs no helper verbs or adverbs, but rather can show mood/tense/voice through endings, which to us are very complicated.  Too often we throw in the towel when it comes to parsing verbs, but come along for the ride in these passages and discover Mark's point, adroitly conjugated:  We must always confess Christ; suffering will happen, no matter: Jesus is Lord.

Key concepts relating to verbs:
Tense: 
The tense of the verb in Greek not only indicates when the action occurred (past, present and future) but also the nature of the action (on-going or discrete event).  English also offers this distinction:  "I was running" implies something slightly different than "I ran."  In English, we normally need a helper verb/adverb to convey both the timing and nature of the event; Greek simply adds letters before or after the verb, much the dismay of the student. 

The present tense in Greek suggests an on-going nature of the action.  The aorist tense suggests a one-time event.  Grammar books sweat over these distinctions because in everyday usage, it is sloppier than this.  That caveat aside, a good example of this distinction is found in verse 34:  If anyone wants to follow me, they must deny (aorist) themselves, take up (aorist) their cross and follow (present) me.  The idea being that following Jesus is an on-going event, whereas taking up the cross was a discrete event. 

Theological disclaimer:  These verbs might make us move into decision theology; I don't think the point is that we only get one cross to bear in our lives or that we only have to make one choice to follow Christ.  The point here, which needs interpretation, is that Jesus points toward an event of denial, an event of taking up a cross and then an on-going activity of following him.

The imperfect tense connotes on-going action in the past.  In verse 27 and 29 Jesus asks his disciples "Who do you say that I am?"  The verb ask is in the imperfect tense, suggesting that Jesus asked this question multiple times, almost like he was walking around and in their faces.  They respond (aorist):  "Elijah...etc"  However, when Peter confesses "You are the Christ" the tense is present, suggesting that Peter said this more than once and that this confession will be on-going.

To drive this all home:  We are always asked and must always confess Jesus as Lord.

Voice: 
English has two voices, passive and active.  Passive means you got it done to you; active means you do it.  Greek has a third, middle, but this is rarely used and more just makes everything complicated because it was used by Homer.  By the time of Jesus, generally the middle voice is less common. 

Anyway, in vs. 31 Jesus discusses his suffering, arrest and death and the entire thing is in the passive voice, meaning he is not the agent, but the one having the action done to him. 

This helps shed light on picking up our cross.  Jesus does not find his cross, but rather it comes to him.  In life, to quote, however vaguely, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, we don't need to find our cross, we simply follow Jesus and it comes to us.

The verb rise (αναστημι) is active, suggesting that Jesus has the power, even over death, to raise himself!  The cross will come, but resurrection is on the wings...

Mood: 
English and Greek have a bunch of moods for verbs.  They can be infinitives, indicatives, imperatives, participles...and subjunctives.  Subjunctive in Greek means different stuff than in English, but the basic idea of subjunctive would be "hypothetical."  In vs. 35 and 38 Jesus uses the words ος εαν to mean whoever and in vs. 35 uses ει to mean "if." 

While I want to reassert my caution about simply saying subjunctive = hypothetical, Jesus makes it clear that following him is not necessarily automatic.  There is something unsure and uncertain about our willingness to follow.  Jesus does not say we have no hope of following him; nor does he say all will follow him.  Obviously choice and faith are a tricky matter.  We can debate how to put these together; we cannot debate that Jesus uses the subjunctive and in this case, this means following Jesus is an uncertain reality.  (And yes, I did phrase that ambiguously).