Introduction: "I want to read the Bible"

I have been asked, many times, how one should read the Bible—I think that that question comes from people who started on page one (Genesis 1:1) and soon get bogged down with all of the very confusing histories, teachings and customs from a time and a place so so very different than our own. (for instance):

This bit of scripture IS important and carries meaning, but you have to really work at it to get to that--and that work means understanding the role of animal sacrifice in this ancient culture, as well as the sense those people had of individual sin and forgiveness.

All of that in these four verses. Not to mention the place Moses held for the people of Israel, and the relationship that God and Moses had (why couldn't God speak directly to the people?).

All of that to say that the Bible is not meant to be read as much as studied.

For study reasons, then, and especially for those who are Christian, or at least more familiar with Christianity, I would recommend a different starting point for the study of the Bible, namely, to begin with the Gospel of Mark.

Mark  is the first of the Gospels to be written and recorded. Its style is provocative and to the point. What the reader misses in sweetness and light from the other Gospels is more than rewarded in the challenges that it offers each and every one of us.

I will go through the Gospel in a series of studies on this website. I use the text from the Christian Community Bible (because I like the language--you can find the Bible in all sorts of translations and one can spend several lifetimes arguing about which is best). I will also use much of the work done by a Mexican Jesuit priest, Carlos Bravo (he passed away about ten years ago) taken from his book  Jesus: Hombre en Conflicto (Jesus, Man in Conflict).

The Gospel of Mark

Since the end of the first century or at the beginning of the second century after Christ, there were texts stating that the second Gospel was the work of Mark. He had accompanied Peter to Rome where he also met Paul and he faithfully put Peter’s teaching into writing.

It would be a mistake to consider the Gospel to be the work of one person, or to think of someone sitting at a desk and writing away until the Gospel was done. It is probably more helpful to understand the Gospel as the result of the work of a community of people who had experienced—first hand—the lives, the hopes, the dreams, the disappointments, and, again, the hopes of people who had known Jesus of Nazareth. The book may well have been composed by a single person, but his work would have been guided by the people he lived and loved and who were his community. 

Mark does not say anything about the birth of Jesus and the years he spent in Nazareth. There are no shepherds or kings bearing gifts. And the ending was so problematic for the early church that not one, but two different endings were added to the original.

The Gospel of Mark consists of two sections. The first part of the Gospel unfolds in Galilee, the province of Jesus and the second one takes us to Judea and Jerusalem, the heart of the Jewish nation. These two parts are like the two sides of the same adventure. The first part shows us the power and the newness of Jesus: the impact of his teachings on the crowds. He is a big hit with his miracles; but his teachings are not so popular, and so disillusionment sets in and in the second part, the crowds are no longer following as Jesus refuses to be what they wanted him to be. Finally, we have his death on the cross that seems to cancel his entire mission.

When Jesus died on the cross, the Roman officer admitted that the crucified one was truly the Son of God (Mk 15:39). The Gospel starts with declaring Jesus “Son of God” and finishes it with the same testimony.

But what on earth does that mean, to be "the Son of God"? That is what the Gospel of Mark intends to show, answering the question by describing Jesus’ actions.