Mark 9:10

Mar_9:10

What the rising from the dead should mean.

The Resurrection: its moral meanings

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.

I. 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.

II. 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.

III. 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.)

Questionings concerning the resurrection set at rest

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.)

The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

9:10 Only after the fact did the three disciples understand what Jesus meant by “rising from the dead.”

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Mar 9:10. Ἐκράτησαν, they laid hold of) They received with attention, and did not treat with neglect.—τί ἐστι, 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.]

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Mar 9:10 . τὸν λόγον ἐκράτησαν , they kept the word; i.e. , if the verb be taken in the sense of Mar 7:3-4 ; Mar 7:8 , 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 πρὸς ἑαυτοὺς with ἐκράτ ., the meaning will be: they kept the saying to (with) themselves (A. V [73] ), or rather, taking λόγον in the sense of “thing,” they kept the matter 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 πρὸς ἑ . were intended to go with συζητοῦντες it would more naturally have come after it. τί ἐστι τὸ , 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 ; 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.

[73] Authorised Version.

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

They questioned not together touching the general resurrection which shall be in the latter day, but they understood not what he meant by that which he spake of his own peculiar resurrection.

Even very hardly as it were.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

Verse 10. And they kept that saying] This verse is wanting in two MSS. and one of the Itala.

What the rising from the dead should mean.] Ὁταν εκ νεκρων αναϚῃ, When he should arise from the dead, is the reading of D, six others, Syriac, all the Persic, Vulgate, all the Itala, and Jerome. Griesbach approves of it.

There is nothing that answers to this verse either in Matthew or Luke.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

(10) And they kept that saying with themselves.—We again note what we may describe as a characteristic touch, analysing the mental condition of the disciples in relation to their Master’s teaching.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

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 the death, so abhorrent to their prejudices, that rendered it possible and necessary, which troubled them.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

And they kept that saying with themselves,.... "They retained it in their own mind", as the Persic version renders it; "they kept it close", as Luke says, Luk 9:36, 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;

questioning with one other what the rising from the dead should mean: 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.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

10 And they kept that saying with themselves, questioning one with another what the rising from the dead should mean.

Ver. 10. And they kept that saying] With much ado they kept it (as the word εκρατησαν 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.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

The Jews here confound the two comings of Jesus Christ. The Baptist, in the spirit of Elias, will precede the first, and Elias in person, the second coming of Christ.

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

10. Should mean — 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.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Vers. 10, 11. Questioning among themselves what the rising again from the dead should mean; that is, his own rising from the dead, of which our Lord had just been speaking. No doubt the general resurrection at the end of the world was an article of faith with which the disciples were familiar. But they could not understand, when he spake of his own immediate rising from the dead. So their perplexities led them at last to ask him the question; or rather to make the remark to him, The scribes say that Elijah must first come; with a view to obtaining some clearer understanding. They had just seen Elijah in the Transfiguration, and they had seen him disappear. They wondered why he should have departed. They thought, it may be, that he ought to have remained, that he might be the forerunner of Christ and of his kingdom and glory, according to the prophecy of Malachi. (Mal_4:6) This the scribes taught; but they erred in the confusion of times, for they did not distinguish the first coming of Christ in the flesh from his second advent to judgment. The thought upon the mind of the disciples appears to have been this: They heard Christ speak of his own resurrection as close at hand, and they had seen the type of it in his transfiguration; and they thought that immediately after that, Christ"s kingdom would come, and he would reign gloriously. Why, then, had not Elijah remained, that he might be his precursor? St. Matthew (Mat_17:13) tells us that our Lord"s words which follow showed the disciples that when he said that Elijah was to come first and restore all things, he meant them to understand" that he spake unto them of John the Baptist." Upon the question of a future coming of Elijah, it seems safest to confess our ignorance. The prophecy of Malachi was no doubt in part fulfilled in the coming of John the Baptist; but it would be rash to affirm that it may not receive another and more literal fulfillment before the second advent. A host of ancient Christian expositors have held that Elijah will appear in person before the second advent of Christ. St. Augustine, in his "City of God" (20:29), says, "Not without reason do we hope that before the coming of our Judge and Savior Elias will come, because we have good reason to believe that he is now alive; for, as Holy Scripture distinctly informs us, he gas taken up from this life in a chariot of fire. When, therefore, he is come he shall give a spiritual explanation of the Law which the Jews at present understand carnally, and will turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the children to the fathers; that is, the Jews who are the children will understand the Law in the same sense as their fathers the prophets understood it." Indeed, this is one of the principal reasons assigned by the Fathers for this appearance of Elijah, that he may convert the Jews.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

10. τὸν λόγον ἐκράτησαν. They kept the saying; they not only remembered it but obeyed it; cf. Mar 7:3-4; Mar 7:8.

πρὸς ἑαυτούς. Amphibolous, but better taken with συνζητοῦντες (R.V.) than with ἐκράτησαν. Syr-Sin. has “reasoning with themselves.” They would be familiar with the idea of rising from the dead, but the special resurrection of the Son of Man perplexed them. Syr-Sin. has “What is this word that He said, When He is risen from the dead?” [2083] and Lat.-Vet. have ὅταν ἐκ νεκρῶν ἀναστῇ for τὸ ἐκ ν. ἀναστῆναι. The ἐστί reproduces their wording; “what His rising again from the dead is.” This questioning is omitted by Mt., who again refrains from recording the Apostles’ want of intelligence; cf. Mar 6:52, Mar 9:6, Mar 10:24.

[2083] Codex Bezae. 6th cent. Has a Latin translation (d) side by side with the Greek text, and the two do not quite always agree. Presented by Beza to the University Library of Cambridge in 1581. Remarkable for its frequent divergences from other texts. Contains Mark, except Mar 16:15-20, which has been added by a later hand. Photographic facsimile, 1899.

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

10. τ. λ. ἐκράτ.] Not, ‘they kept the command:’—for συνζητ. explains it to mean kept secret the saying, as in ref. Dan.

τί ἐστιν τὸ ἐκ ν. ἀν. 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.

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

10. τὸν λόγον ἐκράτησαν—not to be connected with πρὸς ἐαυτοὺς,—they kept the saying to themselves, which does not give ἐκράτησαν a proper meaning, and does not accord with the fact that Jesus restricted his announcement of the resurrection only to the twelve, not to the three; nor is it to be translated, they kept the saying, in the sense of obedience; but the meaning is, they seized this word about the resurrection, it clung to them, they did not let go of it.1 πρὸς ἑαυτοὺς συνζητοῦντες τί ἐστι τὸ ἐκ νεκρῶν ἀναστῆναι,2—questioning among themselves what the rising from the dead is. Not what the resurrection means in general, which they as orthodox Jews at this time would know well enough; but what it meant in the case of Jesus, involving, as it did, his death.

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.