Commentary on Mark 8:27-38

Mark reintroduces the theme of discipleship by first interrogating Jesus’ identity. As is common in Mark, Jesus initiates the dialogue: “Who do people say that I am?” and “Who do you say that I am?” (8:27, 29). Jesus’ identity is an ongoing subtheme with the disciples as they struggle to fully know him. We might also ask ourselves, “Who do I say Jesus is, by my life?” Jesus’ query seems to echo the self-revelation of Yahweh in Exodus 3:14—“I AM.” The disciples’ responses mirror Mark’s narration in 6:14–15.

What is significant is Peter’s declaration, “Messiah” (verse 29b). Ched Myers writes, “Jesus is not simply a great prophet; he is a royal figure who will restore the political fortunes of Israel. The revolution, Peter is saying, is at hand.” Whereas the disciples are often portrayed as lacking understanding, in this instance Peter appears to have insight, for which they are rebuked and admonished to silence. The Greek term used here is the same as Jesus’ silencing command to the demons in 1:25 and the wind in 4:39. Why was it problematic for Peter to identify Jesus as Messiah?

Emerson B. Powery clarifies the tense moment this way: “For Peter and most Jews, ‘Messiah’ (Christos) refers to a militaristic, political figure who would overthrow Rome’s power and establish a new Davidic kingdom, which itself would inaugurate the kingdom of God. Such a divinely authorized figure could not be the one who … would ‘suffer many things … and be killed.’”

Then Jesus’ identity shifts to “Son of Man” (Human One) as he begins to teach the disciples about his impending suffering, rejection, death, and, ultimately, resurrection. Jesus says these things boldly, and in a turn of events, Peter’s shortsightedness is again visible as he rebukes Jesus. 

Imagine the scene:

Jesus rebukes the disciples (after Peter identifies him as Messiah).
Peter rebukes Jesus (after Jesus teaches about the suffering to come).
Jesus rebukes Peter (looking at the disciples, Jesus refers to Peter as “Satan”).

The “Satan” discourse attests to a “fierce contest raging over messianic theology in and around Mark’s community,” asserts Myers. The emphasis here is on making a commitment to follow the path of God despite suffering—this is the mark of discipleship.

Notice the movement from Peter, to Peter and the disciples, then to the crowd with the disciples (8:34)—showing the expanding inclusivity of Jesus’ call to discipleship.  

Deny yourself. Take up your cross. Follow me.

Mark’s early readers would have clearly understood the dire circumstances of taking up one’s cross. In the Roman Empire, dissidents were executed on the cross, condemned persons carried their own cross, and the cross was a symbol of shame. The threat of death by the empire is a tool to maintain the status quo. Mark’s language conveys the severity of what it means to follow Jesus’ way—to commit to God’s reign. It is a political affront to the imperial state, an act of subversion.

Preachers might wrestle with the notion of suffering as integral to human existence—at some point everyone endures some degree of distress—as distinguished from suffering in terms of persecution by adversaries because of following God’s way. Jesus’ ministry of healing relationships, liberating captives, mending hearts, and feeding hungry bodies—that is, alleviating suffering—refutes suggestions that general suffering should be accepted as normative. 

Furthermore, Jesus is not suggesting suffering as a divine good in itself. Theologies of redemptive suffering have led to abuse, particularly for women, persons of color, and persons experiencing homelessness and poverty. Sadly, entire ministries have been built on the theme of suffering for Christ, yet the ministry leaders are excluded from the suffering. A practical response to this reading includes a call to selflessness in discipleship coupled with caring for oneself so that one may be able to faithfully act on God’s call.  

Modern readers tend to read this call to discipleship as an individual call but consider the communal aspect of life in the ancient world. Perhaps the call is to deny self for the well-being of the community, to take up one’s cross on behalf of the beloved community, to follow God with the community.

Following Howard Thurman, Powery concludes, “The one who follows Jesus will choose rather to do the thing that is to him [or her] the maximum exposure to the love and therefore to the approval of God, rather than the things that will save his [or her] own skin.”

References

Avalos, Hector. The Bad Jesus: The Ethics of New Testament Ethics. The Bible in the Modern World 68. Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix Press, 2015.

Blount, Brian K., Cain Hope Felder, Clarice Jannette Martin, and Emerson B. Powery, eds. True to Our Native Land: An African American New Testament Commentary. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2007.

Myers, Ched. Binding the Strong Man: A Political Reading of Mark’s Story of Jesus. 20. anniversary ed., 6. print. Biblical Studies. Maryknoll, N.Y: Orbis Books, 2008.