Going Back to Everything and Leaving Everything

 Below is a rough translation and some preliminary verse-by-verse comments regarding Mark 10:17-31, the Revised Common Lectionary reading for 21^st Sunday after Pentecost. I had not completed translating this text before now (2024) and so, since it’s long, have not been able to process it and expect to need to revise it soon enough. This is where I am for now. 

 

17 Καὶ ἐκπορευομένου αὐτοῦ εἰς ὁδὸν προσδραμὼν εἷς καὶ γονυπετήσας αὐτὸν ἐπηρώτα 

αὐτόν, Διδάσκαλε ἀγαθέ, τί ποιήσω ἵνα ζωὴν αἰώνιον κληρονομήσω; 

And going out of him into a road one having run and having knelt to him interrogated him, “Good teacher, what may I do in order to receive age-long life?”  

ἐκπορευομένου: PMPart gsm, ἐκπορεύομαι, 1) to go forth, go out, depart

προσδραμὼν: AAPart nms, προστρέχω, 1) to run to

γονυπετήσας: AAPart nms, γονυπετέω,1) to fall on the knees, the act of imploring aid, and of  expressing reverence and honor

ἐπηρώτα: IAI 3s, ἐπερωτάω, 1) to accost one with an enquiry, put a question to, enquiry of,  ask, interrogate

ποιήσω: AASubj 1s, ποιέω, 1) to make  1a) with the names of things made, to produce

κληρονομήσω: AASubj 1s, κληρονομέω,1) to receive a lot, receive by lot 

1. I am following Young’s Literal Translation by interpreting αἰώνιον as “age-long” instead of “eternal.” The primary reason I do so is because I think this term is a lot more complex than we let on. For example, this text is the first mention of αἰώνιον in relation to life (ζωὴν) in Mark, and 10:30 is the only other one. Jesus will speak of αἰώνιον with relation to death in Mark 3:29. 

It is not a common phrase in the other synoptics either. 

For Matthew, αἰώνιον death/fire is in 18:8; then the two parallel uses from Mark 10 are in Matthew 19:16 and 29. Then, αἰώνιον fire, punishment, and life appear in the parable of sheep and goats in Mt. 25:41, 46, and 46 respectively. 

For Luke, someone asks Jesus a question about how to inherit αἰώνιον life in 10:25; there is αἰώνιον death in 16:9; then the parallel story to Mark 10 in Luke 18:18 and 30. 

The Gospel of John is the mother lode of αἰώνιον with respect to life: 3:15, 3:16, 3:36, 4:14, 4:36, 5:24, 6:27, 6:40, 6:47, 6:54, 6:68, 10:28, 12:25, 12:50, 17:2, 17:3. 16x. 

To see the difficulty of translating αἰώνιον, consider this. Thayer’s Lexicon offers as their first definition: “without beginning or end, that which always has been and always will be.” Then, in Romans 16:25, the phrase αἰώνιον χρονοῖς (‘age-long’ with ‘time’) is translated as “since the world began” by the KJV. So, the KJV definition has “began” even though the Thayer definition says “without beginning.” Even other definitions of that verse, “long ages” in NIV, ESV, and NRSV, use a term “long” to define something that Thayer says is without beginning or end. 

In some ways, this is simply the best that humans can do, conditioned as we are by time, when speaking of something that lies outside/beyond of time. 

2. In this verse, the phrase “age-long life” seems to be a given. Jesus will follow this question with a question – as is his wont – but the question is not, “Where are you getting this ‘age-long life’ idea?” 

3. Here’s that word ἐπερωτάω, which I translate as “interrogate,” again. I would say, in this instance, the question seems to be coming from a genuine place and Mark does not identify it as a trick or a trap.

 

18 ὁ δὲ Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν αὐτῷ, Τί με λέγεις ἀγαθόν; οὐδεὶς ἀγαθὸς εἰ μὴ εἷς ὁ θεός. 

Yet Jesus said to him, “Why are you saying me good? No one good except God alone.” 

εἶπεν: AAI 3s, λέγω, 1) to say, to speak

λέγεις: PAI 2s, λέγω, 1) to say, to speak

1. I love how Karl Barth quotes this response when his massive Church Dogmatics moves to the topic of ethics. It is wholly and profoundly faithful to begin our ethical inquiries with the presumption that “No one is good except God alone.” 

 

19 τὰς ἐντολὰς οἶδας: Μὴ φονεύσῃς, Μὴ μοιχεύσῃς, Μὴ κλέψῃς, Μὴ ψευδομαρτυρήσῃς, Μὴ ἀποστερήσῃς, Τίμα τὸν πατέρα σου καὶ τὴν μητέρα. 

You have known the law: You may not murder, you may not commit adultery, you may not steal, you may not give false witness, you may not defraud, honor your father and mother. 

οἶδας: PerfAI 2s, εἴδω/ὁράω, 1) to see, 2)to know.

φονεύσῃς: AASubj 2s, φονεύω,1) to kill, slay, murder

μοιχεύσῃς: AASubj 2s, μοιχεύω, 1) to commit adultery 

κλέψῃς: AASubj 2s, κλέπτω,1) to steal

ψευδομαρτυρήσῃς: AASubj 2s, ψευδομαρτυρέω, 1) to utter falsehoods in giving testimony, to testify falsely

ἀποστερήσῃς: AASubj 2s, ἀποστερέω, 1) to defraud, rob, despoil

Τίμα: PAImpv 2s, τιμάω,1) to estimate, fix the value  1a) for the value of something belonging to one's self  2) to honor,

1. Much to the dismay of Christian Nationalists (if they actually paid attention to such things), the New Testament never really cites “the Ten Commandments” as “the Ten Commandments.” Feel free to count them for yourself. There are six here. And “defraud” will not look familiar to anyone who has read Exodus 20 or Deuteronomy 5. So, let’s look at how the Synoptics present what we ought to call “Some Commandments.” 

Matthew and Luke follow Mark’s rendering of the commands, with parallel texts to our reading here, as well as parallel texts to Jesus’ response to the question of which command is the greatest. Here is how they break down.

Mark 10:19 mentions five prohibitions - murder, adultery, stealing, giving false witness, fraud – as well as the positive law to honor one’s parents. 

Matthew 19:16-29 names 4 prohibitions - murder, adultery, steal, false witness - and two positive commands, to honor parents and love your neighbor as yourself. 

Luke 18:18-30 names four prohibitions – adultery, murder, steal, false witness – and one positive command to honor parents. 

In Mark 12:28-31 in response to an inquiry about the primary/greatest command, Jesus says the law is summed up in “Love God with all your heart, soul, mind and strength, and love neighbor as yourself.” 

In Matthew 22:37-39 Jesus says, “Love God with all your heart, soul, and mind; love neighbor as yourself.”

In Luke 10:25-28 Jesus says “Love God with all your heart, soul, strength, and mind, and your neighbor as yourself.” 

2. My point is that when Christians speak of the law, the commands, etc., we are better off focusing on loving God with all one has and loving one’s neighbor as we love ourselves. The Ten Commandments from Exodus 20/Deuteronomy 5 are certainly important and noteworthy descriptions of how one loves God and neighbor, but they are not a sacrosanct set of 10 – at least to Jesus and the New Testament writers. 

 

20 ὁ δὲ ἔφη αὐτῷ,Διδάσκαλε, ταῦτα πάντα ἐφυλαξάμην ἐκ νεότητός μου. 

But he declared to him, “Teacher, all these things I kept out of my childhood.”

ἔφη: IAI 3s, φημί, 1) to make known one's thoughts, to declare 

ἐφυλαξάμην: AMI 1s, φυλάσσω, 1) to guard   1a) to watch, keep watch 

1. I will typically translate δὲ as “yet” since it can show continuation (like “and”) or contrast (like “but.”) Here, however, the inquirer seems to be pushing back a bit, so I am comfortable going with “but.” 

2. As noted above, Mark has “defraud” as part of the commands, which Luke and Matthew (and Exodus and Deuteronomy) do not include. If one accepts that Mark was written first, then it seems that Luke and Matthew deliberately omit “defraud,” just as some later manuscripts of Mark’s gospel did. However, it seems that defrauding others may be the primary issue for this inquirer, per the next verse. Still, it’s complicated.

3. This is the only use of the verb φυλάσσω in Mark. It pertains to someone who is like a guardian, who keeps watch. That is really a lovely way of imagining how one might observe and keep the law, by guarding it like a treasure.  

4. Please remember that this is a wooden literal translation, not a refined one. The phrase “I have kept out of my childhood” will ultimately become “since my childhood.” It does not imply that this inquirer has warded off the law.  

 

21 ὁ δὲ Ἰησοῦς ἐμβλέψας αὐτῷ ἠγάπησεν αὐτὸν καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ, Εν σε ὑστερεῖ: ὕπαγε ὅσα ἔχεις πώλησον καὶ δὸς [τοῖς] πτωχοῖς, καὶ ἕξεις θησαυρὸν ἐν οὐρανῷ, καὶ δεῦρο ἀκολούθει μοι. 

Yet Jesus having looked at him loving him and said to him, “You are lacking one thing; go sell all you have and give [to the] poor, and you will have riches in heaven, and come follow me.” 

ἐμβλέψας: AAPart nms, ἐμβλέπω 1) to look

ἠγάπησεν: AAI 3s, ἀγαπάω, 1) of persons  1a) to welcome, to entertain, to be fond of, to love dearly 

εἶπεν: AAI 3s, λέγω, 1) to say, to speak 

ὑστερεῖ: PAI 3s, ὑστερέω, 1) behind 1a) to come late or too tardily 1a1) to be left behind in the race … 1c) to fail, be wanting  1d) to be in want of, lack 

ὕπαγε: PAImpv 3s ὑπάγω, 1) to lead under, bring under 2) to withdraw one's self, to go away, depart 

ἔχεις: PAI 2s, ἔχω, 1) to have, i.e. to hold 

πώλησον: AAImpv 2s, πωλέω, 1) to barter, to sell 2) sellers

δὸς: AAImpv 2s, δίδωμι, 1) to give

ἕξεις: FAI 2s, ἔχω, 1) to have, i.e. to hold

δεῦρο: XXXXX 

ἀκολούθει: PAImpv 2s, ἀκολουθέω, 1) to follow one who precedes, join him as his attendant, accompany him 

1. This is the only mention in Mark of Jesus loving (using ἀγαπάω) someone. The only other uses of are in 12:30-33 in conversation with the Sadducee about the greatest command to love God, neighbor, and self. It is related to the term ἀγάπη, which does not appear in Mark; and ἀγαπητός (beloved), which is used for the divine pronouncements in 1:11 and 9:7, as well as in a parable in 12:6 of a father sending a beloved son who is killed.

2. I’m trying to think of the relationship between Jesus loving this inquirer, the inquirer’s claim that he has observed the command against defrauding others, and the instruction that the one thing he lacks is that he needs to divest his riches and give them to the poor, to follow Jesus. It raises questions: 

- Is the inquirer lying and has he accumulated his riches via defrauding others? 

- What is the nature of ‘defraud’ anyway? And why does Mark (alone) include it as part of the commands? 

- Is this like a coin, where the prohibition (-) to defraud the one side, whereas the instruction (+) to sell one’s goods and give all to the poor is another side? 

- Is that positive instruction something like taking the prohibition to its maximal goal? Perhaps something like, “if there are poor among you, it is not enough to avoid defrauding, you must address the poverty itself”? 

3. I’m speculating the heck out of this thing, but I am trying to honor that Mark does include “defraud” which is easily identifiable as a “mistake” (as some people put it), and that Jesus’ instruction to the inquirer seems to be an attempt to make restitution (if not punishment) for defrauding others. And that Jesus loves him, which may be something that we like to sing about but only appears here in Mark. 

4. One last speculation: Maybe the inquirer is telling the truth, and he has been an honest broker all along. Still he is very wealthy. So, perhaps he is an honest broker in a profoundly dishonest system. Anti-racism studies have been very helpful to me in seeing how systemic thinking is quite different from the approach we often take regarding “personal holiness.” A white person may indeed “have many black friends” and still buy into histories and language and economic policies and law enforcement policies and politics more generally that are built on anti-black presumptions. Just as anti-racism for a white person is more than having black friends, so living with justice for a wealthy person can be more than not personally defrauding anyone while getting quite rich. Maybe that is the approach that holds together Mark’s inclusion of “defraud,” the inquirer’s protest of personal innocence, and Jesus’ instruction based on the one thing he lacked. And perhaps this all circles back to Jesus’ original statement that nobody is good but God alone. 

5. p.s. Some later manuscripts add “take up the cross” to the last part of “follow me.”  

 

22 ὁ δὲ στυγνάσας ἐπὶ τῷ λόγῳ ἀπῆλθεν λυπούμενος, ἦν γὰρ ἔχων κτήματα πολλά. 

Yet having been appalled by the word he departed sorrowing for he had many possessions.

στυγνάσας: AAPart, nsm, στυγνάζω, to put on a gloomy and downcast look, to be shocked, appalled

ἀπῆλθεν: AAI 3s, ἀπέρχομαι, to go

λυπούμενος: PMPart nms, λυπέω, to be sorrowful

ἦν: IAI 3s, εἰμί, to be

ἔχων: PAPart nms, ἔχω to have

1. Here is where we discover that the inquirer was wealthy. 

2. I suspect the verb ἀπέρχομαι, which is the stem έρχομαι (to go) with the prefix ἀπό (away from), is the opposite of ἀκολουθέω from v.21. 

3. Jesus’ love and the inquirer’s sorrow. Mark really digs into the feelings here.

 

23 Καὶ περιβλεψάμενος ὁ Ἰησοῦς λέγει τοῖς μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ, Πῶς δυσκόλως οἱ τὰ χρήματα ἔχοντες εἰς τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ θεοῦ εἰσελεύσονται. 

And having looked around Jesus says to his disciples, “How difficult those who are possessing wealth to enter into the reign of God. 

περιβλεψάμενος: AMPart nms, περιβλέπω to look around

λέγει: PAI 3s, λέγω to say

ἔχοντεςεἰς: PAPart nmp, ἔχω to have

εἰσελεύσονται: εἰσέρχομαι to come in, to enter 

1. I think I was conditioned to hear “enter into the reign/kingdom of God” as being something like “go to heaven.” So far in this story it would be more like divesting oneself of the one thing holding us back and following Christ. 

2. And, indeed, Jesus says it is difficult, particularly for wealthy folk. Following my speculation of v.21, n.4, it’s not that wealthy people aren’t nice – of course some are and some aren’t. It is that being wealthy in a world where most people are not, requires being okay with some practices and accepting some status quos that, in fact, are unjust. 

3. How in the world anyone can seriously espouse the Prosperity Gospel heresy and read this text is simply beyond me. 

 

24 οἱ δὲ μαθηταὶ ἐθαμβοῦντο ἐπὶ τοῖς λόγοις αὐτοῦ. ὁ δὲ Ἰησοῦς πάλιν ἀποκριθεὶς λέγειαὐτοῖς, Τέκνα, πῶς δύσκολόν ἐστιν εἰς τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ θεοῦ εἰσελθεῖν.

Yet the disciples were amazed by his words. Yet answering Jesus again says to them, “Children, how difficult [it] is to enter into the reign of God.  

ἐθαμβοῦντο: IPI 3p, θαμβέω to be amazed

ἀποκριθεὶς: APPart nsm, ἀποκρίνω to answer

λέγει: PAI 3s, λέγω to say

ἐστιν: PAI 3s, εἰμί to be

εἰσελθεῖν: AAInf, εἰσέρχομαι to come

1. Once again a radical call to follow and once again the disciples are astonished and once again Jesus doubles down. 

2. Curiously, Jesus calls them “children.” This is a different term than last week’s reading, in 10:13, when people brought children (παιδία) so Jesus might bless them. 

3. Some later manuscripts added “trusting in their riches” to the last part of this verse. I imagine people who were not fabulously rich, but certainly not poor, (like me), have long struggled with how to read this. Perhaps we have been astonished at it. Perhaps we ought to have less criticism and more sympathy with the astonished disciples.

 

25 εὐκοπώτερόν ἐστιν κάμηλον διὰ [τῆς] τρυμαλιᾶς [τῆς] ῥαφίδος διελθεῖν ἢ πλούσιον εἰς τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ θεοῦ εἰσελθεῖν. 

It is easier a camel to go through [the] eye of [the] needle the rich to enter into the reign of God. 

ἐστιν: PAI 3s, εἰμί to be

διελθεῖν: AAInf, διέρχομαι to go through

εἰσελθεῖν: AAInf, εἰσέρχομαι to come

1. This verse, and Luke’s parallel story, are the only places where the word τρυμαλιᾶς - translated everywhere as “eye” as in “eye of a needle” - appears. It’s hard to see the etymology clearly, but Thayer’s lexicon says its meaning is “to wear away, perforate), a hole.”  The root τρύω means to rub through something. And, indeed, it is followed by ῥαφίδος (needle), which only appears here and in parallel synoptic renderings of this story.

2. The bracketed portions of this verse are more evidence that it has been treated rather roughly as it has gone through the copyist mill. 

3. There are numerous iterations of the verb έρχομαι (to go) in these verses, with different prefixes such as “apart” “into” and “through” attached.  

 

26 οἱ δὲ περισσῶς ἐξεπλήσσοντο λέγοντες πρὸς αὐτὸν/ἑαυτούς, Καὶ τίς δύναται

σωθῆναι; 

Yet they were even more astonished saying to him/each other, “Who even can be saved? 

ἐξεπλήσσοντο: IPI 3p, ἐκπλήσσω to be astonished

λέγοντες: PAPart nmp, λέγω to say

δύναται: PMI 3s, δύναμαι can

σωθῆναι: APInf, σώζω to save 

1. There are conflicts between manuscripts over whether the disciples direct their question to Jesus or to one another. 

2. In addition to θαμβέω (amazed) in v.24, now the disciples are ἐκπλήσσω (astonished.) The root of ἐκ/πλήσσω means “to strike.” 

3. I wonder what, exactly, the disciples mean by “be saved.” I know how I learned to hear those words, but so far this story has not been about fiery pits or anything like that. The verb σώζω can mean lots of things, like to heal or to make whole. In Mark 8:35, we are hearing as someone losing their life in order to save it. 

 

27 ἐμβλέψας αὐτοῖς ὁ Ἰησοῦς λέγει, Παρὰ ἀνθρώποις ἀδύνατον ἀλλ' οὐ παρὰ θεῷ, πάντα γὰρ δυνατὰ παρὰ τῷ θεῷ. 

Having looked them Jesus says, “According to humans impossible, but not according to God, for all things possible with God.  

ἐμβλέψας: AAPart nms, ἐμβλέπω to look

λέγει: PAI 3s, λέγω to say

1. Let’s look at looking. Specifically, what to make of the “having looked, Jesus says”? I see two possibilities, but welcome more.

A. “Having looked” could indicate that the disciples are asking this question to one another. If they asked him directly, the typical beginning would read, “Having answered” with the participle for answering preceding the main verb for saying. 

B. Jesus could be continuing something here. Walking backward, in v 23, Jesus, “having looked around” (same verb, with a prefix peri) says how hard it is for people with possessions to enter the reign of God. In v.21 Jesus, “having looked” loved the inquirer then tells him about the thing he lacks. So maybe this “looking” is a way of prefacing Jesus saying something impactful.

2. Jesus’ pronouncement here lacks verbs. And every translation under heaven prefers to make the preposition παρὰ “with,” so just ignore me on this. 

 

28 Ἤρξατο λέγειν ὁ Πέτρος αὐτῷ, Ἰδοὺ ἡμεῖς ἀφήκαμεν πάντα καὶ ἠκολουθήκαμέν σοι. 

Peter began to say to him, “Behold we left everything and are following you.”  

Ἤρξατο: AMI 3p, ἄρχω to rule

λέγειν: PAInf, λέγω to say

Ἰδοὺ: AMImpv εἶδον, a particle serving to call attention.

ἀφήκαμεν: AAI 1p, ἀφίημι to leave

ἠκολουθήκαμέν: PAI 1p, ἀκολουθέω to follow 

1. It is a little confusing to see that the root of ἤρξατο (began) is ἄρχω, which means to reign or rule over something. It helps to see ruling as being ‘first’ among others, just as ‘begin’ it to initiate something first.

2. I’m always a little disappointed when translation resources treat Ἰδοὺ simply as a particle and do not trace it to root as a verb. It’s our word “Behold!” It’s an imperative, not just some passing term. The NIV does not translate Ἰδοὺ itself, but does pay homage to it by finishing Peter’s words with an exclamation point!

3. The word “left” (forsake, divorce, abandon, etc.) is past tense, while “following” is present tense. 

4. Peter’s response here sounds suspiciously like the inquirer’s response that he has kept the commands since his youth. How we hear it might shape how we hear Jesus’ words in the next verse.  

 

29 ἔφη ὁ Ἰησοῦς, Ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, οὐδείς ἐστιν ὃς ἀφῆκεν οἰκίαν ἢ ἀδελφοὺς ἢ ἀδελφὰς ἢ μητέρα ἢ πατέρα ἢ τέκνα ἢ ἀγροὺς ἕνεκεν ἐμοῦ καὶ ἕνεκεν τοῦ εὐαγγελίου, 

Jesus replied, “Truly I say to you, there is no one who has left home or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or fields for the sake of me and for the sake of the gospel, 

ἔφη: IAI 3s, φημί to say

λέγω: PAI 1s, λέγω to say

ἐστιν: PAI 3s, εἰμί to be

ἀφῆκεν: AAI 3s, ἀφίημι to leave

1. The first verb, φημί, is curious. On 3 occasions (Mk. 9:12, 10:30, and 12:24) the later manuscripts on which the KJV was based replace φημί with λέγω. Both terms can be translated “to say” but I am going with “replied” to show that its different from the “I say to you” that follows. Maybe Mark used it to avoid the redundancy. Dunno. 

2. Topically, this verse ought not to be separated from the next. But in terms of sheer length and repetition, geez.

 

30 ἐὰν μὴ λάβῃ ἑκατονταπλασίονα νῦν ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τούτῳ οἰκίας καὶ ἀδελφοὺς καὶ ἀδελφὰς καὶ μητέρας καὶ τέκνα καὶ ἀγροὺς μετὰ διωγμῶν, καὶ ἐν τῷ αἰῶνι τῷ ἐρχομένῳ ζωὴν αἰώνιον. 

who will not receive hundredfold now in this time house and brothers and sisters and mothers and children and fields with persecution and in the age which is coming life age-long. 

λάβῃ: AASubj 3s, λαμβάνω to take

1. On a side note, I don’t know what life would be like with a hundred mothers, but I love children and have often thought, “The more the merrier.” 

2. I will continue my irritating habit of following Young’s Literal Translation in making αἰώνιον “age-long” instead of the common “eternal.” In this case it is helpful in that it shows the connection of “in the age (αἰῶνι) which is coming” and “age-long (αἰώνιον) life.” 

3. Are these words a “yes, but …” kind of response like Jesus’ response to the inquirer? Or are they a reassuring confirmation? 

 

31 πολλοὶ δὲ ἔσονται πρῶτοι ἔσχατοι καὶ [οἱ] ἔσχατοι πρῶτοι. 

ἔσονται: FMI 3p, εἰμί to be

For many first will be last and [the] last first. 

1. The verb here is in the future tense, continuing the flow of life in the age to come. This reversal of fortune may be a way of summarizing the whole story, with the inquirer who has many possessions and the disciples who have left everything.