{N}1,{/}1 The expression, {C}Son of God{/}, is missing in some manuscripts. This title seems to coincide with the Roman official's recognition of Jesus as the Son of God at the crucifixion. Outside of these two places, only demoniacs (people possessed by evil spirits) give this title to Jesus (3,11 and 5,7). Each time Jesus makes them be quiet. It seems that in Mark's gospel this title, when used by Jesus' contemporaries, was no more than a royal title misleading them about the profound mystery of the Father and the Son. Perhaps we too easily apply it to Jesus without a second thought. In contrast, a person who has seen Jesus die and then believes in his resurrection, that person can call him Son of God and know Jesus' unique greatness.

{N}1,{/}4 The text says with precision: "a baptism of conversion". Many religious groups were used to baptize, but they differ in the significance they give to this rite. Actually it means purification and renewal, but Mark insists that being baptized by John manifests one's decision to change one's life, as John demanded. The word that we translate by "conversion" and that others translate as "repentance" means: to make an about face in one's way of seeing, thinking, and behaving.

{N}1,{/}5 "They confessed their sins." This may have been a public confession in the form of a litany in the style of Ne 9,6 and Dn 9,4. Imagine the following scene at the Jordan. John enumerates all types of commonly committed sins, a little like what Moses did in Dt 27,16-26. Then the people respond that they will not commit them any more. Finally, the pilgrims participating in this ritual would enter the Jordan to be baptized. 

{N}1,{/}10 The text says: "The heavens were torn open." That is a common way of saying that Jesus had received a vision from heaven or from God. "And Jesus saw the Spirit coming down on him". In saying this, Mark departs from the ancient understanding of the Spirit as a breath from God that invaded the prophets. Rather, the Spirit is more like a presence or a divine "anointing" that is softly imposed, somewhat as when a dove softly alights on its perch. 

{N}1,{/}11 See the note in Mt 3,17.

{N}1,{/}12 "Satan" is a Hebraic word meaning: the adversary, one who places obstacles (Job 1,6; Zech 3,2). Its Greek translation is: the devil, the accuser.
According to Mark, Jesus was tempted the entire time he was in the desert. Is it certain that animals were subject to him as in Is 11,16? Possibly, the wild animals symbolize the forces of evil: Opposing the devil's followers, another army appears, made up of angels who feed him.

{N}1,{/}14 "Change your ways and believe in the Good News." Jesus takes up John's central call to conversion, meaning to change your life. However, He adds a new emphasis or element: Believe in the Good News, which is to say, the coming of a time of grace, a year of reconciliation (Is 61,10). Jesus demands both an opening of one's heart in faith as well as the willingness to live an upright life. Luke will explain more about this message in Lk 4,18-22.

{N}1,{/}16 We know very little about what Jesus did during the eighteen or more months that he spent with his disciples. John shares some details about his first encounters with them (Jn 1,29-34). Mark shows here the call that Jesus would address to them one day: "It was not you who chose me."

{N}1,{/}24 "You are the Holy One of God." John places these same words in the mouth of Peter. Holy should be understood as "consecrated," more or less in the sense of "the Messiah," the anointed one.

{N}1,{/}26 "He commanded the impure spirits."
The original text says, "an impure spirit", somewhat in the sense of an evil spirit. Impurity refers to everything irreconcilable with the worship of God. A ritually impure person may not necessarily be in sin, but rather, is forbidden to participate in a religious act. Such was the case of the lepers. Luke tells us many times about {C}evil spirits {/}(7,21; 8,2), describing a possession as an enslavement or a degeneration of the individual. More frequently, the Gospels talk to us about {C}demons{/}. Let us not forget that in Greek the word, demon did not necessarily designate an evil spirit. It was sometimes used for artists and geniuses. The Gospel sometimes uses {C}demon{/} to mean impure spirit, but more often it simply designates someone suffering a deformity such as deafness accompanied by psychological disturbances, as in Mk 1,32.
We must keep in mind that Jewish society in Jesus' time was very preoccupied with impure spirits and all types of possessions. For example, it was recommended not to go out at night without covering one's head in order to protect oneself from the evil spells that could be dropped by some night birds. Exorcists existed to expel demons through prayer. Another practice, which the Church would later adopt, was to try to force a devil to reveal its name, which granted the listener a certain power over it. Similarly, when an exorcist crossed the path of a true demon, he commanded it to tell the exorcist information that would injure or even destroy it. It is in this context that Jesus began to expel demons just as he adopted the custom allowed to men to speak publicly in the synagogue at the Sabbath assembly. The difference that became immediately evident, however, was that Jesus acted with great authority and forcefulness.

{N}1,{/}29 We are in Capernaum, a village on the shore of the lake, located on the border of the territory of Herod Antipas and the territory of his brother Philip (Lk 3,1). Archaeological excavations carried out in this place uncovered the ruins of houses from the time of Jesus. The ruins of successive churches built over the remains of a circular shaped house have identified it with great certainty as the family home of Peter (3,20) where he lived together with Andrew and his mother-in-law.
Most likely, Jesus' pattern of acting and staying in that house became a model for what Peter and Andrew, and later others, would do as missionaries in Galilee (Mk 3,10).

{N}1,{/}44 Jesus could not ignore the laws governing leprosy (Lev 14). He acts like a good Jew, preoccupied with observing both the civil and religious prescriptions of the times.

{N}2,{/}1 {C}And He announced the Word{/}. "The Word" is part of the vocabulary that the primitive Church developed. It designated at that times the proclamation of the Christian message (Acts 6,4; 10,44; 14,25; Rom 10,8). It involves, on the one hand, interpreting the Word of God in the regular readings of the Old Testament. This ministry also involves prophetic inspiration that enables Him to actualize the text as a present reality, as in Lk 4,21. Both the Gospel and apostolic writings show Jesus, and later the Church, as having revived the prophetic tradition. Time had come in which Jesus' apostles would no longer be satisfied with only repeating sacred texts but rather making use of them to proclaim that a new age had begun.

{N}2,{/}10 {C}The Son of Man has the power on earth to forgive sins{/}. To understand this statement, we must ask first if Jesus himself proclaimed it, and if He said it at that exact moment. The fact that all three synoptic Gospels present this statement indicates that it certainly formed part of the primitive tradition. We must also remember that contemporary Jews seldom pronounced the name of God. Instead, they said, "the Heavens." Jesus' critics very probably said, "Who can forgive except the Heavens?" To which Jesus responded, "But on earth the Son of Man has power..." as we see in Mt 16,19 and 18,18.
In the Jewish religion, no one had power to forgive sins. A priest could only verify whether a sin had been committed or if satisfaction had been made through restitution or sacrifice. Jesus primarily affirms here, what is evident to everyone, that forgiveness has been granted on earth, and that God has confirmed the fact. But He makes this statement in such a way that He attributes an authority to Himself that no one else would dare to claim.

{N}2,{/}16 This detail helps us to capture the environment in which Jesus found Himself. The criticism does not come from some Pharisees alien to the group of disciples who would reproach the disciples. At this beginning stage, Jesus' preaching was a phenomenon limited to Galilee, which did not yet have any effect on the Pharisees as a group. Several teachers of the Law of that province are attracted to Jesus' campaign and share his priorities. Mingling with his disciples, they are invited to eat with the outcasts. Immediately they realize the consequences of eating with sinners and in the house of sinners. Everyone will become ritually impure, and they openly communicate their concern to the bystanders: "Where is he leading us? We will have to purify ourselves again!"

{N}3,{/}5 The original text says: "saddened to see the hardness of their heart." In Jewish culture, the heart stands for one's conscience or inner awareness. These good-hearted believers are not resisting Jesus out of malice, but rather because of their closed mentality that shackles them to the letter of the Law. Jesus is saddened by their blindness, which is not a sin in itself, but it quickly leads to condemning anyone with a different opinion. With that, they use every means possible to get rid of the person disturbing their peace of mind. 

{N}3,{/}14 Several ancient manuscripts add the expression, "those whom He named Apostles," after the words, "the Twelve." It is very probable that copyists incorporated this phrase from Lk 6,13, thinking that if Luke quoted these words, they were an authentic saying of Jesus. That supposition would justify their incorporation into Mark's version. However, it is much more probable that Luke had added the words, "whom he also called apostles," since in his time the Twelve were customarily referred to as the Apostles. Nonetheless, for Jesus Himself they were simply "the Twelve," a term used most consistently in the Gospel (See also 1Cor 15,5). 
{C}Apostle{/} is a Greek term and very possibly was introduced by the primitive Christian community. But even this is not sure: at that time even common people of Galilee could not live without using some words of Greek and Jesus himself could have done.

{N}3,{/}31 {N}THE BROTHERS OF JESUS{/}
What is doing here Mary with the{C} brothers of Jesus{/}? Let us not condemn those relatives of Jesus who will become an important element of the early Church. Mary, the widow of Joseph and orphan of Jesus had to live with them, as it was usual at that time. This could have been a part of her cross till the moment in which John took charge of her.
Here, we will simply supplement what already appears in the commentary on 3,31. One may be surprised that the gospel's testimonies in this respect should be usually interpreted with such little impartiality. Will it be because the insistence (and at times the excesses) of the catholic preaching referring to Mary are refuted by a more objective examination of the texts? What is actually worth mentioning is that on this point many deny Gospel testimonies and information with no more arguments than some "it may be" and "it can be thought that".
First, let's clarify that the teaching about the "perpetual virginity of Mary" is not merely an ancient tradition, as even some Catholic authors say. Rather, this is a matter of faith and an article of the Creed based on revelation. We are not dealing simply with pious devotion concerning events that are open to discussion. Mary was to become the mother of God's Son in the strictest sense of the word. If God's only Son was conceived by an act of free will worthy both of God and of a woman conscious of the unique grace offered to her, it was impossible for God not to have made her his own in the exclusive and definitive form indicated by virginity. No one who has had a deep spiritual experience will dare to question this point. This spiritual intuition of divine truth forms the basis for the constant affirmation of Christian faith. When we manifest our belief in this reality, we are unveiling God's face as manifested in the Scriptures. And we should do so, regardless of the ignorance of other Churches about this aspect of God's wonders.
Now to the texts in question. Are they ambiguous? We said that if the brothers of Jesus were his mother's children, the author should have written, "your mother and your mother's sons." But we do not find this anywhere referring to Jesus. Still more indicative is the question, that if the three Gospels wanted to document Jesus' response at this moment, why didn't they quote the most obvious and appropriate text that everyone knew: "I have become a stranger to my kindred, an alien to my mother's sons" (Ps 69,9)? This psalm appears fifteen times in the New Testament, nevertheless, when the Gospels refer to the "brothers" of Jesus, verse 9 is never quoted as any Jew would have done. The early Church would certainly have used it, if Jesus had had brothers, sons of his mother.
On the other hand, the arguments against interpreting the word, "brothers," as a reference to "relatives" are very weak. We did not find more than these two. The first: Hebrew texts use {C}brother{/} in a very wide sense, but here we are in a Greek gospel and Greek has precise words for relatives. Response: all the Greek translations of the Bible keep the word {C}brother {/}everywhere it is found in Hebrew original, may it mean true brothers or relatives. The second argument we found is the following. An exegete discovered that in one place of the New Testament Paul uses the specific Greek word, "cousin" (Col 4,10). The exegete concludes: If Paul used it in that place, why did he not use it, speaking of the brothers of the Lord, if they were actually cousins? Response: Paul specifically used "cousin" in Colossians because his Greek correspondents knew Aristarcos as a "cousin of Barnabas". Elsewhere Paul spoke of the "brothers of the Lord" because that was the name that everyone gave to the cousins of Jesus in an Aramean context and that remained either in the spoken language or in the Greek translations. 
We talked about the weight that the testimony of Mk 15,40 has, supported by Mk 15,47 and Mt 27,56 with respect to Mary, the mother of James and of Joseph. Those who oppose this overwhelming linguistic and cultural evidence never brought more that conjectures and hypothesis. Why do Mary's virginity and the mention of her only son disturb so many intelligent people? There must be unvoiced factors, as John says, "They hated me without cause" 15,25.

{N}4,{/}16 The whole presentation of the parable of the Sower retains characteristics of its use in preparing new believers for baptism. The purpose the catechists had in mind was to have the candidates seriously examine their own dispositions in receiving the teachings of the faith. Jesus, on the other hand, must have insisted on another aspect to his disciples. Even when the seeds encountered many difficulties, the missionaries should still expect a harvest.

{N}5,{/}40 "Talitha kum!" That means: Little girl, get up! These are Jesus' own words in his native Aramean, the common language of all Jews in Palestine. Mark has also preserved other original words of Jesus (7,34; 15,34).
Jesus spoke Aramean, but what was the original language of our Gospels? All New Testament texts are in Greek, but surely much of the Gospels was translated from previous texts written in a semitic language. At that time there were two: Aramean, which the people spoke, and Hebrew, which was the holy language for the Scriptures, but which was not spoken. Here, if Mark were translating a primitive version written in Aramean, there would be no reason for him to conserve these two words which would not be distinguished from the rest. Yet if, on the contrary, the primitive story was written down in Hebrew, a language that was not spoken but was used for holy texts, it is better understood that its writer had wanted to keep some of Jesus' actual words. Then he did not need to translate because everyone understood them. Later Mark will have translated into Greek everything that was in Hebrew, respecting the aramean words of the text, but adding their translation for the Greeks who could not understand them. 
From that we may conclude that the primitive texts from which Mark wrote these accounts were written in Hebrew. Another conclusion we can draw from that is that already in the very beginning, these testimonies were considered to be holy writings.

{N}6,{/}1 {C}Who is He but the carpenter{/}. This is the only place where Jesus is called {C}son of Mary{/}. For Jews to say this, is very strange, perhaps even an insult. Normally, they would call him, son of Joseph. In fact, ancient manuscripts read: "the son of the carpenter", as in Mt 13,55 and this text is confirmed by Origen saying that nowhere in the Gospel is Jesus called: "the carpenter". Other manuscripts read: the son of the carpenter and of Mary. The actual text must have been modified out of respect for Mary.

{N}6,{/}45 {C}Two hundred{/} {C}denarius{/}. With this amount of money they could buy two thousand liters of flour for five thousand people and each one had a main part of the daily ration.
John's Gospel situates the sermon about the bread of life in this place, and the rupture that occurred between Jesus and the majority of his disciples. The present verse confirms for us that the first abandonment by the crowds took place here, from which would result the isolation of Jesus and the triumph of his adversaries. Jesus crosses the lake and takes advantage of the occasion for a brief mission into Decapolis. The majority of inhabitants of this territory were known as Greeks, meaning, numerous non-Jewish ethnic groups in Palestine, who had adopted the Greek language and culture. Jesus recognized in 7,24 that his mission was limited to the lost sheep of Israel. However, this mission in Greek territory shows that it would be a mistake always to absolutize and universalize each one of Jesus sayings.

{N}6,{/}52 {C}They had not understood about the loaves{/}, nor did they know that Jesus was master of nature.

{N}6,{/}56 {C}Touch the fringe of his cloak{/}. Jesus wore a cloak with trimmings on the four corners, as the Law required (Num 15,38). Their purpose was to remind others about the Law.

{N}7,{/}1 This whole section (chapters 6 - 9), which Mark and Matthew have in common, contains events grouped together perhaps for catechesis, much before these Gospels were written. The present episode teaches about the true purity required of Christians. Since it follows the multiplication of the loaves, it can be understood as a preparation for the Eucharist. Jesus' rejection of the fundamental distinction demanded by the Law between what is pure and impure, clean and unclean, served as a criterion for accepting pagan peoples into the Church, since the Jewish purity code had excluded them.
Jesus argues with a delegation of teachers of the Law sent from Jerusalem, just as in 3,22. It may be that the present incident occurred at the same time. In 7,3-4, Mark adds details about Jewish traditions that his readers in Rome would not be familiar with. 

{N}7,{/}5 {C}The tradition of the ancestors{/}. The teachers of the Law claim the authority "of the ancestors" for what they themselves are reformulating, expanding, and transmitting orally. Jesus attacks this claim to authority for what is merely their own interpretation. Many Jews did not understand Jesus' distinction, and became indignant with Him. Jesus is not voicing the "Protestant" argument here, that is, placing the Bible, as the only source of revelation, in opposition to the Tradition of the religious community of Israel. Jesus accepts, just as the Pharisees do, the official interpretation of the Bible (Mt 23,2), yet he does not rush to call "Tradition" what are the mere teachings of contemporary teachers.
Later Jesus expresses the famous sentence: {C}What enters into the person.{/}.. He was referring to food eaten with "impure" hands, because the obligatory rites, either before or during meals, of purification with water were becoming more numerous (Jn 2,6). Jesus' broader intention, of course, was to criticize the ancient distinction between clean and unclean foods (Lev 11).
What comes from outside is food and enters the stomach, not the heart. What comes out of the person is the product of his or her intentions, that is, from their heart. Jesus demythologizes the language, separating what is merely biological from what is interior or spiritual. He opposes {C}heart{/} and {C}stomach{/} the way Paul will oppose the stomach and the body in 1Cor 6,13.

{N}7,{/}17 The text says: "They asked him about this parable." This sentence is a parable in as much as it reveals to us an important aspect of God's Reign that will only be gradually understood in all of its implications. All of creation is pure; sin comes only from humankind. This perspective is so revolutionary that Jesus can only explain it privately to his disciples. And in spite of having explained it, the Church will need years of conflicts and revelations in order to make its conclusions understood (Acts 10-11; Eph 3,5; Gal 2,11). 

{N}7,{/}19 The second part of this verse could be translated: "... is converted into manure, -in fact (Jesus) purified all foods" or "... is converted into manure and (in this way) all foods are purified." This second translation sounds better, but it does not emphasize what Jesus wanted to say.
We adopt the first version in which Mark makes a somewhat ungrammatical parenthesis, from which he draws the conclusion found in verse 18. However, that was certainly not Jesus' own conclusion, because He would have unnecessarily created a tremendous scandal by claiming that all the foods are pure. He Himself observed the laws of purity in the same way that the people did, that is, without the thousands of details added by tradition which the Pharisees strictly observed. This point will not be very important until non-Jews become Christians, then the Church will tell them that they are not bound by the prescriptions of Jewish Law (Acts 15).

{N}7,{/}31 Jesus continues walking along the borders of Galilee. In Decapolis there is a territory whose population is mainly pagan. {C}They gave glory to the God of Israel{/}. This expression fitting to the praise of non-Jews announces the time when pagans evangelized by the Church will give glory to the God of Israel (Rom 15,7-11; Eph 2,11-13).
This miracle of the deaf mute follows the pattern of the one in 8,22. They complement each other to demonstrate what is said in Is 35,5. They symbolize the healing that the disciples of Jesus receive upon being baptized. {C}Ephphetha{/}: one of Jesus' own words in Aramean that has been preserved.

{N}8,{/}10 {C}Dalmanutha{/}: a town as unknown as {C}Magadan{/} which is read in Mt 15,39.

{N}8,{/}12 {N}THE GOOD USE OF SIGNS{/}
{C}To this people no sign will be given{/}. {C}This people{/} here, the {C}people of the present time{/} in the anterior sentence: these are two possible translations of the original Greek: "this generation". In reality, Jesus has given many signs (Jn 20,30) and John insists on the fact that his miracles form part of the signs that permit him to be recognized (Jn 10,38). Therefore, Jesus gives the impression here that He refuses to give any signs because they are ordering Him to give one (Jn 6,30). They did not have the proper disposition to pass from a sign to faith (Jn 6,26).
There are other passages, nevertheless, where Jesus complains that we always need signs in order to believe (Jn 4,48). For Him, the sign that God gives, just as prayers that are heard, are like a person who freely reveals himself to another, and that is the way he should be received (Jn 16,24). Many times in our relationship with God, we consider trust as something difficult and costly which God should not demand without having given clear proof that He exists, that He hears us, and that our services, actions, and obedience will be rewarded. Yet, from the moment that we demand these guarantees, we deny Him the only thing that interests Him, our trusting love. 
Why should He feel glad about our fulfilling our religious obligations or doing good works? These things are of little importance to Him. On the contrary, all of his happiness (the word is not too strong) consists in initiating us into a game of reciprocal love in which we become capable of taking one step at a time, testing whether or not He will respond, then taking a second step, and a tenth. This is a way of reaching eternal life.

{N}8,{/}34 Several times in these very decisive verses we have to substitute the word, {C}life{/}, to translate the original word, "soul". Jesus uses "soul" in the Hebrew sense of meaning one's life or very person. In verse 35, "save your soul" means to preserve it, and "lose your soul," means to risk or sacrifice yourself. The same is true in verse 36, "injure your soul," and in verse 37, "recover your soul," where one can choose between "yourself" and "your life."

{N}8,{/}38 {C}The Son of Man{/}. This title orients us toward the glorious coming of Christ. "He will come in the glory of his Father," something like in Dn 7,13, but here it talks about {C}his Father{/}. {C}Surrounded by his holy angels{/}. These are angels of God and they are holy because they receive their mission from Him.

{N}9,{/}1 {C}Some of those that are here...{/} In the actual text of the Gospels, this sentence should be interpreted as an announcement of the Transfiguration, which follows immediately afterwards, during which some of the Apostles saw God's Kingdom identified with the glorified Jesus. 
This phrase from 9,1 is also related to the preceding 8,38. After announcing this glorious coming, Jesus affirms that some of those present will see this coming. In this case the expression, "coming with power," should be understood as a coming of Christ the Judge. For this reason several authors think that Jesus was referring to the destruction of Jerusalem, which several of his disciples would witness and which for Jesus was like an anticipation of the judgment. Some others think that Jesus was saying that He would return soon, and that he was mistaken.
Luke probably comes closest to the primitive meaning: "Some will not die without having seen God's Reign (Lk 8,27), understood as the Transfiguration. Jesus had said several times that the Reign was already present, consequently no one should wait for prodigious events signaling its coming (Lk 17,20).
On the other hand, the three synoptic Gospels present the Transfiguration together with the baptism of Jesus by John as one of the few divine signs conceded to Jesus. Both signal the beginning of a new stage in his mission. The Transfiguration announces that the Passion is very near, as Jesus says with all clarity in Lk 9,31. That is the reason for his warning to the Apostles in Mark 9. Since Jesus knew that this glorious manifestation was going to take place, and having decided that only three of the Apostles would accompany him, the anticipated announcement would permit the rest to receive the testimony of those three privileged ones later on.
In the years after the Resurrection, it is very possible that the expectation of an early coming of Jesus brought with it the need to modify Jesus' phrase, and to refer it to this coming. Later this phrase, with its new meaning, would have brought Mark and Luke to place here the previous sentence: "If anyone is ashamed..." Anyway, this somewhat enigmatic sentence is related to the waiting of first generation Christians (1Cor 15,51; 1Thes 4,15) and to the rumors that were circulating with regards to the Apostle John (Jn 21,23). And it is noteworthy that in spite of the doubts about how it had been verified, the Evangelists maintained it.

{N}9,{/}13 {C}Just as it was written about him.{/} None of the texts refer directly to John's death. It may be that this notation was no more than a formula to say: They treated him as God had foreseen and ordered. What is more important for us to recognize here is Jesus' specific manner of interpreting Scripture. For Him, the prophecies referring to the Servant of Yahweh formed the center of Old Testament prophecy, and they were equally valid for his Apostles and prophets as for Jesus himself.

{N}9,{/}14 It is no accident that the disciples got into trouble while Jesus was up on the mountain. The same had happened to Moses in the Sinai, when the Tempter revengefully took advantage of his absence with the Golden Calf.
Each Evangelist treats this episode according to his own genius. Mark develops a version similar to Luke's with the help of other contributions (very possibly the catechesis of Peter). However, the various accounts cannot be simply integrated into one. Paragraphs 20-27 do not follow 14-19 in sequential thought. In 16 Jesus asks the people a question, but they do not respond, although we find Jesus' negative comment to them in 19. On the other hand the entreaty of the father in 17-18 is answered in 21-24. 
As for the demon, it is a {C}dumb spirit{/} (17), a {C}deaf and mute{/} spirit (25). This refers to a very rebellious demon that turns a deaf ear to the exorcist's orders and that refuses to say his name, all of which makes it difficult to expel it from the boy.

{N}9,{/}19 The present event comes to temper the enthusiasm that the disciples of Jesus could be feeling upon seeing his miracles. Jesus has just reprimanded Peter who was doing no more than expressing his confidence in the Messiah's triumph. The present warning of incredulity is valid both for the Apostles as for all subsequent disciples. They should not trust too much in the miracles that Jesus promises to anyone with a grain of faith, since their contemporaries, just as his, are an incredulous people.
{C}With prayer{/}, or {C}with prayer and fasting{/}? The manuscripts are divided on this point and it is almost impossible to distinguish which were Jesus' authentic words, since He never insisted on the value of fasting. An exception might be in the case of exorcisms.

{N}9,{/}33 This paragraph has two different themes: Knowing who is the greatest and welcoming Jesus in the person of children. When comparing the versions of Matthew and Luke, we see that each of these Evangelists situates the questions differently. In addition, there are the parallel texts of Mt 1-10 and Lk 9,46-48. Later, we see the attitude of James and John in Mt 20,20 and Mk 10,35, which is magnified by an equivalent dispute in Lk 22,24. And finally there is Jesus' response to those who do not like to see him blessing children: Mt 19,13; Mk 10,13; Lk 18,15.
In 9,33 Jesus responds to the first question with the admonition: {C}He who wants to be first, should become servant of all{/}.
Later, He has them bring a child to him, to demonstrate that the rank of the one received is irrelevant. Rather, what matters is that in his or her person Christ and his Father are welcomed.
In Luke 9,46-48 both of Jesus' responses are combined into one. The social status of the one being received has no importance whatsoever, since in receiving any person, you receive Christ and his Father.
Mark and Luke omit here the words about having a child-like spirit and the welcoming of the Reign, only to mention them in the incident narrated in Mk 10,13.
Matthew forgot that what occasioned Jesus' remarks was a rivalry among his own followers. In Matthew, Jesus responds just as a Teacher should when asked a pious question by his disciples. He turns unexpectedly to the theme of the Reign of the Heavens, and what interests him is a spiritual attitude. Consequently, Matthew leaves out Jesus' warning to his Apostles, very especially to the three "greatest" (Peter and the two sons of Zebedee), about becoming a servant. So Jesus calls a child to Himself in order to illustrate a child-like spirit. Only afterwards, He speaks of welcoming children, which he immediately changes to the "little ones", meaning any simple believers and people without social status. Matthew waits until 20,20 to have Jesus respond to those who look for the first place.

{N}9,{/}43 {C}Go into hell{/}, {C}the Gehenna{/}. Jesus talks about the abyss into which those are thrown who have sacrificed everything for the sake of an idol to which they had become enslaved. Shouldn't we think that they have destroyed their destiny? There are neither words nor images that can express the irreparable loss of those who destroyed their destiny, which will never end for them. Will there be a true eternity for them when time ends? What type of inconsolable sadness and irremediable frustration will be the price of this definitive failure, of not having given birth to what one has inside? The Gospel states clearly that our total destiny is determined in this present existence by our free choice. However, the Gospel cannot describe what we call hell and purgatory. Jesus, on his part, recalls two images used by the prophets. First, He mentions {C}Gehenna{/}, the valley on the southwest side of Jerusalem, a place covered with tombs, profaned by multiple sacrifices of children who had been burned, and which was considered to be evil. Then He mentions {C}fire and worms{/} which devour the cadavers of the rebels in Is 66,24. 

{N}9,{/}50 Numerous pages of our Gospels were repeated from memory for years before being written down. At a time when very few books were available in daily life and when there were neither daily newspapers nor newscasts, people relied on their memory for many things. Individuals could repeat entire discourses from memory and the one speaking used mnemonic formulas to help memorize what he was going to say. A common aid was to place a key word at the end of one theme and at the beginning of the one that followed, which served to connect the two. This is the purpose of {C}salt{/} connecting verses 49 and 50, although salt had nothing to do with the theme of verses 42-49.
The end of verse 49 varies greatly in the ancient manuscripts that we have available. Apparently everyone was confused about its meaning. Most probably, the Evangelist used a comparison in which salt represented something that had a lasting effect. Salty foods are self-preserving, and salty offerings were considered as having an eternal value. In this sense, the fire mentioned would be everlasting.

{N}10,{/}14 This whole chapter and the beginning of the next one presented actions and words of Jesus that surprised and even deeply shocked those around Him. His attitude toward children is on the list of those very unique gestures that his disciples respected in spite of not understanding them. Let us not forget that this was a very male oriented society in which the children were the mother's concern and did not interest the rest of the world. For Matthew and Mark, they were little children, for Luke, they brought even the smallest children to Him.

{N}10,{/}40 In some ancient manuscripts this verse ends with the same meaning as in Mt 20,23, but the most important ones have the text we give here. Some authors took this response word for word and tried to fix the hierarchical protocol of Heaven: Mary, John the Baptist, or Joseph, or Moses...

{N}11,{/}16 {C}He would not let anyone carry things...{/} to take a short cut through, instead of around the Temple on their way to the city.

{N}11,{/}20 Contrary to Matthew, according to which the fig tree dries up immediately, Mark situates the event on the next day. In this case as in many others, rationalistic interpreters claim that the later tradition invented the prodigy in order to confirm the parable of the fig tree in Lk 13,6. Why don't these skeptics consult present day people who have witnessed such cases of a tree drying up when its owner dyes?

{N}11,{/}25 {C}And when you stand...{/} When someone perseveres asking God for something in prayer, God enlightens him to transform his dispositions. The individual cannot achieve total confidence in God without having first forgiven others. Forgive in order to be heard. See something similar in 1P 3,7. Persons with the charism to heal begin by helping the sick person to forgive all others, to ask forgiveness for his own errors, and to forgive himself for his own past failures. Only then will the grace of healing act freely.

{N}12,{/}13 In Mark's version, the alliance between Herod's partisans and the Pharisees, as in 3,6 and 8,15, suggests that this controversy also takes place during the Galilean ministry of Jesus.

{N}12,{/}30 {C}Hear, Israel!{/} The Hebrew text can be translated: "Yahweh, our God, is the only Yahweh," or: "Yahweh, our God is an only Yahweh." The first means: Yahweh is the only living God. The second means that there cannot be as many Yahwehs as there are diverse temples in Israel. He is the One and Only, and his presence is found in only one place. In the Greek Bible, Yahweh is translated as, Lord, without the article, "the." In the present verse we read: "Lord, our God, is one Lord," which the Evangelist Mark reproduces faithfully.
{C}With all your soul, with all your intelligence...{/} The Greek text of Dt 6,5 says, as does the Hebrew text: "heart, soul, strength." Mark adds here, "with all your intelligence," thus restoring the original Hebrew sense. In Hebrew culture, the heart designates the faculty of thinking and perceiving, more than feeling, which is better expressed with the word: soul.

{N}12,{/}35 Jesus quotes Psalm 110. People thought that David was the sole author of the Book of Psalms. The author says: {C}Oracle of the Lord for my lord{/}. The second, "my lord," is a more common term, equivalent to: my master. Some have wondered whether this might include a prophetic announcement of being the Messiah. No, in this Psalm there is but what Jesus has it to say. In fact it was enough for Jesus to silence these know-it-alls. However, we can surmise that if that Psalm immediately came to mind, it was because He was continually conscious of his messianic vocation. And if his disciples, who forgot 99% of his actions and sayings, remembered this one, it was because this Psalm contained two expressions that will have greater meaning for them in the risen Jesus: "Sit at my right hand," and "You are a priest for all eternity, just like Melchizedek" (Heb chapter 7).

{N}12,{/}41 A Jewish tradition claims that, if only the so-called "Wall of lamentation" remains from the now destroyed Temple, this is because this part of the construction was done with the offerings of the poor.

{N}13,{/}1 The discourse beginning here is sometimes called either the {C}apocalypse of the synoptic{/} or the {C}eschatological discourse{/}.
Apocalypse: see the commentary on Mt 23,1.
Eschatological: refers to the last times or, in Christianity, to the fullness of divine communication, to what is definitive and already present in our history by the coming of Christ.
The pretext for this discourse is the disciples' admiration of the Temple newly constructed by Herod. The people wondered at its enormous stones, some five meters long, and its elaborate adornments donated kings and the wealthy, for example, the gold covered doors. Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, 500 meters from the Temple as the bird flies, having an unobstructed view across the Kidron Valley. They asked him privately, since any prophecy about the destruction of the Temple that was not even yet finished, must contain serious and secret information, besides being a very seditious subject (see 14,58). Only Andrew, Simon Peter's brother, was with the group of the Three.
Each Evangelist gives his own interpretation of Jesus' prophetic words that we read here. These words were not all spoken on the same occasion, nor are they always easy to understand. Therefore, we will not attempt a simple parallel comparison, paragraph by paragraph. The reader should read each Evangelist through completely in order to understand his particular perspective.
One thing the three Evangelists do agree upon in this context is giving Jesus' warning to those who worry too much about signs of an imminent end of the world. Don't be always waiting for New Age, otherwise you run the risk of being fooled. In 13,6 the text says only: {C}I am{/}, to which we added the following words for better comprehension.

{N}13,{/}9 {C}You will be taken to Jewish courts{/}. (See the note on Mt 10,17.) In this way they will have the opportunity to give testimony (Act 9,15; 23,11).

{N}13,{/}10 {C}Because the Gospel must first be proclaimed to all the nations{/}. This is probably not meant as a sign of the end of the world, but rather of the tragedy that is going to happen in Palestine some thirty years later. The destruction of the Temple and the cessation of worship will not occur before the new era has begun in which the Gospel is being preached in many nations and church communities are being implanted in all parts of the Roman Empire. Regarding this sign, see 14,9 and 2Thes 2,6.

{N}13,{/}14 Interpreters do not agree to what extent Jesus' words distinguish between the fall of Jerusalem and the end of the world. Many interpreters present the following alternative. If the two events are clearly distinguished, it is because the Evangelists corrected the text after the fall of Jerusalem, when they saw that the end of the world did not occur. Others say to the contrary, that if Jesus is the one speaking these words, He must have confused the two events, because surely He expected the end of history to happen very soon.
In reality, we don't have any reason to believe that Jesus expected mistakenly such an imminent end of history (See Mt 10,23 and 16,28). An analysis of all the references in the Gospel to a long waiting period for the Church gives no reason to doubt that Jesus expected long times for his Church. Certainly, the Evangelists would not have changed all of these references on their own initiative. Rather, they saw the destruction of the Temple as the beginning of the time of the Gospel. 
The present text refers with all probability to the Jewish crisis of the years 66 to 70. But it is equally certain that Jesus must have expressed Himself in general and figurative terms, such as we read in Matthew and Mark, and not just with the precision proper to Luke. 

{N}13,{/}19 {C}There will be distress{/}. These words refer usually in the Bible to suffering preceding God's Judgment. Here it is related to the crisis of the Jewish nation, just as the following words also do, indicating that this crisis is a coming of God to judge history. {C}If the Lord had not shortened those days...{/} Jewish tradition was aware that even the worst disgraces were never equivalent to what our sins really deserved. God will shorten the punishment out of consideration for the chosen ones who are interceding for sinners.

{N}13,{/}21 Concluding this prophecy about the Jewish crisis, Mark returns to the initial warning (13,6): Be careful of liberators presenting themselves as the Messiah. There were a number of these false Messiahs (or: Christs) during the crisis of 66-70, and in the following years. Later, Bar Kochba initiated another liberation movement against the Romans, and even the great Jewish teacher Aquiba recognized him as the Messiah, until he was killed in the year 135. {C}The chosen ones{/}, that is, the disciples of Jesus, did not let themselves be carried away by Jewish nationalism, not only because it was destined to failure, but rather because nationalism pretended to give Israel its salvation after it had refused to recognize God's hour (Lk 19,42).

{N}13,{/}24 Mark says: "later," with no more details, having already concluded the warnings given by Jesus to his Apostles in 13,23. It is easy to see that Jesus is no longer talking directly to them, nor does he give them instructions for that day, because whoever is destined to be present at the end will not be able to escape.
{C}The sun will grow dark... {/}These are traditional images of a universe crumbling before the majesty of its supreme judge, figures taken from Is 13,10 and 34,4.

{N}14,{/}18 {C}While they were at the table.{/} The text says: "reclining." The gesture of reclining while eating indicates that they were celebrating the Last Supper in a comfortable and furnished home (14,15). Surely Jesus and his Apostles did not normally eat in the way that wealthy Greeks did, but Jesus wanted a certain luxury for that day.
{C}Woe to the one!{/} The text says, "Woe to the man!", distinguishing in this way: the Son of Man. and that man.
{C}Pronounce the blessing...{/}  (22), {C}give thanks...{/} (23). The first expression was used in the Eucharist of communities of Jewish origin, the second in the Eucharist of Greek communities (See the commentary on Mk 8,1).

{N}14,{/}22 The words, {C}This is my Body{/}, would not be enough to identity the bread with the Body of Christ in the strictest sense. To begin with, in the Hebrew language that Jesus used, the verb "to be" does not have the same meaning that it has for us. Therefore, the theological significance of this narration can only be grasped by studying the whole context. 
This supper is a holy banquet, as was the Jewish Passover supper. It is also necessary to recognize the holy and sanctifying character of the person of Jesus (See Mk 7,31; Lk 8,46; and the whole discourse on the bread of life in Jn 6). These characteristics cannot be recognized merely from the texts themselves, but rather from the understanding that the Apostles and the Church had of this mystery. For example, look at the great significance that Paul recognizes in Jesus' words of consecration over the bread and the cup in 1Cor 11, 26-29.
The text does not talk about bread and wine, but rather {C}bread{/} and {C}the cup{/}, following perhaps what was usual in everyday language. The term, cup, may have been used because it is also richer in meaning in Hebrew culture. However, we also find the expression, bread and wine, in Gen 14,18 and Pro 9,5. 

{N}14,{/}24 {C}Blood that will be shed for a multitude{/}. Much has been argued about these words because the original text preserves the Hebrew form used by Is 53,11-12: "for the many," and certain people understood them as: for many, but not for all. Yet this grammatical form in Is means: for the multitude. In fact, in the prophet's text, the servant is sacrificed for the multitude, meaning, for the people of Israel. 
And Jesus also sacrificed Himself (Jn 17,19 says: was consecrated) in order to purify and sanctify the people He was going to acquire: the remainder of Israel. The subject here is not atonement, as some have thought, either for the individual sins of some, or of many, or of all. Neither does it indicate whether Jesus is atoning only for Christians or for all of humankind. In speaking about Jesus' sacrifice for us.
Matthew and Mark use the same expression elsewhere (Mt 20,28 and Mk 10,45), and they see in that multitude the new redeemed people. In the same way in Jn 17,19 Jesus is consecrated for their sake, just as in Heb 10,14. In Eph 5,25 Christ is sacrificed for the Church. In Acts 20,28 He redeems the Church at the price of his blood. That reminds us of the first meaning of redemption: To acquire (Rev 5,9-10) the property of another, or to rescue one's property. Luke's text in 22,19-20 will say: That is given, and that is poured out for all of you (in plural). Only in 1 Tim 2,6 does it say in a rather vague way: for all.

{N}14,{/}36 Father or "Daddy"! Jesus was the first to speak of the Father with this simplicity and affection, which is scandalous for anyone who has not received the spirit of children (Rom 8,15; Gal 4,6).
{C}Do not do what I want. {/}The nature of Jesus is as complex as our own. Even if a person's spirit is totally united to the divine will, he still has to contend with his own fears and natural instinct of self-preservation. It is characteristic of the Spirit not to deify humans, so that they won't feel as if they were totally in control. Rather, the Spirit seems to abandon humans for a short time, or more often, lets them experience great insecurity, even while supporting them firmly in their obedience to God. Jesus turns to prayer three times in order to subdue and pacify the rebellion that he is experiencing.

{N}14,{/}63 {C}He tore his clothes{/}. He tore open about 20 centimeters of the cloth that had already been opened, and then sewn together again with fine thread. He was fulfilling a ritual gesture of indignation required whenever one heard a blasphemy.

{N}14,{/}68 Several manuscripts add here: {C}and the cock crowed{/}. But this is to justify verse 72 when the cock crows for the second time. In Palestine, cocks normally crowed twice, after midnight and, for the second time at dawn. In this way Peter's cock crows at dawn and it is the second time.

{N}15,{/}1 {C}They held council{/}. Several manuscripts say: they held a consultation, which would refer to a preparation for a meeting with Pilate.

{N}15,{/}8 The people went up to Pilate's residence that, with all probability, was in Herod's Palace. This is not the palace of Herod Antipas present in Jerusalem during those days (Lk 23,7). Rather it was his father', Herod the Great. The Gospel makes it understood that the priests intervene in support of a petition in favor of Barabbas, who had already been presented by an important group, probably lead by zealous nationalists.

{N}15,{/}21 {C}Simon, father of Alexander and Rufus{/}. These are both Roman names and surely these sons were well known in the primitive Church. But no proof exists that this Rufus is the one named in Rom 16,13.
The way to Calvary was relatively short, a little more than a kilometer through the narrow and crowded streets of Jerusalem.

{N}15,{/}25 {C}It was about nine o'clock in the morning{/}. The text says, the third hour. According to the traditional interpretation of the calendar of the Passion, Jesus is arrested in Gethsemane during the night of Thursday to Friday. If we add to that the two appearances of Jesus before the Jewish authorities, and later, his long appearance before Pilate with the interventions of the crowds, we will have to delay the hour of the crucifixion considerably. In that case, we must interpret the references to time: the third hour and the ninth hour, as merely symbolic references recalling the hours of sacrifice in the Temple. In that case, we may comment that the third hour has struck, but not yet the sixth, which stands for midday. On the other hand, if we situate the arrest of Jesus on the night between Tuesday and Wednesday, then Mark's notation is very likely.

{N}16,{/}9 Verses 9-20 do not belong to Mark's text and are missing in the oldest manuscripts. Some of the ancient manuscripts present another much shorter conclusion:
Those close to Peter proclaimed in a trustworthy way everything that was entrusted to them. Following this, Jesus Himself spread the sacred and incorruptible message of the time of salvation from east to west through them.
In some manuscripts another conclusion of an agnostic and much later style is read.

{N}16,{/}16 {N}THE ONE WHO DOES NOT BELIEVE WILL BE CONDEMNED{/}
The original text says: "The one who does not believe will be condemned." Even if we understand this as, "the one who refuses to believe," this is a terrible statement of incalculable effects.
The one refusing to believe is the person to whom the message has been presented. In the context of this paragraph, a series of signs will accompany the message, signs eloquent enough to be recognized as a message from heaven. The one who does not believe in such circumstances {C}will be condemned{/}, which means that the day he is judged by God and must account for his good and bad acts, he will receive condemnation with respect to this distrust: the rejection of faith was a fault on his part. The same is read in Mt 10,40.
{C} The one who believes and is baptized is saved{/}; meaning that he or she enjoys the gifts from that moment on that God has reserved for those who have recognized Him in the person of his Son. Thanks to their faith, they benefit from a reordering of all of their being. These are at the same time beneficiaries and cooperators in the mystery of salvation that God is accomplishing in the heart of human history. God has reserved for his special people, both those who are near and those who are far, an essential part of his work. And if they should refuse to fulfill their mission, humanity would be doomed to sink, in the full sense of the word.
One wonders how God could allow these truths to be interpreted so tendentiously in the Western Church even to the end of the nineteenth century. The bearers of the Gospel were convinced that everyone was obliged to accept their preaching, even when they spoke in a hateful or incomprehensible language or when they didn't show the signs indicated in the Gospel. They wanted to impose Baptism without, however, having initiated the candidates into a process leading to a rebirth. Instead, they expected the rites that they performed to bring about results as if by magic. They maintained that anyone who did not believe lost eternal salvation and was condemned to a hell without end, something that the text does not say. See the Introduction to the Book of Jonah in this respect.
This erroneous interpretation invited the ecclesiastical institution to consider that it was the "saved ones" in comparison to the vast majority who were lost. Such thinking gives rise to a certain violence often manifested in the heart of those who believe that God has chosen them alone to communicate the absolute truth to the world.
It is surprising that this false interpretation of Scripture was so commonly accepted without any prophets rising up to argue against it. This is a mystery. However, let us recognize that this black and white vision of a world without any half tones did manage to awaken a sense of determination in millions of believers to dominate their instincts and often to carry out heroic actions: suffer everything rather than sin.

