When He came into the house, His disciplesbegan questioning Him privately, “Why could we not drive it out?” And He said to them, “This kind cannot come out by anything but prayer.” (Mark 9:28-29).

The disciples could not cast out the unclean spirit that was causing a boy to be deaf and mute. When they asked Jesus why they could not cast it out, Jesus told them that only prayer could cast it out. So what is the difference between commanding and praying? May I suggest that the disciples lacked the faith to speak authoritatively to this particular demon (cf. Matthew 17:20). By prayer they could appeal to the authority of the Lord. This limitation of gifting by the measure of faith can also be found from Paul's description of certain gifts:

We have different gifts, according to the grace given to each of us. If your gift is prophesying, then prophesy in accordance with your faith (Romans 12:6).

Power in healing, casting out demons, and the performance of supernatural acts seem to require measures of faith, which not everyone possesses. But everyone can pray, by which people can make their appeal to God, who can do wonders in spite of their lack of faith. So Jesus could command the demon out, but the disciples had to appeal to the Lord to do the same.

This perspective is by no means absolutely certain. I would love to get the point of view of others on Jesus' words, "This kind cannot come out by anything but prayer."

Mark 8
3 And if I send them away hungry to their homes, they will faint on the way. And some of them have come from far away."

I revert in my life that when something doesn't go to my desires that it must be for a good reason or it will work out to a good end; this is biblical (cf Romans 8:28). But while the end is taken care of I don't forget that he also cares. Recall that God was setting up his authority "I" Jesus, "rule over the Sabbath, I rule over life and death, I rule over creation" but he cared that they were hungry.

While we speak of "for the glory of God" he cares and has compassion along the way; the wholesome goodness and greatness of God.  Knowing this the purpose of his works can better be reasoned. But it can seem cold in a time of great loss or reflecting on those times, such as the loss of a young life.

This is one of those aspects of God I am in awe. He is always full of purpose, meaning, and usefulness. We may not want this moment to be but in God's hands you can bet there is more than you realize. During a time of loss it is true God knew, it is true God agreed/allowed, it is true he is loving you. To ask "why" is to ask The Source of purpose and meaning for his multilayered, awesome depth, and complex purposes - wrapped up in "for his glory."

Consider Jesus in the garden, pleading for that moment to be different. He received a cold "no," a "you will hang on a tree bleed and die." No one understands better God's profundity than Jesus. With that understanding Jesus says "your will be done." In that moment of cold reality when God allowed this evil to be done to his only begotten son you see the entire book, and therefore the entirety of creation, coming to its most decisive move for our future- because of evil's plans, evil is destroyed; because of evil's pride, evil is brought down; Evil set up a lynch for Good, but evil found itself hanging.

Because of this cold moment, sins are forgiven, millions will be adopted to glory, the earth will not groan, healing was unleashed, tears dried up - the most awesome butterfly effect.

So God is the God of the butterfly effect. In a moment set up to teach that he has authority to manifest for any need, to teach what "leaven" means, to teach he is God, to glorify his name by planting seeds of faith in his disciples, he stops and has compassion on a hungry people.

How awesome.

------------------ 

Mark 9
2 And after six days Jesus took with him Peter and James and John, and led them up a high mountain by themselves. And he was transfigured before them,

Observation
Mark 3:16-17 identifies the 12 disciples. 3 of who were given special names. Simon, Cephas, for identifying Jesus as Christ, and John and James as Boanerges, the Sons of Thunder; the latter were possibly named for their temper or their boisterousness. No explanation of the events that lead to this name are given. Luke 9:51-54 tells of their rash request to call fire down on a village. 'Rash' since Jesus rebuked them. Mark 10:35 has more insight into their rashness with requests like "Teacher, we want you to do for us whatever we ask of you."

There was another known as a zealot but no reference is given that it was given by God. Perhaps his zeal was for something else besides God, as I would say Peter, James and John had for God.

Perhaps these identifiable traits were a signal to be his closest disciples and there brought to his transfiguration and private prayer in the garden. I thought it interesting that the ones Jesus names were the ones closet to him.

...............

Names
As for God changing people's names, God named someone after they showed the new name's meaning; not before. As a sign to always point where the change happened, such as Abraham, Sarah, and Israel.

As for people naming people, the names too came from seeing a trait related to them, such as Jacob

Or in some cases God named to point to a future he has prepared such as, Methuselah, Isaiah's kids Shear-Jashub and Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz, John and Jesus.

Names are never poised to be the cause of the change or destiny, but as a witness to God's word.

Then he called the crowd to him along with his disciples and said: “Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me. For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me and for the gospel will save it. What good is it for someone to gain the whole world, yet forfeit their soul? Or what can anyone give in exchange for their soul? If anyone is ashamed of me and my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will be ashamed of them when he comes in his Father’s glory with the holy angels (Mark 8:34-38).

There is a version of this call to discipleship in each of the synoptic (Matthew, Mark, Luke) gospels. There is debate as to whether this is a call to salvation as well, because the language seems to suggest a clear dichotomy between, on the one hand, saving one's life in betrayal of the gospel and losing one's soul and, on the other hand, losing one's life for the gospel and preserving one's soul. So is this level of devotion also a requirement for salvation? If so, isn't this a works based, rather than a grace based, salvation? 

I believe that the key to understanding this passage lies in the immediate context of Jesus' steps to the cross. Remember, Peter has just been strongly rebuked by Jesus for trying to dissuade Him from going to the cross (Mark 8:31-33). Jesus says that he is thinking like Satan rather than like a believer.

Jesus taught the disciples that His mission required His suffering and death. What is more, if anyone truly wanted to follow Him, they would likely suffer the same fate. And, as tradition records, all the disciples were martyred for their faith in Christ. And before Christianity was embraced by the state, persecution and death were the common fate of many, if not most, Christians. So Paul also wrote, "In fact, everyone who wants to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted" (2 Timothy 3:12). Therefore, what Jesus stated here was not so much a universal principle for faith but a very-present reality for His immediate followers. A contemporary example might be Muslim converts to Christianity living in a radical Islamic culture. They too would face the life-and-death choice of following Christ or remaining Muslim. 

Further support for this understanding of Jesus' call to discipleship is Jesus' identifying the historical context with the expression "this adulterous and sinful generation" (Mark 8:34), which highlights not every generation per se, but the generation that was demanding more signs while rejecting the many clear signs God gave them of Jesus as God's chosen Messiah. This was the generation of leaders that would persecute and kill the Son of Man (Mark 8:31). These very leaders would also persecute and kill those who follow Christ.

Thus, while today we discuss and debate the matter of degrees of faith and devotion, it was hardly an option for many Christians in Jesus' day. Simply identifying themselves as a Christian could mean the death sentence.  

Praise God that we are also given the failures of the disciples and Peter in this regard. In spite of these words from Christ, when Jesus was arrested, all the disciples fled and Peter three times denied even knowing Christ. Now, they would later repent and be restored, except Judas Iscariot, but the very fact of their failure and need for restoration reminds us that salvation is forever grace-based. Does this diminish the truth and seriousness of the call? No, but it should humble us, as we reflect on our inability and need for God's grace in the face of God's high standards.

Jesus foretells his coming death, but Peter naively objects and is harshly criticized by Jesus.

(Mark 8:31-36) "He then began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders, the chief priests and the teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and after three days rise again. He spoke plainly about this, and Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him. But when Jesus turned and looked at his disciples, he rebuked Peter. "Get behind me, Satan!" he said. "You do not have in mind the concerns of God, but merely human concerns."

Its an interesting exchange as Peter does not understand yet that Christ's death was ordained by God, and speaks for his compassion and love for Christ. Jesus rebukes him harshly and implies his suggestion is motivated by Satan. Its seemed quite harsh to me, but Jesus wanted to make the point to Peter and the disciples that Gods will is what matters, even though they don’t see the big picture. Of course Peter does not realize that all humanity is at stake, as salvation came through Christ's sacrifice.

Jesus continues that the sacrifice would not be His alone.

"Then he called the crowd to him along with his disciples and said: "Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me. For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me and for the gospel will save it. What good is it for someone to gain the whole world, yet forfeit their soul? Or what can anyone give in exchange for their soul?"

Gods grace is a free gift and available to all that accept it. However, Christ warns that all that follow Him will experience trials and even persecution in His name. While I have experienced my share of trials, and there were times when I questioned God I have learned to take refuge in Gods promise.

"For I know the plans I have for you," declares the LORD, "plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future." (Jer 29:11)

Friends, if you have the desire to memorize one of the four gospels, I would encourage you to choose Mark's Gospel. It is the shortest, but it carries the substance of the life and message of Christ. In fact, many believe that it is the sourcebook for the other Gospels. And in memorizing it you will gain wonderful insight and understanding beyond those that have not memorized it, because you will have the ability to see the whole book in your mind in a way that a verse-by-verse or chapter-by-chapter study cannot easily achieve.

Now, a few comments about these chapters. In Mark 8:15 Jesus tells the disciples to "beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and the leaven of Herod." The disciples think that Jesus was upset with them because they had forgotten to bring bread. In response to their thoughts, Jesus says, "Do you not yet perceive nor understand? Is your heart still hardened? Having eyes, do you not see? And having ears, do you not hear?" (Mark 8:17-18). Does this sound familiar? It should, for in Mark 4:12 Jesus said something similar, citing Isaiah 6:9-10,

Seeing they may see and not perceive,
And hearing they may hear and not understand
Lest they should turn,
And their sins be forgiven them.

In that context, Jesus was explaining to the disciples why He spoke in parables. He explained that He did so because the mystery of the kingdom of God was to be hidden to unbelieving outsiders but revealed to the believing disciples. Yet, here He criticizes them for being like the unbelieving outsiders, failing to perceive Jesus' words through the eyes of faith.

Even though we too have been granted understanding of the mystery of the kingdom of God, I wonder if we still live like "unbelieving outsiders," failing to perceive the challenges in our lives through the eyes of faith? The Scripture says, "If God is for us, who can be against us?" (Romans 8:31). This is not a real question for us to respond, "Let me think?..." No, it is a rhetorical question, for the answer is "No one! No one can stand against us because God, who is greater than all, is for us." So, dear friends, why do you fret over this hardship or that difficulty? Just be busy about giving God glory and advancing the Gospel of Jesus Christ, because everything in this life will soon pass away for you, and only what you do for Him will remain into eternity.

--------------

Some of you have expressed that my sharing can sometimes be long. I'm not really good at providing bite-sized messages , but I will provide these breaks (------------) that mark the end of a complete segment, so that you can choose to stop reading if you are feeling overwhelmed or tired.

--------------

In Mark 8:22-26 we find an interesting event. Jesus heals a blind man. But unlike His other healings, He heals the man in two parts. First, Jesus spits on His eyes and puts His hands on him. The man sees, but the people he sees look like walking trees. Then Jesus put His hands on his eyes. After this, we are told that the man saw everyone clearly, namely, as people rather than trees.

Now, just as an aside, notice that Jesus took the blind man out of the town before He healed him. And afterwards, Jesus told him not to go back in town nor tell anyone in town what happend to him. As I discussed earlier, this was because Jesus did not want to stir a commotion and engender premature confrontation with the religious and civil authorities.

Back to the point, many "faith healers" use this incident as a reason why when they perform a healing, some are not "healed" immediately but rather months or years later. But is this a reasonable application of this passage? Even though Jesus did not heal immmediately, I would dare say hardly a minute passed before the man was fully healed. Also, there is another, perhaps better, way to look at this passage. Instead of seeing one healing event, two can be seen. The first healing Jesus performed was the restoration of sight. The man saw, but he could not understand what he saw. This would certainly be true if he was blind from birth. The second healing, therefore, was the restoration of perception. Now, the man could not only see but also properly identify what he saw. The people were human beings and not walking trees.

Finally, consider this. Jesus performed an organic healing. A blind man received his sight. Every documented "healing" by faith healers are functional healings (e.g. headache, bad back, leg misalignment, etc.) not organic healings. All of Jesus' and the apostles' healings were organic in nature. This is a very signficant difference between what Jesus and the apostles did in the first century and what is claimed today.

From time to time, I come across passages that are perplexing. Mark 9:49-50 is one of them. I could choose to just skip over it and read on, or else I could stop and search it out. On this occasion I chose to stop and search it out.

"For everyone will be salted with fire. "Salt is good; but if the salt becomes unsalty, with what will you make it salty again? Have salt in yourselves, and be at peace with one another."

What is meant here? And does this have any relation to Jesus' words in Matthew 5:13?

"You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled underfoot."

The word "for" in verse 49 tells us that this verse is vitally connected to the context that came before it. If we consider the context of Mark 9:49-50, we discover that Jesus is speaking about judgment, even the fire of judgment reserved for sinners sent to hell. Since fire has to do with judgment, so "salt" also has to do with judgment here. Let's try to read these verses with the word "judgment" in place of "salt."

For everyone will be judged with fire. Judgment is good; but if the judgment becomes undiscerning, with what will you will make it discerning again? Have judgment in yourselves, and be at peace with one another.

Now, as I look at this passage, I see the profound meaning captured in the image of salt. We will all be judged, and this judgment will either prove us worthy of salvation or else worthy of condemnation (cf. Luke 3:16; 1 Corinthians 3:10-15). This understanding is supported in the very next statement: "Judgment is good" (cf. Romans 7:7-24 where "the Law" is discussed in a similar way). This tells us that what is meant by the word "judgment" is not condemnation but rather discernment, by which every person's work will be tested (cf. Romans 2:6). So far so good.

But then we read, "but if the salt (or judgment) becomes unsalty (or undiscerning), with what will you make it salty (or discerning) again?" If we are still speaking about God's judgment, this would be confusing, because how can God's judgment (or discernment) be anything other than perfect. However, if we see Jesus now moving to human discernment, it makes clear sense. Can a person lose their discernment, so that they no longer know the difference between right and wrong? Yes! The Bible even says that people's consciences can be seared (cf. 1 Timothy 4:2). And could this not be what Jesus meant in Matthew 5:13 when he spoke of salt that loses its saltiness? If believers are the salt of the earth, we lose our saltiness when we fail to understand the truth and/or begin to live like the world. So Paul also wrote in Romans 12:2, "Do not be conformed to this world system." And John wote in 1 John 2:15, "Do not love the world or anything in the world." The church is not only meant to be the conscience of America but also of the whole world. But if we look just like the world, wherein can we be the contrast, even the distinguishing flavor, to the world?

Now, we can understand what Jesus meant when he said, if we lose our sense of discernment, "with what will you make it salty (or discerning) again?" In other words, if the place you go to for discernment is undiscerning, how can you make it discerning again? This is a rhetorical question, the understood answer being, "You can't." If the standard is skewed, everything will be skewed. And as Jesus said in Matthew 5:13, "It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled underfoot." If we fail to be the discerning standard for the world, we can no longer fulfill the purposes for which God designed us (cf. Ephesians 2:10). And rather than being a vehicle to turn people from their sins, we may be found to be even causing people to sin (cf. Romans 1:32). This fits the immediate context of our passage, where Mark addresses the causes of sin, even people that cause others to sin (cf. Mark 9:42). Jesus says that it would be better for such people to have a large weight hung around their necks and be thrown into the depths of the sea compared to the severe judgment awaiting them in hell.

Now, we can also understand the final statement in verse 50, "Have salt in yourselves, and be at peace with one another." It is an exhortation to be self-discerning, even to judge ourselves, so that we might not be judged (cf. 1 Corinthians 11:31). It follows along the heals of the message in Matthew 7:1-2, which warns against wrongful judgment:

"Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you."

When we are judging others, we are not at peace with them, and in danger of violating the royal command to love one another (cf. Galatians 5:13-15). While these verses do not take away from the commands to correct and rebuke when necessary (cf. 2 Timothy 3:16-17; 4:2; Titus 2:15; Colossians 3:16; Ephesians 5:11; 1 Corinthians 2:15-16), they remind us that we ourselves need to make sure that we've got it right in the first place. Otherwise, not only will we be lost, we will make others lost as well. We will be like the Pharisees, who Jesus called "blind guides" (cf. Matthew 15:14).

We must have "salt in ourselves." We must be discerning. And there is no better way to improve our discernment then to spend lots of time in the Word of God, which itself is the key to all discernment (cf. Hebrews 4:12-13; Psalm 19:7-10; Psalm 119:1-176; and a thousand others). And I write this long discursis to encourage you not to skip over difficult passages but to take the time to search it out.

One of  you asked...

Mark 9:29 "And he said to them, "This kind cannot be driven out by anything but prayer."

Not to be confused with 'the word of faith' movement (I don't fully understand this movement) am I correct to get from this this that our 'level of holiness' effects the manifestations of our prayers?

My reply...

Mark 9:29 may not be the best passage for teaching on the connection between faith and prayer. Nevertheless, there is a connection. A better passage might be James 1:5-8, where the teaching is more explicit.

Regarding this passage, where Jesus heals a boy with a deaf and mute spirit, there are three parallel accounts. One has Jesus saying that the disciples could not perform the miracle because of their lack of faith (cf. Matthew 17:14-21). In another, no explanation is given of why the disciples could not drive out the demon (cf. Luke 9:37-43). And in this passage, Jesus says that "prayer" is what is required. Some manuscripts read "prayer and fasting". Common to each passage is that the disciples could not heal the boy and that it was an extraordinary challenge. Notice here that the faith required and the challenge to be overcome were not to be found in the boy but in the disciples. It is not so much that the boy could not be healed, but the disciples lacked the faith and perhaps prayer necessary to heal.

Many in the "word of faith" movement put the onus of responsibility on the one being healed. But even where there is no faith, Jesus healed. So, when these so-called "healers" in this movement fail to heal, which is often, if not always, the case, it is more biblical to say that it is because of the healer's lack of faith rather than the one seeking healing. It is interesting to observe that there is no verifiable documentation of any organic, not merely functional (e.g. sore arm, headache, etc.), healings. Yet, Jesus did well-attested and organic miracles, where people in a whole town knew the condition of the one healed and where even his opponents could not refute the healing itself.

And another shortcoming of this movement is that the emphasis is more on the miracle than the message. Many religious groups have healers, even the New Age, and they attract thousands to their rallies. How are we to distinguish the true from the counterfeit without a clear focus on the message. The only times that Jesus did not heal were when he recognized that people would reject the message in spite of the miracle. Miracles were never meant to create faith, only to confirm it. Faith comes by the "Word of God" (cf. Romans 10:17, some translations "message of Christ").