THIS Gospel reflects on the character of rule. James and John want positions of authority within the Kingdom. The anger of their fellow-disciples then prompts Jesus to attract a lesson from the episode. All the disciples, guilty of hankering after status, need education in Kingdom priorities.
If true that Christianity signifies that “it will not be so amongst you,” we cannot know if it has succeeded; for such service-centred lives are, by definition, lived mostly out of the general public eye. Examples of those that have the identical aim as James and John — using faith as a way to preferment — are easier to identify.
We usually are not told why the disciples want seats on the Lord’s side. It appears that status and celebrity are self-evidently desirable. Now, Jesus connects rule with tyranny. His understanding of “greatness” will not be like every sort of greatness that the world has recognised before, since it is determined by serving others (being a “deacon”) reasonably than lording it over them. Being first amongst others means becoming their slave.
This topsy-turvy take doesn’t come out of the blue. Jesus often contrasts his teaching with established norms. But is he teaching us what Christian rulers must be like? or saying that Christian leadership is completely at odds with worldly authority? His tackle rule, in other words, could possibly be all the time negative, or be depending on how power is exercised. Christians who acknowledge their earthly rulers could possibly be showing co-operation or collaboration.
I are inclined to select the tricky bits from passages for discussion on this column, not the simple words and concepts. This will not be a frivolous pursuit of obscurity, but a reasoned alternative, specializing in what will not be self-evident and unambiguous. My interpretation of this passage is determined by a verb that makes modern translators wriggle. Once again, we must dip a toe into the Greek.
No Christian who accepts scripture as an entire has anything to fear from such an endeavour. The “excellent news” speaks clearly when it will not be reduced to at least one verse against one other in a contest for authority. The variety of translations available witnesses to the continuing power of the gospel message — and to our freedom to explore in whatever ways we want to.
Puzzles and problems drive us to think harder. When I tackle them here, or in a sermon, I accomplish that to not undermine people’s confidence in scripture, but to indicate that the Bible can sustain rigorous questioning while remaining a trustworthy witness to God-with-us. It is we human beings, with our shifting priorities, our changes of heart, taste, and custom, who need recent translations and interpretations, that are all the time “of their time”.
Comparing Bible versions can make clear meaning, even when it sometimes appears like straining at gnats while swallowing camels (Matthew 23.24). Mark 10.42 is a living proof. Reading “whom they recognise” within the NRSV, I wondered what the verb was, consulted the Greek, and checked another translations. The older translations were closest to what, I believe, the Greek means. More modern ones soften it. I struggled to know why; for it will not be a teaching that triggers squeamishness, or theological conflict.
I might translate verse 42 as “those that appear to rule over the Gentiles exercise dominion over them”. Here are another versions, in approximate descending order of date and literalness:
“they which seme to beare rule”: Tyndale
“they that are accounted to rule”: AV
“those that are alleged to rule”: RSV
“those they call their rulers”: NJB
“the recognised rulers”: REB
“those that are thought to be rulers”: NIV
Literal translations expose a niche between apparent and real rule, reflecting an authentic Christian belief that there is just one true ruler — God (1 Timothy 6.15). If Gentile rulers only “seem” to lord it over people, they lack real authority, and their idea of their very own status is a delusion. Less literal translations still express that gap, but in a way that plays down the contrast between divine and human.
I still don’t understand why translators avoid the simple translation of verse 42. But, when God is the one true ruler, the one true human rule must take the shape of servanthood. Service, Jesus says, trumps tyranny. So, to nobody’s surprise, Nelson Mandela images the Christian ruler higher than Vladimir Putin. God rules truly, not seemingly, because he’s everlasting — whereas even dictators who withstand democracy cannot withstand death.
