Mark 8 : Isn't it right to rely on Jesus' possibilities rather than human possibilities?

Mark 8
Isn't it right to rely on Jesus' possibilities rather than human possibilities?

34 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.
35 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 did Jesus mean when he spoke of the cross long before his crucifixion? The concept of the cross for Jesus, the editor of Mark's Gospel, and its readers differ. Due to the event at Golgotha, the cross holds a different meaning for the editor of Mark and his readers than it did for Jesus. The cross Jesus referred to is more naturally a symbol of self-denial and restraint rather than salvation.

So, is it possible to deny oneself, take up one's cross, and follow the Lord? If Jesus proclaimed verses 34-35 because it is possible, then Kant is correct. The categorical imperative presupposes human possibility, which not only generates moral rules but also automatically derives duties from those rules.

There is no salvation in the world of human possibility. Salvation completely rejects human possibility. Instead, salvation embraces the inadequate human possibility through atonement. Every Christian is commanded by Jesus to cast aside their life for Him and His gospel, thus rejecting the rule and obligatory command. Let's not interpret verses 34-35 as a demand for acquisition and realization. The moment the duty, which includes effort, resolution, and paradox, is imposed on humans, the cross of Jesus disappears. Rather, let's interpret these verses as Jesus' commitment and declaration: 'I will deny myself and take up my cross.' 'I will cast my life to save yours.' This interpretation acknowledges possibility solely in Jesus, excludin