Previous posts at the bottom
__________________
1. The middle of this chapter will mark the midway point in the Gospel. Starting at verse 27, the tone of the Gospel will change, and Jesus will set his face toward the cross.
Mark 8 begins with the feeding of the 4000. The story is strikingly similar to the feeding of the 5000, which we encountered in Mark 6. The main difference is the quanity of food that Jesus has to distribute (7 loaves here) and the quantity picked up (also 7 baskets here). In chapter 6, there were five loaves and two fish, with 12 baskets of fragments left afterward. Jesus blesses the bread, and it feeds the whole crowd.
Some have seen these as two versions of the same story. The idea is that oral traditions about a single event found its way into two versions -- one with 5000 and one with 4000. Such a scenario would of course speak strongly to the historicity of the core event. Others would of course preclude this possibility from a sense that the truthfulness of Mark requires historicity on the level of detail. Yet it is not clear that ancient history writing was as concerned about such things as we are. Papias in the early 100s suggests that Mark's main concern was more to record all the stories that he had heard. [1]
A multiplication of food and feeding of multitudes is recorded in all four Gospels. In John 6, it is one of seven signs that likely came from some source tradition known by its compilers. It was thus a core memory of Jesus tradition.
Some see these two stories relating to two different audiences. The feeding of the 5000 might take place within Jewish territory. The feeding of the 4000 is in the Decapolis and thus in a more Gentile area. They thus suggest that two different audiences are in view.
2. Verses 11-12 give a key statement of Jesus on signs. The Pharisees demand a sign from Jesus. He tells them that no signs will be given. The saying is preserved in Matthew and Luke as well but with the exception of the sign of Jonah. That sign is then differently interpreted as being three days in the fish (Matt. 12:40; 16:4) or the fact that Nineveh repented (Luke 11:29-30). [2]
The contrast with John's Gospel is striking, where the whole of the first half of the Gospel seems structured in part around 7 key signs. This difference fits well the contrast between Mark's secrecy theme in contrast to John's "megaphone" about Jesus' identity.
Neverthless, there is no contradiction here. A sign in Mark is a sign on demand, it is a call for Jesus to do something spectacular for those who do not believe. In actually, Jesus provides countless signs for those who have eyes to see and ears to hear. So the difference is that John calls those miraculous deeds "signs" even though they are not done on demand. Mark, on the other hand, does not call them signs.
It is thus a difference of vocabulary not of substance. It is a reminder that God inspired each biblical author within their own language and style. If they were only mindlessly typing God's dictation, this would be more of a contradiction. But once we take into account individual vocabulary, there is no contradiction here.
3. Following Jesus' statement on signs, Jesus warns his disciples about the "yeast" of the Pharisees and Herod. He is talking about the corrupting influence they have on society. He is warning them to avoid them. This is not controversial to us, but the religious leaders -- especially the Pharisees -- were highly revered at the time.
But while Jesus is talking on a deep level, the disciples are still on the surface. They are worried about having enough bread to eat in the boat. Jesus reminds them that he has just fed 4000 and that earlier he had fed 5000. He's got bread covered!
The story thus reveals the difficulty the disciples had in understanding Jesus, a key theme of Mark's Gospel. Back in Mark 4, we first saw this theme in full bloom as the disciples failed to understand the Parable of the Soils, a parable whose point was that only those with faith would understand his parables. As hear it would seem that they did not have "eyes to see" or "ears to hear."
This theme of the dullness of the disciples probably arose especially in their failure to see that Jesus as Messiah was going to die on the cross, as we will see at the end of the chapter. They expected only the victorious Christ, not the suffering one. Jesus even asks here if their hearts are "hardened."
4. In Bethsaida, Jesus heals a blind man. This is the only healing that seems to take place in stages. Jesus spits on his eyes and his vision partially returns. Then he puts his hands on his eyes again, and his sight is completely restored. In John 9, Jesus also spits as part of the healing.
Matthew 11:20 suggests that Jesus did many miracles in Bethsaida, the village where Philip was from -- and possibly also Peter and Andrew originally (John 1:44). However, this is the only miracle that the Gospels mention specifically taking place in Bethsaida, although it is possible that the feeding of the 5000 took place nearby. Bethsaida was a little northeast of Capernaum. Jesus will heal another blind man near Jericho.
5. Mark 8:27-33 is arguably the turning point, the pivot of Mark's story. Up to this point, the mood as been optimistic and positive. Jesus heals. He casts out demons. It's "go, go, go." He faces opposition, but it is hardly forceful. Jesus is an unstoppable force and any resistance is ineffective.
From this point on in the Gospel, Jesus is facing the cross. Three times he will predict his imminent death, and three times the disciples won't get it. They are expecting a militant Messiah. Jesus is a suffering servant in this stage.
The conversation begins with the question, "Who are people saying I am?" It is a reminder that, while the demons know that Jesus is the Holy One, Jesus' identity as Messiah has not yet been established yet in Mark among his disciples. Here we are at the very end of Jesus' earthly mission. They are about to head to Jerusalem, and only now is the subject coming clear.
Some say Jesus is John the Baptist come back from the dead -- which Herod had feared. Some say he is Elijah, the forerunner of the Messiah. Still others think he is a prophet, perhaps the prophet of Deuteronomy 18:15-18.
Then Jesus asks who they think he is. Peter is the one to say it. "You are the Christ." Christ is Greek for anointed one. In Aramaic, it would have been meshiach, meaning "anointed one." Jesus accepts this belief. But in keeping with the secrecy theme, he warns them not to tell anyone.
6. At verse 31, Jesus makes his first prediction of his death. Referring to himself as the "Son of Man" or the "Son of Humanity," he connects the phrase to the suffering he is about to endure. Remember that this phrase chiefly appears in three contexts: 1) places where it is a idiomatic self-reference that means something like "the man," 2) a phrase connected with his identity as the suffering Messiah, and 3) places where it alludes to Daniel 7 and Jesus' victorious coming on the clouds of heaven.
Jesus will suffer. He will be rejected by the elders. He will be killed. Then after three days, he will rise again.
Peter does not understand. The disciples "don't get it." He takes Jesus aside and begins to rebuke him. "You're not going to die. You're a winner, Jesus. You're the Messiah. You're going to pound the Romans."
But Jesus says, "Get behind me Satan." While satan can mean "adversary," Jesus may suggest that Satan is using Peter's ignorance to test him, to try to derail him from the cup that is set before him. Jesus tells Peter that he simply does not understand the things of God. He is thinking on a merely human level.
7. Now Jesus instructs Peter, the rest of the disciples, and the crowds. He indicates that following him is a way of the cross. Following Jesus is not a call to conquer. It is not a call to win. It is a call to suffer, perhaps even to die. If we are to follow Jesus, we must be willing to go to the cross. [3]
"Whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for my sake and the gospel, will save it" (8:35). This is the paradox of following Jesus.
Part of the paradox is the difference between now and that which is to come. If we invest our life's meaning too much in this current world, we are not likely to abound in the world that is coming. If we betray Christ now to survive, we will not live in the kingdom to come. If we are ashamed of Christ now, he will be "ashamed" of us at the time of his second coming to set up the kingdom in its fullness.
[1] Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 3.39. It might say something about the author of Mark, however, if he incorporated into his Gospel two version of the same story. Might it imply a greater distance from Jesus than we might expect of John Mark? For example, would Peter have recorded both a feeding of 5000 and a feeding of 4000 if he knew these were two versions of the same story?
[2] In my estimation, this is probably an example of a saying that was both in Mark and Q. The Q version of the saying must have included the statement on Jonah, which Matthew and Luke then variously interpreted. Some of the Baptist material likely also fits in this category of overlap. I find it less likely that Luke has modified Matthew's version.
[3] This seems likely to be a paraphrase -- "take up your cross." Such a statement would have made no sense at all to Jesus' disciples or the crowd at this point. On the other hand, it is an incredibly powerful statement to those of us who live after the crucifixion.
Mark 1:1-13
Mark 1:14-15
Mark 1:16-45
Mark 2
Mark 3
Mark 4:1-34
Mark 4:35-5:43
Mark 6
Mark 7
Mark 11:1-11 (Palm Sunday)
Mark 11:12-25 (Temple Monday)
Mark 11:26-12:44 (Debate Tuesday)
Mark 13 (Temple Prediction)
Mark 14:1-52 (Last Supper)
Mark 14:53-15:47 (Good Friday)
Mark 16 (The Resurrection)
No comments:
Post a Comment