The earliest direct mention of the authorship of this account of Jesus' life is that of Papias, who probably wrote prior to 130 CE. Papias' original account no longer exists, but he is quoted by Eusebius as having written that, "Indeed Markus, since he was the Peter's translator, wrote accurately, but not in order, the things either said or done by the Lord as much as Peter remembered."
This appeared to identify the author with Johannes Markus, a man who was also a companion of Paulus at one time. There were attempts during the Second Century to identify accounts of Jesus' life with Peter (including the so-called "Gospel of Peter"), so the reference to Markus as Peter's scribe is not surprising. The author is unknown, however, making no mention of anyone called Markus. Linguistic evidence shows that the account includes several embedded Latin words as well as a number of Semitisms. Coupled with the author's reference to the sons of Simon of Kurene and the fact that history wound up associating him with Peter (who is thought to have died in Rome), it is reasonable to believe that the author was a Roman Jew who acknowledged Jesus as the Messiah.
The account does mention (ch. 13) the destruction of the temple, in language that indicates that the event had not yet happened. The association with Markus may predate the association with Peter, so that whether or not Peter's memoirs have any connection with Markus it is still quite possible that Johannes Markus was the author. There is no reason to doubt the tradition pointing back to the middle of the first century, perhaps around the time of Peter's death in about 65 CE.
As to the "priority" of the three synoptic accounts, there are quite a few hypotheses. Although the hypotheses of Markan priority are the most popular, there is also good reason to suppose that Markus is secondary, depending at least on Matthaiah's account, and probably on Lukas' as well. I adopt the Matthean priority hypothesis of the synoptics, but the timing of the books will seldom factors into understanding the events.
Markus abbreviates Matthaiah's account, including specific episodes that advance his comparison of Jesus to Elijah and Elisha, and adding segments that focus the reader on the power of trust.
Click here to see a brief comparison of themes for Elijah, Elisha, and Jesus. As far as the number of miraculous signs, you will notice that Markus' Jesus performs three times as many miracles as Elijah did. Just as Elisha had a "double" measure of Elijah's spirit, so Jesus has a "triple" measure. In specific instances where the details warrant comparison, the commentary will also mention how this author shows Jesus to be greater than Elijah (Elisha).
Markus divides the story of Jesus into two parts, separated by a midword. In Part One, Jesus readily identifies himself via various signs and wonders. The midword emphasizes a key element of Markan philosophy: trust. In Part Two, elements of trust are strong, and Jesus seldom works miracles.
BOOK ONE
The beginning of the good message of Anointed Jesus, God's son:
For this author, the beginning of the Messianic story is the transition between John the Baptizer (an antitype of Elijah) and Jesus (an antitype of Elisha); therefore, the story begins with John out in the desert, and with an allusion to Elijah. Already at the commencement, Jesus is referred to as the Anointed One, and by another Messianic title ("God's son").
1:2 Just as it was written in Isaiah the prophet:
"Look, I am sending my messenger ahead of your presence," who "will prepare your way." "A voice crying out in the desert, 'Make ready Yahweh's way. Make his paths straight.'"
There are two quotations here. The first, from Mal 3:1, identifies John the Baptizer as the "messenger" whom God would send in advance of the Anointed One. Malachi refers to this messenger as an Elijah figure; thus, for Markus the primary role of John was as the successor to Elijah. This is also borne out in his citation of Isa 40:3. God was about to do something spectacular (in bringing the Messiah), and so John (who lived in the desert) was heralded by Markus as a prophetic forerunner of the Messiah...just as Elijah introduced Elisha.
It happened that John was baptizing in the desert and heralding a baptism of mental change into forgiveness of sins. And all the country of Judea went out to him, and all the Jerusalemites, and they were baptized by him in the Jordan river, fully acknowledging their sins. And John was clothed in camel's hair and a leather belt around his waist, and he was eating locusts and wild honey.
John was "heralding." This activity is limited to those who were sent officially by someone great. In this case, God had sent John as a herald. The central subject of John's heralding is given below.
As we also read in the other accounts of John's work, he was calling people to a national reformation. Pointing out that the Messiah was about to come and go, and that God would soon destroy the temple, he urged the people to acknowledge their faults and seek the true teaching. Markus borrows the description of the Baptizer as a prophet from Matthaiah's account.
And he heralded, saying, "The one who is stronger than me is coming after me, the strap of whose sandals I am not enough to bend down and loosen. I am baptizing you in water, but he will baptize you in holy breath."
Markus edits out the context of the Matthean baptizer. There, John had been chastising the religious leaders, and in doing so, he pointed to the destruction of the temple that was to follow the coming of the Messiah. Markus' portrayal of John centers on his Elijah-like role. Here, the subject of his heralding is that he is to pave the way for the Anointed One.
9 And it happened during those days that Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilaiah and was baptized in the Jordan by John. And immediately as he came up from the water, he saw the heavens split open and the Spirit descending to him like a dove. And a voice from the heavens happened: "You are my son, the beloved, in whom I delight."
Markus' account of the baptism of Jesus is briefer than Matthaiah's, making use only of the important transition between John and Jesus. Markus adds a single note about Jesus being from Nazareth. Markus has changed the wording slightly, so that instead of speaking to the crowds, God speaks directly to Jesus -- affirming his anointing to him.
12 And immediately the spirit cast him out into the desert, and he was in the desert for forty days, being tested by the Enemy, and he was among the wild animals, and the messengers served him.
Markus' account basically follows Matthaiah's. However, he uses "the Enemy" as the title rather than "the Accuser" (as in both Matthaiah and Lukas). Also, whereas the others merely indicate that Jesus was hungry during the forty days, Markus adds that God's divine messengers were present, serving Jesus. Markus' account makes no mention of Jesus' hunger. At this point, the author has edited out the details (which do not suit his literary purpose).
14 Now after John had been delivered over, Jesus went into Galilaiah, heralding God's good message and saying that, "The season has been fulfilled, and God's kingdom is near. Change your minds and trust in the good message." And as he was going by the Sea of Galilaiah, he saw Simon and Simon's brother Andreas, casting a dragnet into the sea, for they were fishers. And Jesus said to them, "Come, behind me, and I will make you become fishers of human beings." And immediately, leaving the nets, they followed him. And after going forward a little, he noticed Jacob the son of Zebediah and Johannes his brother. They were also in the ship, repairing the nets. And immediately he called them. And, leaving their father Zebediah in the ship with the hirelings, they followed after him.
We find out a few more details from Matthaiah about Jesus' travels, but Markus is more direct. After the baptizer was in Roman custody, Jesus began to herald a specific message. As with John's message, Jesus' heralding itself takes center stage. What was he saying? Perhaps echoing the transition between Elijah and Elisha, Jesus here repeats and strengthens the message brought by John. John had urged mental change because the Messiah was coming. now that the Anointed One had come, the time "has been fulfilled," and it was necessary for people to trust.
21 And they went into Kafar-Nahum, and immediately he entered into the gathering on the Sabbath and taught. And they were amazed at his teaching, for he was teaching them as though he had authority, and not as the scribes taught. According to Matthaiah, the remarks about Jesus teaching "with authority" began with the Sermon on the Mount (see Mt 7:24ff.). Markus collapses the sermon, and Jesus' walking around the region, into what seems to be a single event. Before explaining the principles to his readers, Markus finds it necessary to demonstrate Jesus' identity via various signs. Thus, while Markus indicates the gist of what Jesus has to say, his treatment of the Torah is not found here.
23 And immediately, there was in their gathering a person with an unclean spirit, and he called out, saying, "What is there between us and you, Jesus, Nazarene? Have you come to destroy us? I know you, who you are: God's holy one." And Jesus censured him, saying, "Be voiceless and come out of him." And the unclean spirit gave him spasms, and it sounded with a loud voice and came out of him. And all people wondered, so as to inquire to themselves, saying, "What is this? A new teaching with authority? And he directs the unclean spirits, and they listen to him." And the report of him went out immediately everywhere, into the whole countryside surrounding Galilaiah.
Matthaiah's account does not mention this event, although it can be found in Lukas' (4:31ff.). The wording is close to identical, so one of the two is paraphrasing the other. Jesus' power over unclean spirits was a point of superiority, for neither Elijah nor Elisha had had such authority.
29 And immediately after leaving the gathering, he went into the household of Simon and Andreas with Jacob and Johannes. Now Simon's mother-in-law was lying down with a fever, and immediately they told him about her. And he went to her and raised her up, taking hold of her hand. And the fever left her, and she served them.
Markus' version appears to be a redaction from Lukas' account rather than Matthaiah's here. Matthaiah refers to Simon as "Peter," whereas both Markus and Lukas use "Simon." Markus adds a reference to Peter's brother, Andreas," also mentioning two witnesses to the event -- Jacob and Johannes.
32 Now after evening happened, when the sun had set, they carried to him all those who had maladies and those who were affected by spirit beings, and the whole city was gathered at the door. And he cured (of various diseases) many who had maladies, and he cast out many spirit beings, and he did not allow the spirit beings to speak, because they knew him.
Matthaiah's version mentions the role of Jesus as the "suffering servant" from Isaiah, quoting a segment of chapter 53. Markus' version follows Lukas, who indicates that the spirit beings were prevented from publicly identifying Jesus as the Anointed One. Markus adds to Jesus' fame, indicating that "the whole city" was watching him cure people. Markus also appears to separate the spirit beings who left people from (other?) diseases that might have gripped them.
35 And after getting up very early in the morning, he exited and went out into a desert place, and he prayed there. And Simon and those who were with him were hunting him down, and after finding him, they said to him, "All are seeking you." And he said to them, "Let's go up elsewhere into towns around the city, so that I might herald there also. For it is for this reason that I have come out."
Again, Markus continues to follow Lukas' version. Here, Markus adds the detail that Jesus was not merely alone, but that he was praying. In Lukas, it is "the crowds" who were searching for Jesus, but Markus' account explicitly mentions his students. This mention of the students correlates to the close attention paid to Elisha by his student, Gehazi.
And he went into the whole of Galilaiah, heralding in their gatherings, and he was casting out spirit beings. And a leper came to him, calling him aside, kneeling, and saying to him, "If you want, you are able to cleanse me." And he felt compassion, and he stretched out his hand, touched him, and said to him, "I want it. Be cleansed." And immediately the leprosy went away from him, and he was cleansed. And he agitated him, threw him out immediately, and he said to him, "See to it that you say nothing to anyone. On the contrary, go up and show yourself to the priest and present yourself concerning your cleansing -- do those things that Moses directed, for a testimony to them."
Markus expands Lukas' version again. Instead of merely going into the gatherings of Galilaiah, Markus spells out that he covered the whole territory. As the people trusted, Jesus was also casting out spirit beings. This segue permits Markus to omit the account of the miraculous catch of fish (Lk 5); instead, he continues to the next event -- the cleansing of a leper. Since the cleansing of Na'aman the Syrian was important in the Elijah/Elisha cycle, the cleansing of a leper was also important to Markus. Markus adds a point of emphasis: that Jesus felt compassion toward the leper. Lukas indicates that the word "got out" about Jesus, despite the fact that the leper was supposed to remain quiet. Markus' account returns to Jesus' teachings.
Comparing this cleansing to the healing of Na'aman the Syrian by Elisha (2 Kgs 5:1f.), we see that both lepers believed that God's prophet could heal them. However, whereas Na'aman was reluctant to do as Elisha asked, this leper was healed immediately and did as Jesus asked. Jesus merely spoke, and this man was healed. Na'aman was sent to perform a cleansing ritual. Another healing that might be compared to the curing of Na'aman is the healing of a blind man in Mk 8:22ff.. 45 Now after exiting, he began to herald many things and to disseminate the message. And so, he was no longer able to enter into the city plainly, but he was outside at desert places. And they came to him from everywhere.
Lukas says only that Jesus was withdrawing himself to deserted places. Markus adds the reason: Jesus' increasing fame. He also focuses on Jesus' heralding the message, rather than simply his healing people.
2:1 And after he entered again into Kafar-Nahum after some days, it was reported that he was in a house. And many people were gathered together, and so the house could no longer contain them, nor could the places at the door. And he spoke the message to them.
And they came, carrying to him a paralyzed person who was being borne by four people. And since they were unable to come near to him on account of the crowd, they unthatched the roof where he was, and, after getting through, they lowered the mat upon which the paralyzed person was lying. And when Jesus noticed their trust, he said to the paralyzed person, "Child, your sins are forgiven."
Markus' account is longer than either of the others here, so that his additions set up the context of the healing with more detail. The lowering of the paralytic through the roof comes from Lukas, but Markus also indicates that four people were carrying him. All three accounts focus on the trust of the paralyzed man's friends.
6 Now some of the scribes were sitting there, and they were reasoning in their hearts, "Who is this who speaks this way? He is speaking evil. Who is able to forgive sins, except the One God?" And immediately Jesus knew in his spirit that they were reasoning within themselves this way. He said to them, "Why are you reasoning in your hearts this way? What is easier: to say to the paralyzed person, 'Your sins are forgiven,' or to say, 'Rise, and take up your mat, and walk?' But so that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins...." He said to the paralyzed person, "I'm telling you, rise, take up your mat, and go up into your house." And he got up, and immediately he took up his mat and exited, in the presence of all. And so, they were all amazed, and they glorified God, saying, "We have never seen anything like this!"
Matthaiah and Lukas appear to portray the scribes as whispering to one another; Markus' "in their hearts" and "within themselves" may be taken to mean that Jesus was reading their minds. Alternatively, "within" may be replaced by "among," and "in their hearts" may merely mean that their confusion was sincere. The mention of hearts seems to be borrowed more from Matthaiah than from Lukas, but the conclusion is derived from Lukas. Matthaiah's conclusion to the matter is that the people glorified God for giving such power to people. The final quote in Lukas is that the people had seen something they didn't expect to see. Markus emphasizes their amazement, adding that the people exclaimed that they had never seen anything like that before.
13 And again he went out by the sea. And all the crowd went to him, and he taught them. And as he was going along, he noticed Levi the son of Alfaius sitting at the tax office, and he said to him, "Follow me." And he rose up and followed him.
And as he was lying down in Levi's house, it happened that many tribute takers and sinners reclined together with Jesus and his students. For they were many, and they followed him. And the scribes of the Perushim noticed that he was dining with the sinners and tribute takers, and they said to his students, "He is eating with tribute takers and sinners!" And when Jesus heard, he said to them, "The healthy have no need of a healer; rather, those who have a malady. I have not come to call just people but sinners."
Markus reports the account much as Lukas does -- therefore using the name "Levi" rather than "Matthaiah." However, Markus adds the detail that Levi was the "son of Alfaius." "Levi" (indicating a gift) would be an ironic name for a tribute taker, so quite possibly this is the name that he chose (or was given) after he began to follow Jesus. Matthaiah himself had provided few details, and Lukas indicates that Levi himself threw a feast. Markus' account downplays the feast, focusing on the question of eating with tribute takers (Levi himself) and "sinners" -- those who had left Priestly Judaism. This agrees more with Matthaiah's account, who also concludes with "but sinners," whereas Lukas adds "into mental change."
18 And John's students and the Perushim were fasting. And they came and said to him, "Why do John's students and the students of the Perushim fast, but your students do not fast?" And Jesus said to them, "Can the sons of the wedding hall fast while the groom is with them? As long as they have the groom with them, they are unable to fast. But days will come when the groom will be taken away from them, and then they will fast in that day.
"No one sews a patch of unbleached cloth on an old cloak. But if they do, the fullness of the new is ripped away from the old, and a worse division occurs. And no one casts new wine into old wineskins. But if they do, the wine bursts the wineskins, and the wine and the wineskins are destroyed. On the contrary, new wine is cast into new wineskins."
Those who say that Markus was written before the other synoptics may point to this passage, in which Markus' account has a shorter ending. It is also slightly different as well. In Matthaiah's account, the students of John the Baptizer put the question to Jesus about fasting. In Lukas' version, Jesus' own students pose the question. Here, Markus appears to reconcile the two. Adding the comment that there was fasting going on, "they" probably refers (with Matthaiah) to the students of the baptizer.
The wording about ways of thinking (paradigms) -- here, "wineskins" -- follows Matthaiah's, but whereas both Matthaiah and Lukas explain the meaning slightly, Markus omits it, merely indicating that people only put new wine into new wineskins. The "new wine" is Jesus' teachings, and the "old wineskins" are Priestly Judaism.
23 And during the Sabbath, as he was going through the cornfields, it happened that his students began to make their way, picking the ears of corn. And the Perushim said to him, "Look, why are they doing what is illegal on the Sabbath?" And he said to them, "Have you never read what David did when he had a need, and when he and those who were with him were hungry? How he went into God's house, to Abiathar the high priest, and ate the loaves of design, which it is not legal to eat, except for the priests? And he gave them also to those who were with him."
And he said to them, "The Sabbath happened on account of humanity, and not humanity on account of the Sabbath. And so, the Son of Man is also lord of the Sabbath."
This account continues to follow Lukas' version, adding mention of the role of the high priest. However, Markus' conclusion is different. Instead of merely indicating that since the Messiah is greater than David's people (Lukas) or that they did not understand the teaching about God wanting mercy rather than sacrifice (Matthaiah), Markus' Jesus adds the explanation that the sabbath-day rest was made in order to benefit people. Therefore Jesus, as human, was greater than any legalistic code that the religious leaders were imposing over the sabbath-day principle.
3:1 And he entered again into the gathering. And a person was there who had a withered hand. And they were scrutinizing him, to see if he would cure him on the Sabbath, so that they might accuse him. And he said to the person who had the withered hand, "Get up into the middle of the group." And he said to them, "Is it legal on the Sabbath to do good, or to do evil? To save a life, or to destroy?" But they were silent. And he looked them over with anger, sorrowful at the hardness of their hearts. He said to the person, "Stretch our your hand." And he stretched it out, and his hand was restored. And the Perushim went out immediately with the Herodians, and they took counsel against him, as to how they might destroy him.
Lukas' version notes that this event took place on a following Sabbath day, but Markus has begun to follow Matthaiah's account more closely again, yet like Lukas, Markus omits the question from the Perushim. Markus adds a note that Jesus' statement silenced his would-be accusers. What was Jesus teaching here? That the sabbath principle extended beyond the legalistic interpretation provided by the religious leaders. Thus, the Perushim are shown here consulting with the Herodian party about executing Jesus. The Herodians were sympathetic toward the rule of the Herods, so that both Perushim and Herodians might ally together in preserving the status quo.
7 And Jesus withdrew with his students to the sea, and a great multitude followed him from Galilaiah, and from Judea, and from Jerusalem, and from Idumaea, and from beyond the Jordan. And when a great multitude around Ture and Sidon heard as much as he had done, they went to him.
Matthaiah mentions this retreat, but Lukas does not. Since Elijah often retreated by himself, and since Elisha would go off with his student(s), it was useful for Markus to mention this retreat to the sea. The details are different, though. Whereas Matthaiah again mentions the servant song from Isaiah, Markus plays up the size of the crowds following Jesus and adds that they were coming from a wider set of provinces.
And he said to his students that a boat should attend him, on account of the crowd, so that they would not afflict him. For he cured many people, so that as many as had scourges rushed him, so that they might touch him. And the unclean spirits, when they observed him, they fell toward him and called out, saying, "You are God's son." And he censured them many times, so that they would not make him apparent.
Again adding to Matthaiah's version, Markus reports that the crowds were somewhat frenzied. Everyone was hoping to be cured ... just by his touch. Thus, in a subtle way, Markus acknowledges their trust, even as he points out that they knew him to be the Messiah.
13 And he ascended into the mountain and called to him those whom he wanted, and they went to him. And he made the Twelve (who are also named envoys), so that they might be with him, and so that he might sent them out to herald and to have authority to cast out the spirit beings:
They were: Simon, whom he had also surnamed Peter; and Jacob the son of Zebediah and Johannes (Jacob's brother), and he also surnamed them with the name, B'nai-Rogez [that is, sons of thunder]; and Andreas; and Filippos; and Bar-Talmai; and Matthaiah; and Thomas; and Jacob the son of Alfaius; and Thaddeus; and Simon the Jealous; and Judah Iscarioth (who also delivered him up).
The account of the sending of the Twelve follows both Matthaiah's and Lukas' versions. The introduction comes from Lukas, with Jesus taking his students up the mountainside. Some of his descriptions of the members of the Twelve appear to follow Matthaiah's, including the use of "Matthaiah" instead of "Levi." However, Markus moves Andreas' name later in the list, and he adds the description of Zebediah's sons as "sons of thunder."
20 And they went into a house. And the crowd came together again, and so they were unable even to eat bread. And when the ones who were with him heard, they went out to lay hold of him, for they said, "The crowd is beside itself!"
And those scribes who had come down from Jerusalem said that, "He has Ba'al Zebul," and that, "He is casting out the spirit beings with the ruler of the spirit beings!"
This account follows Matthaiah and is excluded by Lukas. Here, Markus excludes the actual healing of the possessed man (a deaf-mute, see Mt 12:22f.), focusing instead on the great crowds and on the accusation against Jesus.
And he called them to him and said to them (with analogies): "How can an enemy cast out an enemy? And if a kingdom should be divided upon itself, how can that kingdom stand? And if a house should be divided upon itself, how can that house stand? And if the Enemy rises up and is divided upon himself, how can he stand? On the contrary, he has an end. But no one is able to enter into the strong person's household to plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong person -- and then he may plunder his household."
Markus' version answers the rhetorical question about the enemy, whereas Matthaiah's leaves it rhetorical. The aside about the strong man is the same as in Matthaiah: If they know that God has the power, and if God has not been overcome, then they must realize who Jesus is.
"Indeed I am telling you that all things will be forgiven the sons of humanity, acts of sin and as many evil speakings as they should speak. But the one who should speak evil of the holy Spirit, he has no forgiveness for the age, but he is liable for an eternal act of sin." He said this because they had said, "He has an unclean spirit."
Markus includes the saying about speaking evil: Whatever they might say against Jesus (or anyone else) would be forgiven. But if one tries to deny what God did, though you know it to be true, then one will not be forgiven. Denying God the recognition for the deeds you know he performed is unforgivable. Markus strengthens this when he summarizes Matthaiah's comment on the ages with the age-lasting connotation of "eternal." Afterwards, Markus omits the "brood of vipers" rebuke and the "sign of Jonah" statement that was important to Matthaiah.
31 And his mother and his brothers came, and standing outside, they sent to him, calling him. And a crowd was seated around him, and they said to him, "Look! Your mother and your brothers are outside, seeking you." And he answered them, saying, "Who are my mother and my brothers?" And looking around at those who were seated around him, he said, "Look: my mother and my brothers. For whoever should do what God wants, this one is my brother, and sister, and mother."
By this time, apparently Jesus' dad, Yosef, was dead. We know he was dead before the cross, because Johannes was given the charge of taking care of Jesus' mother, but he seems to have died by this time. Jesus says then that relationship by physical birth is not so important. He doesn't mention Abraham and the Jewish sense of identity through physical birth, but this may have been in mind. He does say that whoever does what God wants is his brother, sister, or mother. In the spiritual sense, God's followers are relatives more than we could ever be otherwise. Here, Markus continues to follow Matthaiah's version.
4:1 And again he began to teach by the sea. And a crowd, a multitude, gathered toward him, and so he went down into a boat, sat on the sea, and all the crowd was at the sea on land. And he taught them with many analogies, and he said to them with his teaching:
"Hear! Look! The sower went out to sow. And while he was sowing, it happened that some seed indeed fell by the road, and the birds came and devoured them. And another fell on the rocky place, where it did not have much soil, and immediately it sprang up, on account of not having any deep soil. And when the sun rose, it was scorched, and it withered, on account of having no root. And another fell into the acanthus, and the acanthus plants sprang up and choked it, and it yielded no fruit. And another fell into the nice soil and yielded fruit, springing up and increasing. And one produced thirty, and one sixty, and one a hundred." And he said, "The one who has ears to hear, let him hear."
10 And when it happened that he was all alone, the ones who were around him, with the Twelve, asked him about the analogies. And he said to them, "To you is given the secret of God's kingdom, but to those who are outside all things are done with analogies, so that "seeing, they would see and not notice; and hearing, they would hear and not understand...Otherwise, they would turn back, and it would be forgiven them.""
Although Markus still follow's Matthaiah's account, his reliance on the analogy of the sower is stronger. He presents this one, first, as a means of revealing meaning through all of Jesus' analogies. Thus, while the Sower is about the message being spread (see below), for Markus it is necessary to learn from this first analogy how Jesus employs analogies in his teaching.
And he said to them, "Don't you know this analogy? Then how will you know all the analogies? The sower sows the message. Now those that are by the road, when the message is sowed, and when they hear, the Enemy comes immediately and takes away the message that was sowed to them.
As Markus relates the Sower, he reports an additional saying of Jesus, identifying this as a sort of Master Analogy. In modern language, Markus interprets the explanation as pedagogy. Rather than simply telling his students the meaning of one analogy, Jesus was explaining to them his methods of instruction.
"And those that are sowed on the rocky place, when they hear the message, they immediately receive it with joy, and since they have no root within them, they are but seasonal. Then when affliction or persecution happens on account of the message, they stumble immediately.
"And others are those that are sowed in the acanthus plants. These are those who hear the message, and the cares of the age, and the deceit of wealth, and the remaining strong desires, go in, choke the message, and it becomes unfruitful.
"And the latter are those that are sowed on the nice soil, who hear the message, and accept it, and bear fruit: one thirty, one sixty, and one a hundred."
The sower might be God, or Jesus, or the Twelve themselves (who are assisting Jesus). Most likely, the sower is God.
The seed is identified as God's message. That expression in the New Testament always refers to the message brought by Jesus. As the author has explained it, the message includes a statement of Jesus' identity as the Anointed One and a deeper explanation of the Torah, for there would soon be an end to the nation that viewed the Torah superficially.
The fate of the seed sown by the road represents what happens to those who hear but do not understand. "...the Enemy comes immediately and takes away the message that was sowed to them." This category most fits the Perushim and scribes, although others surely belonged here as well.
The fate of the seed sown on rocky land represents what happens to those who experience only the emotion attached to the freedom that the message brings. Freedom from the legalistic view of the Torah was bound to be euphoric. But then what happens? If there's no foundation there other than a good feeling, when conflict arises, it's real easy to fall away altogether. For those of us who have accepted the "freedom from rituals and legalism," this is the pitfall that might most closely apply to us -- if we have no foundation!
The acanthus is a sticker plant, and the message that falls into the acanthus plants tells what happens to those who reject the message because of the higher priorities that it calls on them to have. They'd rather keep doing what they're doing than experience mental change and put God first. The message was so radical that change was difficult.
The one who hears and understands -- as Jesus put it elsewhere, the one who hears the Torah and does it -- that person experiences spiritual growth. Obviously, it's Jesus' intent that more and more people become fertile ground.
21 And he said to them, "Neither does a lamp come so that it may be placed under a measure of grain or under the bed. Doesn't it come so that it may be placed on a lampstand? For there is no secret thing except that which is made apparent. Neither does it happen that something is hidden away, but so that it might come into appearance. If anyone has ears to hear, let him hear."
Borrowed from the Sermon on the Mount, Markus includes the saying here, as does Lukas. Certainly it relates to the spread of the message, which was being revealed through the lives of those who lived its truth.
And he said to them, "Look at what you are hearing. With whatever measure you measure, it will be measured to you and added to you. For to the one who has, it will be given to him, and to the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away from him."
"Look at how you hear." It is important to receive the message like "good ground." It is essential to open up and to start loving. Love generates love, and so, if someone "has," then he will have more. Markus adds to this saying from Lukas, flying in the segment about using an appropriate measure. In this context, the Perushim needed to be careful to put into practice what they believe to have learned, and to judge others appropriately and accordingly.
26 And he said, "God's kingdom is like this: like a person who casts seed on the ground, who sleeps and wakes by night and day. And the seed shoots up and grows, and he does not know how. The ground bears fruit automatically, first the plant, then the ear, then the full grain in the ear. But when the fruit is ripe, he sends out the sickle immediately, because the harvest is ready."
Expanding on the analogy of the Sower, Markus quotes a related saying from Jesus. Here, even the sower himself (presumably Jesus, or one of his faithful proclaimers) doesn't know how the seed grows. But the sower can tell when the harvest is ready; that is, he knows when the message is active within someone...for it becomes clear through the person's actions.
30 And he said, "How should we liken God's kingdom? Or what analogy should we use for it? It is like a mustard grain, which when it is sowed on the ground, it is the smallest of all the seeds that are on the land. And when it is sowed, it grows up and becomes greatest of all the shrubs, and it makes great branches, so that it is possible for "the birds of the sky to nest" under its shadow."
And with many such analogies he spoke the message to them, just as they were able to hear. But he did not speak to them without an analogy, but he explained all things to his students by themselves.
Inserted from Matthaiah's account is the analogy of the mustard seed, but Matthaiah and Markus refer to Daniel 4:12 slightly differently; Lukas (13:18f.) follows Matthaiah more closely but abbreviates the analogy. Here, as in Matthaiah, the emphasis is on the simplicity of the message being its power. Although "small," when the message grows within someone, that person flourishes (like Nebuchadnezzar in Daniel).
35 And during that day, after evening happened, he said to them, "Let's go over to the other side." And leaving the crowd, they took him with them in the ship, as he was, and other ships were with him. And a great storm of wind happened, and the waves were crashing into the ship, and so the ship was already full.
And he was at the stern, asleep on a headrest. And they woke him and said to him, "Teacher, doesn't it concern you that we are being destroyed?!" And he got up and censured the wind, and he said to the sea, "Be silent. Be still." And the wind ceased, and a great calm happened. And he said to them, "Why are you timid? How little trust you have!" And they were afraid with a great fear, an they said to one another, "Who then is this, that even the wind and the sea listen to him?"
Matthaiah's account contains additional analogies before this event, analogies omitted by Markus, as he continues (in general) to follow Lukas more closely than Matthaiah, even keeping with Lukas' chronology. Markus adds a detail not found in the other accounts -- that the crossing occurred after sundown. This appears to be implied in Lukas' account, since the students went to sleep, but Markus states it clearly, allowing to omit some of the details. Again, Markus' priority regarding Trust emerges, for instead of simply asking, "Where is your trust" (as Lukas), Markus' Jesus more bluntly asked his students why they were afraid. His question of their trust becomes a comment on how little trust the students had.
Who is he? God's anointed one, who called upon the power of God. Indeed, they should have trusted him!
5:1 And they came to the other side of the sea, to the country of the Gerasenes. And as he was coming out from the ship, immediately a person with an unclean spirit met him out of the sepulchers. He had his dwelling in the sepulchers, and no one was able to bind him any longer, not even with chains, on account of the fact that he had often been bound with fetters and with chains, and the chains had been burst off by him, and the fetters had been broken. And no one was strong enough to overpower him. And throughout every night and day he was in the sepulchers and in the mountains, calling out and cutting himself with stones.
And when he noticed Jesus from a large distance, he ran and bowed down to him, and he called out with a loud voice, saying, "What is there between me and you, Jesus, son of the highest god?! I make an oath with you by God, don't torment me!" For he had said to him, "Unclean spirit, come out from the person." And he asked him, "What is your name?" And he said to him, "Legion is my name, because we are many." And he called him aside many times, so that he would not send them out of the country.
Now there was there, in the direction of the mountain, a great herd of pigs, feeding. And they called him aside, saying, "Send us into the pigs, so that we might enter into them." And he permitted them. And the unclean spirits went out and entered into the pigs, and the herd, about two thousand of them, rushed down the cliff into the sea, and they were drowned in the sea.
And their swine herders fled and announced the message in the city and in the fields. And they came to see what it was that had happened. And they went toward Jesus and observed the one who had been affected by spirit beings -- the one who had had the Legion -- seated, clothed, and of sound mind. And they were afraid.
And those who had seen related how it had happened to the one who was affected by spirit beings, and about the pigs. And they began to advise him to go away from their borders.
And as he was going down into the ship, the one who had been affected by the spirit beings called him aside, so that he might be with him. And he did not allow him, but he said to him, "Go up into your house, to your people, and announce the message to them -- as much as the Lord has done for you and has had mercy on you." And he went away and began to herald in the Dekapolis as much as Jesus had done for him, and all wondered.
Here as in Lukas' version, the group of unclean spirits is named "Legion." A Roman Legion might consist of several thousand men; therefore, the name was a point of intimidation. A slight difference here is that the spirits begin speaking directly to Jesus right away, whereas in Lukas' account the man himself appears to speak at first. The spirits were insisting that there were thousands of them within the man.
Pigs were considered unclean animals, according to the Torah (Lev 11:1-8). It was forbidden even to touch the corpse of a pig (Lev 11:8), and so there should have been no purpose to raise pigs. Maybe they were being raised for the consumption of gentiles. Regardless of the purpose, it does seem that the residents of the area ought not have been raising pigs. Even so, the story provides a contrast, allowing the spirits to be forced into a herd of unclean animals. The herd, being intelligent enough not to want spirits inside of them, committed suicide.
The residents later approached with astonishment, each of them noticing that the man was perfectly happy and was listening to Jesus' teachings ("seated" at Jesus' feet). Therefore, the formerly possessed man acknowledged Jesus as the Anointed One and recognized the importance of his teachings, but the people were frightened at the power Jesus had displayed. Again, Markus reports how Jesus' fame was spreading, but this time (as in Lukas) his renown was growing negative. Jesus was politely asked to leave. But Markus' version accentuates Jesus' fame again, for instead of reporting that Legion spread Jesus' fame throughout his own city (as Lukas does), Markus indicates that Legion spread the message about Jesus through the Dekapolis -- literally, a ten-city area.
21 And after Jesus went over to the other side again [in the ship], a crowd of many people came gathered with him, and he was by the sea. And one of the rulers of the synagogue, named Yairos, came, and when he noticed him, he fell toward his feet and called him aside many times, saying, "My daughter is having her last moments. So, won't you come and lay hands on her, so that she would be saved and live?" And he went with him, and a crowd of many people followed him and thronged him.
Instead of "the crowd received him" (Lukas), Markus notes that the crowd consisted of "many people" and that they "followed" and "thronged" him. The name of Yairos was probably reasonably well known in the area, and so the author mentions him as a witness to what transpired. Yairos asked for Jesus' intervention on behalf of his twelve year old daughter, and after Jesus agreed, he led Jesus to his house.
25 And there was a woman who was in a flow of blood for twelve years. And having suffered many things from many healers, and having spent all her things, and having profited nothing, but rather having come into a worse state, when she heard about Jesus, she went in the crowd behind and touched his cloak. For she had said, "If I should touch even his clothes, I will be saved." And immediately the source of her blood was dried up, and she knew that her body had been healed from the scourge.
And immediately, knowing within himself that power had exited from him, Jesus turned around in the crowd, saying, "Who touched my clothes?" And his students said to him, "You see the crowd thronging you, and you say, 'Who touched me'?" And he looked around to see the one who had done it. But the woman, afraid and trembling, knowing what had been done to her, came and fell down toward him, and she told him all the truth. But he said to her, "Daughter, your trust has saved you. Go into peace, and be well from your scourge."
Markus adds a detail not found in the others -- that no matter what treatment the woman sought for her affliction, it was only made worse (until Jesus arrived). Markus continues to follow Lukas' account, though, omitting the brief exchange between Jesus and the woman (prior to the healing) that is found in Matthaiah's version. He also retains Lukas' use of the word "immediately."
Jesus was entirely unaware of the incident, but he knew that he had been responsible for curing someone. Therefore, he asked the people nearest him in the crowd who had touched him. Instead of naming Peter, Markus indicates that "his students" wondered why Jesus was concerned about someone bumping into him.
The woman who had been healed of her condition knew that she had been d iscovered, and so she "told the truth" about wanting to touch him. Jesus recognized that her trust in God was great and acknowledged to the crowd that a miracle had occurred, comforting the woman, so that she would be at peace.
Jesus did not have to make some sort of show in order to heal. He didn't even have to be aware of the healing! God was active through this greatest of prophets all of the time.
35 While he was still speaking, someone came from the synagogue ruler saying, "Your daughter has died. Why trouble the teacher?" But having overheard the message that was being spoken, Jesus said to the ruler of the synagogue, "Don't be afraid; only trust." And he did not allow anyone to follow along with him except for Peter, and Jacob, and Johannes, Jacob's brother. And they came into the house of the synagogue ruler, and he observed confusion and much crying and lamenting. And after entering, he said to them, "Why are you confused and crying? The child is not dead but asleep." And they laughed at him. But he threw them all out, took aside the child's father and mother (and those who were with him), and they went into where the child was. And he took hold of the child's hand and said to her, "Talitha Kum," that is, translated, "Girl, I am telling you, get up." And immediately the girl arose and walked around. For she was twelve years old. And they were amazed with a great amazement. And he gave a statement to them many times, that no one should make this thing known, and he said to give her to eat.
As in Lukas' account, at this point someone informed Yairos that his daughter was dead. The wording in Lukas is more of an instruction not to bother Jesus, whereas the question here seems to be more of an expression of futility. Again Jesus emphasizes trust, and in this account, Jesus expels from his midst everyone who did not trust God.
Markus also reports the Aramaic saying spoken to the girl, and he alone indicates her young age. Although both Markus and Lukas make a point of noting that Jesus instructed the people not to tell anyone about the healing, Matthaiah's version indicates that the word spread anyway.
6:1 And after exiting from there, he went into his country, and his students were following him. And when a Sabbath happened, he began to teach in the synagogue, and many people heard and were filled up, saying, "Where are these things from? And what is this wisdom that he has been given to him? And what are these powers that are being done through his hands? Isn't this the carpenter, the son of Miriam and brother of Jacob and Yosef, and Judah, and Simon? And aren't his brothers here around us?" And they stumbled over him. And Jesus said to them, "A prophet his not without honor, except in his country, and among his relatives, and in his household." And he was unable to do a power there for anyone, except for a few sick people that he cured, placing his hands on them. And he wondered, on account of their distrust. And he went around the surrounding villages, teaching.
Jesus has returned to "his own country," the area surrounding Nazareth, where Jesus had grown up. Here, the people were inquisitive. Where does he get his powers? Some recognized him, saying, "Isn't this the carpenter?" They remembered the names of his family members.
The confusion arose because the Anointed One was said to come from out of nowhere, yet they knew who Jesus was. And so, their familiarity with Jesus (his growing up, probably doing all the things that little children do) became a stumbling-block to their accepting the fact that he was the Anointed One. So Jesus said, "A prophet is not without honor, except in his country, and among his relatives...." Matthaiah reads that Jesus did not work many miracles "on account of their distrust"; Markus' wording is stronger: Jesus did almost nothing. From this account, we see a different kind of disbelief than we have seen before. These people have a preconceived view not only of the Messiah but also of JESUS. This expectation stemmed from their knowledge of him as a person. Some of them knew his family. Perhaps they had seen him growing up under the tutilage of his father, Yosef the carpenter. How could he be the Anointed One? Yet he continued to teach, and to heal those who did trust. Matthaiah's parallel is out-of-sequence, in chapter 13.
7 And he called the Twelve to him and began to send them out, two by two. And he gave them authority over the unclean spirits, and he charged them, so that they would take along nothing for the way except a staff alone: not bread; no bag; no copper for the belt. On the contrary, "Having your feet shod with sandals, you should not put on two tunics." And he said to them, "Wherever you enter into a house, stay there until you go out from there. And whatever place will not receive you or hear you, go away from there, shaking off the dust that is under your feet, for a testimony to them."
And they went out and heralded that the people should change their minds, and they cast out many spirit beings, and they anointed many sick people with oil (and they were cured).
Markus adds a detail here as well -- that Jesus' students were sent out in pairs. Markus disagrees with others about the Twelve being instructed to take a rod (staff) with them, but the point of the saying is not a list of specific forbidden items. A bag, food, money, and spare clothing might be used by someone who was going to spend an extended period of time somewhere, but the Twelve were to take no such things. They were to be travelers, spending no more time than would be necessary to announce God's message, prove themselves with signs, and move on. The rabbis, too, acknowledged the carrying of certain objects into the temple (including some of those mentioned above) as being indicative of service other than to God (so Guzik); if the Twelve carried none of these they would be seen as devoted to God.
Shaking the dust from one's feet was a symbol. Some Jewish people would take this action after leaving a gentile city so as not to take anything from the city with them. The action represented the abandonment of the city, and in the Twelve's case may have indicated that they were treating its residents like gentiles. Notice that the mission of the Twelve was not to "convert" everyone in the city. Instead, they were merely there to share the message; any "conversion" came from God. If people would not accept them, they were to go somewhere else quickly. Jesus' students, too, had the ability to cure sick people and to cast out spirits. The casting out of spirits is a detail not shared by Lukas.
14 And King Herod heard, for Jesus' name had become apparent, and he said, "John the Baptizer has risen from among the dead, and on account of this the powers are being worked by him." But others said that, "He is Elijah;" others said that, "He is a prophet like one of the prophets." But when Herod heard, he said, "John, the one whom I beheaded, he has risen."
For Herod himself had sent out people who took hold of John and bound him in jail, on account of Herodias, the wife of Filippos his brother (because he had married her). For John told Herod that, "It is illegal for you to have your brother's wife." Now Herodias held a grudge against him and wanted to destroy him, and she was unable. For Herod feared John, knowing him to be a just and holy man, and he protected him. And, hearing him, he did many things and heard him gladly.
And when a seasonal day occurred, when Herod made a feast to his birthday for his nobles, and for the commanders, and for the foremost people of Galilaiah, Herodias' daughter entered and danced. And since she pleased Herod and those who were reclining with him, the king said to the girl, "Ask me whatever you want, and I will give it to you." And he swore to her many times, "Whatever you ask me, I will give to you, up to half of my kingdom." And she went out and said to her mother, "What will I ask for?" Now she said, "The head of John the Baptizer."
And immediately she entered with haste to the king and asked, saying, "I want that you would instantly give me the head of John the Baptizer on a platter." And the king became very sorrowful; on account of the oaths and those who were reclining, he did not want to reject her. And immediately the king sent out a sentinel, directing for John's head to be brought. Now he went away and beheaded him in jail. And he brought the head on a platter and gave it to the girl, and the girl gave it to her mother. And when his students heard, they went and took his corpse, and they placed it in a sepulcher.
Markus follows Lukas' chronology here but adds the details of the incident that are otherwise found in Matthaiah's version. There is an interesting Elijah/Elisha connection that Markus clarifies, but which Matthaiah ignores. Was Jesus the returned Elijah? No, actually John the Baptizer had been the Elijah-figure who was supposed to come. Jesus was not John returned; he was greater. Markus further adds that Herod himself believed that Jesus might have been John, raised from the dead.
Herod the Tetrarch was the son of Herod the Great, who was associated with events surrounding Jesus' infancy. Herod wanted to sleep with his half-brother's wife, Herodias, but John had told him, "It is illegal for you to have your brother's wife," for incest is against the Torah. Herod wanted to have him killed, but chose instead to imprison him.
Interestingly, the account says that Herod regretted having told Salome she could have anything and regretted ordering the death of the Baptizer. At any rate, that's how he met his demise on account of a vengeful woman.
Markus' account adds that Herod thought John to have been a holy man and that he used to enjoy listening to John, although he did not understand. Both accounts place the blame more on Herodias than on Herod Antipas.
30 And the envoys were gathered to Jesus, and they related to him all the things that had been done and as much as they had taught. And he said to them, "You come by yourselves into a deserted place, and rest for a short time." For many were coming and going out, and it was not even seasonal to eat.
And they went away in the ship to a deserted place by themselves. And many people saw them going, and they recognized them, and they ran together on foot from all the cities and went ahead of them.
As the Twelve returned, they related to Jesus what things they had done. How much time has now passed we do not know. It may be either the Summer prior to Jesus' death or the preceding Fall. At this time, Lukas reports that Jesus took his students into Beth-Saida, where they were followed by the crowds. By this time, Jesus primarily announces his message (rather than heals). The healings were secondary to the work that he needed to accomplish.
There were so many people around Jesus and the Twelve that they didn't even have time to eat, and so Jesus tried to take them to a secluded spot. Lukas notes that Jesus' students were displeased that the crowds continued to follow them, so that there was no real seclusion anywhere.
And since already many hours had passed, his students came to him, saying, "The place is a desert, and already many hours have passed. Let them go away, so that they would go away into the outlying fields and villages and buy themselves something to eat." But he answered, saying to them, "You give them to eat."
And they said to him, "Should we go away and buy loaves for two hundred denarii and give them to eat?" But he said to them, "How many loaves do you have? Go see." And when they knew, they said, "Five, and two fish." And he directed them to have all recline, company by company, on the green grass. And they reclined, group by group, by hundreds and by fifties.
And, taking the five loaves and the two fishes, he looked up into the sky, blessed, and broke the loaves and gave them to his students, so that they would distribute them to the people. And he apportioned the two fish to all of them. And all of them ate and were well fed, and there were twelve baskets full of fragments, and from the fish. And the men who ate the loaves were five thousand.
Lukas merely says that dusk was approaching, whereas Markus indicates that Jesus' discussion with the people had gone on for "many hours." Jesus' students wanted Jesus to send the crowds away to buy food, but since thousands were present that would have been impractical. Jesus simply told his students to feed the crowd. Clearly, they couldn't do as Jesus expected them to do -- at least not by ordinary means.
Markus adds a point of practicality -- that Jesus' students offered to go to buy food, even though it would have been expensive. Jesus replied that they should feed the crowd with what they had. Lukas indicates only the groups of fifty, but Markus notes that the crowd also reclined in groups of one hundred to receive the distribution of food.
Just as God had provided the manna while the Israelites wandered through the wilderness (Ex 16), so also God provided for the crowd following Jesus around. Then, it had been the people who had complained; here, Jesus' own students were wondering how the group might be able to eat.
Reclining (lying back) was one method of eating. Jesus asked that the crowd be broken into groups, and that each group be made to recline for the meal. Then came the miracle: Jesus asked God to bless the meal, and God provided for the crowd. As Jesus broke the bread and fish, giving to his students to distribute group-by-group, there always seemed to be more. And when the people were full, there were twelve baskets of food remaining!
When Elisha was prominent as a prophet (2 Kgs 4:1-7), he was responsible for a similar but lesser miracle. The daughter-in-law of one of the prophets, whose husband had died, asked for his assistance in paying off a debt, so that her children would not be taken as payment and enslaved. All she had was a jar of oil -- not nearly valuable enough to pay the full amount. Elisha called upon God's power to direct others to pour the oil from its jar into other (similar) jars -- until the original jar became empty. As it turned out, they had enough to fill every empty jar that they could find. She sold the oil, and she and her sons lived off of the profit from the sale. Jesus provided not oil but food, and there was an overabundance remaining -- well beyond anyone's need.
45 And immediately he necessitated for his students to go down into the ship and to go ahead to the other side to Bethsaida, while he was releasing the crowd. And after directing them to go away, he went away into the mountain to pray.
And after evening happened, the ship was in the middle of the sea, and he was alone on the land. And when he noticed that they were being tormented while rowing (for the wind was opposite them), at about the fourth guard of the night, he went to them, walking on the sea, and he wanted to go alongside them. But when they noticed him walking on the sea, they thought that he was an apparition, and they screamed, for they all saw him and were terrified.
Now immediately he spoke with them, and he said to them, "Take courage. It is I. Don't be afraid." And he went up to them into the ship, and the wind ceased. And they were exceedingly, abundantly, amazed within themselves. For they did not understand about the loaves, but their hearts were stupefied.
At this point in the narrative, Markus' account begins to follow Matthaiah's version more closely. The connection between the two accounts continues from here until the end, with a few deviations.
Jesus retreated alone onto a mountain, in a style perhaps reminiscent of Elijah. After that comes a water miracle. Elisha had parted the waters (2 Kgs 2:1-18) and had made an axe float on water (2 Kgs 6:1-7), but Jesus walked on water -- again, a greater miracle.
Markus omits the segment, found in Matthaiah, about Peter walking on water. Markus adds one detail as well. Why were Jesus' students amazed about this miracle? Because they didn't understand about the miraculous feeding. That is, they did not understand the power of trust.
53 And after they passed over, they came to the land at Gennesaret, and they went to the shore. And after they exited from the ship, people immediately recognized him and they ran around that whole countryside, and they began to carry around on mats those who had maladies to wherever they heard that he was. And whenever he went into villages, or into cities, or into fields, they placed the weak in the marketplaces and called him aside, so that they might touch even the tuft of his cloak. And as many as touched him were saved.
Markus' conclusion to the walk on water is similar to Matthaiah's, but (as often) Markus more strongly emphasizes Jesus' spreading fame. The account concludes with another comment about the people's trust.
7:1 And when the Perushim and some of the scribes who had come from Jerusalem gathered to him and noticed some of his students, that they were eating loaves with common (that is, unwashed) hands --
for the Perushim and all the Jews do not dine unless they wash their hands with the fist, holding on to the traditions of the older people. And they don't dine after coming from the marketplace unless they ceremonially purify themselves. And there are many other things that were delivered over for them to hold on to: ceremonial purification of cups and pots and copper vessels --
Markus clarifies the account from Matthaiah. Whereas Matthaiah had merely indicated that Jesus' students were eating with unwashed hands, Markus makes a point of indicating that failure to wash their hands made the students ritually "common" in the eyes of the religious leadership. The point of clarification went so far as to specify the details of the tradition. Rabbi Shammai considered the ritual cleansings to be of crucial importance.
In the Talmud, tractate Shabbath 62b, we read: "In a Baraitha it was taught: Three things bring man to poverty. viz., urinating in front of one's bed naked, treating the washing of the hands with disrespect, and being cursed by one's wife in his presence."
In tractate Sotah 4b, we also read: "R. Zerika said in the name of R. Eleazar: Whoever makes light of washing the hands will be uprooted from the world. R. Hiyya b. Ashi said in the name of Rab: With the first washing it is necessary to lift the hands up; with the latter washing it is necessary to lower the hands. There is a similar teaching: Whoever washes his hands must lift them up lest the water pass beyond the joint, flow back and render them unclean. R. Abbahu says: Whoever eats bread without first wiping his hands is as though he eats unclean food; as it is stated: 'And the Lord said: Even thus shall the children of Israel eat their bread unclean.'"
5 And the Perushim and the scribes questioned him, "Why don't your students walk according to the tradition of the older people? On the contrary, they are eating bread with common hands." But he said to them, "Isaiah prophesied well about you hypocrites, as it was written that, "This people honors me with the lips, but their hearts are far away from me. Now they revere me worthlessly, teaching as teachings human precepts." Leaving God's precept, you lay hold of human tradition."
And he said to them, "You are setting aside well God's precept, so that you might make your tradition stand. For Moses said, "Honor your father and your mother" and, "The one who says a bad thing of father or mother should be completed to death." But you say that if a person should say to father or mother, 'Whatever you would have been profited from me is korban [that is, a gift],' then you no longer allow him to give anything to the father or mother, nullifying God's message for your tradition which you have handed down. And you do many such things."
And again he called the crowd to him, saying to them, "Hear me, all of you, and understand. There is nothing that enters into a person from outside him which is able to make him common. On the contrary, the things which go out from a person are the things that make the person common."
In Jesus' time, the rabbis had begun to place great emphasis on certain ritual cleansings, including the cleansings before and after eating a meal. Jesus did not address the hand-washing subject directly, instead turning to something that he considered similar: the rabbis' use of a principle of temple sacrifice to override one of the Ten Commandments.
Jesus cites passages from the Torah which indicate that one's parents should be honored. It was normally recognized that a person should take care of his parents when they age. But the common practice was that if something were set aside for temple use, korban, then they could treat that money (or property) as though it did not exist. Therefore, they could claim that they were unable to provide support for their parents -- getting around the precept of honoring their parents. So Jesus says, "You are setting aside God's precept, so that you might make your tradition stand." This clarifies the wording in Matthaiah's account, for the religious leaders wanted so badly to follow their tradition that they were willing to ignore the Torah.
God had told them about a principle: honor and respect. They had interpreted mechanically what this honor entailed, and then found legalistic ways around it. They had created similar Sabbath rules.
Now the Perushim, sticklers for detail, believed that they were clarifying in what situations different statements applied. But it was their externalization of internal principles that made them miss the point entirely.
Thus, Jesus continues by citing God's statement to Isaiah (Isa 29:13). They had made the Torah worthless, and their religion was the problem. This reverence of God in Isaiah is a "tremble in fear" reverence. Rather than tremble in fear of God, they preferred to follow that which was familiar: their own traditional opinions. Jesus is calling for "restoration" -- for a look back at what God originally said, and not at the human opinions and interpretations that had created the Jewish religious paradigm of his time.
In speaking against creating a ritualistic religion out of the internal principles of the Torah, Jesus says, "There is nothing that enters into a person from outside him which is able to make him common. On the contrary, the things which go out from a person are the things that make the person common."
For them, ritual cleansing made sure that the food that entered the mouth was not "unclean"; therefore, the person wouldn't be defiled. It was a precautionary measure that the Leadership had enacted. They'd been doing it for several generations -- perhaps 200 years. Jesus addressed their practice by saying that food doesn't rob someone of their holiness. Yet they looked at defilement from an external standpoint, and Jesus was internalizing it. No handwashing is going to help, and Jesus was about to explain exactly what sorts of things render someone useless for holy purposes.
17 And when he had entered into a house, away from the crowd, his students asked him about the analogy, and he said to them, "Are you too so without understanding?! Aren't you mindful that nothing that enters into a person from outside is able to make him common, because it does not enter into the heart but into the abdomen, and it goes out into the latrine, cleansing all the foods?"
But he said, "What goes out from a person, this makes a person common. For from inside, bad reasonings go out from the hearts of people: sexual sins, thefts, murders, adulteries, greed, evil, deceit, debauchery, an evil eye, evil speaking, high mindedness, lack of wisdom. All of these evil things go out from within and make the person common."
In Matthiah's version, it is Peter who asked about the meaning of Jesus' statements about cleanliness; Markus extends that question to all of them. The list of internal sins is also longer here than in Matthaiah's account, and some are changed. The different items are: sexual sins; greed; evil; deceit; debauchery; an evil eye; high mindedness; and lack of wisdom. "False testimony," from Matthaiah's list, appears to be omitted here, but "deceit" was probably intended to broaden "false testimony."
Some translations of v. 19 read that in making the statement about food, JESUS declared all foods to be clean, while other translations (as the NET) say instead that the body itself cleanses foods. Either way, the thrust of Jesus' statement is that foods themselves are incapable of making someone "clean" or "unclean."
24 Now after getting up from there, he went within the borders of Ture. And he entered into a house, wanting no one to know it, and he was unable to be concealed. On the contrary, a woman whose daughter had an unclean spirit heard about him immediately. And after coming, she fell down toward his feet. Now the woman was a Hellenist, Surofoinikian by birth, and she asked him that he cast out the spirit being from her daughter. And he said to her, "Allow the children to be well fed first. For it is not a good thing to take the children's bread and to throw it to the dogs."
But she answered, saying to him, "Sir, even the dogs under the table dine on the children's crumbs." And he said to her, "On account of this saying, go on. The spirit being has exited from your daughter." And after she left into her house, she found the child lying down on the bed, and the spirit being had exited.
Matthaiah's account refers to the woman as a Canaanite; Markus says she was Surofoinikian -- Markus is more precise, also adding that she was a Hellenist, and in his usage a Hellenist is equal in status to a gentile. It does appear, though, that Markus makes her out to be Jewish, for he omits Jesus' statement that the Messiah had been sent only to Jewish people.
After testing the woman's trust and resolve, Jesus noted that because she had humbled herself her daughter would be healed. Of course, this is what happened. Jesus appears harsh, but he told the truth in that his mission was not to her. Still, if she demonstrated the requisite trust in God, he was naturally willing to help her daughter. Could anyone complain that he had healed her, after she so humbled herself before God's servant?
Markus is more specific as to Jesus' travels. Adding to that detail is his unique account of Jesus' healing of the stammering man. It is interesting that in two healings found in Markus' account alone Jesus' mechanism for healing includes touching and spitting. The aftermath of this healing served to add to Jesus' spreading fame, despite his own objections.
And he asked them, "How many loaves do you have?" But they said, "Seven." And he charged the crowd to recline on the ground. And, taking the seven loaves, he gave thanks, broke them, and gave to his students, so that they would distribute them. And they distributed them to the crowd. And they had a few fish. And after blessing them, he also said, "Distribute these."
And they ate and were well fed, and the abundance of the fragments was seven large baskets full. Now they were four thousand people; and he released them. And immediately, he went down into the ship with his students and went to the parts of Dalmanutha.
Some of the people who were healed along with the stammerer stayed with Jesus for so long that they had exhausted their food supply. This time, in Matthaiah's version, his students didn't question him. Markus' wording is more doubtful: instead of asking how they might feed the crowd, his students wonder how anyone could do such a thing. Jesus intends to feed them, as he fed the thousands before, and they obliged. Seven loaves and a few fish are turned into a feast for 4,000 men (plus women and children). They ate until they were full, and seven baskets of pieces were collected. Until his approach to Jerusalem, this would be the last time he healed people for the simple purpose of curing them. Markus' version adds one healing for a specific purpose...soon to come!
MIDWORD
11 And the Perushim went out and began to question him, seeking a sign from him from heaven. They tested him. And groaning in his spirit, he said, "Why does this generation seek a sign? Indeed I am telling you, no sign will be given to this generation." And he left them, going back down, and went to the other side.
And they had forgotten to take loaves, and except for one loaf they did not have any with them in the ship. And he gave a statement to them, saying, "See, look out for the yeast of the Perushim and the yeast of Herod." And they were reasoning to one another because they had no loaves. And, knowing this, he said to them, "Why are you reasoning because you don't have loaves? You are not yet mindful, neither do you understand. Have your hearts been made stupid? "Having eyes, you do not see, and having ears, you do not hear." And don't you remember? When I broke the five loaves for the five thousand, how many baskets full of fragments did you take up?" They said to him, "Twelve."
"When I broke the seven for the four thousand, how many large baskets of fragments full did you take up?" And they said to him, "Seven." And he said to them, "How is it that you don't understand?"
And they went into Bethsaida. And they carried a blind person to him and called him aside, so that he might touch him. And he took the blind person's hand and led him out from the village. And he spit on his eyes, placed his hands on his eyelids, and asked him, "Do you see anything?" And looking up, he said, "I can see the people, like trees. I see them walking."
Then again, he placed his hands on his eyes, and the man saw clearly and was restored, and he could again see all things plainly. And he sent him away into his house, saying, "You shouldn't enter into the village."
In Matthaiah's account, this occasion (16:1f.) was one of several instances where Jesus predicted what would happen to the people of his generation. In that respect, for Matthaiah their importance connects them together. Markus, on the other hand, uses this event as a test of trust -- both for his students and for his readers.
When prodded to provide signs, Jesus chided them for not recognizing the signs that he had already shown them. The timing here is unspecified; it could be much later than the portions that precede. What we do know is that by this time Jesus expected people to realize who he was on their own.
Although Matthaiah ties this to his own chapter 12 by referring to "the sign of Yonah," Markus omits this detail. To him, Jesus is done producing signs (even if the resurrection might be considered one). A single (important) demonstration, provided only by Markus' version, follows immediately.
This time, Jesus was approached by people who brought a blind man to him. As far as we know, the people who were leading the blind man believed that Jesus could heal him. However, we know nothing about the trust of the blind man himself, or about the citizens of the region. Since Markus places such a great emphasis on trust, he appears to indicate here that the people of Bethsaida were having doubts. This is underscored by his telling the healed man not to enter the village.
Markus draws a connection between the two-stage healing of the blind man and the trust level of the citizens of Bethsaida. The patient himself had his trust increased twice as a result of the healing, but the people nearby appeared to be unaffected. Not only did this cause Jesus to ask his students exactly what people thought of him (8:27ff.), but also from this point on his healings (9:14ff., 10:46ff.) are always tied to lessons about trust.
Contrasting this to the curing of Na'aman by Elisha, we see that blindness was thought to be a more "impossible" disease to cure than was leprosy. In both cases water was used, although Jesus required much less water to effect the healing. In both cases doubt was involved -- here, Jesus healed the man despite the doubts of many people. Both here and with Na'aman, a lesson about trust emerged, with two results: if you trust God, even miraculous things will happen; only a kernel of trust is necessary in order to do great things.
Return to the Religious Concepts Page