(Gospel of Mark 4:01 - 4:34)
Jesus once again began teaching by the Sea of Galilee. So large a crowd gathered around him that he boarded a boat on the lake. He sat in it while the crowd remained on the land, lining the edge of the water. He taught them many things by using parables, for example, during his teaching, he said, “Listen, a farmer went out to plant his seed, but as he scattered it, some fell outside the furrow and birds flew down and ate it up. Other seed fell upon rocky ground where dirt was sparse. Because the soil was not deep, seedlings quickly sprouted. However, when the sun came up, the plants wilted, and, since they had little root, they withered away. Other seed fell among thorns that grew up and choked off the plants, which thus produced no grain. But other seeds fell upon good soil. They sprung up, flourished, and produced a crop, 30, 60, even 100 times what was planted.”
Then Jesus said, “Whoever has ears to hear, let him listen.”
Later, when Jesus was alone with his Twelve Disciples, others who gathered around him asked about the parable. He replied, “It is given to you to understand the secret truth of God’s dominion, but to those on the outside, all these truths are expressed in parables. And so, in seeing, they may see, but not perceive, and so, in hearing, they may hear, but not comprehend. Otherwise, they might be converted and their sins forgiven.”
Jesus then said to them, “You don’t understand this parable? How, then, will you understand the rest of the parables? The farmer plants — the Message of God. Some people are like the seeds that fall outside the furrow; Satan immediately comes and takes away the Message of God that was planted within them. Some are like the seeds on the rocky ground; they hear the Message and at once joyfully receive it. But, because they have no roots, the Message does not take, for as soon as there is some trouble or some persecution connected with it, they immediately lapse. Still others, like the seed that is sown among the thorns, hear the Message, but because worries about the state of the world, the seductiveness of wealth, and desires for other things intrude and stifle the Message, it has no effect. But there are those who are like the seed fallen upon good soil: they hear the Message, accept it, and produce a crop, 30, 60, or a 100 times what had been planted.”
Jesus also said to them, “ Is a lamp brought in so that it may be put under a basket or under a bed, and not on the lamp stand? Indeed there is nothing that is it hidden that will not be disclosed, nor is there anything secret that will not be revealed.
“If anyone has ears to hear, let him listen.” He added, “Listen carefully to what you hear. The more you listen, the more you will understand and the more understanding will be given to you. For he who has understanding, more will be given to him, but he who does not, even the little understanding he has will be taken from him.”
He also said, “This is the coming of God’s rule: when a man scatters seeds upon the ground, night day, whether he is asleep or awake, the seeds sprout and grow — he knows not how. On its own the land brings forth a crop, first the stalk, then the ear, then the kernel that ripens within it. As soon as the grain is ripe, he promptly puts a sickle to it, for the time for harvesting has come.”
Jesus said as well, “How can we describe the coming of God’s rule, what parable may we use to illustrate it? It is like a mustard seed, the smallest of all the seeds on earth. Yet, after it is planted, it grows and becomes the largest of all garden plants; it brings forth branches so great that under the shade of their foliage the birds of the sky may find repose.”
Jesus employed many other parables as he spoke as much of his message as the people were able to understand. Indeed he spoke to them of nothing without use of parables, but in private he would expound on all things to his disciples.
Notes
1. Jesus, who is famous for teaching in parables, explains here why he does so. He doesn’t use analogies and symbolic moral tales to illustrate his teachings and make his points clearer — quite the contrary. He uses parables to obscure the meaning of his teachings. This seems counterintuitive. Most teachers and preachers try to enlighten as many in their audience as possible and make their message easily comprehensible. Jesus, though, is unabashedly elitist. He only wants his message to be understood by a select group. It’s almost as if he is saying to his would-be followers, “If you’re too stupid to understand my parables, then I don’t want you as my disciple. I don’t want to be obliged to forgive the sins of those who don’t ‘get it.’”
2. The First Parable of the Seeds divides those who are exposed to Jesus’ Message into four categories:
1. Those who ignore it and quickly fall into the clutches of Satan and, presumably, sin and disbelief.
2. Those who are eager to believe and are easily converted, but who lack the strength of character to remain faithful when they are tested.
3. Those who are simply too immersed in material things, too preoccupied with their own affairs, and too susceptible to worldly desires to care about receiving the Message.
4. Those who do receive it and are true to it.
3. The second parable involving seeds illustrate the manner in which God’s rule will spread, like a seed that grows and matures by itself without the need for cultivation. In another words, man is not a necesary instrument for the propagation of his rule. It will not occur because of the work of preachers and prophets, an assertion that seems in conflict with a long-accepted tenant of Christianity and one which Jesus would later espouse, evangelism, the seeking of converts. The third seed parable, that of the mustard seed, alludes to the enormous growth potential of God’s rule, like many things in nature that begin as something very small and grow into something very large.
4. What is rendered here as “God’s rule,” or the “rule of God” is almost universally translated as “Kingdom of God” or “Kingdom of Heaven.” In modern English, “kingdom” means a country ruled over by a king, or a monarchial form of government. Although it is understandable why the ancients or 17th Century Bible translators would choose to use this term to describe the rule of God, it is no longer apt and can only be misleading. Unfortunately, neither Jesus nor any of the gospel writers ever really defined what they meant by the term, which seemed to have been employed in various ways. Whether this was owing to an assumption that it would be readily understood or to the intention that it would remain nebulous and undefined cannot be known. In the present context “God’s rule” likely refers to the beliefs, laws, customs, and practices to which the believer, the faithful must submit himself. God’s rule, therefore, is something that exists within, a result of acceptance, faith, and righteous devotion. (A believer places himself under the “rule of God” when he becomes a Christian.) But the rule of God refers at other times to direct political dominion over the earth by the divinity, which will occur in the future, after the Second Coming. Sometimes, though, it may refer not only to God’s authority, but to the earth itself under his rule — a closer match to the common use of “kingdom.” Other meanings and shades of meanings are possible. One of the most frustrating ambiguities in the New Testament, the definition of “Kingdom of God” is still a matter of theological debate and controversy.
5. Like many religions, especially cults, Jesus has one set of teachings for the hoi polloi and another for his inner circle of disciples. Even the teachings he vouchsafed to the former were obscured by being couched in parables. It was, therefore, accepted that only the disciples, in particular, the 12 apostles would know in totality Jesus’ teachings. This system was preserved in part by the later Catholic church, consisting of priests who were in the know and privy to God’s message and the mostly illiterate believers who would not be expected to understand theological concepts. The printing press and expanded literacy endangered this set up during the Renaissance. In contrast to the Catholic Church, Protestant churches expressly required believers to have personal knowledge and understanding of the Bible — no secret doctrine, but a universal set of beliefs.
Monday, August 21, 2017
Jesus Comes Home
(Gospel of Mark 3:20 - 3:35)
Jesus came home, but so large a crowd gathered that he and his disciples were not even able to able to have a meal. When his friends and family heard about this, they went to take charge of him, saying, “He’s out of his mind!”
Scribes who came from Jerusalem pronounced, “He is possessed by Beelzebub. He exorcises demons with the prince of demons.”
And so Jesus called them over to him and spoke to him with analogies. “How can Satan exorcise Satan? If a nation is divided against itself, it is not able to endure. And if a family is divided against itself, that family is unable to endure. And if Satan rebels against himself and is divided, then he cannot endure, but will come to his end. No one can go into a strong man’s house to steal his possessions unless he first ties up the strong man. Only then can he ransack his house.”
“I tell you truly, all the sins that man commits and all the blasphemies they may utter will be forgiven. But whoever blasphemies against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven, for he is guilty of a sin that is eternal.’
He said this to them, because they were claiming, “He is possessed by an evil spirit.”
Then Jesus’ mother and brothers arrived and standing outside, they sent some inside to call him. A crowd was sitting around Jesus and they told him, “Your mother and brother are outside looking for you.” He answered them, “Who are my mother and my brothers?” He looked at those seated around him and declared, “Here are my mother and my brothers! Whoever it is that does God’s will, that is my brother and sister and mother.”
Notes
1. This is apparently not a great homecoming for Jesus. Followers crowd into his house so that he and his apostles cannot even get themselves a meal. Some of his friends and family think he’s lost his marbles and, in modern terms, want to have him committed. Scribes (theologians and teachers of religious law) come from Jerusalem, a long way off, to declare that he is possessed by evil spirits, even Beelzebub, probably used here as synonomous with Satan, the devil. (Later Beelzebub would be regarded as a separate, but major demon, the “Lord of the Flies”). The scribes also assert that he is exorcising demons by using the authority of the demon leader, Satan. This Jesus effectively and eloquently refutes by reasoning that Satan could not go against his own demonkind without destroying himself. His analogy about the strong man and the robber suggests that Jesus can exorcise demons only because he has suppressed the power of Satan. --- Next, interrupting his teaching, Jesus’s mother and brothers show up wanting to see him. (Apparently he did not live with his family, for his mother and brothers seem to be visitors). Jesus totally snubs his family, declaring that his family are his disciples, those who do the will of God. It is implied that his family does not do the will of God, or if they do not, they are no longer his family. It is not recorded whether his mother and brothers were ever accorded the courtesy of being received by Jesus.
2. Jesus is from Nazareth in Galilee, but no further information about his background is here vouchsafed. What did he do before he was an evangelist? His house was apparently large enough to accomodate a large number of people. Had he been relatively wealthy?
Jesus came home, but so large a crowd gathered that he and his disciples were not even able to able to have a meal. When his friends and family heard about this, they went to take charge of him, saying, “He’s out of his mind!”
Scribes who came from Jerusalem pronounced, “He is possessed by Beelzebub. He exorcises demons with the prince of demons.”
And so Jesus called them over to him and spoke to him with analogies. “How can Satan exorcise Satan? If a nation is divided against itself, it is not able to endure. And if a family is divided against itself, that family is unable to endure. And if Satan rebels against himself and is divided, then he cannot endure, but will come to his end. No one can go into a strong man’s house to steal his possessions unless he first ties up the strong man. Only then can he ransack his house.”
“I tell you truly, all the sins that man commits and all the blasphemies they may utter will be forgiven. But whoever blasphemies against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven, for he is guilty of a sin that is eternal.’
He said this to them, because they were claiming, “He is possessed by an evil spirit.”
Then Jesus’ mother and brothers arrived and standing outside, they sent some inside to call him. A crowd was sitting around Jesus and they told him, “Your mother and brother are outside looking for you.” He answered them, “Who are my mother and my brothers?” He looked at those seated around him and declared, “Here are my mother and my brothers! Whoever it is that does God’s will, that is my brother and sister and mother.”
Notes
1. This is apparently not a great homecoming for Jesus. Followers crowd into his house so that he and his apostles cannot even get themselves a meal. Some of his friends and family think he’s lost his marbles and, in modern terms, want to have him committed. Scribes (theologians and teachers of religious law) come from Jerusalem, a long way off, to declare that he is possessed by evil spirits, even Beelzebub, probably used here as synonomous with Satan, the devil. (Later Beelzebub would be regarded as a separate, but major demon, the “Lord of the Flies”). The scribes also assert that he is exorcising demons by using the authority of the demon leader, Satan. This Jesus effectively and eloquently refutes by reasoning that Satan could not go against his own demonkind without destroying himself. His analogy about the strong man and the robber suggests that Jesus can exorcise demons only because he has suppressed the power of Satan. --- Next, interrupting his teaching, Jesus’s mother and brothers show up wanting to see him. (Apparently he did not live with his family, for his mother and brothers seem to be visitors). Jesus totally snubs his family, declaring that his family are his disciples, those who do the will of God. It is implied that his family does not do the will of God, or if they do not, they are no longer his family. It is not recorded whether his mother and brothers were ever accorded the courtesy of being received by Jesus.
2. Jesus is from Nazareth in Galilee, but no further information about his background is here vouchsafed. What did he do before he was an evangelist? His house was apparently large enough to accomodate a large number of people. Had he been relatively wealthy?
Jesus Chooses His Disciples
(Gospel of Mark 3:14 - 3:19)
Jesus climbed a mountain and called down to those he wanted, and they came up to him. Twelve of them he chose to be his companions, that he might send them out to preach and endow them with the power to heal and to exorcise evil spirits.
The 12 he appointed were these:
Simon (whom he called “Peter”)
James, the son of Zebedee and his brother John (whom he gave the name of Boanerges, meaning “Sons of Thunder”)
Andrew
Philip
Bartholomew
Matthew
Thomas
James, the son of Alphaeus
Thaddaeus
Simon the Zealot
Judas Iscariot, the one who turned him in
Notes
1. According to the text, Boanerges means “sons of thunder” presumably in Aramaic, the language that Jesus and his disciples spoke. It does not, however, seem to be a regular word, only an awkward portmanteau expression partly from Hebrew, made up either by Jesus or by the author of Mark. The term is never used again.
2. This is the standard list of the apostles, however, some of the names vary. The Gospel of John, which, unlike the other gospels, does not offer a list of the apostles, calls Bartholomew, Nathanael, while Thaddeus is probably the same person as Judas or Jude, the son or brother of James. James, the son of Alphaeus, is sometimes (unflatteringly) called James the Less. Matthew may also be Levi, the son of Alphaeus, and Simon may be the same person as Simeon of Jerusalem. Curious that more than one apostle would be known by more than one name. Unlike the Romans, who had a first name, a family name, and a tribal name, Hebrew men had only one name. Added to it might be another name indicating their place of origin or residence, whose son they were, what work they did, or a personal characteristic they might have -- very similar to the situation in medieval England.
3. Ascending a mountain suggests an ascent to Heaven, communion with the divine. Moses climbs a mountain to receive the Ten Commandments. Perhaps this is a parallel, Jesus ascending a mountain and calling up to him his chosen apostles.
Jesus climbed a mountain and called down to those he wanted, and they came up to him. Twelve of them he chose to be his companions, that he might send them out to preach and endow them with the power to heal and to exorcise evil spirits.
The 12 he appointed were these:
Simon (whom he called “Peter”)
James, the son of Zebedee and his brother John (whom he gave the name of Boanerges, meaning “Sons of Thunder”)
Andrew
Philip
Bartholomew
Matthew
Thomas
James, the son of Alphaeus
Thaddaeus
Simon the Zealot
Judas Iscariot, the one who turned him in
Notes
1. According to the text, Boanerges means “sons of thunder” presumably in Aramaic, the language that Jesus and his disciples spoke. It does not, however, seem to be a regular word, only an awkward portmanteau expression partly from Hebrew, made up either by Jesus or by the author of Mark. The term is never used again.
2. This is the standard list of the apostles, however, some of the names vary. The Gospel of John, which, unlike the other gospels, does not offer a list of the apostles, calls Bartholomew, Nathanael, while Thaddeus is probably the same person as Judas or Jude, the son or brother of James. James, the son of Alphaeus, is sometimes (unflatteringly) called James the Less. Matthew may also be Levi, the son of Alphaeus, and Simon may be the same person as Simeon of Jerusalem. Curious that more than one apostle would be known by more than one name. Unlike the Romans, who had a first name, a family name, and a tribal name, Hebrew men had only one name. Added to it might be another name indicating their place of origin or residence, whose son they were, what work they did, or a personal characteristic they might have -- very similar to the situation in medieval England.
3. Ascending a mountain suggests an ascent to Heaven, communion with the divine. Moses climbs a mountain to receive the Ten Commandments. Perhaps this is a parallel, Jesus ascending a mountain and calling up to him his chosen apostles.
Thursday, October 8, 2015
Jesus Accused of Violating the Sabbath
(Gospel of Mark 2:23 - 3:13)
On the Sabbath Jesus happened to be passing through a field of grain. As his disciples walked along with him, they began to pick some of the heads of grain.
The Pharisees challenged him. “Look, why are they doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath?"
Jesus replied to them, "Haven't you ever read what King David did when he and his companions were hungry and needy? In the days of Abiathar, high priest, he entered the Tabernacle and ate the sacred showbread, which was lawful only for the priests to eat. He even gave some to the companions who were with him.”
He also said to them, "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. Therefore, the Son of Man is master of the Sabbath as well.”
On another occasion Jesus entered the synagogue and noticed a man there with a withered hand. Those who were looking for a pretext to bring a charge against him watched Jesus closely to see if he would heal the man on the Sabbath.
Jesus told the man with the withered hand, "Come and stand up in front of us all.” He asked the people, "What is lawful on the Sabbath, to do good, or to do evil, to save a life, or to take one?" But the congregation was silent.
Jesus glared at them in anger, appalled by the hardness of their hearts. Then he said to the man, "Hold out your hand." He held out his hand, and, lo, it was restored!
As soon as the Pharisees left the synagogue, they conferred with those supporters of Herod Antipas who were opposed to Jesus and conspired with them how they might destroy Jesus.
Jesus retreated with his disciples to the Sea of Galilee. A large crowd followed him, people not only from Galilee, but from Judea, Jerusalem, Idumea, the trans-Jordan, and the area around Tyre and Sidon. Having heard of the great things he was doing, vast numbers of people were coming to see him. Concerned that the crowds might crush him, Jesus ordered his disciples to make ready a boat. He had healed so many on that day that those who were diseased surged forward through the crowd that they might touch him. Whenever those possessed by unholy spirits recognized him, they would prostrate themselves before him and exclaim, "You are the Son of God!" But Jesus sternly commanded them not to reveal his identity.
Notes
1. By picking heads of grain as they passed through the fields, the disciples were engaged in a forbidden activity, harvesting on the Sabbath, so judged the knit-picking Pharisees. Presumably the disciples were picking the heads of grain to eat the kernels. Gee, most folks wait until the kernels are made into flour or bread! We are referring to wheat here, not to what we call corn, which is maize, a strictly New World cereal that would have been unknown to those living in the ancient Middle East. (The word corn was traditionally used to refer to any grain or cereal crop.) Was Jesus so poor at providing for his disciples that they must scavenge for food? This behavior, though, was sanctioned by Deuteronomy. We must ask, though, how the Pharisees knew of this. Were the Pharisees, who seem to dog Jesus' footsteps, really trailing the disciples through the grain field, spying on them and scrutinizing their every move? The Pharisees do give the impression that they will go to any length to try to catch Jesus in a blasphemy or in some violation of religious law, however minor or harmless in order to find an excuse for getting rid of him, a troublemaker and a threat to their authority. Yet, this seems excessively petty -- which is perhaps the very reason this trivial incident was included by the author, to discredit the good sense of the Pharisees who opposed Jesus.
2. Jesus' response to the Pharisees' charge concerning the disciples' questionable conduct, plucking heads of grain on a Sabbath, is somewhat evasive. He compares it to an act of David and his hungry companions when they ate food meant for the priests. The circumstances are not really comparable at all. David was a future king in flight, not a follower of an evangelist. David secured the approval of the priests for what he did. And David and his companions were in distress and genuinely hungry. Were the disciples really that hungry? Did that compel their indiscreet plucking? And if David had acted improperly, how does that excuse the actions of Jesus' disciples? One instance of wrong behavior is not justified by citing another instance of wrong behavior, especially when the latter act is motivated by extenuating circumstances and the former is not. Jesus is very much like a little boy caught with his hand in the cookie jar. He excuses himself by claiming his older brother filched an extra brownie the week before. He never directly addresses the morality of his own conduct, or rather that of his disciples, he only diverts attention from it by pointing to the conduct of another. This behavior, this response to an accusation, this debating tactic, is as puerile as it common. One would think it beneath someone who claims to be the Son of God.
3. The incident concerning David is mentioned in Samuel. David, feeing from Saul, was alone when he asked the Jehovan priests to feed him with the sacred showbread. But he did bring back 5 loaves for his companions. The high priest at that time was actually Ahimelech, the father of Abiathar, who later succeeded his father when he was murdered by Saul. The presumed mistake is explained away variously by biblical commentators -- Abimelech was also called Abiathar or the phrase is not “in the days when Abiathar was high priest,” but “in the days of Abiathar, the high priest,” not referring to the time when he held the office, but merely when he was active. Reasoning that neither Jesus nor the author of Mark would make so egregious an error, I have accepted the latter rendering and assumed meaning.
4. Jesus, though, presents another alibi for his disciples' conduct. But in saying that the Sabbath was made for man and not vice versa, Jesus is arguably throwing out the whole concept of strict Sabbath observance. One might interpret his remarks as sanctioning any Sabbath violation that serves not only necessity, but practicality and convenience. Moreover, he, as the Son of Man, claims the right to make of the Sabbath whatever he wishes. By advocating that the Sabbath serves the purposes of man (and not God?), Jesus seems to say that he is free to make any rules about it he deems fit and not be bound by the laws concerning it set down in the Mosaic texts. This is surely a repudiation of Judaism, at least traditional Judaism. Indeed the Pharisees thought so and were so outraged by it that they resolved to kill Jesus. (Forgetting, of course, the commandment against murder.)
5. That Jesus chooses to heal the man with the withered hand on the Sabbath in the synagogue is intentionally provocative. The man was not suffering and in need of immediate succor. Jesus could have seen the man the next day and healed him in the privacy of his home. He didn't need to do it on the Sabbath. He didn't need to do it in front of a congregation that might be offended by healing on the Sabbath. Instead, Jesus chose to make the man the object of a spectacle and a means of showing up the congregation -- who were probably less hard-hearted than sheep-like, believing what they were told by the Pharisees.
6. The Pharisees conferred with supporters of Herod Antipas who were opposed to Jesus: in other words, they were seeking the approval of the political establishment and plotting with it to destroy Jesus. Jesus, although he hasn't done or said a great deal at this point in the narrative, has already acquired national, if not international notoriety. A preacher, a healer of populist appeal, he is a threat to the powers that be. The political and religious establishments, no doubt oft at odds, thus form an alliance against Jesus.
7. Jesus is constantly running into people possessed by unholy, or impure spirits. There seems to have been an epidemic at that time of what we would term demonic possession. While there is certainly compelling, contemporary evidence that demonic possession does exist, it must be regarded as rare. Here, it is common. The spirits or demons immediately recognize Jesus and, for whatever reason, wish to expose him as the Son of God. Jesus, at this point, doesn't wish to reveal his true identity. He wants to stay in the closet, so he silences the spirits, who apparently obey his commands and acknowledge his mastery over them. He does not on this occasion exorcise the spirits. Jesus, after healing so many, is now more intent upon getting away from the crowd that want a piece of him.
8. Sidon and Tyre were major cities of Phoenicia, to the north of Galilee. Idumea was the Roman name for Edom or the Negev, south of Judea.
On the Sabbath Jesus happened to be passing through a field of grain. As his disciples walked along with him, they began to pick some of the heads of grain.
The Pharisees challenged him. “Look, why are they doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath?"
Jesus replied to them, "Haven't you ever read what King David did when he and his companions were hungry and needy? In the days of Abiathar, high priest, he entered the Tabernacle and ate the sacred showbread, which was lawful only for the priests to eat. He even gave some to the companions who were with him.”
He also said to them, "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. Therefore, the Son of Man is master of the Sabbath as well.”
On another occasion Jesus entered the synagogue and noticed a man there with a withered hand. Those who were looking for a pretext to bring a charge against him watched Jesus closely to see if he would heal the man on the Sabbath.
Jesus told the man with the withered hand, "Come and stand up in front of us all.” He asked the people, "What is lawful on the Sabbath, to do good, or to do evil, to save a life, or to take one?" But the congregation was silent.
Jesus glared at them in anger, appalled by the hardness of their hearts. Then he said to the man, "Hold out your hand." He held out his hand, and, lo, it was restored!
As soon as the Pharisees left the synagogue, they conferred with those supporters of Herod Antipas who were opposed to Jesus and conspired with them how they might destroy Jesus.
Jesus retreated with his disciples to the Sea of Galilee. A large crowd followed him, people not only from Galilee, but from Judea, Jerusalem, Idumea, the trans-Jordan, and the area around Tyre and Sidon. Having heard of the great things he was doing, vast numbers of people were coming to see him. Concerned that the crowds might crush him, Jesus ordered his disciples to make ready a boat. He had healed so many on that day that those who were diseased surged forward through the crowd that they might touch him. Whenever those possessed by unholy spirits recognized him, they would prostrate themselves before him and exclaim, "You are the Son of God!" But Jesus sternly commanded them not to reveal his identity.
Notes
1. By picking heads of grain as they passed through the fields, the disciples were engaged in a forbidden activity, harvesting on the Sabbath, so judged the knit-picking Pharisees. Presumably the disciples were picking the heads of grain to eat the kernels. Gee, most folks wait until the kernels are made into flour or bread! We are referring to wheat here, not to what we call corn, which is maize, a strictly New World cereal that would have been unknown to those living in the ancient Middle East. (The word corn was traditionally used to refer to any grain or cereal crop.) Was Jesus so poor at providing for his disciples that they must scavenge for food? This behavior, though, was sanctioned by Deuteronomy. We must ask, though, how the Pharisees knew of this. Were the Pharisees, who seem to dog Jesus' footsteps, really trailing the disciples through the grain field, spying on them and scrutinizing their every move? The Pharisees do give the impression that they will go to any length to try to catch Jesus in a blasphemy or in some violation of religious law, however minor or harmless in order to find an excuse for getting rid of him, a troublemaker and a threat to their authority. Yet, this seems excessively petty -- which is perhaps the very reason this trivial incident was included by the author, to discredit the good sense of the Pharisees who opposed Jesus.
2. Jesus' response to the Pharisees' charge concerning the disciples' questionable conduct, plucking heads of grain on a Sabbath, is somewhat evasive. He compares it to an act of David and his hungry companions when they ate food meant for the priests. The circumstances are not really comparable at all. David was a future king in flight, not a follower of an evangelist. David secured the approval of the priests for what he did. And David and his companions were in distress and genuinely hungry. Were the disciples really that hungry? Did that compel their indiscreet plucking? And if David had acted improperly, how does that excuse the actions of Jesus' disciples? One instance of wrong behavior is not justified by citing another instance of wrong behavior, especially when the latter act is motivated by extenuating circumstances and the former is not. Jesus is very much like a little boy caught with his hand in the cookie jar. He excuses himself by claiming his older brother filched an extra brownie the week before. He never directly addresses the morality of his own conduct, or rather that of his disciples, he only diverts attention from it by pointing to the conduct of another. This behavior, this response to an accusation, this debating tactic, is as puerile as it common. One would think it beneath someone who claims to be the Son of God.
3. The incident concerning David is mentioned in Samuel. David, feeing from Saul, was alone when he asked the Jehovan priests to feed him with the sacred showbread. But he did bring back 5 loaves for his companions. The high priest at that time was actually Ahimelech, the father of Abiathar, who later succeeded his father when he was murdered by Saul. The presumed mistake is explained away variously by biblical commentators -- Abimelech was also called Abiathar or the phrase is not “in the days when Abiathar was high priest,” but “in the days of Abiathar, the high priest,” not referring to the time when he held the office, but merely when he was active. Reasoning that neither Jesus nor the author of Mark would make so egregious an error, I have accepted the latter rendering and assumed meaning.
4. Jesus, though, presents another alibi for his disciples' conduct. But in saying that the Sabbath was made for man and not vice versa, Jesus is arguably throwing out the whole concept of strict Sabbath observance. One might interpret his remarks as sanctioning any Sabbath violation that serves not only necessity, but practicality and convenience. Moreover, he, as the Son of Man, claims the right to make of the Sabbath whatever he wishes. By advocating that the Sabbath serves the purposes of man (and not God?), Jesus seems to say that he is free to make any rules about it he deems fit and not be bound by the laws concerning it set down in the Mosaic texts. This is surely a repudiation of Judaism, at least traditional Judaism. Indeed the Pharisees thought so and were so outraged by it that they resolved to kill Jesus. (Forgetting, of course, the commandment against murder.)
5. That Jesus chooses to heal the man with the withered hand on the Sabbath in the synagogue is intentionally provocative. The man was not suffering and in need of immediate succor. Jesus could have seen the man the next day and healed him in the privacy of his home. He didn't need to do it on the Sabbath. He didn't need to do it in front of a congregation that might be offended by healing on the Sabbath. Instead, Jesus chose to make the man the object of a spectacle and a means of showing up the congregation -- who were probably less hard-hearted than sheep-like, believing what they were told by the Pharisees.
6. The Pharisees conferred with supporters of Herod Antipas who were opposed to Jesus: in other words, they were seeking the approval of the political establishment and plotting with it to destroy Jesus. Jesus, although he hasn't done or said a great deal at this point in the narrative, has already acquired national, if not international notoriety. A preacher, a healer of populist appeal, he is a threat to the powers that be. The political and religious establishments, no doubt oft at odds, thus form an alliance against Jesus.
7. Jesus is constantly running into people possessed by unholy, or impure spirits. There seems to have been an epidemic at that time of what we would term demonic possession. While there is certainly compelling, contemporary evidence that demonic possession does exist, it must be regarded as rare. Here, it is common. The spirits or demons immediately recognize Jesus and, for whatever reason, wish to expose him as the Son of God. Jesus, at this point, doesn't wish to reveal his true identity. He wants to stay in the closet, so he silences the spirits, who apparently obey his commands and acknowledge his mastery over them. He does not on this occasion exorcise the spirits. Jesus, after healing so many, is now more intent upon getting away from the crowd that want a piece of him.
8. Sidon and Tyre were major cities of Phoenicia, to the north of Galilee. Idumea was the Roman name for Edom or the Negev, south of Judea.
Questions About Fasting
(Gospel of Mark 2:18 - 2:22)
When the disciples of John and the Pharisees were fasting, some people came up to Jesus and asked him, "Why is it that John's disciples and the disciples of the Pharisees are fasting, and your disciples are not?"
Jesus answered, "Can the wedding party fast when the groom is still celebrating with them. Of course not, so long as the groom is still among them. But the time will come when he will be taken from them. Then they will fast.
"No one sews a patch of new cloth on an old garment. For the patch would shrink and the new material would pull away from the old, making the tear worse. Nor does anyone put new wine in old wineskins, for the wine would burst the skins and so both the wine and the wineskins would be lost. New wine demands new wineskins."
Notes
1. The Pharisees and the disciples of John were known to have regularly fasted two days a week, but this was not something demanded by religious law. In his reply, Jesus suggests that whatever the merits of the practice, it is superseded by his presence: he is more important than any possible cause for fasting. It is interesting what Jesus does not say in response, e.g., "I see no purpose in my disciples fasting. But if John's disciples or those of the Pharisees wish to do so, that's fine." In the answer Jesus gives, he asserts his independence of not only the Pharisees, but of the Baptist's followers.
2. As he is wont, Jesus, when he is not dodging the queries addressed to him, uses a inquiry to make an unrelated point. Here, the analogy of patching an old garment with new, unshrunk material and putting new wine into old wineskins would seem to have nothing to do with whether his disciples should fast or not. Several interpretations of the analogies suggest themselves. One presumes, though, he is not dispensing practical advise on the mending of one's wardrobe or the storage of alcoholic beverages. It is most likely the analogies refer to himself and his message. He is the new piece of material, he is the new wine. He cannot be contained within the current religious establishment; his message cannot be grafted upon the Pharisaical teachings of the time. He is bringing something new into the world, something that will not fit into old parameters. One might even surmise that Jesus is suggesting his followers found a new religion and discard Judaism, an old wineskin.
3. Woolen garments tend to shrink a great deal when washed. A new piece of woolen, if sewn onto an old, already well-shrunk garment would shrink upon washing. The stitches of the patch would likely pull apart, enlarging the rip or hole in the old garment.
4. New wine is wine that has not yet thoroughly fermented. The fermenting process would put a strain upon wineskins that are old and brittle, perhaps rupturing them. Therefore, it would be foolish to put new wine into old wineskins.
When the disciples of John and the Pharisees were fasting, some people came up to Jesus and asked him, "Why is it that John's disciples and the disciples of the Pharisees are fasting, and your disciples are not?"
Jesus answered, "Can the wedding party fast when the groom is still celebrating with them. Of course not, so long as the groom is still among them. But the time will come when he will be taken from them. Then they will fast.
"No one sews a patch of new cloth on an old garment. For the patch would shrink and the new material would pull away from the old, making the tear worse. Nor does anyone put new wine in old wineskins, for the wine would burst the skins and so both the wine and the wineskins would be lost. New wine demands new wineskins."
Notes
1. The Pharisees and the disciples of John were known to have regularly fasted two days a week, but this was not something demanded by religious law. In his reply, Jesus suggests that whatever the merits of the practice, it is superseded by his presence: he is more important than any possible cause for fasting. It is interesting what Jesus does not say in response, e.g., "I see no purpose in my disciples fasting. But if John's disciples or those of the Pharisees wish to do so, that's fine." In the answer Jesus gives, he asserts his independence of not only the Pharisees, but of the Baptist's followers.
2. As he is wont, Jesus, when he is not dodging the queries addressed to him, uses a inquiry to make an unrelated point. Here, the analogy of patching an old garment with new, unshrunk material and putting new wine into old wineskins would seem to have nothing to do with whether his disciples should fast or not. Several interpretations of the analogies suggest themselves. One presumes, though, he is not dispensing practical advise on the mending of one's wardrobe or the storage of alcoholic beverages. It is most likely the analogies refer to himself and his message. He is the new piece of material, he is the new wine. He cannot be contained within the current religious establishment; his message cannot be grafted upon the Pharisaical teachings of the time. He is bringing something new into the world, something that will not fit into old parameters. One might even surmise that Jesus is suggesting his followers found a new religion and discard Judaism, an old wineskin.
3. Woolen garments tend to shrink a great deal when washed. A new piece of woolen, if sewn onto an old, already well-shrunk garment would shrink upon washing. The stitches of the patch would likely pull apart, enlarging the rip or hole in the old garment.
4. New wine is wine that has not yet thoroughly fermented. The fermenting process would put a strain upon wineskins that are old and brittle, perhaps rupturing them. Therefore, it would be foolish to put new wine into old wineskins.
Jesus Dines With Sinners
(Gospel of Mark 2:13 - 2:17)
When Jesus once again went out to the shore of the Sea of Galilee, a large number of people gathered round him, and he began to teach them. As he walked along, he saw Levi son of Alphaeus manning a custom booth. "Follow me," Jesus bid him, and Levi rose and followed him.
As he dined at Levi's house, there were many tax collectors and sinners who were reclining with Jesus -- and with his disciples as well, for there were many who were following him. When the scribes and Pharisees saw Jesus eating with tax collectors and sinners, they asked of his disciples, "Why does he eat and drink with tax collectors and sinners?"
When he heard this, Jesus replied to them, "It is not the well who need a doctor, but the sick. I come not to treat those who are righteous, but to cure those who are sinners."
Notes
1. That tax collectors are equated with sinners is revealing of the attitude that Galileans must have had toward their government, not that those who collect taxes are ever popular among citizens of any country at any time. The tax collectors would have worked for the native ruler, Herod Antipas, who administered Galilee as a client state of Rome. (They would not have been employees of Rome, as is asserted by many biblical commentaries.) Although Herod Antipas’ reign, dependent upon the good will of the Roman emperor, was a long one, it is doubtful that he was very popular with his subjects. His servants were probably reviled by the populace. Therefore, the ranks of the tax collectors would have been filled by disreputable and unsavory characters, outcasts, and opportunists. But the tax collectors would have been educated men, literate in Aramaic certainly and perhaps in Greek and Latin. The sinners were probably not those who were immoral in their conduct, but those who were merely religiously unobservant or heretical in their beliefs. This would probably include Hebrews who had become Hellenized or Romanized and had abandoned traditional customs and religious practices.
2. Levi, a tax collector (a publican, or what we would call a public contractor), is, for some reason, chosen by Jesus. He calls to Levi and Levi comes, leaving without explanation his well-paid job to follow an itinerant rabbi. Levi was probably manning a booth, collecting duties on imported goods that were being transported to Galilee from other jurisdictions across the Sea of Galilee. Little is here said of Levi, save that he apparently invites Jesus and his disciples to dinner. He is prosperous enough to give his guests a good feed. (The guests dine Roman style, while reclining on couches before a low table. They do not sit at a table as in da Vinci’s anachronistic depiction, The Last Supper.) Other tax collectors and "sinners" join Jesus and his disciples as guests.
3. Levi is generally thought to be the same person as the Matthew, supposed author of the Gospel of Matthew and later listed in Mark as one of the 12 apostles. (Dual names wee not uncommon at the time, but make for much confusion. It is possible, too, that Levi changed his name to Matthew when he became a disciple of Jesus.) His father Alphaeus is probably not the same Alphaeus who was the father of the Apostle James, although this is matter of some controversy.
4. Jesus, contrary to the point of view of those in the religious establishment, does not feel he needs to be selective in his society. He explains in his own way (it is the sick and not the well that need a doctor) the obligation he feels to consort with sinners in order to convert them. That, one surmises, would have beneath the dignity of the Pharisees, who are quick to find fault in anything that Jesus says or does. The Pharisees see their role in defending and perpetuating religious orthodoxy and are more interested in rooting out heretics than finding converts.
5. The questioning of Jesus' actions and statements by the Pharisees seem like a Socratic dialogue. Were the Pharisees really present, making these challenging inquiries, or are these interchanges literary devices employed by the author to illustrate Jesus' teachings?
When Jesus once again went out to the shore of the Sea of Galilee, a large number of people gathered round him, and he began to teach them. As he walked along, he saw Levi son of Alphaeus manning a custom booth. "Follow me," Jesus bid him, and Levi rose and followed him.
As he dined at Levi's house, there were many tax collectors and sinners who were reclining with Jesus -- and with his disciples as well, for there were many who were following him. When the scribes and Pharisees saw Jesus eating with tax collectors and sinners, they asked of his disciples, "Why does he eat and drink with tax collectors and sinners?"
When he heard this, Jesus replied to them, "It is not the well who need a doctor, but the sick. I come not to treat those who are righteous, but to cure those who are sinners."
Notes
1. That tax collectors are equated with sinners is revealing of the attitude that Galileans must have had toward their government, not that those who collect taxes are ever popular among citizens of any country at any time. The tax collectors would have worked for the native ruler, Herod Antipas, who administered Galilee as a client state of Rome. (They would not have been employees of Rome, as is asserted by many biblical commentaries.) Although Herod Antipas’ reign, dependent upon the good will of the Roman emperor, was a long one, it is doubtful that he was very popular with his subjects. His servants were probably reviled by the populace. Therefore, the ranks of the tax collectors would have been filled by disreputable and unsavory characters, outcasts, and opportunists. But the tax collectors would have been educated men, literate in Aramaic certainly and perhaps in Greek and Latin. The sinners were probably not those who were immoral in their conduct, but those who were merely religiously unobservant or heretical in their beliefs. This would probably include Hebrews who had become Hellenized or Romanized and had abandoned traditional customs and religious practices.
2. Levi, a tax collector (a publican, or what we would call a public contractor), is, for some reason, chosen by Jesus. He calls to Levi and Levi comes, leaving without explanation his well-paid job to follow an itinerant rabbi. Levi was probably manning a booth, collecting duties on imported goods that were being transported to Galilee from other jurisdictions across the Sea of Galilee. Little is here said of Levi, save that he apparently invites Jesus and his disciples to dinner. He is prosperous enough to give his guests a good feed. (The guests dine Roman style, while reclining on couches before a low table. They do not sit at a table as in da Vinci’s anachronistic depiction, The Last Supper.) Other tax collectors and "sinners" join Jesus and his disciples as guests.
3. Levi is generally thought to be the same person as the Matthew, supposed author of the Gospel of Matthew and later listed in Mark as one of the 12 apostles. (Dual names wee not uncommon at the time, but make for much confusion. It is possible, too, that Levi changed his name to Matthew when he became a disciple of Jesus.) His father Alphaeus is probably not the same Alphaeus who was the father of the Apostle James, although this is matter of some controversy.
4. Jesus, contrary to the point of view of those in the religious establishment, does not feel he needs to be selective in his society. He explains in his own way (it is the sick and not the well that need a doctor) the obligation he feels to consort with sinners in order to convert them. That, one surmises, would have beneath the dignity of the Pharisees, who are quick to find fault in anything that Jesus says or does. The Pharisees see their role in defending and perpetuating religious orthodoxy and are more interested in rooting out heretics than finding converts.
5. The questioning of Jesus' actions and statements by the Pharisees seem like a Socratic dialogue. Were the Pharisees really present, making these challenging inquiries, or are these interchanges literary devices employed by the author to illustrate Jesus' teachings?
Thursday, August 27, 2015
Jesus Heals the Sick
(Gospel of Mark 1:29 - 2:12)
When Jesus left the synagogue with James and John, they went to the house of Simon and Andrew. Simon's mother-in-law lay sick in bed with a fever. Jesus, who was immediately told of this, came to her, held her hand, and helped her up. The fever at once departed, and she was able to wait upon her guests.
That evening after sundown many who were ill or possessed by demons were brought to see Jesus. The whole town gathered outside the door of the house to watch. Jesus cured many people with a variety of ailments. He also exorcised many demons, but he forbad them speak for they were aware of who he was.
Rising very early in the morning, while it was still dark, Jesus went out to find a secluded place where he could pray. Later, Simon and the others looked for him, and when they found him, they told Jesus, "Hey, everybody's looking for you!" But Jesus replied, "We need to go to other towns and preach there as well, for that is why I have come." And so he traveled around Galilee, preaching in the synagogues and casting out demons.
A man suffering from a serious skin disease came to him, kneeling before him and begging, "If you are willing, you can make me clean."
Jesus, feeling pity for the man, reached out his hand and touched him. "I am willing," he said. "Be clean!" At once the disease left him and his skin was cleansed. Jesus quickly sent him on his way with a stern warning, "Now don't tell anyone about this, but go to a priest and let him examine you. Offer the sacrifices required by Moses; let that be the public acknowledgment of your cleansing."
But the man instead went out and talked freely about what had happened, spreading the news abroad, so that Jesus could no longer openly enter a town; he stayed out of doors in lonely hideaways. Even then people from far and wide flocked to see him.
A few days later when Jesus returned to Capernaum, the people heard that he was staying in a certain house. The crowds that congregated there were so great that there was no room for them, even outside. Nevertheless, he preached his message to them.
A group arrived, bringing to him a paralytic, who was carried by four men. They couldn't get near Jesus because of the press of people, so they laid bare the roof above where Jesus was standing and broke open a hole through which they lowered the man and the mat on which he was lying. Jesus, so impressed by their faith in him, said to the paralyzed man, "My son, your sins are forgiven."
Some of the scribes who were there began thinking to themselves, "Why does this man talk like this? It's blasphemy! Only God can forgive sins."
Jesus immediately sensed what they were thinking. He asked them, "Why do you harbor these thoughts in your mind? Which is easier, telling a paralyzed man, 'Your sins are forgiven,' or ‘Rise, pick up your mat, and walk'? I will show you that the Son of Man has the authority on earth to forgive sins." He turned to the paralytic and bade him, “I say to you, rise, pick up your mat, and go home!” The man leapt to his feet, collected his mat, and strode out in full view of the company. Everyone was astounded and praised God. "We've never seen the like of this!' they declared.
Notes
1. Little is revealed of the apostles' private lives, but here we are told that Simon Peter has a mother-in-law. One assumes that he also has a wife, perhaps children as well -- that he will more or less desert to travel around with Jesus. (The question of how the apostles who had families managed to support them is not an issue addressed in the gospels.)
2. Jesus is in so much demand as a healer that he is mobbed wherever he goes and does his best to evade the crowds that demand his services. Jesus is moved to help the man with the skin disease and the paralyzed man, but his compassion, like that of most people, is more or less limited to those he has immediate contact with. Jesus does not think in terms of how many of the ill and infirm he can help, but rather how he avoid their entreaties and escape being bothered by them. One can understand his reaction, the compassion fatigue; it is normal. But considering he is supposed to be the Son of God, one expects something more than "normal." In fact, the purpose of Jesus' healing seems less humanitarian than a means to further his own end, the conversion and indoctrination of the people to his belief system.
3. Jesus forbids the demons he exorcises to speak because they know who he is. Does Jesus want to keep it a secret that he is the Son of God? Is this revelation premature? Yet Jesus pretty much says so when he justifies his authority to forgive sins. One might wish to silence the demons for other reasons, but why prevent them from making a true statement? And wouldn't the demons' testimony to his divinity strengthen Jesus' case that he is the Son of God? "Look, it's not just me who says I'm the Son of God, even these demons say so." Perhaps Jesus may have concluded that confirmation from demons would instead suggest that he was in cahoots with them, that he was an emissary not from God, but from the Devil. Experience from those who may have had truck with such demons recommends avoiding discourse with them.
4. Most translations refer to those suffering from skin diseases (tzaraath in Hebrew -- the subject is treated exhaustively in Leviticus) as being lepers. This is not necessarily the case, nor is it at all certain that ancient leprosy is the same disease as modern leprosy (Hansen's disease). Identification of ancient diseases is always problematic even when symptoms are accurately described, and conflation of different afflictions is common, e.g., no distinction was made by the ancients between leprosy, which may have been what this individual had, and vitiligo (abnormal whitening of the skin), which may account for most of Old Testament tzaraath.
5. The man cured of his skin disease does not follow Jesus' explicit instructions, that is, to keep it dark about how he was cured. Instead he blabs about it all over town. One would think the man would have enough gratitude to obey the man who cured him, if not fear of crossing a man with such power.
6. It is well established that Jesus is from Nazareth and when he preaches at the synagogue in Capernaum, one gets the impression he is a stranger in town. Many translations suggest that he has come home to Capernaum, when all that is meant is that he had come to a house in Capernaum. He was probably staying, as he often would, with a friend and/or follower. It is a dwelling large enough to accommodate a large number of people, but not the masses that turn out. The roof would have been flat and tiled most likely. By removing the tiles, a hole and access to the interior would have been created. The paralytic could have lowered on his mat with the four men handling ropes attached to each corner of the mat (bed, pallet, litter, couch, cot, stretcher?). Other explanations are possible, depending upon the design of the house, which we don’t know.
7. In the text the scribes thinking to themselves, literally think in their “hearts.” The ancients had the notion that thoughts originated not in the brain, but in the heart, just as we fancifully regard the heart as the origin of emotions.
8. Already Jesus is running afoul of members of the religious establishment who question his authority to forgive sins, the prerogative of God. Jesus, who can read minds, chides them and says he does indeed have that authority, for he is the Son of God. To demonstrate it, he heals the paralytic so that he can walk and make a dramatic ambulatory exit from the gathering. This will not be the last time that Jesus uses showmanship rather than argumentation to prove a point.
When Jesus left the synagogue with James and John, they went to the house of Simon and Andrew. Simon's mother-in-law lay sick in bed with a fever. Jesus, who was immediately told of this, came to her, held her hand, and helped her up. The fever at once departed, and she was able to wait upon her guests.
That evening after sundown many who were ill or possessed by demons were brought to see Jesus. The whole town gathered outside the door of the house to watch. Jesus cured many people with a variety of ailments. He also exorcised many demons, but he forbad them speak for they were aware of who he was.
Rising very early in the morning, while it was still dark, Jesus went out to find a secluded place where he could pray. Later, Simon and the others looked for him, and when they found him, they told Jesus, "Hey, everybody's looking for you!" But Jesus replied, "We need to go to other towns and preach there as well, for that is why I have come." And so he traveled around Galilee, preaching in the synagogues and casting out demons.
A man suffering from a serious skin disease came to him, kneeling before him and begging, "If you are willing, you can make me clean."
Jesus, feeling pity for the man, reached out his hand and touched him. "I am willing," he said. "Be clean!" At once the disease left him and his skin was cleansed. Jesus quickly sent him on his way with a stern warning, "Now don't tell anyone about this, but go to a priest and let him examine you. Offer the sacrifices required by Moses; let that be the public acknowledgment of your cleansing."
But the man instead went out and talked freely about what had happened, spreading the news abroad, so that Jesus could no longer openly enter a town; he stayed out of doors in lonely hideaways. Even then people from far and wide flocked to see him.
A few days later when Jesus returned to Capernaum, the people heard that he was staying in a certain house. The crowds that congregated there were so great that there was no room for them, even outside. Nevertheless, he preached his message to them.
A group arrived, bringing to him a paralytic, who was carried by four men. They couldn't get near Jesus because of the press of people, so they laid bare the roof above where Jesus was standing and broke open a hole through which they lowered the man and the mat on which he was lying. Jesus, so impressed by their faith in him, said to the paralyzed man, "My son, your sins are forgiven."
Some of the scribes who were there began thinking to themselves, "Why does this man talk like this? It's blasphemy! Only God can forgive sins."
Jesus immediately sensed what they were thinking. He asked them, "Why do you harbor these thoughts in your mind? Which is easier, telling a paralyzed man, 'Your sins are forgiven,' or ‘Rise, pick up your mat, and walk'? I will show you that the Son of Man has the authority on earth to forgive sins." He turned to the paralytic and bade him, “I say to you, rise, pick up your mat, and go home!” The man leapt to his feet, collected his mat, and strode out in full view of the company. Everyone was astounded and praised God. "We've never seen the like of this!' they declared.
Notes
1. Little is revealed of the apostles' private lives, but here we are told that Simon Peter has a mother-in-law. One assumes that he also has a wife, perhaps children as well -- that he will more or less desert to travel around with Jesus. (The question of how the apostles who had families managed to support them is not an issue addressed in the gospels.)
2. Jesus is in so much demand as a healer that he is mobbed wherever he goes and does his best to evade the crowds that demand his services. Jesus is moved to help the man with the skin disease and the paralyzed man, but his compassion, like that of most people, is more or less limited to those he has immediate contact with. Jesus does not think in terms of how many of the ill and infirm he can help, but rather how he avoid their entreaties and escape being bothered by them. One can understand his reaction, the compassion fatigue; it is normal. But considering he is supposed to be the Son of God, one expects something more than "normal." In fact, the purpose of Jesus' healing seems less humanitarian than a means to further his own end, the conversion and indoctrination of the people to his belief system.
3. Jesus forbids the demons he exorcises to speak because they know who he is. Does Jesus want to keep it a secret that he is the Son of God? Is this revelation premature? Yet Jesus pretty much says so when he justifies his authority to forgive sins. One might wish to silence the demons for other reasons, but why prevent them from making a true statement? And wouldn't the demons' testimony to his divinity strengthen Jesus' case that he is the Son of God? "Look, it's not just me who says I'm the Son of God, even these demons say so." Perhaps Jesus may have concluded that confirmation from demons would instead suggest that he was in cahoots with them, that he was an emissary not from God, but from the Devil. Experience from those who may have had truck with such demons recommends avoiding discourse with them.
4. Most translations refer to those suffering from skin diseases (tzaraath in Hebrew -- the subject is treated exhaustively in Leviticus) as being lepers. This is not necessarily the case, nor is it at all certain that ancient leprosy is the same disease as modern leprosy (Hansen's disease). Identification of ancient diseases is always problematic even when symptoms are accurately described, and conflation of different afflictions is common, e.g., no distinction was made by the ancients between leprosy, which may have been what this individual had, and vitiligo (abnormal whitening of the skin), which may account for most of Old Testament tzaraath.
5. The man cured of his skin disease does not follow Jesus' explicit instructions, that is, to keep it dark about how he was cured. Instead he blabs about it all over town. One would think the man would have enough gratitude to obey the man who cured him, if not fear of crossing a man with such power.
6. It is well established that Jesus is from Nazareth and when he preaches at the synagogue in Capernaum, one gets the impression he is a stranger in town. Many translations suggest that he has come home to Capernaum, when all that is meant is that he had come to a house in Capernaum. He was probably staying, as he often would, with a friend and/or follower. It is a dwelling large enough to accommodate a large number of people, but not the masses that turn out. The roof would have been flat and tiled most likely. By removing the tiles, a hole and access to the interior would have been created. The paralytic could have lowered on his mat with the four men handling ropes attached to each corner of the mat (bed, pallet, litter, couch, cot, stretcher?). Other explanations are possible, depending upon the design of the house, which we don’t know.
7. In the text the scribes thinking to themselves, literally think in their “hearts.” The ancients had the notion that thoughts originated not in the brain, but in the heart, just as we fancifully regard the heart as the origin of emotions.
8. Already Jesus is running afoul of members of the religious establishment who question his authority to forgive sins, the prerogative of God. Jesus, who can read minds, chides them and says he does indeed have that authority, for he is the Son of God. To demonstrate it, he heals the paralytic so that he can walk and make a dramatic ambulatory exit from the gathering. This will not be the last time that Jesus uses showmanship rather than argumentation to prove a point.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)