Mark 5:21 – 43 Jairus’ two women

We are now back on the Jewish side, beside the sea, with the great crowd gathered around him. Things are much as we left them in 4:1 but since then we have seen two mighty works and are now about to see two more involving the miraculous healing of two Jewish women, on Jewish soil, beside the sea.

The two stories are inseparably woven together; the older woman’s story is slotted into that of the younger woman, while they are on route to Jairus’ house. The linkage may go much deeper. The younger woman is twelve years old, has reached the age of menstruation; the older woman has been suffering for twelve years from some sort of vaginal bleeding. Are we encouraged to see them as mother and daughter? The older woman will have been excluded from the community because of her “uncleanness” and has exhausted her funds on doctors. Such middle class behavior implied a middle class husband somewhere. The younger woman’s father, Jairus, is such a middle class candidate because of his position as one of the synagogue leaders. Following her healing, her restoration into Jewish society, the younger woman’s story continues and, in 5:40 both father and mother now appear in the story. What had happened at the birth of this young woman that is now going to be put right? What a tease that Mark is!

We also note some of the color of the story(s). (i) At age 12, the younger woman is doing exceedingly well in the “staying alive stakes. Malina, p. 211, notes that by mid-teens, 60% of those “who had survived child birth would now have died. (ii) Jairus’ falling to the ground, the behavior of a supplicant, is similar to the demoniac’s posture of worship on spotting Jesus. (iii) The older woman “is physically ill, ritually unclean, and near impoverishment: (Donahue, p. 174). (iv) Her singular focus on Jesus, her “faith”, parallels that of the Syrophoenician woman in Mk 7:25. (v) The bleeding is not a hemorrhage; a 12 year hemorrhage would have long since been fatal. (vi) Verses 27 – 30 are the work of the omniscient narrator — he sees all and shares it with us, his readers. (vii) The actions of the older woman touching Jesus’ cloak and that of Jesus touching the younger woman’s corpse would have been sources of contamination in this clean-unclean world. The healing of Jairus’ two women and the restoration of their family carried a huge risk.

Mark 6:1 – 6a Rejection at Nazareth

Jesus comes to his hometown, Nazareth (so 1:9). This confrontation recalls the question of who is the true family of Jesus (3:19-35): where is he from, what/who defines his honor and standing? Here we have a sustained and comprehensive attempt to challenge the honor of Jesus by the inhabitants of Jesus’ hometown:

• Where does all this come from?
• What is this wisdom that’s been given to him?
• What mighty works are done through his hands?
• Isn’t he a manual worker?
• Isn’t he the son of Mary and the brother of … ?
• Don’t his sisters still live here with us?

The implied assertion is that “Jesus can be no better than we are!” “We know everything that is to be known about him. You can’t tell us anything about him!” It’s the “tall poppy syndrome”. (I have argued that the issue of “where Jesus is from” is raised to an art form in the Fourth Gospel.) Our privileged vantage point as readers allows us to feast on the irony of their claim to know everything when in reality they know nothing. However, at the same time, to move Jesus’ identity away from his family is a source of shame and dishonor. There must be a new source of honor.

Jesus riposte is to quote a piece of gnomic wisdom: a prophet will receive honor everywhere except in his own country-village-family. If Jesus is dishonored by standing out from his (natural) family, he receives honor from his common experience with the rejected prophets. As with the sin against the Holy Spirit, some will make choices that place themselves outside the influence of the power of God.

There are several historical issues that lie beneath this story: where was Jesus’ hometown; was Jesus the manual worker/craftsman or was it his father; is the naming of a person in relation to his mother an insult; is this good information about Jesus having siblings? This is the only occasion in Mark where the mother of Jesus is named as 'Mary'.

Mark 6:6b – 13 The Mission Charge to the Twelve

Those who were called to be with Jesus were also sent out to proclaim the message (3:14) and will, in time, be witnesses to the risen Jesus (1 Cor 15:5). The twelve travel light, carrying little more than their given authority over the unclean spirits. From its origin, the church is missionary. In its style it is open to welcome and hospitality (in contrast to the Cynic philosophers. See Donahue 193). In its timing it is urgent.

The activity of the twelve will form the backdrop for the long interlude on the death of John the Baptist. (This is one of those "Markan Sandwiches") They will return at its closing (6:30)

Mark 6:14 – 29 Jesus and John the Baptist

Jesus’ ministry had been prepared for by the Baptist and had begun on his arrest (1:14). Everything that has happened to this point has had the imprisoned Baptist as its background. The murder of the Baptist brings us face to face with the fate of Jesus and his twelve.

The length and (gruesome) detail of the story mark it out as an important extended metaphor: Is Jesus the one whom Herod executed, now raised? Jesus is John? We meet Herod Antipas (tetrarch of Galilee and Perea) his half brother Philip (a lesser tetrarch), Philip’s (former?) wife Herodias. her daughter (Salome?) and a gopher/soldier. Herodias has it in for John because he has denounced her marriage while Antipas has a certain fascination for John. It’s another episode of Soap! A court drama with a powerful woman behind the throne; I am reminded of Jezebel conspiring to deliver Naboth’s garden to the petulant King Ahab (1 Kings 21). Antipas suffers from a rush of blood to the head and, in front of his drinking buddies, makes a promise to Salome from which he cannot back down.

The “Gentile rulers lord it over them” comment (10:42) seems hand written for all the Herods. The contrast in the comment is to the Son of Man who came not to be served but to serve and give his life a ransom. He too had his disciples who came and collected his body and laid it in a tomb. The preaching of the Kingdom is never too far away from death and resurrection.

Mark 6:30 – 33 Along the Sea

The twelve whom he sent out (6:6b-13) are now called “the apostles” (the sent ones). They return from “preaching and casting out and healing” (6:13) and report back to Jesus all the things they “did and taught” (6:30). This forms an inclusio (it brackets off) Herod’s execution of John.

In order to introduce the feeding story, we note the following: (a) We are on the Jewish side of the lake. The short boat trip (6:32) is along the side of the lake; the crowd can take a short cut and get there, on foot, first. (b) Jesus takes the twelve to a desolate (uninhabitable) place in search of privacy, rest and something to eat. (c) Jesus is recognized and preceded by a great crowd, as he had been earlier in the story and in contrast to the people of his hometown. We will note continuity with Jesus’ earlier ministry where crowds prevented him from eating and a contrast with Herod’s banquet.

Mark 6:34 – 44 Feeding the 5000

We remember that the parallel activity on the Gentile side of the lake also has its own feeding story where the counting of the crowd and the leftover food has a contrasting set of numbers. The significance of the numbers is intriguing but not clear: 5000 men, 5 loaves and 12 basketsful versus 4000 people, 7 loaves and 7 basketsful.

It is of the very nature of the Jesus of this story that he does extraordinary things: that is a given in this story, it is what divine men do. This is a vehicle of the story telling rather than the focus of the story.

Obviously this is a significant story for Mark tells it twice; clearly it contains much symbolic material and many echoes from stories past. These include:

• The wilderness feedings with manna (Ex.16:13-21; Num. 11:4-9)
• The sheep and shepherds metaphor from Ezek 34, where the kings are called ‘shepherds’ and are castigated for not teaching Torah.
• What seems to be an equating of ‘bread’ with ‘teaching’: “for they did not understand the bread” (6:52, 8:17-21).
• The miraculous feeding of 100 men, with 20 loaves, by Elisha (2 Kg. 4:42-44)
• The echoes of the promised, extravagant messianic banquet (Is 25:6-8), 49:10) and the satiation that awaits in the new land (Deut. 8:10). The extravagance here is shown in the vast quantity of leftovers.
• The contrast of this banquet with Herod’s execution feast: (a) The large number of peasant followers of Jesus v. the small number of rich and powerful (b) In the desolate place v. in the king’s palace (c) Jesus’ compassion for the people v. Herod’s killing of the Baptist to save face (d) An order to feed v. and order to execute
• The seating of the people by “groups” and by “plots” and “hundreds” and “fifties” is evocative of Moses’ divisions of the people (Ex. 18:25) and was replicated within the Essene community at Qumran.
• The Eucharistic patterns (took, blessed, broke, gave) with the bread are made very explicit by the time of the Fourth Gospel (Jn. 6) However, (i) there is no reference to a cup pattern and (ii) the sequence of actions with the bread is natural – what else could he do!

This is a grand story which, in time, will become overloaded with significance and associations in much the same way that a parable will often grow from an extended metaphor into an allegory as it is handled and admired and polished. It is too good not to tell it again on the Gentile side of the lake.

Mark 6:45 –52 Walking on the Water

On the level of the story’s plot, this incident allows the key players to get back over to the Gentile side of the lake: setting off towards the region of Bethsaida, they end up in Gennesaret. But it is much more that this: it is an epiphany of Jesus and a judgment on the disciples.

Jesus goes up onto a mountain to be in the presence of God, to pray. This also allows Jesus to be separated from the disciples and thus to come to them on the lake. His descent from the mountain and its startling effect has echoes of Moses’ transfiguration (“the skin of his face shone because he had been talking with God” Ex. 34:29-35).

The sea/waters evoke memories from the biblical tradition of chaos and the dwelling place of monsters. The spirit of God sweeps over the face of the deep in the first creation story (Gen 1:2) God sports with the sea monster Leviathan (Ps. 104:26; 74:12-14) and rescues sailors on the sea. Jesus comes to the disciples in the boat(s), striding over the face of the deep as a creator figure. The disciples are appropriately terrified at this god-like figure and he responds, “Be courageous, I am, be not afraid”, using the revelatory formula associated with Moses and the burning bush (Ex 3:14). There is no need to admonish the wind and the waves: that has already been done (Mk 4:39).

Here the narrator (6:52), later the character Jesus (8:17ff.), admonish the disciples for not understanding the loaves. This may be using loaves/bread as a metaphor for teaching, teaching about the Eucharist, as God’s extravagant meal given to both Jew and Gentile, satiating the needs of all members of the new family. The theme of the disciples’ misunder­stand­ing of the power of Jesus will come up again and again in chapters 8 – 10 and will be resolved in the figure of the cross-bearing Son of Man. The power wielding, miracle working of a Son of God will only make sense for Mark when Jesus hangs from the cross (15:39).

Mark 6:53 –56 The Healing Power of Jesus

We remember the other major Markan summary in 3:7-12: there he gets into a boat, here he gets out, there he is recognized by the unclean spirits, here he is recognized by all as a mighty healer, a ‘holy man’ whose garment tassels are even infused by the aura of the healer. The disciples have just mistaken him for a ghost!

They had set out towards Bethsaida on the Eastern shore of the lake and now they land back on the Western side of the lake, in the plain between Capernaum and Tiberius. How do we make sense of this: by rationalizing a boat adrift in the storm? By saying that Mark is confused by the details of Palestinian geography? Either way, the return journey across the lake to the Eastern, Gentile side has not worked out smoothly. Jesus will move back into Gentile territory in 7:24.

Jesus went into the centre, into the “market places”, of the “villages, cities or hamlets” of the densely populated Galilee and healed the sick. “Sabbath rest by Galilee, Calm of hills above and Silence of eternity” find no place here in Mark. There is no day off or time to eat or be alone.

Mark 7:1 –23 Clean and Unclean

While still on the Jewish territory, on the Western side of the lake, Jesus is surrounded by a new cast of characters and a new environment into which fits a discussion of clean and unclean. We have already encountered these social boundaries issues in Mk 2:13-17.

Malina & Rohrbaugh p.222ff set out the need for a wider system of meaning within which the ritual system of clean and unclean makes sense, the imaginary lines (boundaries) which mark out what is in place (clean) and what is out of place (unclean) and the rituals (cleansing) which returns everything to its place. “This system of place is one indication of the existence of a larger system for making sense out of human living.” Such maps of purity, which show the boundaries between the pure (in place) and impure (out of place) work for times, places, persons, things, meals.and the things that pollute by contact. The Jesus of Mark redraws maps of times (what can be done on the Sabbath), people (who may be touched – lepers, menstruating women, corpses) and things (“thus he declared all foods clean” Mk 7:19)

In at least two places (vv3-4 and v19), explanatory comments or asides are made to the reader, interpreting what is going on, implying that the readers are separated by time or space or culture from the ritual system that is being mapped.

A similar distance, or vagueness, is implied in the phrase “the Pharisees and all the Jews” and “the Pharisees and (certain of) the scribes”. The wide spread of groupings and reform movements within nascent Judaism at the time of Jesus is now, following the destruction of the Temple, collapsing onto the popular lay movement, the Pharisees, and, in time on their heirs, the rabbis. By now there is a settling out of but two of the many early Jewish reform groups, the followers of Jesus and the followers of the Pharisees. Forgotten are the other earlier options of what it was to belong to the people of God that included the Essenes at Qumran and the Hellenistic Judaism of Philo.

The world of Mark reduces everything down to Jesus and the Pharisees. They live by “the traditions of the elders” (v.5) and are hypocrites (vv.6f), we follow “the commandments of God” (vv.8f). As an example of this abandonment of the commandments of God, the Markan Jesus mentions the practice of Corban (which sounds like a first century equivalent of a trust fund being used to avoid tax payments!).which creates a loophole to avoid giving support to parents. Also, purity rituals are done away with by internalizing and spiritualizing them; what is external is irrelevant, what has to be addressed is what flows out of the human heart (vv.21f)

Jesus is now ready to go back into the Gentile territory

Mark 7:24 –38 Two Healings

Well, we know we are back in Gentile territory. The mother in the first healing is said to be from Tyre [not a good place to be this week!!!], a Gentile and of Syrophoenician origin. The geography, however is confused: Tyre is between Sidon and the top of the lake but they are said (7:31) to go “from the region of Tyre, … by way of Sidon towards the Sea of Galilee” .

The first healing is unusual in that the subject and the process are not a part of the story; when we are done with the mother we are told that the demon has already left the young girl. In terms of a healing of a young girl, it provides a match with the healing of Jairus’ daughter where the mother also occupies centre stage (if we are persuaded by the argument that the bleeding woman is the mother). Jesus addresses her in a way that is insulting (let’s not put a gloss on it). His response to the woman’s request is expressed through three metaphors: the Gentiles are dogs, the Jews are children, healing is bread. “The children’s bread is not to be thrown out to the dogs” To this challenge, the woman “answers back” with a riposte that bests Jesus: “Not true: dogs are fed under the children’s tables.” Even if the dogs metaphor is allowed, Jesus’ argument does not hold up. He acknowledges her point: “for saying that you may go …” The woman trusts Jesus’ declaration, goes home and verifies the healing.

The second healing has the level of detail missing from the first: description of the problem, the act of healing and the crowds’ choral response. However there are elements of the healing that firmly link it with the Gentile territory: the spitting and the touching. Saliva was thought to have medicinal properties; Jesus spits on his hands and anoints the man’s ears and his tongue. We have already noted that Jesus has redrawn the purity maps of people and things that cause contamination, by touching a leper, a bleeding woman and a corpse. That case has already been made on the Jewish side of the lake. [We struggle with HIV and H1N1.]

Markan summary statements have often shown up significant acclamations: “Who is this that even the wind and the waves obey him?” (4:41) “What is this? A new teaching — with authority! He commands even the unclean spirits and they obey him” (1:27). “We have never seen anything like this!” (2:12). Now we have a new one: “He has done everything well: he even makes the deaf to hear and the mute to speak.” The biblical echo is of Isaiah 35:5-6; the coming new age will be characterised not only by the extravagant feast for all, it will also be known as a time of healing for all.

We are now ready for the final balancing off of the two sides of the lake: the healing of the 4000, the Gentile messianic banquet is about to be laid out.

Mark 8:1 –10 The Gentile Feeding Story

We are aware that this story functions as the Gentile equivalent to the extravagant messianic feast on the Jewish side of the lake. Its beginning “in those days,” marks it off as a significant event in Mark (cf. 1:9; 2:20; 14:25)

In terms of their detail, the stories are different. This story has 4,000 people (the other, 5,000 men), seven loaves plus some fish (5 and 2), this is motivated by Jesus’ compassion for their hunger (sheep without a shepherd), Jesus raises the issue of how the crowd might be fed (the disciples raise it), the crowd have been with Jesus and have traveled a long way (they arrive independently from across the lake and get there first), their return home is out of the question, purchase of food is out of the question in this locality (the cost of food is the issue), no OT allusions in the sitting down, (allusions to the Messianic feast), there is a blessing of the fish, seven small baskets of leftovers (twelve large baskets).

Which, if any, differences are significant and what is their significance? Donahue (p. 245f) suggests the numbers seven and four, the absence of OT allusions and the more Pauline language of the formula of thanks­giving provide a Greek flavor to this story.

This concludes the mission of Jesus to the Gentiles. A balance that includes Jew and Gentile in the healing and table fellowship of the new family has been established within Mark’s community as having its origin in the life of Jesus.

Mark 8:11 –13 They Seek a Sign

The Pharisees seek a sign: we would expect this of the “chief priests and the scribes”. It is a hostile seeking that is a seeking him to have him killed (8:12, 11:18, 12:12, 14:1, 55) or their agent Judas (14:11). The sign is neither a symbol nor a work of power: in Mark it is a “mark of authentica­tion,” here coming from God. The expected “Prophet like Moses” will be authenticated by his words coming true (Deut. 18:18-22); the words of the Son of Man will be (have been) authenticated by his crucifixion. All other signs are denied this (evil and adulterous 8:38) generation.

Mark 8:14 –21 The Misunderstanding of the Bread

Outside of its use in baking, “leaven” is often a metaphor for a corrupting influence (mould?). The leaven of the Pharisees may be their need for an authenticating sign in the previous section. What of the “leaven of Herod”? It might be a reference to Herod misunderstanding of Jesus (6:14-16).

The narrator makes us privy to the musing of the disciples as the “suppose among themselves” just as Jesus will read their thoughts. Why did they suppose it was because they had no bread? Are we intended to make the connection from the “one loaf” that is in the boat to Jesus? This would require that we commit to accepting the eucharistic overtones of the two extravagant meals we have just seen. The insight that the disciples cannot receive brings together these meals with the community’s inclusive eucharist in which the one loaf is broken (14:22) Maybe. This is one of the most enigmatic sections of Mark’s Gospel (Donahue p. 251).

If this is about the misunderstanding of the significance of Jesus by the disciples than it serves as a link into the central section of Mark’s Gospel that now begins (8:22 – 10:51) where the misunderstanding by the disciples acts as a foil for the teaching of the Son of Man.

D. Mark 8:22 – 10:52 On the Way to Jerusalem

The structure of a story is an important means of picking up signals of how the story is to be read – particularly if you don’t have headings, pictures, bold type or verse numbers we take for granted. Originally, the Gospels had none of these: in fact the Greek text was originally written as one long string of capital letters, no breaks, no punctuation SOMETHINGLIKETHISBUTWRITTENINGREEKNOTENGLISH.

There are a couple of markers (oops!) that tell us that 8:22 – 10:52 needs to be regarded as a unit, and an important one at that. The first of these is that Jesus makes a statement three times: the Son of Man must go up to Jerusalem where he will be rejected by the Jerusalem authorities, undergo great suffering, be put to death and be raised from the dead ”after three days”.(8:31, 9:31, 10:33f.) These three sayings are know as the “passion predictions”.

Each prediction by Jesus is followed by an incident of the disciples misunderstanding what Jesus is saying and a subsequent little block of teaching on the true nature of discipleship.

This section has a great concentration of things to say about Jesus (Christology) and about what it means to follow him: it is “christologically dense”

The story of the transfiguration (9:2-13) forms the mathematical centre point of the Gospel of Mark – count the verses and find the middle.

The block is framed by two giving of sight stories that form the beginning and end. The stories are different – one is a two-stage regaining of sight and one is a discipleship story since the once-blind man now follows Jesus “on the way” up to Jerusalem, exemplifying what it is to be a true disciple. One is set in the Gentile north and the other in the Jewish south. In two different ways, these framing stories use the metaphor of the restoration of physical sight to speak about the gaining of spiritual insight and the beginning of a new life. The Fourth Gospel takes this metaphor even further and uses the giving of sight to a man who has been born blind (John. 9). He is the exemplar of the one who makes the true confession of faith under fire, so to speak.

What we have seen up to this point is a Jesus who is mighty in word and deed, a powerful healer, a divine man. Such healers were “a dime a dozen”, they were men of power. Since such a model does not begin to capture what Jesus is about, we have seen s pretty consistent attempt to hush things up, to keep quiet about such a model of interpreting Jesus – “He commanded them to say nothing!”

What we are about to see is another model they sees powerlessness and humble service of the Son of Man as going to the heart of Jesus. The tension between such contrasting models of power and greatness will provide the occasion for the misunderstandings and teaching.
The structure of this section of the story draws grabs our attention and tells us that we are on holy ground. THISISIMPORTANTSTUFFLETSGOON

Mark 8:22 - 26 First Giving of Sight Story: Gradual Healing

The first framing, giving of sight story is a Gentile story (spitting in the eyes) in a Gentile place to which the disciples had previously been sent (6:45). As such it provides a link, fitting in with what has gone before and helping to frame what is yet to come.

In addition to its Gentile context, it is different from the story of blind Bartimaeus in Jericho (10:46-52) in that (i) it is a two-stage healing, (ii) the healing is described and (iii) it does not exemplify the true Markan response to the word of Jesus in the way Bartimaeus does.

The two-stage healing is often said to provide a model for the response of the disciples. As we will see in 8:29, acclaiming Jesus as Messiah, as Peter does, is quite inappropriate and far from the Markan understanding of Jesus. Peter still has a long way to go!