Does anyone have an explanation for this?

[NCSue]

How odd.

In the 6h chapter of Mark is really packed with lots of “stuff”. Jesus leaves Nazareth because their unbelief keeps him from doing much in the way of miracles. He sends the disciples out on a mission of repentance after giving them power over unclean spirits. John is beheaded, 5000 people are fed using 5 loaves and 2 fish. The disciples go out on the lake in a boat and a storm tosses them around. They look out and are terrified when they see what they think is a ghost walking on the water. Then (verses 51-52) “He got into the boat with them and the wind died down. They were [completely] astounded. They had not understood the incident of the loaves. On the contrary, their hearts were hardened.”

It just struck me how peculiar it is to find these verses at this point. Any idea why their lack of understanding about the loaves and their hardened heart should be mentioned just after the sea calms down and Jesus gets into the boat with them after walking on the water?

 

[JeanneH]

How odd.

In the 6h chapter of Mark is really packed with lots of “stuff”. Jesus leaves Nazareth because their unbelief keeps him from doing much in the way of miracles. He sends the disciples out on a mission of repentance after giving them power over unclean spirits. John is beheaded, 5000 people are fed using 5 loaves and 2 fish. The disciples go out on the lake in a boat and a storm tosses them around. They look out and are terrified when they see what they think is a ghost walking on the water. Then (verses 51-52) “He got into the boat with them and the wind died down. They were [completely] astounded. They had not understood the incident of the loaves. On the contrary, their hearts were hardened.”

It just struck me how peculiar it is to find these verses at this point. Any idea why their lack of understanding about the loaves and their hardened heart should be mentioned just after the sea calms down and Jesus gets into the boat with them after walking on the water?

IMHO
I don’t think that these things happened in the exact order as they are presented. I think that Mark wrote them down as he remembered them.
Jeanne

 

[Simon_X]

IMHO
I don’t think that these things happened in the exact order as they are presented. I think that Mark wrote them down as he remembered them.
Jeanne

I agree with Jeanne, but I Sue makes a good point. There sure is a lot of stuff in that Chapter. I am going to go back and read it again…

 

[NCSue]

IMHO
I don’t think that these things happened in the exact order as they are presented. I think that Mark wrote them down as he remembered them.
Jeanne

Your explanation makes sense. It just seemed sorta “out of place” to me.

Thanks.

 

[The_Fool]

One explanation is that the Disciples saw the miracle of the loaves and still didn’t get it. The fact that they were afraid on the boat was simply a sign that they didn’t get it. Why be afraid? Didn’t they understand after seeing what they had? It goes to show that just because you see something awe inspiring does not mean you grow closer to God. Well, at least that’s my opinion.

 

[rcjones]

How odd.

In the 6h chapter of Mark is really packed with lots of “stuff”. Jesus leaves Nazareth because their unbelief keeps him from doing much in the way of miracles. He sends the disciples out on a mission of repentance after giving them power over unclean spirits. John is beheaded, 5000 people are fed using 5 loaves and 2 fish. The disciples go out on the lake in a boat and a storm tosses them around. They look out and are terrified when they see what they think is a ghost walking on the water. Then (verses 51-52) “He got into the boat with them and the wind died down. They were [completely] astounded. They had not understood the incident of the loaves. On the contrary, their hearts were hardened.”

It just struck me how peculiar it is to find these verses at this point. Any idea why their lack of understanding about the loaves and their hardened heart should be mentioned just after the sea calms down and Jesus gets into the boat with them after walking on the water?

If the four gospels are related to the four voices of God as prophet, priest, king and judge, then Mark is the voice of the Judge written primarily to the Jews. God is showing us the heart conditions of those around Jesus throughout the book.

Matthew is the voice of the Priest speaking about the Kingdom of Heaven. Luke is the voice of the King telling the literal story of Christ to the gentiles, and John is the voice of the Prophet, using symbolic language to show Jesus is God to the gentiles who are tired of men claiming to be gods.

Mark starts telling the story of Christ as judge. The first miracle related by Mark is to cast out a demon, or to “bind the strong man”. This shows the authority of the judge. As you read Mark, try to see each narrative as a judgment, (what or whom is being judged?) and then see if these don’t fit perfectly.

 

[NCSue]

As you read Mark, try to see each narrative as a judgment, (what or whom is being judged?) and then see if these don’t fit perfectly.

Thank you for your reply, rcjones.
I understand your point, but it still seems like this particular verse is placed in a peculiar position; it seems that it would have been more appropriately placed at verse 45.

Isn’t it strange how (at least for me) something different frequently “jumps out” when rereading the same passage of Scripture?

 

[atassina]

I heard Scott Hahn talk about the multiplication of the loaves and fishes. He said something approximately like this:

The Israelites in the desert consumed large amounts of manna, about several train loads. Perhaps the apostles and the Jewish authorities were not impressed because they already knew of what God accomplished in the desert for their ancestors.

Anthony

 

[rcjones]

Thank you for your reply, rcjones.
I understand your point, but it still seems like this particular verse is placed in a peculiar position; it seems that it would have been more appropriately placed at verse 45.

Isn’t it strange how (at least for me) something different frequently “jumps out” when rereading the same passage of Scripture?

When I find something that appears to be ‘out of place’ is a hint that I haven’t looked deep enough.

I was hoping to give you a chance at discovery. The beheading of John, the feeding of the five thousand and the walking on the water with the peculiar note are all related. The passage in question looks out of place when we separate them.

First John: When speaking of Elias Jesus says two things: Matt 11:14 “this is Elias” and Matt 17:12 But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them. 13 Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.

There are three proper ways to understand the prophecy of Elijah. John is Elijah and Jesus is Elisha, John and Jesus together are Elijah, and Jesus is Elijah and Elisha. These are three of the four voices.

Elijah and Elisha shared the same mantle and since garments are always works, they shared the same work. Elijah is a shadow of Christ as judge, and Elisha is a shadow of Christ as Priest (grace). These shadows always recapitulate, or repeat in the scriptures. As the time of the cross approaches the distance between the shadow and the reality in Christ is shorter until the time of John and Christ, the shadow is on top of the reality.

John is a shadow of Christ as judge. When he dies, the shadow tells us that judgment ceases. His beheading is a shadow of Christ being abandoned on the cross by his Father, he has lost his ‘authority’ since he has borne our sin and cannot even be looked upon by his Father. This is the same picture of the leper shaving his head.

Back to Mark. Now that John is dead, it is a shadow of judgment ended, Jesus reveals himself as the bread of Life. He is introducing his ministry in grace. He himself is a shadow of his own resurrection. In the flesh he can only promise grace because he has not yet accomplished the fulfillment of the law on the cross. He is a shadow of his own resurrection as he ‘takes over’ the mantle of John as Elisha took the mantle of Elijah.

The bread speaks of Christ as the bread of life. It is broken for us. It speaks of the cross. Though Jesus was not physically broken on the cross, Deity was torn in fulfillment of the parted waters, torn veil, split rock, etc.

The fish represent “every word that proceeds from the mouth of God” remembering that “man does not live by bread alone”. Jesus feeds them bread AND fish. The cross AND every word.

Jesus had just miraculously produced bread and fish to reveal himself as the source of life, or living water and the disciples did not get it. As he walks on the water, he reveals himself as the firmament between the waters in Genesis 1, and they didn’t get it.

Mark makes the point to say that it was evening. We know that the light that came into the world is Christ. And John further tells us that it is the light in the world that brings condemnation. Christ’s perfect life puts us to shame. So as the evening came, a time of grace, since men hide their sin in darkness, (we hide our sin in the grace of Christ) the men in the boat are digging the water and working real hard. As Jesus arrives, he does all the work (gives them grace) as the sea is calmed and they arrive at their destination. Yet they didn’t get it.

In Mark’s telling of the story, the death of John is the turning point between law and grace as a shadow of Christ’s death being the real turning point between law and grace. And as Jesus’ miracles are a shadow of his resurrection state, the disciples don’t get it.

They didn’t get the picture of Christ on the water, because they did not get the picture of him as the bread of life and the incarnate word. Now the verse is perfectly situated and explains their disbelief.

 

[Crumpy]

Just an observation: Mark’s gospel seems to be called the gospel of Peter in recent years. There may be an autobiographical undercurrent here, as Peter “didn’t get it” for so long. Imagine, somebody like him who witnessed the Transfiguration was cowardly in the courtyard of the high priest?

Peter and the other apostles were filled with courage after their experience with the Holy Spirit on Pentecost.

That gospel was told and eventually written to cast the apostles in just that light, of confusion and unbelief. The people who swarm to Jesus seem to have better insights and/or are more spontaneous than the apostles.

 

[rcjones]

Just an observation: Mark’s gospel seems to be called the gospel of Peter in recent years. There may be an autobiographical undercurrent here, as Peter “didn’t get it” for so long. Imagine, somebody like him who witnessed the Transfiguration was cowardly in the courtyard of the high priest?

Peter and the other apostles were filled with courage after their experience with the Holy Spirit on Pentecost.

That gospel was told and eventually written to cast the apostles in just that light, of confusion and unbelief. The people who swarm to Jesus seem to have better insights and/or are more spontaneous than the apostles.

In the shadows contained in Revelation, there are only seven authors of the New Testament which would exclude Mark in favor of Peter. It also hints that Peter asked John to write Revelation. But that’s all for another thread.

I think your insight to the autobiographical nature of it is right on.

 

[Mintaka]

When people call Mark’s Gospel “the Gospel of Peter”, it’s a mnemonic or nickname indicating the traditional connection between Mark and Peter, with whom Mark worked and from whom he probably got most of his info. Similarly, when people call Luke “the Gospel according to Paul” or even “the Mary Gospel”. They’re not suggesting actual authorship that I’ve ever seen. (And you’d have to be very desperately in need of a thesis topic to suggest such folks as Gospel authors!)

There are various extremely apocryphal Gospels of Peter and Mary (and probably Paul, too), of course. But the people who wrote those back in Roman times were probably also in desperate need of a thesis topic, because you couldn’t found a really good Gnostic cult unless you could offer your followers something new in the way of “secret knowledge”.

 

[rcjones]

Gnostics were condemned because of their heresy of polytheism, not simply because they taught something that others were unfamiliar with.

Every teacher teaches something that others are unfamiliar with. The question about ‘secret knowledge’ is whether something is independently verifiable or not in the scriptures. The Bereans checked the scriptures before they accepted or rejected the teachings of others, they weren’t called ‘more noble’ because they rejected stuff with knee jerk reactions.

There is also nothing wrong with holding a tentative position to see if further study bears it out. There is nothing in the Apostle’s or Nicene creeds that demands one believe Mark or Peter was the author of Mark and so insinuations that the belief might be as heretical as Gnosticism are probably unwarranted.

 

[nancy_dalrymple]

One explanation is that the Disciples saw the miracle of the loaves and still didn’t get it. The fact that they were afraid on the boat was simply a sign that they didn’t get it. Why be afraid? Didn’t they understand after seeing what they had? It goes to show that just because you see something awe inspiring does not mean you grow closer to God. Well, at least that’s my opinion.

Hello Jesus didn’t have alot of time with Deciples 3 years or so, and you think back to when you were 3 how long it took you to get it? You have to crawl before you can walk,and i believe untill his death on the cross they might not have deeply understood as they did when they saw the final page. I first grew up realy saw the light when i saw my sister dead in front of me, Not as much as at the scene but at the wake, then reality hit! Love of Christ Nancy

 

[Peter_Dawson]

How odd.

In the 6h chapter of Mark is really packed with lots of “stuff”. Jesus leaves Nazareth because their unbelief keeps him from doing much in the way of miracles. He sends the disciples out on a mission of repentance after giving them power over unclean spirits. John is beheaded, 5000 people are fed using 5 loaves and 2 fish. The disciples go out on the lake in a boat and a storm tosses them around. They look out and are terrified when they see what they think is a ghost walking on the water. Then (verses 51-52) “He got into the boat with them and the wind died down. They were [completely] astounded. They had not understood the incident of the loaves. On the contrary, their hearts were hardened.”

It just struck me how peculiar it is to find these verses at this point. Any idea why their lack of understanding about the loaves and their hardened heart should be mentioned just after the sea calms down and Jesus gets into the boat with them after walking on the water?

Perhaps this is merely the shape of the cold, sluggish human heart. God has helped me 2000 times, but I still sin. I have given others my all, but they still stab me in the back.

What Mark describes is “people,” and it explains why we need “Church.”

 

[adriancombe]

How odd.

In the 6h chapter of Mark is really packed with lots of “stuff”. Jesus leaves Nazareth because their unbelief keeps him from doing much in the way of miracles. He sends the disciples out on a mission of repentance after giving them power over unclean spirits. John is beheaded, 5000 people are fed using 5 loaves and 2 fish. The disciples go out on the lake in a boat and a storm tosses them around. They look out and are terrified when they see what they think is a ghost walking on the water. Then (verses 51-52) “He got into the boat with them and the wind died down. They were [completely] astounded. They had not understood the incident of the loaves. On the contrary, their hearts were hardened.”

It just struck me how peculiar it is to find these verses at this point. Any idea why their lack of understanding about the loaves and their hardened heart should be mentioned just after the sea calms down and Jesus gets into the boat with them after walking on the water?

It is a veiled reference to the Eucharist. The Greek word pwrow (harden) is used here in conjunction with artos (bread) and again 8:17. Believers and unbelievers alike being hardened against the reality of the Eucharist is a recurring theme in the NT.

 

[Nita]

When people call Mark’s Gospel “the Gospel of Peter”, it’s a mnemonic or nickname indicating the traditional connection between Mark and Peter, with whom Mark worked and from whom he probably got most of his info. Similarly, when people call Luke “the Gospel according to Paul” or even “the Mary Gospel”. They’re not suggesting actual authorship that I’ve ever seen. (And you’d have to be very desperately in need of a thesis topic to suggest such folks as Gospel authors!)

Just some early evidence to back up the connections you mention:

newadvent.org/fathers/0103301.htm
ST. IRENAEUS Against Heresies, 3.1.1
St. Irenaeus was born somewhere around 115-125 AD. Date of death unknown.
Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect, while Peter and Paul were preaching at Rome, and laying the foundations of the Church. After their departure, Mark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, did also hand down to us in writing what had been preached by Peter. Luke also, the companion of Paul, recorded in a book the Gospel preached by him. Afterwards, John, the disciple of the Lord, who also had leaned upon His breast, did himself publish a Gospel during his residence at Ephesus in Asia.
(Note: “after their departure” means after their death.)

newadvent.org/fathers/250103.htm
EUSEBIUS - *Church History *iii.39 (Book III, Chapter 39)
Eusebius lived 265-340 AD.
Papias, whose writings he is citing, probably born somewhere in the 60’s AD.

*14. Papias… the tradition which he gives in regard to Mark, the author of the Gospel.

1. This also the presbyter said: Mark, having become the interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately, though not in order, whatsoever he remembered of the things said or done by Christ. For he neither heard the Lord nor followed him, but afterward, as I said, he followed Peter, who adapted his teaching to the needs of his hearers, but with no intention of giving a connected account of the Lord’s discourses, so that Mark committed no error while he thus wrote some things as he remembered them. For he was careful of one thing, not to omit any of the things which he had heard, and not to state any of them falsely. These things are related by Papias concerning Mark.
2. But concerning Matthew he writes as follows: So then Matthew wrote the oracles in the Hebrew language, and every one interpreted them as he was able.*

 

[Nita]

One explanation is that the Disciples saw the miracle of the loaves and still didn’t get it. The fact that they were afraid on the boat was simply a sign that they didn’t get it. Why be afraid? Didn’t they understand after seeing what they had? It goes to show that just because you see something awe inspiring does not mean you grow closer to God. Well, at least that’s my opinion.

I like your explanation. The apostles still didn’t seem to grasp the extent of Jesus’ power over the physical elements – even after witnessing the multiplication of the loaves.

“their hears were hardened” may mean that they failed to put “2 and 2” together; that is, to recognize that He was God. After seeing the demonstrations of power (over disease, death, water into wine, multiplying loaves, etc.) they still didn’t make the connection that Jesus had to be more than just human – He had to be Divine. The demonstration of his power to walk on water and calm the wind should not have “astounded” them.