Pisteuomen - πιστευομεν - T. Michael W. Halcomb

The whole scene of the disciples thinking that Jesus was a “ghost” really fascinates me (Mk. 6.45-56). After Jesus has told the disciples to go ahead of Him, He goes up on to a mountain to pray. From atop the mountain, He looks out and sees the disciples having a hard time rowing against the wind. Moments later, He comes down the mountain, walks out to them on the water and they think they’re seeing a ghost. Now, the episode itself is quite incredible. Yet, I think there is even more going on than originally meets the eye that makes this story even greater than first appears. In my opinion, there are a few important words in this narrative that must be analyzed to get at what is going on. One of those terms is phantasma , that is, “ghost” or “apparition.” (Of course, this is from whence we get our word phantom.) This word also occurs in the Matthean account of this tale (Mt. 14.26). This word refers to a being from the spiritual realm. It can denote a demon or some type of god or godde...

Within the short span of two chapters of Mark’s narrative, the reader encounters two sea stories. In the first one, 4.35-41, Jesus is asleep in the stern, is awoken by His disciples and then calms the wind and the sea. I have written on that passage already, you can read that post by clicking the following link: Mark’s Sleepy Jesus . In this post, I want to take a look at the second sea voyage, which is found in 6.45-53. Many translations and commentators include verses 53-56 within this pericope but because it interrupts a pattern that Mark is using (I will write about this narrative pattern in a future post), it should probably not be included. It should be pointed out from the beginning that while Mark recounts two sea stories in close proximity and while there are some similarities, the differences between the episodes are greater. Because of this, I am not going to compare the stories as some do; I am going to take them on their own. Of course, because each scene in Mark’s account...

In the last couple of posts dealing with "Studies in Mark," I have been analyzing the story generally referred to as "The Feeding of the 5,000." I have argued a number of points in those posts: 1) The story is not just about a "feeding," it is also about Jesus "teaching," 2) The 5,000 men in the story were political zealots, 3) The zealots wanted new leadership because of all the evil and corruption brought about by the Herodian family, and 4) The way that Mark arranges and tells his stories in chapter 6, is done purposefully and with numerous echoes from the Hebrew Scriptures. In this post, which I will keep short, I want to add some more thoughts on this. In thinking about the arrangement, structure and context of Mark's narrative of the story about the 5,000, a question came up: Why did the zealots choose Jesus to be their new religio-political leader? In other words, what piqued their interest in Him above anyone else? After thinking abou...

In my previous post dealing with “Studies in Mark,” I argued that one of main points of the episode generally referred to as “The Feeding of the 5,000,” is often overlooked. That point is that, in the story Jesus not only miraculously feeds the people (zealots) but also teaches them; He teaches them about His identity and mission. The zealots wanted Jesus to be the leader of the religio-political faction, a faction that would overthrow the Roman Empire via force. In Mk. 6.34, Mark says that when Jesus’ boat reached shore, He “saw a large crowd and He had compassion on them, because they were like sheep without a shepherd. So He began teaching them many things.” As I showed in the last post (click the following link to read: Feeding and Teaching of the 5,000 ), that phrase “sheep without a shepherd” was a political idiom. Mark was drawing on Num. 27.17. In that verse, Moses has just handed over his leadership role to Joshua. He did this so that as the text says, “…the Lord’s people woul...

It is probable that, of all of the passages in Mark’s account of the Gospel, biblical scholars are the most perplexed—at least from a historical standpoint—with Mk. 6.14-29. This is the case, in a nutshell, because Mark’s record conflicts with the historian Josephus’s about two things: 1) The location of the banquet that Herod is giving, and 2) Who the mother and daughter are (e.g. Are they actually Herodias and her daughter Salome or other persons?). While I do not wish to address that issue here and barring the enigma of the daughter’s name, I would suggest that Mark’s account is accurate in what it reports: Herod took his brother Philip’s wife, Herodias, and married her while Philip was still living; from John the Baptist’s point-of-view, this was a trespass against God (Lev. 18.6). Moving on, what I want to focus on here has not to do with sorting out the Herodian kin issue but rather the genre of writing that Mark places this story in. More specifically, I want to simply point out...

It is no mystery that when Jesus went back to His hometown, His success rate was lower than usual. In fact, I would suggest that this is one of those places where Mark seeks to remind his audience that, in addition to His divinity, Jesus was very, very human! In Mark 6.1-6, we do not see Jesus fending off mighty storms, nor do we see Him bringing people back to life, no, we see Him meeting criticism after criticism head-on. Even 6.2, which is normally read as a positive statement, can and probably should be read as a negative remark. The English rendering “amazed” could very well have a negative sense to it. The Greek term, εξεπησσοντο, which has the connotation of amazement or astonishment, can be taken positively but does not have to be taken as such. To give a simple, common example from the English language, one could say, “I am amazed that he did that, I didn’t know he was that type of person.” In this comment, of course, the word “amazed” has a negative sense to it. Thus, I would...