2 Samuel 5:22-6:11

David Defeats the Philistines, Moves the Ark from Baale-judah to the House of Obed-edom the Gittite

22 Once again the Philistines came up, and were spread out in the valley of Rephaim. 23 When David inquired of the LORD, he said, "You shall not go up; go around to their rear, and come upon them opposite the balsam trees. 24 When you hear the sound of marching in the tops of the balsam trees, then be on the alert; for then the LORD has gone out before you to strike down the army of the Philistines." 25 David did just as the LORD had commanded him; and he struck down the Philistines from Geba all the way to Gezer. 6:1 David again gathered all the chosen men of Israel, thirty thousand. 2 David and all the people with him set out and went from Baale-judah, to bring up from there the ark of God, which is called by the name of the LORD of hosts who is enthroned on the cherubim. 3 They carried the ark of God on a new cart, and brought it out of the house of Abinadab, which was on the hill. Uzzah and Ahio, the sons of Abinadab, were driving the new cart 4 with the ark of God; and Ahio went in front of the ark. 5 David and all the house of Israel were dancing before the LORD with all their might, with songs and lyres and harps and tambourines and castanets and cymbals.

6 When they came to the threshing floor of Nacon, Uzzah reached out his hand to the ark of God and took hold of it, for the oxen shook it. 7 The anger of the LORD was kindled against Uzzah; and God struck him there because he reached out his hand to the ark; and he died there beside the ark of God. 8 David was angry because the LORD had burst forth with an outburst upon Uzzah; so that place is called Perez-uzzah, to this day. 9 David was afraid of the LORD that day; he said, "How can the ark of the LORD come into my care?" 10 So David was unwilling to take the ark of the LORD into his care in the city of David; instead David took it to the house of Obed-edom the Gittite. 11 The ark of the LORD remained in the house of Obed-edom the Gittite three months; and the LORD blessed Obed-edom and all his household. (2 Samuel 5:22-6:11, NRSV)

The following comments are repeated here from August 4, 2007 (Saturday in the week of the Ninth Sunday after Pentecost, references for the week of the Sunday closest to July 27, Year One):

In yesterday’s reading we are informed that David attacked the Jebusites and took their city, Jerusalem (2 Sam. 5:6-20). It was to be his political capital city, and King Hiram of Tyre has sent “messengers . . . cedar trees, and carpenters and masons who built David a house” (v. 11). In the interval, we are updated on David’s growing family with “more concubines and wives” and eleven named “sons and daughters” (vv. 13-16; cf. 3:2-5; 1 Chron. 3:1-9). The interval also includes the report of an attack by the Philistines, who came and “spread out in the valley of Rephaim” (v. 18), that is, according to Nancy L. Lapp, “the broad valley or plain southwest of Jerusalem, modern Baqa” (Harper’s Bible Dictionary, rev. ed., 1996, s.v. Rephaim, Valley of). After inquiring of the LORD, who says, “Go up; for I will certainly give the Philistines into your hand” (v. 19), David defeats the Philistines at Baal-perazim, “modern Sheikh Bedr northwest of Jerusalem” (Harper’s Bible Dictionary, rev. ed., 1996, s.v. Baal-perazim). On the narrator’s report that the “Philistines abandoned their idols there, and David and his men carried them away” (v. 21), P. Kyle McCarter says, “Just as the Philistines carried off the ark after their victory in 1 Sam. 4:1-11, David and his men now caraway their idols (lit. ‘gods’)” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on 2 Sam. 5:21).

Today’s reading begins with a second attack by the Philistines as, “Once again [they] came up, and were spread out [again] in the valley of Rephaim” (v. 22). This time, when “David inquire[s] of the LORD,” the response is affirmative, but qualified. “You shall not go up; go around to their rear, and come upon them opposite the balsam trees (Myx9kAB4, b^ekā’îm)” (v. 23). Further instruction is given from the LORD. “When you hear the sound of marching in the tops of the balsam trees (Myx9kAB4ha, habb^ekā’îm), then be on the alert; for then the LORD has gone out before you to strike down the army of the Philistines” (v. 24). The New Jewish Publication Society translation calls the trees “baca trees” with note d, “Meaning of Heb. Uncertain” (v. 24 NJPS 1985, 1999). William L. Holladay translates the term as “baka shrubs 2 S 5:23f; 1 C 14:14f; ‘emeq habbākâ Ps 84:7, a specific valley, or in general a valley with rich vegetation?” (A Concise Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, 1971, 10^th corrected impression 1988, s.v. xk!b!, bākā’). Whether the trees are balsam or baka, it is the sound as of marching that David is to take as his signal. Then, he is to “be on the alert; for then the LORD has gone out before you to strike down the army of the Philistines” (v. 24b). “The sound of marching,” says P. Kyle McCarter, “will indicate that the LORD has gone out as the Divine Warrior to fight on David’s behalf” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on 2 Sam. 5:24). David follows instructions to the letter, “just as the LORD had commanded him; and he [strikes] down the Philistines from Geba all the way to Gezer” (v. 25). “From Geba near Jerusalem all the way to Gezer near the border of Philistine territory,” says McKenzie (op. cit., on v. 25).

We will learn later that “David attacked the Philistines and subdued them” (2 Sam. 8:1), a victory that McKenzie calls “David’s decisive defeat of the Philistines, the archenemies of Saul. They never surface again as enemies during his reign” (on 8:1). But in our present reading they are already sufficiently subdued so that David can attend to other matters. He plans to make Jerusalem the religious capital as well as his political capital. So he sets out with “all the chosen men of Israel, thirty thousand (Jl,xA Myw9low4, š^elōšîm ’eleph)” (6:1) “to bring up from there [from Baale-judah, i.e. Kiriath-jearim, cf. 1 Sam. 7:1; Josh. 15:9, and McKenzie on v. 2] the ark of God, which is called by the name of the LORD of hosts who is enthroned on the cherubim” (v. 2). The word for “thousand” ( Jl@x, ’eleph) is sometimes understood to mean “military unit” or “subdivision of tribe” (cf. Holladay, op. cit., s.v. Jl@x@, ’eleph III), so McKenzie says the word “Thousand probably designates a military unit of much smaller size” (on v. 1; cf. Shimon Bar-Ephrat, The Jewish Study Bible, p. 629, on 2 Sam. 6:1, with a cross-reference to his note on 1 Sam. 15:4, p. 589).

The journey to return the ark begins as a joyful religious procession. “They carried the ark of God on a new cart, and brought it out of the house of Abinadab, which was on the hill. Uzzah and Ahio, the sons of Abinadab, were driving the new cart with the ark of God; and Ahio went in front of the ark” (vv. 3-4). In celebration of the ark’s return, “David and all the house of Israel were dancing before the LORD with all their might, with songs and lyres and harps and tambourines and castanets and cymbals” (v. 5).

But the day that started on such a joyous note ended in a very sad way. “When they came to the threshing floor of Nacon, Uzzah reached out his hand to the ark of God and took hold of it, for the oxen shook it” (v. 6). One would think Uzzah’s only purpose was to steady the ark, but: “The anger of the LORD was kindled against Uzzah; and God struck him there because he reached out his hand to the ark; and he died there beside the ark of God” (v. 7). According to McCarter, “Because of its great sacredness the ark is potentially very dangerous (cf. 1 Sam. 6:19) and must be treated with great care. Although Uzzah’s purpose in reaching for the ark is probably only to steady it, he has not been ritually prepared to touch it, and his lapse proves fatal” (op. cit., on 2 Sam. 6:6). David, in turn, becomes very angry, as the narrator tells us: “David was angry because the LORD had burst forth with an outburst upon Uzzah” (v. 8a). But the narrator pauses to explain, “so that place is called Perez-uzzah, to this day” (v.8b). According to McKenzie, “The story is also an etiology explaining the name Perez-uzzah (‘Uzzah’s breach’)” (op. cit., on v. 8). It seems that David’s anger turns to fear, for he “was afraid of the LORD that day; he said, ‘How can the ark of the LORD come into my care?’ ” (v. 9). So, “unwilling to take the ark of the LORD into his care in the city of David; instead David took it to the house of Obed-edom the Gittite” (v. 10). According to Shimon Bar-Efrat, “Obed-edom may have been one of the Gittites who accompanied David on his way from the Philistine town of Gath (see 15:18). But there were also several places called Gath (meaning ‘winepress’) in Israel” (The Jewish Study Bible, 2004, on 2 Sam. 6:10). We are told that Obed-edom was blessed by the presence of the ark. “The ark of the LORD remained in the house of Obed-edom the Gittite three months; and the LORD blessed Obed-edom and all his household.” (v. 11).

Acts 17:16-34

Paul’s Sermon at the Areopagus in Athens

16 While Paul was waiting for them in Athens, he was deeply distressed to see that the city was full of idols. 17 So he argued in the synagogue with the Jews and the devout persons, and also in the marketplace every day with those who happened to be there. 18 Also some Epicurean and Stoic philosophers debated with him. Some said, "What does this babbler want to say?" Others said, "He seems to be a proclaimer of foreign divinities." (This was because he was telling the good news about Jesus and the resurrection.) 19 So they took him and brought him to the Areopagus and asked him, "May we know what this new teaching is that you are presenting? 20 It sounds rather strange to us, so we would like to know what it means." 21 Now all the Athenians and the foreigners living there would spend their time in nothing but telling or hearing something new.

22 Then Paul stood in front of the Areopagus and said, "Athenians, I see how extremely religious you are in every way. 23 For as I went through the city and looked carefully at the objects of your worship, I found among them an altar with the inscription, 'To an unknown god.' What therefore you worship as unknown, this I proclaim to you. 24 The God who made the world and everything in it, he who is Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in shrines made by human hands, 25 nor is he served by human hands, as though he needed anything, since he himself gives to all mortals life and breath and all things. 26 From one ancestor he made all nations to inhabit the whole earth, and he allotted the times of their existence and the boundaries of the places where they would live, 27 so that they would search for God and perhaps grope for him and find him-though indeed he is not far from each one of us. 28 For 'In him we live and move and have our being'; as even some of your own poets have said,

'For we too are his offspring.'

29 Since we are God's offspring, we ought not to think that the deity is like gold, or silver, or stone, an image formed by the art and imagination of mortals. 30 While God has overlooked the times of human ignorance, now he commands all people everywhere to repent, 31 because he has fixed a day on which he will have the world judged in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed, and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead."

32 When they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some scoffed; but others said, "We will hear you again about this." 33 At that point Paul left them. 34 But some of them joined him and became believers, including Dionysius the Areopagite and a woman named Damaris, and others with them. (Acts 17:16-34, NRSV)

The following comments are based, with revision and supplement, on earlier comments, those of September 23, 2006 (Saturday in the week of the Sunday closest to September 14, Year Two), of August 4, 2007 (Saturday in the week of the Ninth Sunday after Pentecost, references for the week of the Sunday closest to July 27, Year One), of June 29, 2008 (the Sunday closest to June 29, Year Two), and September 20, 2008 (Saturday in the week of the Sunday closest to September 14, Year Two).

At the end of yesterday’s reading we learned the Paul has come to Athens from Beroea, where he will remain alone. “Those who conducted Paul brought him as far as Athens,” says Luke; “and after receiving instructions to have Silas and Timothy join him as soon as possible they left him” (Acts 17:15). So Paul, alone in Athens, “was deeply distressed to see that the city was full of idols” (v. 16). According to Beverly Roberts Gaventa, “Ancient historians provide similar descriptions of the religious fervor of Athens”; and she adds that “idols [is] a derogatory term that exposes Luke’s thoroughly monotheistic perspective” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Acts 17:16). In one respect, Paul continues his pattern, for “he argued in the synagogue with the Jews and the devout persons” (v. 17a). There, if anywhere, we might suppose, he would find sympathy for his opposition to idolatry. But he argued “also in the marketplace (ajgorav, agora; cf. ‘Or civic center’ NRSV text note b) every day with those who happened to be there” (v. 17b). We’re not told that he practiced his tent-making trade in the marketplace, as he would later at Corinth with Aquila and Priscilla (18:2-3). He apparently also did so at Thessalonica, though the record in Acts of his first visit there would hardly have room for a marketplace ministry. But later he reminds the Thessalonians, “You remember our labor and toil, brothers and sisters; we worked night and day, so that we might not burden any of you while we proclaimed to you the gospel of God” (1 Thess. 2:9).

In any event, whether in the “marketplace” or the “civic center,” he soon finds himself challenged at a philosophical level. “Also some Epicurean and Stoic philosophers debated with him. Some said, ‘What does this babbler (spermolovgoV, spermologos) want to say?’ ” (Acts. 18a). The word spermolovgoV (spermologos), which occurs only here in the New Testament and not at all in the Septuagint, is a compound of spevrma (sperma), “seed,” and levgw (legō), in the sense of “gather, pick up” (Liddell-Scott-Jones, A Greek-English Lexicon, 9^th ed., 1940, reprinted 1966, s.v. levgw, legō). From this derivation, “literally ‘picking up seeds’; of birds . . . [the word is used] in pejorative imagery of persons whose communication lacks sophistication and seems to pick up scraps of information here and there scrapmonger, scavenger” (Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich [BDAG], A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3^rd ed., 2000, s.v. spermolovgoV, spermologos). “English synonyms,” adds the Lexicon, “include ‘gossip’, ‘babbler’, ‘chatterer’; but these terms miss the imagery of unsystematic gathering.”

According to Pheme Perkins,

Stoics [were] members of a philosophical school founded in Athens by Zeno (335-263 B.C.). Although the scholars of the school developed theories of physics, cosmology, and logic, it was best known for its emphasis on moral conduct. . . . The Stoics held that the entire universe was a living creature animated by the divine Logos (reason ore mind). This Logos was identified with Zeus. Every person was a slave of the ruling Logos.

Since the Logos pervaded everything, whatever happened in the universe was governed by this universal law of nature or providence. All human beings were brothers and sisters in this universal, living body. . . . Since everything that happens to people was determined, the only way in which individuals could control their lives was to control the passions governing how external events affected them. Control of oneself was the avenue by which humans showed their freedom and superiority to fortune. (Harper’s Bible Dictionary, rev. ed., 1996, s.v. Stoics)

Of the Epicureans, Perkins says, they were

followers of the philosopher Epicurus (342-270 B.C.). . . . [They] were often attacked as atheists, since they held that sense perception was the only basis for knowledge. Everything had come into being out of atoms and the void. A random ‘swerve’ in the path of the atoms caused the world to come into being and provided the material basis for free will, since no god had created or ruled over human beings, according to the Epicureans.

Epicureans argued against fear of death, since in their view death was merely the dissolution of the atoms entangled to make up the human, and against fear of the gods, who would enjoy their own blessedness without troublesome concern for human affairs. Free from these fears, they counseled, one should seek to live a peaceful life in which the body is free from pain and the mind peaceful and undisturbed. Consequently, one should choose a private life, pursuing this ideal in the pleasant company of friends. (Harper’s Bible Dictionary, rev. ed., 1996, s.v. Epicureans)

F. F. Bruce says,

Stoicism and Epicureanism represented alternative attempts in pre-Christian paganism to come to terms with life, especially in times of uncertainty and hardship; post-Christian paganism has never been able to devise anything appreciably better. But Stoics and Epicureans alike, much as they might differ from each other, agreed at least on this: that the new-fangled message brought by this Jew of Tarsus was not one that could appeal to reasonable people. They looked on him as a retailer of secondhand scraps of philosophy, ‘a picker-up of learning’s crumbs’ (like Browning’s Karshish), a type of itinerant peddler of religion not unknown in the Agora, and they used a term of disparaging Athenian slang to describe him [cf. the discussion of spermolovgoV (spermologos) above]. (The Book of Acts, NICNT, rev. ed., 1988, p. 331, on Acts 17:18)

Some of the Athenians attempt to guess what Paul is talking about. “Others said, ‘He seems to be a proclaimer of foreign divinities’ ” (v. 18b). Luke explains parenthetically: “This was because he was telling the good news about Jesus and the resurrection” (v. 18c). According to Christopher R. Matthews, “Jesus and Anastasis (the Gk. Word for resurrection) are mistaken for two foreign divinities” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on v. 18). The implied charge of ignorance is turned on Paul’s critics, as it were. But they decide to give Paul a hearing. “So they took him and brought him to the Areopagus and asked him, ‘May we know what this new teaching is that you are presenting? It sounds rather strange to us, so we would like to know what it means’ ” (vv. 19-20). And Luke explains again. “ Now all the Athenians and the foreigners living there would spend their time in nothing but telling or hearing something new” (v. 21).

Paul makes a good beginning by establishing rapport. He comments on “how extremely religious you are in every way” (v. 22), because he has seen evidence of that. “For as I went through the city,” he says, “and looked carefully at the objects of your worship, I found among them an altar with the inscription, ‘To an unknown god.’ What therefore you worship as unknown, this I proclaim to you” (v. 23). This he relates to his God, “the God who made the world and everything in it, he who is Lord of heaven and earth” (v. 24a). Paul’s God “does not live in shrines made by human hands” (v. 24b), and does not need the continuing stream of sacrifices of pagan cults, “as though he needed anything, since he himself gives to all mortals life and breath and all things” (v. 25). This critique of pagan idolatry and the corresponding emphasis on the one God as creator ;and sustainer of the world echoes typical Jewish propaganda within the Greco-Roman world. . As other Jews, Paul would abhor idolatry, but he has long lived in Gentile territory where it was commonplace. He will later condemn the pagan world, saying, “they exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling a mortal human being or birds or four-footed animals or reptiles” (Rom. 1:23). To a hypothetical hypercritical Jew he says, “You that abhor idols, do you rob temples?” (Rom. 2:22b). And his modus operandi (way of working) includes a certain tolerance, up to a point. “I have become all things to all people, that I might by all means save some” (1 Cor. 9:22c).

But Paul’s tone at Athens, as presented by Luke, is less polemic. According to Matthews, “God as the creator ([Acts] 14:15) is an idea common to Jews (Gen. 1:1) and Greeks (e.g. Plato, Timaeus)” (op. cit., on Acts 17:24-25). Plato said,

Now the whole Heaven, or Cosmos, or if there is any other name which it specially prefers, by that let us call it,–so, be its name what it may, we must first investigate concerning it that primary question which has to be investigated at the outset in every case,–namely, whether it has existed always, having no beginning of generation, or whether it has come into existence, having begun from some beginning. It has come into existence; for it is visible and tangible and possessed of a body . . . And that which has come into existence must necessarily, as we say, have come into existence by reason of some Cause (ai[tioV, aitios [cf. Heb. 5:9]). Now to discover the Maker and Father of this Universe were a task indeed; and having discovered Him, to declare Him unto all men were a thing impossible. (Plato, Timaeus 28.b, c; trans. R. G. Bury, Loeb Classical Library, pp. 50-51; also on the Internet at http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0180;query=section%3D%23400;layout=;loc=Tim.%2028c, and http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0180;query=section%3D%23401;layout=;loc=Tim.%2028b, accessed July 31, 2009; copy and paste the URL in your browser.)

As Paul elaborates this theme, God’s starting “from one ancestor [Adam, from whom] he made all nations to inhabit the whole earth” which he sustains in their times and places (v. 26), with a view toward their searching for him, perhaps groping and finding him, “though indeed he is not far from each one of us” (v. 27). This last point is supported by two quotations, “In him we live and move and have our being” (v. 28a) and “For we too are his offspring” (v. 28b). According to Matthews, “Although the first quotation is sometimes attributed to Epimenides, its language is probably to be associated with Posidonius (based on Plato); the second quotation is from Aratus (Phanomena 5), a Greek poet of Cilicia educated as a Stoic. In Paul’s usage the original pantheistic sense of both ‘quotations’ is reinterpreted” (ibid., on v. 28). This is the clearest example of Paul’s quotation from non-Judeo-Christian literature in the New Testament; but compare his citation of a Cretan proverb (Titus 1:12). Paul points out that God should not be understood as any form of material object. “Since we are God’s offspring, we ought not to think that the deity is like gold, or silver, or stone, an image formed by the art and imagination of mortals” (v. 29). Paul explains that in the past “God has overlooked the times of human ignorance” (v. 30a), but “now,” says Paul, “he [i.e., God] commands all people everywhere to repent, because he has fixed a day on which he will have the world judged in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed, and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead” (vv. 30b, 31).

In his reference to resurrection, God’s raising Christ from the dead (v. 31), Paul comes to a significant difference between the conception of life after death in Hebrew thought, resurrection of the body, and that of the Greeks, who tended to think of a separation of the soul from the body. Plato, for example, has Socrates say:

Let us consider in another way also how good reason there is to hope that it is a good thing. For the state of death is one of two things: either it is virtually nothingness, so that the dead has no consciousness of anything, or it is, as people say, a change and migration of the soul from this to another place. (Apology, 40c, on the Internet, the Perseus web site, at http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?lookup=Plat.+Apol.+40c, accessed again July 31, 2009; copy and paste the URL in your browser.)

And so, at Paul’s mention of resurrection, he is interrupted. “When they [i.e., his ‘audience’ at the Areopagus] heard of the resurrection of the dead, some scoffed; but others said, ‘We will hear you again about this’ ” (v. 32). So, “at that point Paul left them” (v. 33). And Luke sums up the results, which, in comparison with Paul’s success in other cities, seem rather meagre. “But some of them [the Athenians] joined him and became believers, including Dionysius -the Areopagite and a woman named Damaris, and others with them” (v. 34).

Mark 8:1-10

Feeding the 4000

8:1 In those days when there was again a great crowd without anything to eat, he called his disciples and said to them, 2 "I have compassion for the crowd, because they have been with me now for three days and have nothing to eat. 3 If I send them away hungry to their homes, they will faint on the way-and some of them have come from a great distance." 4 His disciples replied, "How can one feed these people with bread here in the desert?" 5 He asked them, "How many loaves do you have?" They said, "Seven." 6 Then he ordered the crowd to sit down on the ground; and he took the seven loaves, and after giving thanks he broke them and gave them to his disciples to distribute; and they distributed them to the crowd. 7 They had also a few small fish; and after blessing them, he ordered that these too should be distributed. 8 They ate and were filled; and they took up the broken pieces left over, seven baskets full. 9 Now there were about four thousand people. And he sent them away. 10 And immediately he got into the boat with his disciples and went to the district of Dalmanutha. (Mark 8:1-10, NRSV)

On February 3, 2009 (Tuesday in the week of the Fourth Sunday after the Epiphany, Year One), comments were repeated from March 4, 2008 (Tuesday in the week of the Fourth Sunday of Lent, Year Two), when comments were repeated from August 4, 2007 (Saturday in the week of the Sunday closest to July 27, 2007), when comments were repeated from January 30, 2007 (Tuesday in the week of the Fourth Sunday after the Epiphany, Year One), when use was made of comments from March 28, 2006 (Tuesday in the week of the Fourth Sunday of Lent, Year Two), when comments were repeated with supplement from February 1, 2005 (Tuesday of the week of the Fourth Sunday after the Epiphany, Year One) and from comments on Matthew 15:29-39 June 5, 2005 (the Sunday closest to June 8, using Proper 5). The comments are repeated again here.

The Feeding of the Four Thousand is presented in Matthew and Mark as follows:

These accounts are very similar in Matthew and in Mark. Both refer to Jesus’ “compassion for the crowd” (Mt. 15:32; Mk. 8:1), but Matthew’s narrative relates this to the previous paragraph and the “Great crowds [which] came to him, bringing with the lame, the maimed, the blind, the mute, and many others . . . [which} he cured” (Mt. 15:30). So, while for him, while staying with Mark’s order of events, the crowd is already at hand for the Feeding of the Four Thousand. In both accounts, Jesus says, “I have compassion for the crowd, because they have been with me now for three days and have nothing to eat) (Mk. 8:2; Mt. 15:32a; cf. Mk. 6:34; Mt. 14:14). In Greek as in English in the present context, the two forms of this statement are verbatim (identical). In Mark, on the other hand, due to the indefinite time reference, the presence of “a great crowd” is noted again (Mk. 8:1; cf. 7:33). Jesus’ next statement is a conditional sentence in Mark. “If I send them away hungry to their homes, they will faint on the way (Mk. 8:3a). Matthew presents this as a statement of Jesus’ desire and intention. “I do not want to send them away hungry, for they might faint on the way” (Mt. 15:32b). At this point Mark notes that “some of them have come from a great distance” (Mk. 8:3b). Note his more extensive geographical reference (Mk. 7:31), which is simplified by Matthew (15:29). Further details of the stories are similar, the question about feeding the people in the desert (Mk. 8:4; cf. Mt. 7:33, reworded somewhat to emphasize the size of the “great crowd”), Jesus’ question about the number of loaves (Mk. 8:5a; Mt. 15:34a), and the number of loaves in the disciples’ response, “seven” (Mk. 8:5b; Mt. 15:34b), though Mark’s reference to “a few small fish” comes later (Mk. 8:7), but Matthew includes “a few small fish” in the disciples response (Mt. 15:34b). The order for the crowd to “sit down on the ground” is similar (Mk. 8:6a; Mt. 15:35) though Matthew reduces Mark’s statement, “Then he ordered (paraggevllei, parangellei) the crowd to sit down on the ground” (Mk. 8:6a) to a participial phrase, “Then ordering (paraggeivlaV, parangeilas) the crowd to sit down on the ground” (Mt. 15:35). Also, the phrase “on the ground,” the same in English, is different in Greek. Matthew has ejpiv (epi) with the accusative case object ( ejpi; th;n gh:n, epi tēn gēn), which implies motion, but Mark has ejpiv (epi) with the genitive case object (ejpi; th:V gh:V, epi tēs gēs), which has a similar meaning, “on, upon” (F. Wilbur Gingrich, Shorter Lexicon of the Greek New Testament, 1965, s.v. ejpiv, epi) without the implication of motion. Given Matthew’s bringing the responses about bread and fish together (Mt. 15:34; cf. Mk. 8:5, 7), it is not surprising that he has one giving of thanks and one distribution (Mt:15:14), whereas Mark has two of each (Mk. 8:6, 7). To Mark’s subject of the sentence, “they” (implied by the plural verb ending) Matthew adds “all of them” (pavnteV, pantes) in Mark’s statement, “They [‘all of them,’ Mt.] ate and were filled; and they took up the broken pieces left over, seven baskets full” (Mk. 8:8; cf. Mt. 15:37). For Mark’s total, “about four thousand people” (wJV tetrakiscivlioi, hōs tetrakischilioi), Matthew omits “about” (wJV, hōs) but adds “men, besides women and children” (a[ndreV cwri;V gunaikw:n kai; paidivwn, andres chōris gynaikōn kai paidiōn) (Mt. 15:38; cf. Mk. 8:9a). The concluding verse is similar in both accounts, but again Matthew has a participial phrase, “after sending away the crowds” (kai; ajpoluvsaV tou;V o[clouV, kai apolysas tous ochlous), for Mark’s statement, “And he sent them away” (kai; ajpevlusen aujtouvV, kai apelousin autous, Mt. 15:39a; Mk.8:9b). Mark reports that Jesus “got into the boat with his disciples” (Mk. 8:10a); Matthew omits the phrase, “with his disciples” (Mt. 15:39b), but apparently assumes their presence (cf. 16:5), though his one crossing of the lake (Mt. 15:39) does not exactly match Mark’s two crossings (Mk. 8:10, 13). And the destinations appear to differ. According to Mark, “And immediately he got into the boat with his disciples and went to the district of Dalmanutha” (Mk. 8:10), and when they crossed the lake again “to the other side” (v. 13), after a lesson on “the Leaven of the Pharisees” (vv. 15-21), they came to Bethsaida (v. 22). In Matthew, after the feeding, “he got into the boat and went to the region of Magadan (Magadavn, Magadan)” (Mt. 15:39b). “Other ancient authorities read Magdala or Magdalan” *(NRSV text note a). After Jesus’ discussion of the request for a sign from the Pharisees and the Sadducees (Mt. 16:1-4), it appears that the disciples caught up with him. “When the disciples reached the other side, they had forgotten to bring any bread” (v. 5). Soon they reach “the district of Caesarea Philippi” (Mt. 16:13; Mk. 8:27). According to J. Andrew Overman, “Magadan [is] an unknown place” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., 2001, on Mt. 15:39). Dalmanutha is another “unidentified site to which Jesus sailed across the Sea of Galilee after feeding the four thousand (Mark 8:10; various manuscripts read ‘Magadan,’ ‘Magedan,’ ‘Magdala,’ and the parallel in Matt. 15:39 has Magadan). It probably refers to the vicinity of Magdala” (Harper’s Bible Dictionary, 1985, s.v. Dalmanutha; so also the rev. ed., 1996). Magdala is on the western side of the Sea of Galilee, near its most western point, about five or six miles southwest of Capernaum. Bethsaida is about four miles northeast of Capernaum, at the north end of the Sea of Galilee, east of the Jordan River.

Some have suggested that the Feeding of the Four Thousand repeats in Gentile territory the Feeding of the Five Thousand, which occurred in Jewish territory, near Bethsaida (Mk. 6:45; cf. Lk. 9:10), the birthplace of Peter, Andrew and Philip (Jn. 1:44; 12:21). The Feeding of the Four Thousand follows healings in the Decapolis, but the indefinite time reference, “In those days” (Mk. 8:1) and uncertainty about the location of Dalmanutha (8:10) leaves the matter unclear. For Mark, the main points, which echo the Feeding of the Five Thousand, are Jesus’ compassion (Mk. 8:2; cf. 6:34), the fact that Jesus addressed the people’s need for food (8:5-8; cf. 6:35-42), the miracle (4000 people, 8:9; cf. 6:44), and the lesson drawn later for his disciples (vv. 14-21). Judging from the context in Mark, Vincent Taylor suggests that the Feeding of the 4000 may be located in Gentile territory (The Gospel According to St. Mark, 1959, p. 357): “It may reasonably be inferred that he [Mark] intends to locate the incident in the Decapolis and to associate it with the Gentiles. He does not expressly describe a Gentile Mission. Nevertheless, he tells the story in such a way as to suggest that he has in mind the Gentile Church of his day.”

The similar accounts of the Feeding of the Four Thousand (Mt. 15:32-39; Mk. 8:1-10), and the earlier Feeding of the Five Thousand (Mt. 14:13-21; Mk. 6:32-44; Lk. 9:10b-17; Jn. 6:1-15) remind us of God’s feeding of the Israelites in the wilderness, as John’s version of the earlier feeding reminds us (in the Bread of Life discussion, Jn. 6:26-59). Dale C. Allison, Jr., points out that Matthew’s second feeding account adds to the narrative:

The gathering of the crowds, the healing of the sick (cf. [Mt.] 11:5), the allusion to Isa. 35:5-6 (vv. 30-1), the compassionate feeding of many, and the mountain setting together recall OT prophecies about Mount Zion (see Donaldson [Jesus on the Mountain, a Study in Matthean Theology], 1985). So the second feeding shows us that the eschatological expectations associated with Zion have come to fulfillment in Jesus. (The Oxford Bible Commentary, 2001, p. 864, on Mt. 15:29-39)

These comments, of course, refer more to the setting of the feeding, rather than the details of the miracle itself. As Jesus met people’s needs on these occasions, we should trust him to meet our needs today.

Ronald D. Worden, Ph.D.

rdworden@hgst.edu

deanworden@comcast.net