Ezra 9:1-15

Mixed Marriages

9:1 After these things had been done, the officials approached me and said, "The people of Israel, the priests, and the Levites have not separated themselves from the peoples of the lands with their abominations, from the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Jebusites, the Ammonites, the Moabites, the Egyptians, and the Amorites. 2 For they have taken some of their daughters as wives for themselves and for their sons. Thus the holy seed has mixed itself with the peoples of the lands, and in this faithlessness the officials and leaders have led the way." 3 When I heard this, I tore my garment and my mantle, and pulled hair from my head and beard, and sat appalled. 4 Then all who trembled at the words of the God of Israel, because of the faithlessness of the returned exiles, gathered around me while I sat appalled until the evening sacrifice.

Ezra's Prayer

5 At the evening sacrifice I got up from my fasting, with my garments and my mantle torn, and fell on my knees, spread out my hands to the LORD my God, 6 and said,

"O my God, I am too ashamed and embarrassed to lift my face to you, my God, for our iniquities have risen higher than our heads, and our guilt has mounted up to the heavens. 7 From the days of our ancestors to this day we have been deep in guilt, and for our iniquities we, our kings, and our priests have been handed over to the kings of the lands, to the sword, to captivity, to plundering, and to utter shame, as is now the case. 8 But now for a brief moment favor has been shown by the LORD our God, who has left us a remnant, and given us a stake in his holy place, in order that he may brighten our eyes and grant us a little sustenance in our slavery. 9 For we are slaves; yet our God has not forsaken us in our slavery, but has extended to us his steadfast love before the kings of Persia, to give us new life to set up the house of our God, to repair its ruins, and to give us a wall in Judea and Jerusalem.

10 "And now, our God, what shall we say after this? For we have forsaken your commandments, 11 which you commanded by your servants the prophets, saying, 'The land that you are entering to possess is a land unclean with the pollutions of the peoples of the lands, with their abominations. They have filled it from end to end with their uncleanness. 12 Therefore do not give your daughters to their sons, neither take their daughters for your sons, and never seek their peace or prosperity, so that you may be strong and eat the good of the land and leave it for an inheritance to your children forever.' 13 After all that has come upon us for our evil deeds and for our great guilt, seeing that you, our God, have punished us less than our iniquities deserved and have given us such a remnant as this, 14 shall we break your commandments again and intermarry with the peoples who practice these abominations? Would you not be angry with us until you destroy us without remnant or survivor? 15 O LORD, God of Israel, you are just, but we have escaped as a remnant, as is now the case. Here we are before you in our guilt, though no one can face you because of this." (Ezra 9:1-15, NRSV)

On November 10, 2007 (Saturday in the week of the Twenty-third Sunday after Pentecost, references for the week of the Sunday closest to November 2, Year One), comments were repeated with editing and supplement from November 5, 2005 (Saturday in the week of the Sunday closest to November 2, Year One); they are repeated again here with editing and supplement:

In yesterday’s reading we were told about Ezra’s arrival in Jerusalem with a group of returnees from Babylon with much treasure, “six hundred fifty talents of silver, and one hundred silver vessels worth . . . talents, and one hundred talents of gold, twenty gold bowls worth a thousand darics, and two vessels of fine polished bronze as precious as gold” (Ezra 8:26-27). The priests who were charged with this treasure gave an accounting upon their arrival in Jerusalem (vv. 33-34).

After the initial events celebrating their arrival (cf. 8:35), and their delivery of “the king’s commissions to the king’s satraps and to the governors of the province Beyond the River” (v. 36), Ezra is met with a problem. “After these things had been done,” he says, “the officials approached me and said, ‘The people of Israel, the priests, and the Levites have not separated themselves from the peoples of the lands with their abominations, from the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Jebusites, the Ammonites, the Moabites, the Egyptians, and the Amorites” (9:1). These officials explain: “For they have taken some of their daughters as wives for themselves and for their sons. Thus the holy seed has mixed itself with the peoples of the lands, and in this faithlessness the officials and leaders have led the way” (v. 2). The phrase, “the holy seed,” says David J. A. Clines, is “a phrase from Isa. 6:13, with overtones of the language of the blessings to Abraham (e.g. 12:7; 13:14-16; 17:1-9).” He adds, “The exclusivist language expresses a concern with religious rather than simply ethnic identity, but whether that makes it better or worse is a matter of opinion” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Neh. 9:2). Tamara Cohn Eskenazi explains, “To ensure survival as a small (see Ezra 9:8) minority in the midst of surrounding cultures, Ezra-Nehemiah advocates separatist policies” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., on Ezra 9:1-15). The intermarriages are found to be in violation of the rule of Deuteronomy 7:3-4 (cf. vv. 1-5). Hindy Najman says this understanding of the Deuteronomy passage is “according to rabbinic tradition (e.g., Num. Rab. 19:3; Eccl. Rab. 7:23, section 4) and many modern scholars.” “However,” she adds,

Ezra insists on two points that are not explicit in any earlier text. First, intermarriage with any non-Israelite people is prohibited, not only intermarriage with the Canaanite nations referred to in Deuteronomy (see also Deut. 20:16-18). Second, if one has intermarried, one must divorce one’s foreign wife and expel any children resulting from the prohibited marriage. When Ezra says that the prohibition–including the aforementioned two points–is from the Teaching (‘torah’) and the commandment of our God (10:3), he seems to presuppose that Mosaic authority should be ascribed not only to the law explicitly stated in Deut. 7:3, but also to its interpretation or elaboration. This is similar to 1 Kings 11:1-2, an exilic text which suggests that Solomon’s marriage to various foreign wives is a violation of Torah law. In b. Meg. 15a, Ezra is identified with the prophet Malachi because of the reference to a prohibition against intermarriage in Mal. 2:11. (The Jewish Study Bible, 2004, on Ezra 9:1-2)

Upon hearing of this, says Clines, Ezra “responds with mourning (9:3-5) and a prayer of repentance (9:5-13), since he feels that the people as a whole have been implicated in this breach of the law” (op. cit., on Ezra 9:1-10:34).

When I heard this, I tore my garment and my mantle, and pulled hair from my head and beard, and sat appalled. Then all who trembled at the words of the God of Israel, because of the faithlessness of the returned exiles, gathered around me while I sat appalled until the evening sacrifice. (Ezra 9:3-4, NRSV)

“I tore my garment (tunic or undergarment) and my mantle (cloak or outer garment),” says Clines, is “an act of mourning, a stylized stripping oneself naked as a symbol of death.” And he adds, “pulled hair from my head and beard [is] a customary modification of the forbidden practice of shaving the head in mourning (Lev. 19:27; 21:5)” (ibid., on v. 3). According to Najman, “Ezra’s behavior is similar to that of earlier Jewish leaders who tried to avert a national disaster. For example, Josiah tears his clothing upon hearing the reading of the discovered Torah scroll (2 Kings 22:11); Mordecai and Esther fast and engage in mourning practices (Esth. 4:1-3, 16); and Jehoshaphat proclaims a fast and prays for deliverance from Israel’s enemies (2 Chron. 20:1-13)” (op. cit., on v. 3).

In the face of this crisis, Ezra says, “At the evening sacrifice I got up from my fasting, with my garments and my mantle torn, and fell on my knees, spread out my hands to the LORD my God” (v. 5). “Ezra,” says Najman, “takes the typical position of the praying individual in the Bible (see 1 Kings 8:22, 38). The content of his prayer continues through the chapter (vv. 6-15). According to Eskenazi, “more a sermon than a confession, the prayer teaches values and history in order to alter community behavior.” She adds that Ezra, “like the prophets and the Deuteronomistic History [esp. Judges, Samuel and Kings] . . . interprets Israel’s political devastation as the consequence of religious and moral failings by Israel, and uses the fear of a recurrence to motivate the community” (op. cit., on Ezra 9:5-15).

Ezra begins by confessing his own shame and embarrassment before God, “for our iniquities have risen higher than our heads, and our guilt has mounted up to the heavens” (v. 6). He admits that Israel, “from the days of our ancestors,” has been guilty, and that “our kings, and our priests have been handed over to the kings of the lands, to the sword, to captivity, to plundering, and to utter shame, as is now the case” (v. 7). Najman compares “Daniel’s prayer (Dan. 9:4-19), where the exiles’ responsibility for the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple is fully accepted. In Ezra’s view, if the crisis of intermarriage is not averted, the returnees will risk losing Jerusalem, Judah, and the right to practice Temple ritual. These confessions of communal guilt typify postexilic liturgy” (op. cit., on vv. 6-7). Ezra is grateful for the small “remnant,” the present people of Judah, to whom “favor has been shown by the LORD our God, who has left us a remnant, and given us a stake in his holy place, in order that he may brighten our eyes and grant us a little sustenance in our slavery” (v. 8). Ezra acknowledges that, though Judah is under Persia’s control, a situation which he characterizes as “slavery,” nevertheless, “our God has not forsaken us in our slavery, but has extended to us his steadfast love (ds,H,, chesed) before the kings of Persia, to give us new life to set up the house of our God, to repair its ruins, and to give us a wall in Judea and Jerusalem” (v. 9). “Slaves,” says Clines, is not meant “literally, but, as Persian subjects, lacking national independence” (op. cit., on v. 9).

The prayer, or “sermon” (see above), turns to confession of the present situation.

And now, our God, what shall we say after this? For we have forsaken your commandments, which you commanded by your servants the prophets, saying, 'The land that you are entering to possess is a land unclean with the pollutions of the peoples of the lands, with their abominations. They have filled it from end to end with their uncleanness. Therefore do not give your daughters to their sons, neither take their daughters for your sons, and never seek their peace or prosperity, so that you may be strong and eat the good of the land and leave it for an inheritance to your children forever. (Ezra 9:10-12, NRSV)

According to Najman, “The concern for intermarriage in terms of both genders is unusual in the Bible; most texts emphasize the danger of foreign wives rather than husbands” (ibid., on v. 12).

Eskenazi calls verses 11-12 “a paraphrase of Lev. 18:24-30 and Deut. 7:3-4,” and adds, “Such blending of Priestly and Deuteronomic material characterizes this new period, when the Torah as a book is authoritative” (op. cit., on vv. 11-12). Clines sees here rather more diffuse allusion to the Pentateuch (Torah): “The words quoted by Ezra come mostly from the Pentateuch, so he must regard Moses as a prophet (as does Deut. 18:15; 34:10); there are allusions to Deut 7;1; Lev. 18:14-30; Deut. 18:9; 2 Kings 21:16; Deut. 7:3; 23:9; 11:8; 6:11; 1:38-39” (op. cit., on vv. 11-12).

Ezra’s prayer continues with a rhetorical question. “After all that has come upon us for our evil deeds and for our great guilt,” he begins, and concedes that “you, our God, have punished us less than our iniquities deserved and have given us such a remnant as this” (v. 13), before asking, “shall we break your commandments again and intermarry with the peoples who practice these abominations? Would you not be angry with us until you destroy us without remnant or survivor?” (v. 14). Ezra’s prayer closes with emphasis on Judah’s guilt before God. “O LORD, God of Israel, you are just, but we have escaped as a remnant, as is now the case. Here we are before you in our guilt, though no one can face you because of this” (v. 15). Eskenazi, commenting ou the words, “as is now the case,” says, “the end of exile is understood as a result of divine forgiveness, not Israel’s changed behavior” (op. cit., on v. 15).

The resulting remedy, with mass divorces and the break-up of families (10:44) seems very harsh to modern people, but the community apparently felt that its identity was being threatened. Daniel L. Smith-Christopher says that in the complaint that the people “have not separated themselves from the peoples of the lands with their abominations, from the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Jebusites, the Ammonites, the Moabites, the Egyptians, and the Amorites” (Ezra 9:1),

The implication is that the planned second exodus is not being carried out with the same attention to purified peoples as the original Exodus. . . . To understand this action, we must think in terms of minority consciousness of perceived threat and the response to insulate themselves from threatening influences. Mal. 2:10-16 even suggests that some of the Jewish women were first abandoned so that the men could take on the foreign wives.” (Daniel L. Smith-Christopher, The Oxford Bible Commentary, 317, on Ezra 9:1-15)

Tomorrow’s reading will present the response and proposed remedy in some detail.

or Ezra 6:1-22 (alternative reading, Presbyterian and Lutheran traditions)

For the text and comments of this reading see the text and comments of Wednesday, October 28, 2009, ten days ago.

Revelation 17:1-14

The Great Whore and the Beast

17:1 Then one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls came and said to me, "Come, I will show you the judgment of the great whore who is seated on many waters, 2 with whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and with the wine of whose fornication the inhabitants of the earth have become drunk." 3 So he carried me away in the spirit into a wilderness, and I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet beast that was full of blasphemous names, and it had seven heads and ten horns. 4 The woman was clothed in purple and scarlet, and adorned with gold and jewels and pearls, holding in her hand a golden cup full of abominations and the impurities of her fornication; 5 and on her forehead was written a name, a mystery: "Babylon the great, mother of whores and of earth's abominations." 6 And I saw that the woman was drunk with the blood of the saints and the blood of the witnesses to Jesus.

When I saw her, I was greatly amazed. 7 But the angel said to me, "Why are you so amazed? I will tell you the mystery of the woman, and of the beast with seven heads and ten horns that carries her. 8 The beast that you saw was, and is not, and is about to ascend from the bottomless pit and go to destruction. And the inhabitants of the earth, whose names have not been written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, will be amazed when they see the beast, because it was and is not and is to come.

9 "This calls for a mind that has wisdom: the seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman is seated; also, they are seven kings, 10 of whom five have fallen, one is living, and the other has not yet come; and when he comes, he must remain only a little while. 11 As for the beast that was and is not, it is an eighth but it belongs to the seven, and it goes to destruction. 12 And the ten horns that you saw are ten kings who have not yet received a kingdom, but they are to receive authority as kings for one hour, together with the beast. 13 These are united in yielding their power and authority to the beast; 14 they will make war on the Lamb, and the Lamb will conquer them, for he is Lord of lords and King of kings, and those with him are called and chosen and faithful." (Revelation 17:1-14, NRSV)

The following comments are based on comments on Revelation 17:1-18 from November 7, 2008 (Friday in the week of the Sunday closest to November 2, Year Two), when comments were repeated from November 10, 2007 (Saturday in the week of the Sunday closest to November 2, Year One), when comments were repeated from November 10, 2006 (Friday in the week of the Sunday closest to November 2, Year Two), when comments were combined with revision and supplement from November 5, 2004 (Friday of the week of the Sunday closest to November 2, Year Two) and from comments on Revelation 17:1-14 from November 5, 2005 (Monday of the week of the Sunday closest to November 2, Year One).

In yesterday’s reading, Revelation 15:1-8, the third series of seven plagues, “seven golden bowls full of the wrath of God” (Rev. 15:7) was introduced. But the seven plagues, which introduced judgments comparable to the seven seals (6:1-17, 8:1-5), and the seven trumpets (8:6-21, 11:15-19), are passed over in the interval (chap. 16) between yesterday’s reading and today’s.

As today’s reading begins, John continues to report his visions. “Then one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls came and said to me, ‘Come, I will show you the judgment of the great whore (povrnh, pornē ) who is seated on many waters, with whom (meq= h|V, meth’ hēs, feminine relative pronoun) the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and with the wine of whose fornication the inhabitants of the earth have become drunk’ ” (Rev. 17:1-2). According to David E. Aune, John follows an Old Testament pattern of describing godless cities. He pictures Rome as “the great whore” (Harper-Collins Study Bible, 2^nd ed., 2006, on Rev. 17:1-18 [cf. 1^st ed., 1993], and B.M. Metzger, NOAB, 2^rd ed., 1994, on Rev. 17:1). The waters are explained later by the angel as “peoples and multitudes and nations and languages” (v. 15). According to Jean-Pierre Luiz, the reference to “fornication” which “the kings of the earth have committed” with her, refers to “sexual misconduct applied metaphorically to the city’s international commercial and political dealings, which are judged illicit and unjust” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Rev. 17:2).

For the vision of the judgment promised (v. 1), John is transported. “So he carried me away in the spirit [‘Or in the Spirit’ NRSV text note c] into a wilderness, and I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet beast that was full of blasphemous names, and it had seven heads and ten horns” (v. 3). Ezekiel reports that he is frequently transported by the spirit (Ezek. 3:12, 14, 24; 8:3; 11:1, 24; 37:1; 43:1). The blasphemous names, says Metzger, are “divine titles given to Roman emperors.” (op. cit., on v. 3). He adds that the Scarlet Beast is the Roman Empire, who “combines the powers of the four beasts of Dan., ch. 7” (ibid., on Rev. 13:1-10). Earlier, Metzger identifies “the beast rising out of the sea, having ten horns and seven heads; and on its horns were ten diadems, and on its heads were blasphemous names” (13:1) as the Roman empire: it “combines the powers of the four beasts of Dan. ch. 7 and represents the Roman empire, incited by the dragon (v. 2) to persecute the saints (v. 7)” (ibid.,on 13:1-10; cf Ruiz, op. cit., on 13:1-10). Of the beast of 13:1, Aune says it “represents both Rome and its emperors as the sea monster Leviathan (Ezek. 29:3; 2 Esd. 6:47-52; 1 Enoch 60:7-10, 24)” (op. cit., on 13:1). Later Aune says the “beast” of 17:3 is “identical to the beast from the sea (13:1)” (ibid., on 17:3).

John describes the woman, “the great whore” (v. 1), the one sitting on the scarlet beast (v. 3): “The woman was clothed in purple and scarlet, and adorned with gold and jewels and pearls, holding in her hand a golden cup full of abominations and the impurities of her fornication” (v. 4). “Clothed in . . . pearls,” says Aune, means “dressed like a wealthy courtesan (see 18:16)” (ibid. on v. 4). “And on her forehead,” says John, “was written a name, a mystery: ‘Babylon the great, mother of whores and of earth's abominations’ ” (v. 5). “On her forehead,” says Metzger, “as was customary with Roman prostitutes” (op. cit., on v. 5). Aune says this “suggests the lowest form of prostitute, a tattooed slave” (op. cit., on v. 5). Ruiz refers to 13:16; 20:4 (those marked by the beast); 14:1 (144,000 “who had his [i.e., the Lamb’s] name and his Father’s name written on their foreheads”); and 22:4 (those who enter the new Jerusalem). Of “a mystery,” he adds, “indicating that the name is symbolic and that it requires interpretation, which the angel offers in vv. 7-18” (op. cit., on v. 5). “And I saw,” says John, “that the woman was drunk with the blood of the saints and the blood of the witnesses to Jesus” (v. 6a). “Saints,” says Aune, means “the many Christian martyrs” (op. cit., on v. 6). On “drunk with . . . blood ” Ruiz refers to Ezek. 39:19 and adds, “Persecution took the form of exile (1:9), jail (2:10), or death (2:10, 13; 11:3)” (op. cit. on v. 6).

“When I saw her,” says John, “I was greatly amazed” (v. 6b). “But the angel said to me, ‘Why are you so amazed? I will tell you the mystery of the woman, and of the beast with seven heads and ten horns that carries her” (v. 7). The angel tells John that “The beast that you saw was, and is not, and is about to ascend from the bottomless pit and go to destruction” (17:8a). And those people of earth “whose names have not been written in the book of life” will find the object of their “trust” undercut; they will “be amazed when they see the beast, because it was and is not and is to come” (v. 8b). According to Metzger, this beast “now represents the Emperor Nero, commonly expected to return to life and power (v. 11)” (ibid., on v. 8; cf. Ruiz, op. cit., on v. 8). According to Aune, the words “it was and is not and is to come [are] a parody of the divine title ‘who is and who was and who is to come’(see note on 1:4)” (op. cit., 2^nd ed., on 17:8; cf. Ruiz., op. cit., on v. 8).

Richard Bauckham elaborates:

Revelation takes up the popular expectation that the emperor Nero, thought not to be dead but to have fled secretly east to the Parthian empire, would return, with allies from the east, to wreak vengeance on Rome. This expectation, kept alive by a series of pretenders claiming to be the returning Nero, was a matter of eager hope for many in the eastern part of the Roman empire, who saw it as the resurgence of the power of the east against the west. The expected returning Nero was thus a kind of messianic figure. By alluding to this myth, Rev. 17 can take in a different direction the Christological parody which was a feature of the portrayal of the beast in ch. 13. Whereas there the healing of the wound the Roman power suffered at the death of Nero parodies the resurrection of Jesus, here the return of Nero parodies the parousia of Jesus. Thus in v. 8 the beast is twice described in terms which echo one of Revelation’s key designations for God: ‘the one who was and is and is to come’ (1:4-8). The description of the beast differs in that the middle term is negative: ‘is not’. Unlike God, the beast is not eternal. (The Oxford Bible Commentary, 2001, p. 1300, on )

The angel continues to explain for John. “This calls for a mind that has wisdom: the seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman is seated; also, they are seven kings, of whom five have fallen, one is living, and the other has not yet come; and when he comes, he must remain only a little while” (vv. 9-10). With reference to the “seven mountains,” Aune says, “That Rome was located on seven hills was first popularized by Varro (116-27 BCE)” (op. cit., on v. 9). Of the “seven kings,” he adds that they are “either seven actual emperors (either Julius Caesar or Augustus could be counted as the first) or a symbol for a complete series” (ibid.). There is an eighth beast, of which the angel says, “As for the beast that was and is not, it is an eighth but it belongs to the seven, and it goes to destruction” (v. 11). It is this beast that Aune identifies as “the returned Nero” (ibid., on v. 11). And the angel’s explanation continues. “And the ten horns that you saw are ten kings who have not yet received a kingdom, but they are to receive authority as kings for one hour, together with the beast” (v. 12). These are lesser figures, “probably local governors and satraps,” says Metzger (op. cit., on v. 12), or, as Aune puts it, “subordinate kings on the eastern border of the empire” (op. cit., on v. 12). Their time is limited–“one hour, together with the beast” (v. 12). They do join the beast in futile war against the Lamb. “These are united in yielding their power and authority to the beast; they will make war on the Lamb, and the Lamb will conquer them, for he is Lord of lords and King of kings, and those with him are called and chosen and faithful” (vv. 13-14). Metzger describes this as “the victory of Christ over the empire of the Antichrist” (on v. 14). Aune calls this “the final end-time battle; see 16:12-16; 19:17-21,” and adds that “Lord of lords and King of kings [is] a title of Persian origin (Ezra 7:12) usually reserved for God (see Dan 4:37; 1 Tim. 6:15; 1 Enoch 9:4)” (op. cit., on v. 14).

In the interval between today’s reading and Monday’s (18:1-8), the angel explains further: “The waters that you saw, where the whore is seated, are peoples and multitudes and nations and languages” (v. 15). According to Aune, “Waters (see 17:1) [are] often a symbol for threatening armies (see Isa. 8:6-8; Jer. 47:2)” (op. cit., on v. 15). “And the ten horns that you saw,” continues the angel, “they and the beast will hate the whore; they will make her desolate and naked; they will devour her flesh and burn her up with fire” (v. 16). Ruiz refers for comparison to Ezekiel 23:26-29 (op. cit., on v. 16). The words, “they will make her desolate and naked,” are explained by Aune: “The returned Nero, with Parthian allies, will destroy Rome (see 16:19). He adds that “devour her flesh [is] an allusion to the fate of Jezebel (1 Kings 21:23-24)” (op. cit., on v. 16). Aune’s reference is to Elijah’s prediction of Jezebel’s fate, that is fulfilled in 2 Kings 9:30-37. To John, the angel explains that “God has put it into their hearts to carry out his purpose by agreeing to give their kingdom to the beast, until the words of God will be fulfilled” (v. 17). “By divine overruling,” says Metzger, “the forces of iniquity fulfill the purposes of God (compare the passive verbs in 6:4; see 13:5 n.)” (op. cit., on v. 17; cf. Ruiz, op. cit., on v. 17). In the note to which he refers, Metzger says, “The sovereignty of God, even amid persecution, is implied by the use of passive verbs here and in [13:]7, 10, 14, 15 (compare 6:4; see 17:17n)” (ibid., on 13:5). The angel’s explanation to John continues. “The woman you saw is the great city that rules over the kings of the earth” (v. 18). This, says Ruiz, is “an explicit identification of the woman of v. 1 as the great city, i.e., Rome” (op. cit., on v. 18).

Matthew 14:22-36

Today’s reading from Matthew and the parallel texts in Mark and John are presented in the following table:

On June 6, 2008 (Friday in the week of the Sunday closest to June 1, Year Two), comments were repeated from November 10, 2007 (Saturday in the week of the Sunday closest to November 2, Year One), when comments were repeated from June 9, 2006 (Friday in the week of the Sunday closest to June 1, Year Two), when comments were repeated with some editing and supplement from November 5, 2005 (Saturday in the week of the Sunday closest to November 2, Year One). They are repeated again here with editing and supplement:

For recent comments on these passages from the perspective of Mark’s version, see the Archive for July 29, 2009 (Wednesday in the week of the Sunday closest to July 27, Year One); for recent comments from the perspective of John’s version, see the Archive for March 24, 2009 (Tuesday in the week of the Fourth Sunday of Lent, Year One).

At this point in a parallel version of the Gospels such as Aland’s (see the table above), it is remarkable to find parallel versions of events in Matthew, Mark and John, but not in Luke. In general, the narratives Jesus’ public ministry in Mark and Luke run parallel up to and including the Feeding of the Five Thousand (Mk. 1:14-6:44 and Lk. 4:14-9:17) and, after a gap in Luke, the pattern continues (Mk. 8:27-9:41 and Lk. 9:18-50; Mk. 10:13 to the the Passion Narrative and Lk. 18:15 to the Passion Narrative). There are, of course, a number of incidental differences within these overall narratives, but two significant variations in the pattern stand out. The first has been called Luke’s major omission: on the assumption that Mark is one of his sources, he omits Mark 6:45-8:26, beginning with the account of Jesus Walking on the Water (Mk. 6:45-52). The second is Luke’s “Travel Narrative,” the account of Jesus final journey from Galilee to Jerusalem (Lk. 9:51-18:14).

John, however, who often goes his own way, presents a sequence of events at this point that has been compared to the Synoptic tradition, that is, a block of material with a common sequence is shared by the Mark-Matthew tradition (or the “pre-Markan” tradition, if you will) and the Johannine tradition. Vincent Taylor says of Mark’s account of “the Landing at Gennesaret” (Mk. 6:53-56):

This section is a narrative composed by Mark on the basis of tradition. [In other words, he did not find it in its present form in one of his sources.] In this respect it resembles iii. 7-12. Cf. Dibelius, 224; Bultmann, 366. It is not, however, a purely literary and imaginative sketch. There are good reasons for this view. The connexion with the preceding story of the Crossing is good, and there is reason to believe that the Feeding of the Five Thousand, the Crossing, and the Landing, attested twice over by Mark (vi. 30-56 and viii. 1-10) and by John (vi. 1-25), formed a fixed series in the earliest tradition. (Vincent Taylor, The Gospel According To St. Mark, 1959, p.331 on Mk. 6:53-56; cf. pp. 628-632)

For John, these events essentially bring the period of Jesus’ Galilean ministry to a close–most of the activity beginning with John chapter 7 (as some of the earlier material in chapters 2, 3 and 5 as well) is located in Judea. The note about Jesus’ withdrawal when “they were about to come and take him by force to make him king” (Jn. 6:15) is one indication of this transition.

After being present at the feeding of the five thousand, you would think the disciples would begin to understand–but they did not (Mk. 6:52). “Immediately,” says Matthew, “he made the disciples get into the boat and go on ahead to the other side, while he dismissed the crowds” (Mt. 14:22; cf. Mk. 6:45). In Mark the disciples’ destination is Bethsaida. “After he had dismissed the crowds,” says Matthew, “he went up the mountain by himself to pray” (Mt:14:23a; cf. Mk. 6:46). John, who closed his report of the feeding of the five thousand by saying, “When the people saw the sign that he had done, they began to say, ‘This is indeed the prophet who is to come into the world’ ” (Jn 6:14), continues, saying, “When Jesus realized that they were about to come and take him by force to make him king, he withdrew again to the mountain by himself” (v. 15). “When evening came,” says Matthew, “he was there alone, but by this time the boat, battered by the waves , was far from the land, for the wind was against them” (Mt. 14:23b, 24; cf. Mk. 6:47, 48; Jn. 6:16-18). Mark describes the disciples’ difficulty: “they were straining at the oars against an adverse wind” (Mk. 6:48a). John says, “The sea became rough because a strong wind was blowing” (Jn. 6:18). “When he saw that they were straining at the oars against an adverse wind, he [i.e., Jesus] came towards them early in the morning, walking on the sea” (Mk. 6:49a). Matthew simplifies this a little. “And early in the morning he came walking toward them on the sea” (Mt. 14:25). John’s version includes the distance traveled by the disciples in their boat. “when they had rowed about three or four miles, they saw Jesus walking on the sea and coming near the boat and they were terrified” (Jn. 6:19). “He intended to pass them by,” says Mark, “But when they saw him walking on the sea, they thought it was a ghost (favntasma, phantasma) and cried out; for all saw him and were terrified” (Mk. 6:48b-50a). That “he intended to pass them by” (v. 48) is explained as describing “the way Jesus appeared to his disciples” (Elwyn E. Tilden and Bruce M. Metzger, NOAB, 2^nd ed., 1994, on Mk. 6:48). Matthew omits the intention to pass the disciples by (Mk.), but says, “But when the disciples saw him walking on the sea, they were terrified, saying, ‘It is a ghost (favntasma, phantasma)!’ And they cried out in fear” (Mt. 14:26). The word translated “ghost” occurs only here in the New Testament (Mk. 6:49; Mt. 14:2) and as a variant reading (ms. D) at Luke 24:37. It means “apparition, especially ghost,” and appears in classical and Hellenistic writers, including the Septuagint (Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich [BDAG], A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and other Early Christian Literature, 3^rd ed., 2000, s.v. favntasma, phantasma). In Luke’s account of the Lord’s post-resurrection appearance to the disciples (Lk. 24:36-43), when Jesus “stood among them and said to them, ‘Peace be with you.’ They were startled and terrified, and thought that they were seeing a ghost (pneu:ma, pneuma [favntasma, phantasma, ms. D])” (Lk. 24:36b, 37). Jesus explains, “Look at my hands and my feet; see that it is I myself. Touch me and see; for a ghost (pneu:ma, pneuma [no variants listed, Nestle-Aland, Novum Testamentum Graece, 26^th ed., 1979, 4^th printing 1981, ad loc.]) does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have” (v. 39).

In the present account, we are told, “But immediately Jesus [‘he’ Mk.] spoke to them and said , ‘Take heart, it is I; do not be afraid’ ” (Mt. 14:27 = Mk. 6:50b; cf. Jn. 6:20). Some manuscripts of Matthew’s text omit the name Jesus (x* D 084 892 and others, but there are other minor differences in the Greek form of Matthew’s and Mark’s version, but the words of Jesus, “Take heart, it is I; do not be afraid” (Qarsei:te, ejgwv eijmi` mh; fobei:sqe, Tharseite, egō eimi: mē phobeisthe). Apparently they were still lacking in faith, for “they did not understand about the loaves, but their hearts were hardened” (Mk. 6:52). But the next scene, when many were healed (vv. 53-56), ought to have been an encouragement to their faith. How easy it is to let our own faith dwindle when we face “an adverse wind” (v. 48).

So far, the story is closely parallel to the versions of Mark (Mk. 6:45-52) and John (Jn. 6:16-21, briefer, but basically the same so far). The most dramatic feature of the story–found only in Matthew–is Peter’s attempt to come to Jesus on the water. “Lord, if it is you, command me to come to you on the water” (Mt. 14:28). When Jesus said, “Come,” Peter “got out of the boat, started walking on the water, and came toward Jesus. But when he noticed the strong wind, he became frightened, and beginning to sink, he cried out, ‘Lord, save me!’” (vv. 29-30). We know that Jesus “reached out his hand and caught him” (v. 31a), but we may ponder Jesus’ words, “You of little faith ( =Oligovpiste, Oligopiste, adjective, vocative [direct address] case, singular]), why did you (second person singular verb ending) doubt?”

For Mark and John the point of the story is the miracle itself. Here is “the man who walks on water.” We borrow the phrase, “So and so can walk on water!” But with Jesus it is amazing. For John it is one of the signs (shmei:a, semeia) that he begins to enumerate: Water to Wine as the first sign (ch. 2), Healing the Official’s Son as the second (ch. 4), after which the enumeration breaks off. But he summarizes the book, or a significant part of it, as a selection of signs (Jn. 20:30-31). In the three accounts Jesus says “It is I” (Mt. 14:27; Mk. 6:50; Jn. 6:20) but the words (ego eimi) could be translated “I am” (cf. NRSV notes in Mark & John), alluding to the divine name given to Moses (Ex. 3:14).

As for the Walking on the Water miracle, if we believe that “all things came into being through him [i.e. the Logos = Jesus]” (Jn. 1:3), that he is one with the Father, of whom the Psalmist said:

When the waters saw you, O God,

When the waters saw you, they were afraid;

The very deep trembled.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Your way was through the sea,

Your path, through the mighty waters;

Yet your footprints were unseen. (Ps. 77:16, 19, NRSV)

why can’t we believe that Jesus really did walk on water? But there are respectable and responsible scholars who are generally traditional and “conservative” in their approach to controversial issues of biblical criticism who nevertheless give consideration to other explanations. Taylor says:

For the modern reader the point of difficulty is the walking on the water. A not negligible objection is the fact that it cannot be said that the intervention of Jesus meets a desperate need. The disciples are distressed by the wind, but they are not in jeopardy of their lives. . . . Most difficult of all is the objection that a docetic view of the person of Christ appears to be implied. (op. cit., 326-327, on Mk. 5:45-52).

William Barclay, whose conclusion is less decisive against the miracle, suggests that the key phrase in Matthew 14:25, ejpi; th;n qavlassan, epi tēn thalassan, can equally mean either “over the sea” or “towards the sea,” and that ejpi; th:V qalavsshV, epi tēs thalassēs (v. 26), “on the sea” is used in John 21:1 for “at the sea,” that is, “by the seashore, of Tiberias” (The Gospel of Matthew, Daily Study Bible, rev. ed., 1975, p. 105 on Mt. 14:22-27), which he interprets as “a real difficulty in knowing what happened,” since “there are two perfectly possible interpretations of this passage. He adds:

But, whatever interpretation of the Greek we choose, the significance is perfectly clear. In the hour of the disciples’ need Jesus came to them. When the wind was contrary and life was a struggle, Jesus was there to help. No sooner had a need arisen, than Jesus was there to help.

In life the wind is often contrary. There are times when we are up against it and life is a desperate struggle with ourselves, with our circumstances, with our temptations, with our sorrows, with our decisions. At such a time no man need struggle alone, for Jesus comes to him across the storms of life, with hand stretched out to save, and with his calm clear voice bidding us take heart and have no fear. (op. cit., pp. 105-106)

“When they got into the boat, the wind ceased,” says Matthew (Mt. 14:32; cf. Mk. 6:51a). For Mark’s description of the disciples’ astonishment and misunderstanding (Mk. 6:51b, 52), Matthew has, “And those in the boat worshiped him, saying, ‘Truly you are the Son of God’ ” (Mt. 14:33). Dennis C. Duling, commenting on Jesus’ question, “You of little faith, why did you doubt?” (v. 31), says “Their doubt is apparently reversed in v. 33; see 28:17” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Mt. 14:31).

When Peter stepped out of the boat to come to Jesus, Jesus’ words to him come to us as well, especially when we face challenges that seem insurmountable in human terms. “Come. . . . You of little faith, why did you doubt” (Mt:14:29, 31). But after reflection on this event, and perhaps in his preaching, Matthew thought about Peter’s actions as typical of many Christians. They make a good beginning, but doubt overcomes faith, and they falter. They need to learn to sing:

When the storms of life are raging / Stand by me / When the storms of life are raging / Stand by me

When the world is tossing me / Like a ship out on the sea / Thou who rulest wind and water / Stand by me

            (Stand by Me, by Charles A. Tindley)

In the concluding paragraph of today’s reading, we are told, “When they had crossed over, they came to land at Gennesaret” (Mt. 14:34; cf Mk. 6:53, which adds, “and moored the boat”). “Gennesaret,” says J. Andrew Overman, was “a district on the northwestern shore of the Sea of Galilee (which was sometimes called the Lake of Gennesaret)” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Mt. 14:24). It was about two or three miles southwest of Capernaum along the shore of the Sea of Galilee (cf. the scale of Map 13, NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007), and thus close to Jesus’ home and headquarters, so to speak (cf. Mt. 4:13). “After the people of that place recognized him,” says Matthew, “they sent word throughout the region and brought all who were sick to him” (Mt. 14:35). Mark’s version (Mk. 6:54-56a is more detailed and elaborate, but concludes, as does Matthew’s with people wanting to touch Jesus’ clothes; they “begged him that they might touch even the fringe of his cloak; and all who touched it were healed (Mt. 14:36; cf. Mk 6:56b). John’s version, though with a rather different emphasis, has crowds looking for Jesus as well (Jn. 6:22-25).

Ronald D. Worden, Ph.D.

rdworden@hgst.edu

deanworden@comcast.net