Genesis 18:16-33

Judgment Pronounced on Sodom

16 Then the men set out from there, and they looked toward Sodom; and Abraham went with them to set them on their way. 17 The LORD said, "Shall I hide from Abraham what I am about to do, 18 seeing that Abraham shall become a great and mighty nation, and all the nations of the earth shall be blessed in him? 19 No, for I have chosen him, that he may charge his children and his household after him to keep the way of the LORD by doing righteousness and justice; so that the LORD may bring about for Abraham what he has promised him." 20 Then the LORD said, "How great is the outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah and how very grave their sin! 21 I must go down and see whether they have done altogether according to the outcry that has come to me; and if not, I will know."

22 So the men turned from there, and went toward Sodom, while Abraham remained standing before the LORD. 23 Then Abraham came near and said, "Will you indeed sweep away the righteous with the wicked? 24 Suppose there are fifty righteous within the city; will you then sweep away the place and not forgive it for the fifty righteous who are in it? 25 Far be it from you to do such a thing, to slay the righteous with the wicked, so that the righteous fare as the wicked! Far be that from you! Shall not the Judge of all the earth do what is just?" 26 And the LORD said, "If I find at Sodom fifty righteous in the city, I will forgive the whole place for their sake." 27 Abraham answered, "Let me take it upon myself to speak to the Lord, I who am but dust and ashes. 28 Suppose five of the fifty righteous are lacking? Will you destroy the whole city for lack of five?" And he said, "I will not destroy it if I find forty-five there." 29 Again he spoke to him, "Suppose forty are found there." He answered, "For the sake of forty I will not do it." 30 Then he said, "Oh do not let the Lord be angry if I speak. Suppose thirty are found there." He answered, "I will not do it, if I find thirty there." 31 He said, "Let me take it upon myself to speak to the Lord. Suppose twenty are found there." He answered, "For the sake of twenty I will not destroy it." 32 Then he said, "Oh do not let the Lord be angry if I speak just once more. Suppose ten are found there." He answered, "For the sake of ten I will not destroy it." 33 And the LORD went his way, when he had finished speaking to Abraham; and Abraham returned to his place. (Genesis 18:16-33, NRSV)

The following comments are based on those of January 29, 2006 (the Fourth Sunday after the Epiphany, Year Two). Note that the Fourth Sunday after the Epiphany in 2008 was the Last Sunday after the Epiphany, with different references, due to the early date of Easter that year.

With this reading, we come to part B of chiastic structure of Genesis 18 and 19 outlined by Jon D. Levenson “18:16-33 is the announcement of Sodom’s destruction (B)” (The Jewish Study Bible, 2004, on Gen. 18:1-19:37; for the complete analysis, see the citation in yesterday’s comments). “Then the men (Myw9n!x3hI, hā’ ^anāšîm) set out from there, and they looked toward Sodom; and Abraham went with them to set them on their way” (Gen. 18:16). As noted yesterday, in this transitional verse, Rabbi J. H. Hertz says this was “the final act of courtesy of a gracious host” (op. cit., on v. 16). But then we are told, “The LORD said, ‘Shall I hide from Abraham what I am about to do, seeing that Abraham shall become a great and mighty nation, and all the nations of the earth shall be blessed in him?’ ” (vv. 17-18, alluding to 12:2-3). “The men” (v. 16) refers to “the three men” (v. 2), “they” (v. 5), “them” and “they” (v. 8), but the “one” (based on the verb, v. 10) probably refers to “the LORD” of verses 1, 13, 14 and now 19:17. As quoted yesterday, Ronald Hendel refers to “this initial ambiguity” which, he says, “is resolved as we understand later that God is accompanied by two angels (e.g., 19:1)” HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Gen. 18:1-3). Rabbi Hertz says this [i.e., 19:1] is the first time the visitors are referred to by this term [i.e., ‘angels’]” (op. cit., on 19:1). The messages of 18:1-15 and of verses 16-33 are both clearly from the LORD.

Having deliberated about whether to reveal his plans to Abraham (vv. 17-18), the LORD answers his own question. “No [I shall not hide the plan from Abraham], for (yK9, kî ) I have chosen him (vyT9f4day4, y ^eda‘tîw) him, that he may charge his children and his household after him to keep the way of the LORD by doing righteousness and justice; so that the LORD may bring about for Abraham what he has promised him’ ” (v. 19). The negative “no,” not in the Hebrew text, is supplied here by the NRSV based on the context; compare “For I have known him [literal translation], to the end that he may command his children and his household after him, . . .” (Gen. 18:19a JPS 1917; cf. AV/KJV, TNIV). Rabbi Hertz says “for I have known him [means] regarded and chosen him; cf. Amos III, 2, ‘You only have I known of all the families of the earth’; Psalm I, 6, ‘The LORD regardeth the way of the righteous.’ God’s choice of Abraham is no arbitrary election” (op. cit., on v. 19). The more recent Jewish translation begins, “For I have singled him out, . . .” (Gen. 18:19a NJPS 1985, 1999).

On the words “command his children” (JPS v. 19a), Rabbi Hertz says, “Or, ‘charge his children’ [cf. NRSV above]. An important doctrine is here taught in connection with the word ‘command’ hvcy [y ^etsawweh], which has played a conspicuous part in Jewish life. It is the sacred duty of the Israelite to transmit the Jewish heritage to his children after him. The last injunction of the true Jewish father to his children is that they walk in ‘the way of the LORD’ and live lives of probity and goodness” (loc. cit.). According to David M. Carr, “This first speech by the LORD stresses that he speaks to Abraham because he chose him to teach his household the ways of righteousness. In vv. 22-32 the LORD will model such righteousness in his responsiveness to Abraham” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Gen. 18:17-19).

The LORD’s speech continues, coming to the main point. “Then the LORD said, ‘How great is the outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah (hr!mof3v1& Mdos4 tq1f3z1, za‘ ^aqath s ^edōm wa‘ ^amōrah, lit. ‘outcry of Sodom and Gomorrah’) and how very grave their sin!” (v. 20). In the phrase, literally “outcry of Sodom,” the second term, Sodom, the nomen rectum, that is, the second term in an “of” relationship, can be the subject or the object of the implied action, that is, the “outcry.” Gesenius translates the phrase, “the cry concerning Sodom” (E. Kautzsch, ed., and A. E. Cowley, trans., Gesenius’ Hebrew Grammar, 2^nd English ed., 1910, reprinted 1985, secs. 128 g and h). Consistent with the analysis of Gesenius, Rabbi Hertz says, “the cry of Sodom [refers to] the cries of those who suffered from the atrocious wickedness of the inhabitants of Sodom and who implored Heaven’s vengeance against their cruel oppressors (Ezek. XVI, 49)” (op. cit. on v. 20). “I must go down,” says the LORD, “and see whether they have done altogether according to the outcry that has come to me; and if not, I will know’ ” (v. 21). “This second speech by the LORD,” says Carr, “echoes his decision at Babel to go down and see what was going on there (11:5; cf divine self-reflection in 3:22; 6:3, 5-7; 11:6-7. Unlike vv. 17-19, this speech suggests that the LORD has not yet decided what to do” (op. cit., on vv. 20-21). It is at least curious that Carr divides continuous sentences of the text into separate speeches. According to Rabbi Hertz, “I will go down now [is] an anthropomorphic expression, as in XI, 7, to convey the idea that before God decided to punish the dwellers of the cities, ‘He descended,’ as it were, to obtain ocular proof of, or extenuating circumstances for, their crimes” (op. cit., on v. 21).

“So the men turned from there, and went toward Sodom,” says the narrator, “while Abraham remained standing before the LORD” (v. 22). In the conversation between Abraham and the LORD that continues, Abraham raises questions about the LORD’s plans. “Then Abraham came near and said, ‘Will you indeed sweep away the righteous (qyD9ca, tsaddîq) with the wicked (fw!&rA, rāšā‘ )?” (v. 23). “Suppose there are fifty righteous within the city,” he asks; “will you then sweep away the place and not forgive it for the fifty righteous who are in it?” (v. 24). We may well question whether it is Abraham who is testing God’s righteousness, or God who is testing Abraham. Levenson says,

Notice that Abraham’s demand is not that the guilty be punished and the innocent spared, but rather that the LORD forgive [the entire city] for the sake of the innocent . . . who are in it. The point is made more explicit in v. 26. The underlying theology maintains that the righteous effect deliverance for the entire community. This idea, found elsewhere in the Tanakh [i.e. the Hebrew Bible] (e.g., Jer. 5:1), is prominent in rabbinic literature, where it underlies the notion of the thirty-six righteous individuals for whose sake the world endures. Other biblical texts such as Ezek. 14gf:12-23; Ch. 18, however, insist upon individual responsibility and retribution. (op. cit., on v. 24)

“With great diplomacy and humility,” says Hendel, “he [i.e., Abraham] argues that God must be just (v. 23), and even more that God must be merciful (v. 24)” (op. cit., on vv. 22-33). But in any case, Abraham continues. “Far be it from you to do such a thing, to slay the righteous with the wicked, so that the righteous fare as the wicked! Far be that from you! Shall not the Judge of all the earth do what is just?” (v. 25). On the words, “shall not the Judge of all the earth do justly?”cited from the Jewish Publication Society translation (1917), Rabbi Hertz says,

These words have been well described as an ‘epochal sentence in the Bible’ (Zangwill). They make Justice the main pillar of God’s Throne: without it, the whole idea of the Divine totters. Justice, it is true, is not the only ethical quality in God or man, nor is it the highest quality: but it is the basis for all the others. ‘That which is above justice must be based on justice, and include justice, and be reached through justice’ (Henry George). Only Israel, the Justice-intoxicated people, in time became MynmHr ynb MynmHr, ‘merciful children of merciful ancestors.’ The boldness of the Patriarch’s ringing challenge, the universality of the phrase ‘all the earth,’ and the absolute conviction that the infinite might of God must be controlled by the decrees of Justice–that, in fact, an unjust God would be a contradiction in terms–are truly extraordinary. Despite the lapse of thousands of years, mankind has not yet fully grasped this lofty conception of God and its ethical consequences in human society. ‘When Abraham could not find fifty righteous men in Sodom, and pleaded on behalf of forty, thirty, twenty, ten, that the great city might be spared, do you think God did not know all the time that there were not even ten righteous men in Sodom? But God wanted our father Abraham to show whether he was a man or no; and didn’t he show himself a man!’ (Arnold Zweig). (op. cit., on v. 25)

The LORD concedes Abraham’s point, saying, “If I find at Sodom fifty righteous in the city, I will forgive the whole place for their sake” (v. 26). But Abraham presses his point, successively reducing the number of righteous for which the LORD will forgive the city. “Abraham answered, ‘Let me take it upon myself to speak to the Lord, I who am but dust and ashes. Suppose five of the fifty righteous are lacking? Will you destroy the whole city for lack of five? And he [i.e., the LORD] said, ‘I will not destroy it if I find forth-five there’ ” (vv. 27-28). Abraham presses his case, so to speak. “Again he [Abraham] spoke to him [the LORD], ‘Suppose forty are found there.’ He [the LORD] answered, ‘For the sake of forty I will not do it’ ” (v. 29). As Abraham lowers the numbers, “forty” means “forty righteous” (v. 29, cf. v. 26). With apologies, Abraham continues. “Then he [Abraham] said, ‘Oh do not let the Lord be angry if I speak. Suppose thirty are found there.’ He [the LORD] answered, ‘I will not do it, if I find thirty there’ ” (v. 30). Similar questions and answers continue, about “twenty” (v. 31), and about “ten” (v. 32). At this point the discussion ceases, with the LORD’s response, “For the sake of ten I will not destroy it” (v. 32b). “The remainder of the chapter [vv. 23-33],” says Rabbi Hertz,

forms one of the sublimest passages in the Bible or out of the Bible. Abraham’s plea for Sodom is a signal illustration of his nobility of character. Amid the hatreds and feuds of primitive tribes who glorified brute force and despised pity, Abraham proves true to his new name and embraces in his sympathy all the children of men. Even the wicked inhabitants of Sodom were his brothers and his heart overflows with sorrow over their doom. The unique dialogue between God and Abraham teaches two vital lessons: first, the supreme value of righteousness: and, secondly, God’s readiness to pardon (Ezek. XXXIII, 11), if only He can do so consistently with justice. (op. cit., on Gen. 18:23)

Abraham’s bargaining with the LORD over the number of righteous persons needed to spare Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen. 18:23-32) has been called expostulation with God. To “expostulate” is defined as “to reason earnestly with someone in an effort to dissuade or correct; remonstrate” (The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, s.v. “expostulate”). In this respect, Abraham’s “expostulation” has been compared with Job’s protests. Levenson says,

In this section [18:16-33], God treats Abraham as a prophet (cf. 20:7), disclosing His plans to him (vv. 17-21; cf. Amos 3:7), and Abraham, like one of the prophets of Israel, eloquently demands justice from God (vv. 23-25; cf. Jer. 12:1-4) and pleads for mercy (Gen. 18:26-32; cf. Amos 7:1-6). (op. cit., on Gen. 18:16-33)

So the episode closes: “And the LORD went his way, when he had finished speaking to Abraham; and Abraham returned to his place” (Gen. 18:33).

Gal. 5:13-25

13 For you were called to freedom, brothers and sisters; only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for self-indulgence, but through love become slaves to one another. 14 For the whole law is summed up in a single commandment, "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." 15 If, however, you bite and devour one another, take care that you are not consumed by one another. (Galatians 5:13-15, NRSV)

The Works of the Flesh

16 Live by the Spirit, I say, and do not gratify the desires of the flesh. 17 For what the flesh desires is opposed to the Spirit, and what the Spirit desires is opposed to the flesh; for these are opposed to each other, to prevent you from doing what you want. 18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not subject to the law. 19 Now the works of the flesh are obvious: fornication, impurity, licentiousness, 20 idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, anger, quarrels, dissensions, factions, 21 envy, drunkenness, carousing, and things like these. I am warning you, as I warned you before: those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.

The Fruit of the Spirit (Cp Col 3.12-13)

22 By contrast, the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, generosity, faithfulness, 23 gentleness, and self-control. There is no law against such things. 24 And those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. 25 If we live by the Spirit, let us also be guided by the Spirit. (Galatians 5:16-25, NRSV)

The following comments are based on comments on Galatians 5:1-15 and 16-24 from February 5 and 6, 2009 (Thursday and Friday in the week of the Fourth Sunday after the Epiphany, Year One), and earlier comments as noted there, including those of January 29, 2006 (the Fourth Sunday after the Epiphany, Year Two) on the present reading.

The main point or thesis of Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians is spelled out in Galatians 2:15-21 and supported by a series of arguments in chapters 3 and 4. Chapter 5 begins with a summary and application. “For freedom Christ has set us free. Stand firm, therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery” (Gal. 5:1). Paul speaks here of freedom from circumcision, kosher food laws and other regulations of Judaism which the “Judaizer” opponents were saying his Gentile Christian converts must observe. For Paul, salvation is either by law, or by grace (Gal. 5:4). As a matter of principle, “every man who lets himself be circumcised . . . is obliged to obey the entire law” (v. 3). Circumcision is seen as a test case. Earlier, the test case was kosher food, and the Jewish avoidance of table fellowship with non-Jews lest they find themselves eating nonkosher food (2:11-14). Paul surely assumes here what he states elsewhere, “It [the law] was added because of transgressions . . . Is the law then opposed to the promises of God? Certainly not! For if a law had been given that could make alive, then righteousness would indeed come through the law” (Gal. 3:19, 21). “For ‘no human being will be justified in his sight’ by deeds prescribed by the law, for through the law comes the knowledge of sin” (Rom. 3:20). Paul celebrates freedom. “For freedom Christ has set us free. Stand firm, therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery” (5:1). “For you were called to freedom, brothers and sisters; only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for self-indulgence, but through love become slaves to one another” (v. 13). But he does not forget the main point. “The only thing that counts is faith working through love” (v. 6). Freedom is not “an opportunity for self-indulgence, but through love become slaves to one another” (v. 13). As Jesus does, Paul emphasizes “love” as the essence of the law. “For the whole law is summed up in a single commandment, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself’” (v. 14; cf. Mt. 22:37, 39; Lev. 19:18). “If, however,” says Paul, “you bite and devour one another, take care that you are not consumed by one another” (v. 15).

We will see that love is the first of the fruits of the spirit. Paul draws a contrast between “the works of the flesh” (Gal. 5:16-21) and “the fruit of the spirit” (vv. 22-26). “Live by the Spirit,” says Paul, “and do not gratify the desires of the flesh” (v. 16). Paul describes “the flesh” (hJ savrx, hē sarx) as in conflict with “the Spirit” (to; pneu:ma, to pneuma). “For what the flesh desires is opposed to the Spirit, and what the Spirit desires is opposed to the flesh; for these are opposed to each other, to prevent you from doing what you want” (v. 17; cf. a similar contrast in Rom., chap. 8). Note the capitalization (upper case) of “Spirit”; it’s not merely the human spirit that is opposed to the flesh here, but the divine Spirit, the Holy Spirit. “But if you are led by the Spirit,” says Paul, “you are not subject to the law” (v. 18). So Paul lists the “works of the flesh”: “Now the works of the flesh are obvious: fornication, impurity, licentiousness, idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, anger, quarrels, dissensions, factions, envy, drunkenness, carousing, and things like these” (vv. 19-21a). “Works,” as in “works of the flesh,” doesn’t imply that one must “work at” committing the listed sins. The term e[rgon (ergon) is defined as “that which displays itself in activity of any kind, deed, action” with various shades of meaning” (Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich [BDAG], A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3^rd ed., 2000, s.v. e[rgon, ergon). The phrase here, e[rga th:V sarkovV (erga tēs sarkos), “deeds of the flesh,” is explained as “deeds that originate in the flesh (i.e. sin)” (ibid.) and translated (in the NIV and TNIV) as “the acts of the sinful nature.” Many would probably admit to “falling into” sinful practices, and some would probably note that these actions often lead to much work (and agony) for others, but “work at” sinning? No. Someone once offered a parody of a perfectly good Gospel song: “I was sinking deep in sin. Whee!!!” Too often, someone will rush gladly into activities he or she will regret later.

In contrast to these works of the flesh, Paul lists the “fruit of the Spirit”: “love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, generosity, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. There is no law against such things” (vv. 22-23). He explains, “And those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires” (v. 24). Nor is it “work” to produce the “fruit of the Spirit.” Does the nurseryman or vine grower go out among his young plants daily to pull and tug on the stalks to make them grow? “No, of course not!” you say. “That’s absurd!” They must provide the right conditions, soil with proper fertilizer, sunlight and moisture, if the plants are to grow and be healthy. You don’t have to “work at” producing the fruit of the Spirit. But the right conditions lead to growth in grace and spiritual maturation, nurtured by spiritual reflection and exercise in a community of faith. In any case, under good conditions, fruit will be produced through a “natural” process. “I am the vine,” says Jesus, “you are the branches. Those who abide in me and I in them bear much fruit, because apart from me you can do nothing” (Jn. 15:5). Isn’t that the way we are to produce the fruit of the Spirit, “love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, generosity, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control” (Gal. 5:22-23)? And so, Paul exhorts us: “If we live by the Spirit, let us also be guided by the Spirit” (v. 25).

Mark 8:22-30

Jesus Cures a Blind Man at Bethsaida (cf. Jn. 9:1-7)

22 They came to Bethsaida. Some people brought a blind man to him and begged him to touch him. 23 He took the blind man by the hand and led him out of the village; and when he had put saliva on his eyes and laid his hands on him, he asked him, "Can you see anything?" 24 And the man looked up and said, "I can see people, but they look like trees, walking." 25 Then Jesus laid his hands on his eyes again; and he looked intently and his sight was restored, and he saw everything clearly. 26 Then he sent him away to his home, saying, "Do not even go into the village." (Mark 8:22-26, NRSV)

Peter's Confession (Mt 16.13-20; Lk 9.18-20; cf. Jn. 6:67-69)

27 Jesus went on with his disciples to the villages of Caesarea Philippi; and on the way he asked his disciples, "Who do people say that I am?" 28 And they answered him, "John the Baptist; and others, Elijah; and still others, one of the prophets." 29 He asked them, "But who do you say that I am?" Peter answered him, "You are the Messiah." 30 And he sternly ordered them not to tell anyone about him. (Mark 8:27-30, NRSV)

The following comments are based on comments on Mark 8:22-33 of August 4, 2009 ( Tuesday in the week of the Sunday closest to August 3, Year One). Those comments were repeated with adaptation from earlier comments as noted there. Parallel or related passages for today’s reading are presented in separate files, the Blind Man at Bethsaida and Peter’s Confession.

The account of Jesus’ healing of the blind man at Bethsaida (Mk. 8:22-26) is one of the few accounts in Mark with no parallel in the other Gospels. Strictly speaking, the account of Jesus’ healing of the blind man in Jerusalem (Jn. 9:1-7) is not a parallel account, but there are similarities as well as differences. The one is located in a Galilean village, Bethsaida (Mk. 8:22), the other in Jerusalem (Jn. 9:1). In John, the disciples raise the question, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?” (v. 2). Jesus responds, “Neither this man nor his parents sinned; he was born blind so that God’s works might be revealed in him” (v.3). According to Obery M. Hendricks, “Suffering was attributed to sin, either of the parents (Ex. 20:5) or of the man before birth (Gen. Rab. 63: [39c] on Gen. 25:22; Wis. 8:19-20). Jesus denies this explanation and shifts attention from cause to purpose; this is an opportunity for God to act” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Jn. 9:1-3). John’s account also repeats Jesus’ claim to be “the light of the world” (v. 5; cf. 8:12). But both Gospels describe the method Jesus used to heal the blindness in similar ways. According to John, Jesus “spat on the ground and made mud with the saliva and spread the mud on the man’s eyes” (Jn. 9:6). Jesus then sends the blind man to “wash in the pool of Saloam,” after which “he went and washed and came back able to see” (v.7). In Mark’s story, “They [i.e., Jesus and the disciples, cf. Mk. 8:14-21] came to Bethsaida. Some people brought a blind man to him and begged him to touch him” (Mk. 8:22). So Jesus “took the blind man by the hand and led him out of the village; and when he had put saliva on his eyes and laid his hands on him, he asked him, ‘Can you see anything?’ ” (v. 23). When the result left the man partially healed, as indicated by his answer, “I can see people, but they look like trees, walking” (v. 24), “Jesus laid his hands on his eyes again; and he looked intently and his sight was restored, and he saw everything clearly” (v. 5). In Mark’s report, Jesus’ healing miracle is unusual because the healing requires two stages. Jesus may need more time than that with some of us! Richard A. Horsley notes that “this restoration of a blind man’s sight and that of Bartimaeus in 10:46-52 frame this part of Mark in which the disciples are “blind” to what is said and done” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Mk. 8:22-26). Matthew, it appears, deliberately passed over this event, recording the discussion of the leaven of the Pharisees (Mt. 16:5-12; Mk. 8:14-21) and Peter’s confession (Mt. 16:13-20; Mk. 8:27-30), but skipping Mark’s account of this healing. One might suppose that Matthew thought a healing that required two stages didn’t need to be recorded; or perhaps he had too much other material, and simply chose to omit this story. But for us, we can understand that our spiritual healing and maturity may not come all at once–as a bolt of lightning, so to speak. Jesus is able, but he may need to spend more time on some of us. A friend of mine (a relative), has had a sign posted on her refrigerator: “Be patient with me; God’s not through with me yet!”

After the Feeding of the Five Thousand (Mt. 14:13-21; Mk. 6:32-44; Lk. 9:10b-17), Luke discontinues his use of Mark’s narrative from Mark 6:45 to 8:26, where he rejoins Mark’s narrative and sequence for eight of the next nine sections or episodes, from Peter’s Confession (Mt. 16:13-20; Mk. 8:27-30; Lk. 9:18-21) to the Strange Exorcist (Mk. 9:38-41; Lk. 9:49-50; cf. Mt. 10:42). Matthew has continued to follow Mark’s narrative and sequence for the most part throughout.

In Luke, as noted then, the narrative of Peter’s Confession follows immediately upon the Feeding of the Five Thousand, which appears to be set in or near Bethsaida (Lk. 9:10; cf. “a lonely place” Mk. 6:32; Mt. 14:13; with reference to crossing the lake “to Bethsaida” Mk. 6:45). In passing over several sections of Mark, Luke also omits Jesus’ retreat to the north, including the exorcism of the Syrophoenician woman’s daughter (Mk. 7:24-30; Mt. 15:21-28). Mark, however, has Jesus in Bethsaida again (8:22-26) before reporting that he was to the north again in Caesarea Philippi (Mk. 8:27a; Mt. 16:13a). Luke does not indicate the location but simply sets the scene for Peter’s confession as “once when Jesus was praying alone, with only the disciples near him (Lk. 9:18a). Jesus introductory question is similar in the three Gospels, “Who do people (‘the crowds’ Lk.) say that I am (‘the Son of Man is’ Mt.)” (Mk. 8:27b; Mt. 16:13b; Lk. 9:18b). Matthew’s use of the honorific title, “Son of Man,” is significant here, but in the three accounts, the focus is on Jesus’ identity. The opinions of the people reported by the disciples include John the Baptist, Elijah and one of the prophets (Mk. 8:28; Mt. 16:14; Lk. 9:19). Luke specifies “one of the ancient prophets [who] has risen,” and Matthew includes Jeremiah by name, adding “or one of the prophets.” When Jesus asks for the disciples’ opinion (Mk. 8:29a; Mt. 16:15; Lk. 9:20a), Peter’s answer, according to Mark, is direct and simple. “You are the Messiah (oJ CristovV, ho Christos) (Mk. 8:29b). This is clear enough, but the others expand the answer a bit. In Luke, Peter’s answer is “The Messiah of God” (Lk. 9:20b), and in Matthew, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God” (Mt. 16:16).

Mark’s account of Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi may be compared with Peter’s confession in John 6:68-69: “Lord, to whom can we go? You have the words of eternal life. We have come to believe and know that you are the Holy One of God.” In John, the confession brings Jesus’ Galilean ministry to an end–or at least the reporting of ministry in Galilee–in spite of John 7:1, “After this Jesus went about in Galilee. He did not wish to go about in Judea because the Jews were looking for an opportunity to kill him.” Except for the reported delay in Jesus’ departure for Jerusalem and the Festival of Booths (Jn. 7:1-9), John reports no further ministry or events in Galilee except for the post-resurrection appearance in chapter twenty-one. In Mark, too, the Galilean ministry is essentially over at this point. The child with seizure symptoms is healed (Mk. 9:14-29) and the unknown exorcist is discussed (9:38-41) but Jesus leaves Galilee, headed for Jerusalem in 10:1. The First Passion Prediction (8:31-33) is followed by teaching on discipleship, taking up one’s cross (Mk. 8:34), and losing one’s life “for my [Jesus’] sake” (v. 35). It’s as though the miracles were significant, but mostly placed in the first half of Mark (chs. 1-8), and with Peter’s confession and the insight it represents, Jesus was ready to teach them about the seriousness of Christian discipleship, and to face his own cross.

Looking ahead from this reading, we see that after Peter’s confession, and Jesus’ warning not to reveal his identity (Mk. 8:30; Mt. 16:20; Lk. 9:21), Mark moves on to Jesus’ First Passion Prediction (Mk. 8:31-33; Mt. 16:21-23; Lk. 9:22), with no reference to the dialogue between Jesus and Peter, reported in Matthew about the rock, the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and binding and loosing (Mt. 16:17-19). But the discussion of these matters may await another occasion.

Ronald D. Worden, Ph.D.

rdworden@hgst.edu

deanworden@comcast.net