Study of Mark Part 2 (continued): The Calling of the First Disciples

¹⁶ As he went along the Sea of Galilee, he saw Simon and Andrew, Simon’s brother, casting a net into the sea (for they were fishermen). ¹⁷ Jesus said to them, “Follow me, and I will turn you into fishers of people.” ¹⁸ They left their nets immediately and followed him.

The majority of Jesus’ ministry in Mark occurs around the Sea of Galilee, about 65 miles north of the Dead Sea area. After the onset of his ministry, the first thing that Jesus does is to call disciples. The first two he chooses are the brothers Simon and Andrew, and Mark inserts a parenthetical clarification to let us know that fishing was their career. I think this would be another place to possibly ask why Mark, as concise as he has been thus far, spends words clarifying this detail rather than letting the audience assume that casting nets meant they were fishermen. I will suggest an answer to that question shortly. For now, think about how you would explain why Mark inserts this parenthetical clarification.

I have heard sermons and read analyses that downplay the force of Jesus’ call in these verses and seem uncomfortable with the idea that these men would act “irresponsibly” by abandoning their jobs and families in response to Jesus’ call, stating:

1.      That Jesus was not asking for a lifetime commitment from Simon and Andrew (or James and John in the next verses). Instead, his request was something closer to “follow me [to your house, where we will eat dinner and chat];” and after spending a couple days with Jesus, these men then decided to go around the local area with him temporarily, and ultimately grew in their commitment to his cause.

2.      That the disciples already knew who Jesus was as a follower of John the Baptist.

3.      Because Jesus stepped in to fill John’s ministry, and since these men had respect for John’s mission and recognized Jesus as the continuation of that mission, they would have been ready to support and follow him

I do not agree with these interpretations.

#2 and #3: While I have no issue with Jesus being seen as the successor to John the Baptist, and I have argued that Mark paints him in this light, I also claimed that these allusions were for the audience to understand as part of the narrator’s omniscience, and not something that the people inside the story would have been aware of. There is no indication in Mark that Jesus spent any time with John as his disciple, did any preaching before John was arrested, or did anything at all beyond get baptized by John that would have placed him on the people’s radar as Elisha to John’s Elijah. Additionally, Mark 8:28 states that people believed Jesus was John the Baptist. If Jesus were well-known as a follower and successor of John the Baptist before his own ministry began, then it seems strange that people would say that Jesus is John the Baptist. If, however, Jesus was a completely unknown figure until after John’s imprisonment, then people might be more likely to see him as John reborn.

Additionally, although Mark does state that people from the whole Judean countryside came out to be baptized by John, Galilee is not in Judea. When I earlier discussed possible locations for John’s ministry of baptism, I mentioned that the traditional site is near the very southern portion of the Jordan River. If this area is the right region, Galilee is much farther north than anywhere John was baptizing, and it is unlikely that the fishermen around the sea of Galilee would have been in John’s company enough to have identified Jesus as a successor of John’s (if Jesus actually was the successor and they had even met John at all). The alternate location in the Decapolis would make it more likely that the Galilean region would have been familiar with John, but much more difficult for all Jerusalem and the whole Judean countryside to come to him for baptism.

#1: While I have no problem agreeing that the disciples did not irresponsibly abandon their livelihoods or families permanently, like people in a mid-life crisis, never again to return to them (we know from 1 Corinthians 9:5 that Peter’s wife accompanied him in his ministry, at least after his time with Jesus), we do have to deal with the fact that, during Jesus’ ministry, these men were no longer fishing for a living. The call, “Follow me,” carries more weight than simply “come with me to a physical location,” especially paired with the declaration that Jesus will make them into “fishers of people.” And the force of this call is why I think Mark takes time to clarify that Simon and Andrew were fishers by trade. Jesus’ statement that they will become fishers of people implies that they will no longer be in their old profession, but that he will be training them for a new job, using the skills they developed in their old one. It can also be that Mark clarifies that fishing was their profession because of the nature of the job. We think of fishing as casting a lure on a fishing rod, but the fishing referred to here have used a cumbersome net weighted around the edges. This net would have been tossed into the water and the pulled back up by hand, a physically grueling task, especially if the net is full. It is not a coincidence that Jesus calls their new profession fishing as well. It will require hard work, long hours, dedication, and frequently fail to produce results.

Additionally, I happen to think that these men were not familiar with Jesus in any capacity before his call, although I also believe that it doesn’t really matter to the overall narrative if they were. Certainly Jesus’ call carries more weight and authority if Jesus were a stranger to them. Think about the presence and the power of Spirit Jesus must have had, when a single sentence to some strangers can cause them to immediately leave behind their livelihood for an indefinite period of time (and also the problems and controversy this might have caused). However, I think this is part of Mark’s message about the cost of discipleship, and I will talk more about this idea in the next verse with the call of James and John.

Even if the fishermen did know Jesus, though, it would have been as a tekton – a carpenter/woodworker/handyman (Mark is, in fact, the only Gospel that names Jesus as such). But Jesus’ profession actually serves as stumbling block in his hometown when he arrives there as a prophet/rabbi (in Mark 6). If, for example, Jesus had spent significant time as a woodworker around the Galilee/Capernaum area and had worked on the local fishermen’s boats, and the soon-to-be disciples knew Jesus and his profession, why was his carpentry not a stumbling block to them?

Because this account starts a series of episodes that illustrate Jesus’ divine authority over different spheres of influence, I think it is much more likely that this narrative is constructed by the author as a declaration of Jesus’ authority to speak into people’s lives. Here, Jesus speaks with authority and people follow; next, Jesus will demonstrate authority in teaching, authority over demons and over disease, the authority to forgive sins, authority to call sinners, authority over the Sabbath; authority over nature; and ultimately, authority over death. You can see that Jesus has some type of charisma, power, or presence, as Simon and Andrew’s reaction to his statement is to immediately drop what they are doing and follow him.

This power can also been seen as a way that Jesus again surpasses John the Baptist. John speaks and people come to be baptized and then return to their lives. The first people Jesus speaks to immediately follow him.

¹⁹ Going on a little farther, he saw James, the son of Zebedee, and John his brother in their boat mending nets. ²⁰ Immediately he called them, and they left their father Zebedee in the boat with the hired men and followed him.

This episode parallels the previous calling of Simon and Andrew, where Jesus calls two brothers and they immediately follow him. But there are more consequences attached to this decision than there are in the first pair. First of all, it is implied that these men and their father own a fairly prosperous fishing business, as they own a boat and can hire men to work for them. Thus, their leaving means they are (at least temporarily) turning their back on a career in which they will not have to worry about providing for their families.

Secondly, this episode reinforces another theme related to the cost of discipleship: Family Division. Throughout Mark, following Jesus causes strife within families. Though it can’t be proved for certain, I believe this theme reflects an experience in the Markan community; that people’s families were being divided because some were becoming Christians while others were remaining loyal to the Roman civic religion. Family strife is more prevalent in Mark than in the other Gospels, and this theme will resurface, even impacting Jesus’ relationship with his own family. Mark gives us no insight into what Zebedee’s reaction to Jesus is, and Zebedee is given no thoughts or words in response to what his sons do, but think for a minute about the possible repercussions of this scene. The three of them and the hired workers are mending the fishing nets, performing repairs that are necessary for their continued business success and prosperity, when they immediately drop what they are doing and leave their father in the boat! To a Jewish audience, without Zebedee’s permission this action could be seen as breaking one of the foundational Commandments of the Mosaic Law (honor your father...). To a Roman audience, the pater familias (father of the family) held ultimate authority over the household for as long as he was alive, no matter how old his children were. Whether from a Jewish or Gentile perspective, this episode could have been a huge shock to the reader. However, Mark makes this declaration as quickly and as matter-of-factly as if he does every other part of the narrative we have read thus far.

It is not stated that James and John ever return to Zebedee, and he does not make another appearance in the Gospel. How important were the brothers to the fishing? Were they temporarily helping or had they been poised to take over the family business? Was Zebedee angry with them? Disappointed in them? Did he give them permission to go? Was Zebedee left alone and abandoned while his sons chased after some strange itinerant preacher? Was he proud that his sons were learning under a rabbi? None of these questions are given any answers in Mark, and we are left to wonder about the man left in the boat.

Jewish tradition holds that the “Great Assembly” from the generation of Ezra established the synagogue system in order to instruct the people about God’s Law. Rabbis grew out of this system, as teachers who had been given the authoritative role to interpret Scripture and teach on living a righteous life. It was common that young Jewish men attach themselves as disciples to a rabbi, requiring complete submission in following all aspects of the rabbi’s teaching in your life. As challenging and uncomfortable as it may seem to us, I think that Mark wants us to see that leaving Zebedee is part of the cost of discipleship to Jesus.