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.

Study of Mark Part 2 (continued):The Beginning of Jesus' Ministry

¹² The Spirit immediately drove him into the wilderness. ¹³ He was in the wilderness forty days, enduring temptations from Satan. He was with wild animals, and angels were ministering to his needs.

Notice the theme of immediacy again. The pace is picking up, and there will be very few breaks in the narrative from here on. Also notice how briefly all of the information has been presented thus far. John’s entire ministry is dealt with in 5 verses; Jesus’ baptism takes only 3. The wilderness temptation gets 2. Mark is not dwelling very long on any one topic. The Gospels of Matthew and Luke have greatly expanded their accounts regarding the temptation of Jesus in the wilderness, but we must remember that we are viewing Mark as standing on its own (as it would have for probably a decade before either Matthew or Luke were penned).

The importance of Mark’s (very brief) account of Jesus in the wilderness is to emphasize his servant nature, and to begin to paint a picture of how Jesus surpasses John the Baptist. Remember that Mark’s Gospel redefines the Christ figure as the suffering servant of God. This episode demonstrates immediately the servant nature of Jesus, as well as placing Jesus in his first circumstance of suffering. The Spirit drove Jesus into the wilderness forcefully, as though he has submitted himself so fully to the Spirit that he is no longer in command of his own body. The same Greek word (ekballei) used of the Spirit driving Jesus to the wilderness is used in Mark 1:39 in reference to Jesus casting out demons, and in 1:43 when Jesus sends a recently-healed leprous man to present himself to the priest and make offerings. The degree to which Jesus submitted himself to the power of the Holy Spirit is as much power as Jesus will demonstrate in his ministry.

The presence of the Spirit in Jesus, driving his actions and (we will see in greater detail shortly) giving him authority and power, is also a way in which Jesus surpasses John the Baptist, who only declared a coming ministry with power and baptized with water. Furthermore, when Jesus is in the wilderness, he endures temptations from Satan and he is taken care of by angels, indicating a connection to the spiritual world that surpasses that of John, who only lived and preached in the wilderness.

Forty days could be a symbolic connection to the Israelites’ wandering in the wilderness for 40 years (Joshua 5:6), or a reference to Moses’ experience (Exodus 34:28 – “So he was there with the Lord forty days and forty nights; he did not eat bread, and he did not drink water. He wrote on the tablets the words of the covenant, the ten commandments), or that of Elijah (1 Kings 19:8 – “...That meal gave him the strength to travel forty days and forty nights until he reached Horeb, the mountain of God”). This episode could also be seen as a message for followers of Jesus, that there is no such thing as a servant of God who is not tempted, even the Son of God.

Mark also frames this narrative in a way that would have had meaning to a Gentile reader as well. In Greco-Roman myths and epics, the heroes frequently undergo challenges and face temptation from various divine beings. The Aeneid, the Roman national epic, written by Vergil and published after his death in 19BC, was composed (in part) to celebrate the reign of the Emperor Augustus and present all of Roman history as driving ultimately towards his rule. Aeneas, the hero of the epic, will frequently serve as our example of a Roman “divine man” in this study, because the Aeneid was one of the most influential works of all of Roman literature. Although published in the BC’s, the work was still regarded with such prominence and authority in Roman literature during the time that Mark was being written that the next greatest Roman epic, Lucan’s Pharsalia (written from 61-65 AD, during the reign of Nero and roughly contemporaneous to our timeline for Mark), cannot be read as anything but a reaction to Vergil’s work. I will refer to this epic again in the study because there are parallels to be found between Aeneas and Jesus; as well as motifs from the Aeneid that have parallels in the Gospel of Mark.

Aeneas was the son of a god, the result of the union between the goddess Venus and a mortal man, Anchises. The beginning of his mission as the ultimate progenitor of the Roman people can be found in Book 2 of the Aeneid. In this book, Aeneas is living in Troy at the end of the Trojan War. The Trojans (by means of a famous wooden horse) begin to sack the city. The ghost of Aeneas’ dead comrade, Hector, appears in a dream to Aeneas and gives him his divinely appointed mission: Hector entrusts Aeneas with the task of taking the Trojan household gods and the survivors of Troy to a new country. However, Aeneas immediately faces many temptations to neglect his new calling. Without delay he rushes into Troy in an attempt to defend the city or die trying. Then he witnesses the king of Troy murdered with his wife and sons. When Aeneas realizes everyone around him has already died, he starts making his way back to his family. But then he has an opportunity to get vengeance on Helen, the woman whose beauty started the war. His divine mother appears to him and reminds him of his fate, and promises to protect him until he is safely away from the city. Aeneas’ mission is further confirmed by a heavenly omen when his son, Ascanius is “anointed” by the gods with flames that surround his head and lick his hair, but do not burn him. Then, as Anchises prays, a star shoots across the sky and hits a nearby mountain. Aeneas begins to take his family out from the city; but as he makes it out, he realizes that his wife has been separated from him somewhere inside Troy. He rushes back into the city and spends the night searching for her, risking death all over again in a desperate attempt to find her. Her ghost ultimately appears to him and tells him to leave.

While the specifics of this story are not paralleled in the Gospel of Mark, some of the overarching themes are similar: the Son of God/a son of a god who has a specific mission given to him by God/the gods; a period of time in which there is temptation and danger to reject the calling; loneliness and solitude; divine protection; an anointing of the mission through heavenly omens. These epic motifs are present in both stories and would have been recognizable to a Roman audience reading the Gospel.

From a general literary perspective, Mark could be viewed as working inside of a literary framework used from ancient mythology to epics to modern movies:

The Hero (Jesus/Aeneas/Frodo) is called to accept a quest/mission (bring the kingdom of God to the world and suffer and die/found a new city in a strange country/destroy the One Ring). He brings with him one or more Companions (Simon, Andrew, James, John, the other disciples/Achates, Ascanius, Pallas, the Trojan remnant/Sam, Legolas, Gimli, Aragorn, the rest of the Fellowship). These people leave the normal life they have known behind them and go on a journey. This journey challenges them and involves dangers from nature (storm on the sea of Galilee/storm in the Mediterranean Sea/snowstorm in the Pass of Caradhras), other people (Pharisees/Rutulians/Orcs and men), and, sometimes, opposition from spiritual forces (Satan and demons/Juno and Allecto/Sauron and Ringwraiths). There are sometimes moments where the Hero faces doubt or loses his way (Gethsemane/Carthage/Mount Doom). Sometimes the Companions die or betray the Hero (Judas/Pallas/Boromir). And over the course of the journey, the Hero grows in his power/realizes his true identity/accepts his calling, ultimately fulfilling his mission.   

¹⁴ Now after John was imprisoned, Jesus went into Galilee and proclaimed the gospel of God. ¹⁵ He said, “The time is fulfilled and the kingdom of God is near. Repent and believe the gospel!”

With his brief mentioning here of John’s imprisonment, the author gives the audience another example of what it means to be a true disciple of Jesus. John, even though he did not know specifically who the person of power would be, declared this person’s arrival, his service to this person, and the gospel message (repentance and forgiveness of sins) all the way to prison and death. For Mark, suffering will frequently precede glory for those who choose the path of the Christ. To a community facing persecution, this message would have been one of encouragement and hope.

The brief mention of imprisonment also serves another point: to highlight that Jesus’ ministry does not actually begin until after John’s ministry finishes. And just as Elisha received a double portion of the Spirit after Elijah departs (2 Kings 2:9), so Jesus surpasses John after John departs. Jesus (in the model of Elisha) takes up John the Baptist’s mantle and proclaims a similar “gospel” message (repent), but takes the message further to include the kingdom of God, and thanks to the omniscient perspective of the narrator, we get inside this information about Jesus before anyone in the narrative is aware of it. We do not yet know what the “kingdom of God” means in Mark (although Jesus will explain it later), but we can make a couple of observations. First, Jesus is speaking of an action completed, not something that will come in the future. The Greek statement is made in the perfect tense, which denotes an action that is completed by the present reality in the narrative – as in, “By the time you are reading this statement (now) you have read the verses (already completed).

The Greek reads “...the time has been fulfilled and the kingdom of God has drawn near”

In other words, by the time Jesus says these words inside the story, the actions he declares have been done. Secondly, as we have seen multiple times already, everything about Jesus’ ministry surpasses that of John. Where John the Baptist presents a time and person to come in the future, Jesus’ arrival marks the fulfillment of that time, and thus his identity as the person of whom John spoke, and the onset of his ministry is that which ushers in the arrival of the kingdom of God.

A Study of Mark: Jesus' Baptism (Part 2 continued)

⁷ He proclaimed, “One more powerful than I am is coming after me; I am not worthy to bend down and untie the strap of his sandals. ⁸ I baptize you with water, but he will baptize you with the Holy Spirit.”

John’s message is one of a coming man who will have power; one to whom John has already declared himself a servant (by his unworthiness to untie his sandals); a man whose ministry will surpass his own in every way. Where John is only able to ritually cleanse with water, this person will bring a spiritual cleansing. John’s message of baptism by the Holy Spirit is also a foreshadowing beyond the scope of the Gospel narrative. The Holy Spirit doesn’t make many appearances in Mark. The few times where it is mentioned after this point are in connection with Jesus and the power or authority that he possesses. The baptism of other people with the Holy Spirit is an event that will take place after the resurrection, and is not recorded in this Gospel.

The audience, as believers, would have been familiar with the concept of the Holy Spirit. This is an aspect of theology that was developed by the time Paul was writing his letters (roughly a decade before Mark was written down), and Christian communities all over the Mediterranean, even in Rome, would have understood what was meant when the term Holy Spirit is used in a Gospel. For example:

·        Romans 8:14-16 explains adoption as children of God through the Holy Spirit

·        Romans 8:26-27 discusses the Spirit interceding on behalf of the saints

·        Romans 9:1 indicates that the Holy Spirit can assure one’s conscience of the truth

⁹ Now in those days Jesus came from Nazareth in Galilee and was baptized by John in the Jordan River. ¹⁰ And immediately coming up out of the water, he saw the heavens splitting apart and the Spirit descending on him like a dove. ¹¹ And a voice came from heaven: “You are my one dear Son; in you I take great delight.”

We have already been told that Jesus is the Christ and Son of God, so he needs no further introduction. The “prologue,” as it were, is over, and Mark launches directly into the narrative of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel of Mark is roughly divided into a 3-Act structure, much like an ancient drama. Act 1 (1:9-8:26) is Jesus’ Galilean ministry – it is very action-oriented, it demonstrates Jesus’ authority and identity, and it puts his message at odds with the religious authorities (the scribes, teachers of the Law, and Pharisees). Act 2 (8:27-13:37) transitions to Jerusalem and Jesus’ last week. Here the focus shifts to Jesus teaching his disciples, preparing them for his absence, and forcing them (and the audience) to confront and answer the question, “Who do you say that I am?” Act 3 (14:1-16:8) is the climax of the story, the point that the narrative has been relentlessly pushing toward, the culmination of Jesus’ ministry through his suffering and death, and the ending.

Verse 10 introduces us to one of the first recurring themes we will encounter in Mark: Immediacy. The Greek word meaning “immediately” is used over 40 times in the Gospel. The action in Mark (especially Act 1) is fast paced, constantly driving the audience forward to the climax of the story. There are very few “rest breaks.” Another literary motif presented in these verses is that of Patterns of Three. In Mark, things frequently happen in threes: here, Jesus sees heavens opened, he sees the Spirit descending, and he hears a voice.

Examining the narrative itself, the vision at the baptism is written as a personal experience intended for Jesus alone, and not in any way a demonstration to the crowd. He sees the heavens splitting open. The voice speaks to him and not to the crowd: “You are my son... in you...” No mention is made of anyone else beyond Jesus hearing the voice or seeing the Spirit descend. There is also no indication in the text that John recognized Jesus as the one he had been prophesying about, or that he saw or heard the vision.

The internal narrator of the Gospel, however, allows the audience to take part in an omniscient perspective. Frequently, we are given glimpses into information of which the characters inside the narrative are unaware. This is one such example. We get to experience the vision of the Spirit and voice along with Jesus, and by doing so, we know that Jesus is the one of whom John was speaking. The Spirit descends on Jesus because the audience has been told that he will ultimately baptize with it. And just as the OT quotations in v.2-3 were immediately followed with their embodiment in John the Baptist, John’s declaration of the coming person of power is immediately followed by its fulfillment in Jesus.

Additionally, Mark’s baptism episode contains hints of proto-adoptionist theology. Rather than the belief that Jesus was fully divine from birth or before, Adoptionism believed that Jesus was “adopted” by God at his baptism due to his devotion to God, and that he was given divine status and the Holy Spirit because of this adoption, but that he is not equal to God the Father. This doctrine was declared to be a heresy by the 1^st Council of Nicaea (325 AD), but some ideas in parts of Mark and Paul’s letters can be seen as precursors to this doctrine. Other Gospel writers may have noticed this potential theological issue present in Mark, and dealt with it in different ways. For example, Matthew has the voice at the baptism address the crowd (“This is my son”), rather than Jesus, changing the purpose of the event to a public declaration and indicating that Jesus already knew his identity. Luke includes the account of 12-year-old Jesus declaring God to be his father, years before his baptism. Both Matthew and Luke include birth narratives in which a divine messenger informs Jesus’ parents that he is God’s son by miraculous pregnancy, and thus divine from his birth. John’s prologue places Jesus as the Word, preexistent and coeternal with God.

Mark does not include any of this clarifying information, making his theology a little more uncertain. Does the voice speak because Jesus was not aware of his identity before the baptism? Was Jesus a regular man until God declared his adoption as the Son of God and sent the Spirit into Jesus? Is God simply declaring his approval at Jesus’ submission to God through baptism? Is the voice intended to inform Jesus that it was time to begin his ministry? Is the voice a literary construct intended for the reader and not for anyone inside the narrative, including Jesus? Reading Mark independently, I don’t know that you can fully answer these questions, but try to keep them in mind as we read through the rest of the Gospel to see whether anything can be resolved or clarified.

Another question that may have arisen in your mind is why the Son of God would need to be baptized? Wasn’t John’s baptism one of repentance for the forgiveness of sins? Does this indicate that Jesus had sins that needed forgiveness?  2 Corinthians 5:21 states:  ^“God made the one who did not know sin [Jesus] to be sin for us, so that in him we would become the righteousness of God.” Paul wrote this letter most likely between 55-57 AD, which means that this is the earliest point at which we can declare for certain that the doctrine of a sinless Jesus existed in early Christian theology. If we accept the date of Mark as written in the late 60’s then the theological belief of Jesus as sinless would have existed for a decade or more, enough time for the doctrine (even if it was not present everywhere), to be circulated and adopted by the communities around the Mediterranean.  

The other Gospel writers also seem to have noticed this as an issue in need of explanation in the baptism narrative. Matthew 3:14-15 includes an interaction between John and Jesus, in which John tries to prevent Jesus from being baptized and states that Jesus needs to baptize him instead, but Jesus convinces him that it needs to happen “to fulfill all righteousness.” Luke 3:21-23 alters the structure of the events slightly, making the baptism happen after everyone else present was also baptized (v.21 “it happened that, when all the people were baptized, Jesus also was baptized”); having the vision happen as Jesus prays, rather than as he exits the water, thus taking the emphasis off of the baptism itself (v.21 “and while he was praying, the heavens opened...”); and using the event as a symbolic action marking the beginning of his ministry (v.22-23 “‘...in you I take great delight;’ and so Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years old.”). The Gospel of John does not even record Jesus being baptized.

A common explanation attempting to answer the “why baptism” question is that Mark, who greatly emphasizes the humanity of Jesus, has Jesus undergo a baptism in order to declare himself a full member of humanity. A second explanation paints Jesus’ baptism as a symbolic action announcing his willingness to accept the sinfulness of mankind on his shoulders as part of his ultimate mission to suffer and die as Son of God and Christ. Another explanation highlights one of the main purposes of the Gospel of Mark as teaching what it means to be a true follower of Jesus, frequently using Jesus to model the behaviors expected of his followers. Thus, Jesus undergoes a baptism as a model for what future disciples would be expected to do when following in his footsteps. A final explanation (though not in any way the last) views this narrative as another combination of OT quotations, constructed for the audience and declaring the identity of Jesus to the reader just as the OT quotations in v.2-3 declared who John the Baptist was.

·        Psalm 2:7 -- I will proclaim the Lord’s decree:

      He said to me, “You are my son;
      today I have become your father.

·        Isaiah 42:1 -- “Here is my servant whom I support,
my chosen one in whom I take pleasure.
I have placed my spirit on him;
he will make just decrees for the nations.

The placing of the Spirit on Jesus immediately afterward would also serve as a fulfillment of the Isaiah verse for the reader, just as John immediately shows up in the story after Malachi and Isaiah are quoted, and Jesus arrives immediately after John predicts the man of power. Ultimately, whether you think any (or none) of these explanations holds water, I leave it up to you to decide why you think Jesus was baptized.

Study of Mark's Gospel Part 2 (continued): More on John the Baptist

⁵ People from the whole Judean countryside and all of Jerusalem were going out to him, and he was baptizing them in the Jordan River as they confessed their sins.

There is definite hyperbole (exaggeration for literary effect) in these verses, as it is highly unlikely that every single person in Jerusalem and the Judean countryside came to see John. The purpose of the hyperbole is not so much to point out that John’s ministry was popular, as is it is to show that countless people were ready for repentance and forgiveness. In other words, by telling us that huge crowds were accepting John’s baptism, the author indicates that John was doing his job (as stated in the quotation in verses 2 and 3); namely, preparing the way for the forgiveness of sins that would come through Jesus by getting people ready to hear the message.

I want you to keep this verse in the back of your mind because I will revisit it later as one of the ways that the author will show how Jesus surpasses John the Baptist (another being the actual ability to forgive sins, rather than just preaching repentance).

It is not known exactly where Mark has John baptizing. It had to be a wilderness place on the Jordan River accessible to people from Judea and Jerusalem, but the Jordan River stretches for more than 60 miles between the Dead Sea and the Sea of Galilee. The “traditional” site of Jesus’ baptism is east of Jericho and north of the Dead Sea, within a short travel distance of Jerusalem and in the region of Judea. However, if this is even close to the location Mark had in mind, there will be repercussions for Jesus’ decision to focus his ministry in Galilee (as we will see at the end of this study). Another possible site places John’s ministry in the region of the Decapolis, significantly closer to Galilee but much farther from Jerusalem and Judea. It would still be feasible that people would travel from Judea to be baptized by John, but they would have to travel through Samaria to get there. Another possible explanation is that John moved his ministry, baptizing up and down the Jordan River, and Mark, in his brevity, simply used a city and region that his audience would have known without need for explanation.

⁶ John wore a garment made of camel’s hair with a leather belt around his waist, and he ate locusts and wild honey.

Hopefully as you read through this study, you will also be learning ways in which to critically examine a Gospel narrative. Recall in the introductory post my assumption that the Gospels are intentional. Because of this assumption, I work from the idea that the details inside the Gospels were included for a reason. As a general rule, then, any time you see a specific detail mentioned in a Gospel that seems strange or out of place to you, stop for a moment and ask “why?” Mark makes his statement about John’s dress and diet so briefly and changes gears so quickly that we can be tempted to pass by this sentence without giving it any thought. He does not take time to explain what, if any, significance there is to John’s clothing or eating habits. However, he does mention it, and it is a strange detail if you think about it, so we are left to pause and wonder, “Why does it matter (to the author or the audience) what John wore? Of all the foods John could have eaten, why are those two mentioned? Why does the author give no explanation at all about these details?”

I emphasized in the introductory post that Mark was most likely written to a primarily Roman Gentile audience. This doesn’t mean that there was no Jewish presence in his church community. The Jewishness of Jesus (and the characters surrounding him) is not downplayed in the Gospel. In fact, Mark does an excellent job of presenting his message in a way that appeals to both a Jewish and Gentile perspective. Jesus can be viewed in both the light of a Jewish Messiah (but redefined as the “suffering servant” who dies for mankind) and a Greco-Roman “divine man” (but surpassing any of them because of his suffering and death). As can John the Baptist:

In a Jewish context, the details about John’s clothing would have placed him as a prophet in the mold of Elijah. Elijah was described in 2 Kings 1:8 as a “hairy man” with a leather belt tied around his waist (The NIV translates the phrase as “a garment of hair”). Elijah’s “mantle” (his outer -- possibly “hairy”-- cloak), passed on to Elisha after Elijah was taken to heaven, became symbolic of a prophet’s ministry. Zechariah 13:4 states: “...on that day each prophet... will no longer wear the hairy garment of a prophet...” Mark clearly has John the Baptist working within this tradition, wearing a hairy garment and leather belt and preaching repentance, an image that would have immediately resonated with a Jewish audience as following the Elijah archetype.

John’s food choice, however, has no connections with Elijah at all; so why the locusts and honey?  Since Mark gives no clarification at all as to why John eats what he eats, this is an example of not being able to know what the author had in mind when he was structuring this part of the narrative. There is an explanation, but it involves a lot of conjecture and speculation about authorial intent. This explanation has John working within the tradition of OT prophets who delivered God’s messages with symbolic actions rather than words (e.g. cooking over a dung fire, marrying a prostitute, walking around barefoot and naked, shooting an arrow, tearing a garment, breaking a pot). As such, locusts could be symbolic of either God’s judgment (Deuteronomy 28:38), or the Gentile enemies of Israel (described as locusts in Judges and Jeremiah). Honey brings to mind the Promised Land (flowing with honey) or God’s promise of provision (Psalm 81:16), or possibly Ezekiel’s scroll (that tasted as sweet as honey and contained God’s words to his people). Thus the locusts and honey could be symbolic of God either covering his judgment with provision and promise, or God’s inclusion of the Gentile nations in his provision and promise. But again, this is pure speculation, because there are absolutely no clues inside of the Gospel text explaining the reason for John’s diet. It could also have been something as straightforward as John decrying the material wealth and extravagance of the religious authorities by rejecting comfortable clothes, living in the desert, and eating only food he could find in the wilderness (i.e. by God’s provision).

In a Greco-Roman context, John’s actions could have placed him in the mold of the ascetic Greek and Hellenistic philosophers, who were known for their eccentric behaviors and dress, their rejection of material goods and wealth, and their criticisms of society. To give a few examples, Socrates is said to have worn the same clothes every day, no matter the season, and to have stood still, lost in thought, for days on end, neither eating, drinking, or sleeping. Diogenes (the founder of Cynicism) lived in a barrel, regularly wore no clothes, and is said to have walked around Athens in broad daylight holding a lantern, searching for “a genuine man.” Zeno (the founder of Stoicism) was known for eating food that didn’t require cooking, drinking only water, and wearing thin clothes despite the season. All three of these philosophers were also extremely vocal critics of the societal customs and morals of their day, calling for people to change their ways.

Thus to both a Gentile and a Jewish audience, John’s actions could have had significance. But Mark does not dwell on John’s appearance. Instead, he mentions it and then pushes forward to the message, indicating that although it is a detail that helps to characterize John in some way for the audience, it is also not where the author wants to focus. The Gospel is about Jesus Christ, the Son of God, not John the Baptizer, the voice in the wilderness. In the Gospel of Mark, John is more of a plot device to allow Jesus to enter the narrative than he is a developed character (as he is in the other Gospels):