From: Over 50 Interpreters Explain the Gospel of
Mark Return to
Home
By
Roland H. Worth, Jr. © 2013
All reproduction of
text in paper, electronic, or computer
form both permitted and encouraged so long as
authorial
and compiler credit is given and the text is
not altered.
CHAPTER SIX:
6:1 Translations
WEB: He went
out from there. He came into his own country, and his disciples followed him.
Young’s: And he went forth thence, and came to his own country, and
his disciples do follow him,
Conte (RC): And
departing from there, he went away to his own country; and his disciples
followed him.
6:1 He went out from thence. i.e., from
and came into to His own country. The district of Nazareth where He had been brought up and where His
kinsfolk after the flesh still lived.
This is Mark's only direct reference to his
connection with Nazareth, but the reference proves that he knew at least
something of the facts recorded by Matthew (2:23) and Luke (1:26; 2:39), and
serves as one of the confirmatory "cross-references" between the
Gospels--the more important, perhaps, as it relates to the period which lies
beyond the limits prescribed to Mark by the purpose of his Gospel. [23]
And His disciples followed Him. Probably only the twelve; for the term is sometimes restricted to
this nearer circle of the body of believers. The multitudes that had thronged Him did not
now follow Him. [45]
6:2 Translations
Weymouth: On the Sabbath He proceeded to teach in the synagogue; and
many, as they heard Him, were astonished. "Where did he acquire all
this?" they asked. "What is this wisdom that has been given to him?
And what are these marvellous miracles which his
hands perform?
WEB: When the
Sabbath had come, he began to teach in the synagogue, and many hearing him were
astonished, saying, "Where did this man get these things?" and,
"What is the wisdom that is given to this man, that such mighty works come
about by his hands?
Young’s: and sabbath having come, he began in
the synagogue to teach, and many hearing were astonished, saying, 'Whence hath
this one these things? and what the wisdom that was
given to him, that also such mighty works through his hands are done?
Conte (RC): And when the
Sabbath arrived, he began to teach in the synagogue. And many, upon hearing
him, were amazed at his doctrine, saying: "Where did this one get all
these things?" and, "What is this wisdom, which has been given to
him?" and, "Such powerful deeds, which are wrought by his
hands!"
6:2 And when the Sabbath was
come, He began to teach in the synagogue. From
the beginning of His ministry it was the custom of Jesus to attend upon this
worship and teach. Luke (
and many hearing Him were astonished. They
were astonished at the ability, the sublimity, the holiness of His teaching, as
well as at the signs and wonders by which He confirmed it. [39]
saying, From
whence hath this Man these things? They
own Christ's wisdom in His teaching, and the reality of His miracles, of which
they had evidently heard; but the fact that He was one of themselves made them
angry that He should have such gifts and suspicious of where He had got
them. They seem to have had the same
opinion as Nathanael--that no “good thing” come out of
And what wisdom is this which is
given unto Him[?] Whilst they sneer that his
wisdom is not inherent, but received from another, they acknowledge its
existence. [45]
that even such
mighty works are wrought [performed,
NKJV] by His hands!
Not in
6:3 Translations
WEB: Isn't
this the carpenter, the son of Mary, and brother of James, Joses,
Judah, and Simon? Aren't his sisters here with us?" They were offended at
him.
Young’s: Is not
this the carpenter, the son of Mary, and brother of James, and Joses, and Judas, and Simon? and
are not his sisters here with us?' -- and they were
being stumbled at him.
Conte (RC): "Is
this not the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joseph, and
Jude, and Simon? Are not his sisters also here with us?" And they took
great offense at him.
6:3 Is this not the carpenter . . . ? Mark does not assert that
Jesus was a carpenter; and these fellow-townsmen may have intended no more than
a designation of Him from His father's occupation, which indeed is their
language, as Matthew gives it, "Is
not this the carpenter's son?" Yet
we naturally infer that the historian meant to make the impression that Jesus
was Himself a carpenter. Every Jew was required, by their traditional laws or
customs, to teach his son some trade; and as a matter of course the son would
often learn that of the father, whether or not he followed it through
life. Admitting the natural inference
from the language here recorded, we have presented to us the fact that Jesus,
who came to take our nature and bear the curse for us, “ate His bread in the
sweat of His face" (Genesis 3:19), an element in the first pronounced
curse upon fallen man, and that He spent the greater part of His live on earth
in such labor, as is the lot of the great mass of our toiling struggling
race. These fellow-citizens were not
willing to look up to one as a teacher, who had spent His early years among
them in labor, although the occupation of a builder was, and has always been,
honorable. They disdained honoring Him
as a superior. Spite, envy, and jealousy
swayed them. [45]
the Son of Mary. The
absence of the name of Joseph has always been taken to show that Mary was now
known apart from her husband--i.e., as a widow.
Joseph is mentioned in the record of the previous visit: "Is not this Joseph's son?" It would be too much to infer that he had
died between the two visits but it does seem probable that he died not long
before the first, if not after it. [23]
the brother of James, and Joses,
and of Judas, and Simon? The view that Mary had
other children furnishes an argument in favor of the historical character of
the Gospels. Had the story of the
miraculous conception been a fiction, the Evangelists, to give consistency to
the tale, would have denied that our Lord had any brothers instead of speaking
of them without reserve. [11]
And are not His
sisters here with us? Of whom no names are given and of
whose history we know nothing. The only
hint as to their number is found in the word “all” used by Matthew: "Are not his sisters all with
us?" The word indicates that they
numbered three or four at least. [23]
And they were offended at Him. They
took it ill that one brought up amongst them as a carpenter should set Himself
up as a prophet and a teacher; just as there are those in every age who are apt
to take it amiss if they see any one spring from a trade into the [college
professor's] chair. [39]
In depth:
How close a physical kinship with Jesus does the term
"brothers" imply?45 Brother in its proper restricted sense means
the son of the same parent or parents; but in a wider sense it is used of
persons associated together, and indeed of our fellow-men generally; and as
some maintain, of cousins or other kindred.
Is the word here used in
its narrow or its wide sense? In favor
of their being the real brothers and sisters of Jesus, it is properly urged
that it is a sound rule of interpretation, to give a word its ordinary sense,
unless there be strong reason for giving it a less common signification. There is nothing in the context here, nor in any of the other passages where the relatives of
Jesus are mentioned, that gives initiation of any other than the ordinary usage
of brother and sister. It must, however,
be admitted that establishing the fact that these were actual brothers of Jesus
does not prove certainly that they were the children of Mary; since they
may have been, in accordance with an old traditional belief, the sons of Joseph
by a former marriage. The objection to
this theory is that it is a mere assumption, without the slightest historical
basis.
6:4 Translations
WEB: Jesus
said to them, "A prophet is not without honor, except in his own country,
and among his own relatives, and in his own house."
Young’s: And Jesus
said to them -- 'A prophet is not without honour,
except in his own country, and among his kindred, and in his own house;'
Conte (RC): And Jesus
said to them, "A prophet is not without honor, except in his own country,
and in his own house, and among his own kindred."
6:4 But Jesus said unto them. They
had challenged him and so he readily gave a response. At least their challenge was a logical
one: He came--from a socially and
leadership perspective--from “nowhere,” so how could He have accumulated
such insight (“wisdom”)? His response
basically argues that the question is an irrelevancy; what counts is that He does
have that insight and willingly used it.
“Status” and “credentials” are an irrelevancy in comparison. [rw]
A prophet. We
have a similar proverb, “familiarity breeds contempt.” He repeats almost the same proverb which He
before uttered in their hearing, and from the same place (Luke
is not not without honor
except in his own country.
If a minister have faults, they are known there, and he is censured; if
he have great talents, they excite envy, and he is opposed; if he make himself
[friendly] he loses respect, and his influence is thus impaired; if he do not,
he is counted proud, and avoided. [24]
and among his own kin [relatives, KJV], and in
his own house. Whatever may be the cause that prejudices
acquaintances and associates from childhood against looking up with reverence
to one of their own number, that it is a general if not universal fact cannot
be disputed. This seems to
be aimed at the unbelief of His own brethren (John
7:5). [45]
We have a similar
proverb, "Familiarity breeds contempt." [8]
6:5 Translations
Weymouth: And He could
not do any miracle there, except that He laid His hands on a few who were out
of health and cured them; and
WEB: He could
do no mighty work there, except that he laid his hands on a few sick people,
and healed them.
Young’s: and he was
not able there any mighty work to do, except on a few infirm people having put
hands he did heal them;
Conte (RC): And he was
not able to perform any miracles there, except that he cured a few of the
infirm by laying his hands on them.
6:5 Now He could do no mighty work there. Matthew
says, “not many mighty works;” and Mark, “no mighty
work, save that he laid his hands upon a few sick folk and healed
them." They agree that a few were
healed and Matthew gives the reason why the number was so small--"because
f their unbelief." The statement
that "he could do there no mighty
word" etc. does not mean that it was physically impossible; for the
same power which healed a few could have healed more; but He could not do more
because it was improper. When He
had wrought a number of miracles without shaking the unbelief of the people,
others would have had even less effect and would have been worse than unclean;
to work them, therefore, would have been an improper expenditure of time and
power. [38]
The men of
Except that he laid His hands on a few sick people and healed them. He
wrought none of His greater miracles there.
Of course, even these less striking miracles ought to have sufficed. [39]
6:6 Translations
WEB: He
marveled because of their unbelief. He went around the villages teaching.
Young’s: and he
wondered because of their unbelief. And he was going round the villages, in a
circle, teaching,
Conte (RC): And he
wondered, because of their unbelief, and he traveled around in the villages,
teaching.
6:6 And He marveled because of their unbelief. He
is twice recorded to have wondered--once at a Gentile's faith, once at His
townsmen's unbelief. He wondered at the
first because it showed so unusual a susceptibility; at the second, because it
showed so unreasonable a blindness. [50]
unbelief. The
condition of mind of these Nazarenes was what caused amazement to the Saviour. At length,
He turned away from
Then He went about the villages in
a circuit, teaching. The
unbelief of the Nazarenes, though his life-long acquaintances, did not stop the
activity of Jesus. [8]
Literally, "in a
circle, in a circuit," implying systematic visitation, probably repeated
periodically. [45]
6:7 Translations
WEB: He called
to himself the twelve, and began to send them out two by two; and he gave them
authority over the unclean spirits.
Young’s: and he
doth call near the twelve, and he began to send them forth two by two, and he
was giving them power over the unclean spirits,
Conte (RC): And he
called the twelve. And he began to send them out in twos, and he gave them
authority over unclean spirits.
6:7 And He called the twelve to Himself. Hitherto, since they were ordained (
and began to send them out. "Apostle" means one sent forth. [45]
Moses sent twelve men of
the twelve tribes of
two by two. See
Ecclesiastes 4:8-12—a passage that one may almost think Jesus cited to the
twelve in the course of His preparations for their mission. [23]
A detail peculiar to
Mark, who in his list of names does not group the apostles in pairs as the
other Synoptists do--an undesigned
coincidence worthy of notice. [10]
Two and two is a wise
rule for all Christian workers. It
checks individual peculiarities of self-will, helps to keep off faults,
wholesomely stimulates, strengthens faith by giving another to hear it and to
speak it, brings companionship, and admits of division of labour. [50]
and gave them power over unclean spirits. Here, as elsewhere, Mark places the casting
out of demons at the head of the miraculous cures. If Jesus had not been
perfectly sure that He could [bestow] such power, He [would have undermined]
His own designs to send them on such an errand. No impostor would ever have acted a part,
such as this, nor is it possible for man to contrive a more certain method of
ruining his own credit. [24]
Unclean spirits are
specified, but the subsequent verses show that miracle-working power in its
other forms was included. We may call
that Christ's greatest miracle. That He
could, by His mere will, endow a dozen men with such power, is more, if degree
comes into view at all, then that He Himself should exercise it. [50]
In depth:
Who was in each two man pair [23]? As for the division of the twelve into pairs,
of course we cannot tell positively how it was done; but there is every reason
to suppose that the division that is elsewhere given was observed. The pairs were probably Peter and Andrew,
brothers; James and John, brothers; Philip and Bartholomew, friends before they
met Jesus; Matthew and Thomas, probably twin-brothers; James, the son of Alphaeus, and "Judas of James," of whose relation
nothing very certain can be said; and Simon the Zealot and Judas Iscariot. May there possibly have been something in the
presence of the Zealot at his side from which the evil heart of Judas drew
nourishment for a worldly ideal of the Messiah and discontent with Jesus? The six pairs probably went out in as many
different directions, very likely not meeting again until their mission was
fully accomplished.
6:8 Translations
WEB: He
commanded them that they should take nothing for their journey, except a staff
only: no bread, no wallet, no money in their purse,
Young’s: and he
commanded them that they may take nothing for the way, except a staff only --
no scrip, no bread, no brass in the girdle,
Conte (RC): And he
instructed them not to take anything for the journey, except a staff: no
traveling bag, no bread, and no money belt,
6:8 He commanded them. The special instructions
given to the Twelve were practical and were not intended to express poverty or
to entail special hardship. They were
such as an oriental peasant might observe today if sent on a short and
important mission. They were not to
delay for extensive preparation, they were not to be burdened by needless
equipment, they were to expect [help] from those to whom they preached the
gospel and brought relief. [14]
to take nothing for the journey. The
reason He gave is recorded by Matthew (
except a staff--. The
staff in both Matthew and Luke is among the things prohibited, which seems to
conflict with its being here mentioned as allowed. The prohibition in those gospels may refer to
their procuring a staff beyond what they then had. Whatever may be the solution of this minor
difficulty, the general meaning is clear; they were to go without preparation
and without encumbrance, relying for a supply of their wants, under providence,
on those to whom they were to preach. [45]
Or: Those who had a staff might use it; those
who had not one were not to trouble themselves to procure one. [39]
no bag. [It] was of leather, "the skins of kids
stripped off whole, and tanned by a very simple process," used especially
to carry their food on a journey, and slung over their shoulders. [8]
no bread. They were to depend upon finding food as they
went. [23]
no copper. Literally, "brass," or rather
"copper." Copper having been
early used for money, the word has sometimes that generic meaning, as it has in
this place, with specific reference no doubt to [the] coin of the lowest value,
like the plural "coppers" among [the nineteenth century British]. [3]
in their money
belts—
Where they would normally
carry whatever cash, if any, that they had on them. [rw]
6:9 Translations
WEB: but to
wear sandals, and not put on two tunics.
Young’s: but having
been shod with sandals, and ye may not put on two coats.
Conte (RC): but to wear sandals,
and not to wear two tunics.
6:9 but to wear sandals. They were prohibited from carrying
extra sandals, according to Matthew and Luke, but are here permitted to wear
them as was customary. [45]
Alternative
interpretation: According to St. Matthew,
shoes are forbidden directly; according to St. Mark they are forbidden
by implication, where he says that they were to be shod with sandals. Shoes are here forbidden which cover the
whole foot, not sandals which only protect the soles of the feet lest they
should be injured by the rocky ground.
The soil of
and not to put on two tunics. The dress of a person who lived in
WEB: He said
to them, "Wherever you enter into a house, stay there until you depart
from there.
Young’s: And he
said to them, 'Whenever ye may enter into a house, there remain till ye may
depart thence,
Conte (RC): And he said
to them: "Whenever you have entered into a house, stay there until you
depart from that place.
stay there till you depart from that
place. This direction was given to them lest
they appear to be fickle and restless or lest they hurt the feelings of those
with whom they had first lodged. [39]
WEB: Whoever
will not receive you nor hear you, as you depart from there, shake off the dust
that is under your feet for a testimony against them. Assuredly, I tell you, it
will be more tolerable for
Young’s: and as
many as may not receive you, nor hear you, going out thence, shake off the dust
that is under your feet for a testimony to them; verily I say to you, It shall
be more tolerable for Sodom or Gomorrah in a day of judgment than for that
city.'
Conte (RC): And whoever
will neither receive you, nor listen to you, as you go away from there, shake
off the dust from your feet as a testimony against them."
The Lord prepared His
apostles to find some who would refuse to hear their message. The Saviour neither
enjoins nor permits His Apostles to employ their Apostolical
power to avenge themselves nor even to desire that He should do it. [24]
when you depart from there. "Out of that house or
city" (Matthew
shake off the dust under your feet as a
testimony against them. A very significant
action. The dust was shaken off
as an evidence of the toil and labor of the apostles in journeying to
them. It witnessed that they had entered
the city and had delivered the message and that their message had been refused. The very dust, therefore, of the place was a defilement to them.
[39]
For instances of the
carrying out of this command, compare the conduct of Paul at Antioch, in Pisidia, Acts 13:51, and at Corinth, Acts 18:6. The action must be regarded as symbolical of
a complete cessation of all fellowship, and a renunciation of all further
responsibility. [8]
Assuredly, I say to you. You can
rest absolutely confident it will happen this way because I’ve told you ahead
of time. [rw]
It will be more tolerable for
WEB: They went
out and preached that people should repent.
Young’s: And having gone forth they were preaching that men might
reform,
Conte (RC): And going
out, they were preaching, so that people would repent.
that people should repent. This
was their great work, to which the miracles were subordinate. [39]
However much healing helped in the “here and now,” it was vital that
people also be prepared for the world beyond, of which this world is but a tiny
chronological slice. [rw]
WEB: They cast
out many demons, and anointed many with oil who were sick, and healed them.
Young’s: and many
demons they were casting out, and they were anointing with oil many infirm, and
they were healing them.
Conte (RC): And they
cast out many demons, and they anointed many of the sick with oil and healed
them.
and anointed with oil. To
suppose that the oil was used medicinally is contrary to the whole tenor of the
narratives. It was “the vehicle of
healing power committed to them"
(Alford), an external sign such as our Lord sometimes used to connect
Himself and the person cured. It was
probably also a symbol of anointing by the Holy Spirit. [11]
Alternative
interpretation: The Jews were in
the habit of anointing their hair and their faces every day and especially when
they went out among their fellows. This
anointing was omitted when they were sick and when they fasted (cf. 2 Samuel
many who were
sick. The healings were the norm.
Indeed, the wording implies that they always occurred—whether
“many” or “few” were (numerically) envolved in a
particular case. Contrast this with
those today who claim to have the healing power. If they did have it, wouldn’t they be just as
successful? [rw]
and healed them. Learned
men have bestowed some pains to show that it was usual with the Jews to anoint
the sick with oil, in order to their recovery:
and some think that the apostles complied with this custom without any
direction from their Lord. But this is
not at all probable; nor can we suppose that the miraculous effect would have
followed had they acted without orders. [52]
Oil was never used by
disciples for the edification of the dying but for the recovery of the sick. [46]
This practice can give
no support to the doctrine of extreme unction, until they are able to restore
the sick to health by it, which was always the first significance of the
ceremony. [45]
The absurdity of
attempting to make this a perpetual ordinance in the church appears from the
fact that the gift of healing was not given as a perpetual grant nor the
Apostolic order as perpetual--but both for the temporary purpose of founding
the gospel church. [19]
In depth:
Was the anointing for the apostles’ psychological benefit rather than
the sick individuals’ physical welfare [48]? The Jews appear to have used anointing with
oil both as a natural remedy, in certain diseases, and as a religious ceremony,
accompanied with prayer, through which they hoped to obtain from God the
recovery of the sick person. See James
5:14-15. But, at first sight, it may
well strike us with surprise, that individuals possessed of miraculous powers
should have recourse either to a natural remedy, or to such a ceremony. The solution of the fact is to be found, I
believe, in the want of confidence felt by the Apostles in their ability to
perform miracles. Not being fully
assured of their powers, they adopted in healing the sick such means as their
countrymen had been accustomed to employ.
The mission on which they had been sent was their first and it was after
this time that the faith of Peter failed in his attempt to walk on the water,
and that the Apostles through their lack of faith, that is their want of
confidence, could not cure the demonic boy while their Master was absent and in
consequence incurred His grave rebuke (Matthew 17:14-21).
WEB: King
Herod heard this, for his name had become known, and he said, "John the
Baptizer has risen from the dead, and therefore these powers are at work in
him."
Young’s: And the
king Herod heard, (for his name became public,) and he said -- 'John the
Baptist out of the dead was raised, and because of this the mighty powers are
working in him.'
Conte (RC): And king Herod heard of it, (for his name had become well-known)
and he said: "John the Baptist has risen again from the dead, and because
of this, miracles are at work in him."
Herod. This
was Herod Antipas, the second son of Herod the Great (Matthew 2:1; Luke
1:5). His father's kingdom, held as
tributary to
heard of Him. "Of all that was
done" (Luke 9:7). Jesus
seems never to have visited Herod's capital, Tiberias,
situated on the southwestern shore of the sea of Tiberia,
although He was often upon the waters of this sea, and in the towns around it. [45]
for His name was spread abroad [had become well
known, NKJV]. This
awakening of interest seems to be here mentioned as the result of the mission
of the apostles, which the historian has just described. And some of the twelve may, indeed, have
visited Tiberias.
[45]
and he said. "to his
servants" (Matthew 14:2). [45]
That John the Baptist was risen from the dead and therefore these powers are
at work in him.
"John did no miracle" (John
WEB: But
others said, "He is Elijah." Others said, "He is a prophet, or
like one of the prophets."
Young’s: Others
said -- 'It is Elijah,' and others said -- 'It is a prophet, or as one of the
prophets.'
Conte (RC): But others
were saying, "Because it is Elijah." Still others were saying,
"Because he is a prophet, like one of the prophets."
That it is Elias [Elijah, NKJV].
Those who said He was Elijah had in mind the prophecy of Malachi 4:5,
and probably thought of a real return of Elijah. [35]
That it is a prophet, or as one of the prophets. i.e., he is a new prophet in whom the
long-broken line of prophecy has been resumed.
[23]
WEB: But
Herod, when he heard this, said, "This is John, whom I beheaded. He has
risen from the dead."
Young’s: And Herod
having heard, said -- 'He whom I did behead -- John -- this is he; he was
raised out of the dead.'
Conte (RC): When Herod
had heard it, he said, "John whom I beheaded, the same has risen again
from the dead."
he said, It is John whom I beheaded. There are no excuses now
about Herodias' urgency, or Salome's beauty, or the
rash oath, or the need of keeping it, before his guests. The dead stands clear of all these things, as
his own act. [50]
he is risen from the dead. The
murdered prophet haunted his guilty breast like a specter and seemed to him
alive again and clothed with unearthly powers in the person of Jesus. [43]
St. Luke (9:7) says that
at first Herod was "much perplexed” about Him. At length, however, as he heard more and more
of the fame of Christ's miracles, he came to the conclusion that our Lord was
none other than John the Baptist risen again. Such is the opinion of St. Chrysostom,
It should also be remembered that though Herod mocked Jesus, he
conspicuously avoided taking responsibility for another death. Whatever Jesus might or might not be, let
someone else take the responsibility for this one! [rw]
Weymouth: For Herod
himself had sent and had had John arrested and had kept him in prison in
chains, for the sake of Herodias, his brother
Philip's wife; because he had married her.
WEB: For Herod
himself had sent out and arrested John, and bound him in prison for the sake of
Herodias, his brother Philip's wife, for he had
married her.
Young’s: For Herod
himself, having sent forth, did lay hold on John, and bound him in the prison,
because of Herodias the wife of Philip his brother,
because he married her,
Conte (RC): For Herod
himself had sent to capture John, and had chained him in prison, because of Herodias, the wife of his brother Philip; for he had
married her.
had sent forth and laid hold upon
John. So he did not seize him
on the spot after his bold reproof, but took time to think, and sent out
afterward, with greater guilt because with greater deliberateness. [23]
and bound him in prison. [This]
apparently refers to the period of some eighteen months during which John lay
imprisoned under Herod. [15]
This may mean no more
than confined him in prison but custom and the usage of the world favor
the literal sense of binding..
Herod the Great had built a prison in a rocky stronghold east of the
For Herodias’ sake, his
brother Philip’s wife:
for he had married her. This is only implied in
other accounts. Herod Antipas was first
married to a daughter of Aretas, king of
Weymouth: For John had repeatedly told Herod, "You have no right
to be living with your brother's wife."
WEB: For John
said to Herod, "It is not lawful for you to have your brother's
wife."
Young’s: for John
said to Herod -- 'It is not lawful to thee to have the wife of thy brother;'
Conte (RC): For John was
saying to Herod, "It is not lawful for you to have your brother's
wife."
Of the time and place of his reproof there
is no hint. [23]
unto Herod. Personally said to him. The
same thing he had preached outside his presence, he said even when standing in
front of him. The mark
of a truly brave man—a man who would not shade the truth even when before the
man who could order his death. [rw]
It is not lawful for thee. It
was a violation of the law of nature, of human custom, and of the divine
enactment. In the first place, it was
not lawful for either Philip or himself to marry their niece; secondly, his own
wife was still living; and worst of all, he had seduced this woman away from
her own husband, who was his own brother.
More heinous violations of law could hardly have been committed in a
single act. [45]
To have thy brother's wife. It
has been discussed whether John condemned the marriage rather as incestuous than as adulterous. Perhaps it is impossible to determine and
certainly it is needless: the marriage
was equally open to both reproofs. [23]
In depth: Why John was morally required to censure the
king's wide variety of publicly known sins [51]. He reproved him for other sins as well as
this crowning one (Luke
WEB: Herodias set herself against him, and desired to kill him,
but she couldn't,
Young’s: and Herodias was having a quarrel with him, and was willing to
kill him, and was not able,
Conte (RC): Now Herodias was devising treachery against him; and she wanted
to kill him, but she was unable.
and would have killed him. Herodias had always wished to get rid of John, as the stern
and uncompromising reprover of her adultery and
incest; and so at length she persuaded Herod to give way. "For,” says Bede,
“she feared lest Herod should at length repent, and yield to the exhortations
of John, and dissolve this unreal marriage, and restore Herodias
to her lawful husband." [39]
but she could not. The reason is given in the next
verse--Herod's keeping John, and guarding him against her murderous purpose. [45]
Weymouth: for Herod
stood in awe of John, knowing him to be an upright and holy man, and he
protected him. After listening to him he was in great perplexity, and yet he
found a pleasure in listening.
WEB: for Herod
feared John, knowing that he was a righteous and holy man, and kept him safe.
When he heard him, he did many things, and he heard him gladly.
Young’s: for Herod
was fearing John, knowing him a man righteous and holy, and was keeping watch
over him, and having heard him, was doing many things, and hearing him gladly.
Conte (RC): For Herod
was apprehensive of John, knowing him to be a just and holy man, and so he
guarded him. And he heard that he was accomplishing many things, and so he
listened to him willingly.
Alternative
interpretation: There is no
contradiction between the two evangelists.
The case appears to have been this:
that at first Herod desired to put John to death because John had
reproved him on account of Herodias. But by degrees John gained an influence over
Herod by the force of his holy life and teaching. [39]
Or: The statement of Matthew that Herod "would have put him to death," but
"he feared the multitude"
(Matthew 14:5), must be referred to the later period of the
imprisonment, when the importunities of Herodias had
begun to prevail with him; and they
introduce an additional restraining influence which affected him all the time,
the fear of the multitude. [38]
feared. Not
terror or alarm, but awe and reverence produced by his knowledge of John’s
character. [3]
knowing that he was a just man and an holy. This
is a notable example of the power of truth over the heart of a wicked man; and
it is a high testimony not only to the justice and holiness but also to the
commanding character of John the Baptist.
Not Elijah before Ahab was more awe-inspiring. [45]
and when he
heard him, he did many things. This is generally understood to mean that
hearing John, he did many things which he enjoined; that he so far yielded to
his influence as to reform to some extent his outward life, and probably to
give some attention to religion. If the
reading followed in the Revised Version is the correct Greek text,
"was so much perplexed," the clause describes a conflict in the mind
of Herod between the better purposes resulting from John's admonitions and his
unwillingness to give up the sinful alliance with Herodias,
or to abandon other sinful ways. [45]
and heard him gladly. Perhaps quite willing to
listen, by way of amends to his conscience. Compare the conduct of Felix (Acts
24:23-26). Herod appears at better
advantage than Felix, for there is no sign that he was looking for bribes. John lay in prison probably a year and a half, and his disciples had access to him (Matthew 11:2). [23]
He enjoyed his
instruction. He was of the class of
stony ground hearers "who receive the word with joy (Matthew
WEB: Then a
convenient day came, that Herod on his birthday made a supper for his nobles,
the high officers, and the chief men of
Young’s: And a seasonable day having come, when Herod on his birthday
was making a supper to his great men, and to the chiefs of thousands, and to
the first men of Galilee,
Conte (RC): And when an
opportune time had arrived, Herod held a feast on his birthday, with the
leaders, and the tribunes, and the first rulers of
that Herod on his birthday. There
has been such discussion as to whether the occasion was strictly his birthday
or the anniversary of his accession to the throne, which might be called by the
same name. There has been some interest
in maintaining the latter, because the day of his accession is known and such a
fixed date would be very useful in settling other dates in our Lord's
ministry. But the best recent
authorities are generally agreed that this was simply Herod's birthday. The celebration, however, with such an
assemblage, would extend beyond a single day.
[23]
made a supper
to his lords high captains, and chief estates [ nobles, the high officers, and the chief men, NKJV] of
of
In depth:
Where was John beheaded [18]? According to Josephus (Antiquities 18.5.2),
John was put to death at Machaerus, a fortress at the
southern extremity of Perea. It has been questioned whether Herod would
have made a birthday feast at the southern extremity of his dominions, where it
would be difficult for the courtiers and noblemen of his court to attend. Still, if we remember that the Jews generally
were in the habit of going up from the most remote parts of the land to
Jerusalem, once or more every year to the feasts, the journey of a few
courtiers to Machaerus will not seem strange. Besides, if Herod was detained [there for one
reason or another] the feast must follow his pleasure; and if Machaerus was not convenient to his guests from
Some, however, have
supposed that the feast did not take place at Machaerus,
although John was beheaded there, but at Tiberias, or
at Julias. But
although possible that the head of the Baptist should have been taken from Machaerus to Tiberias before the
feast ended, yet the obvious interpretation of the narrative is, that he was
beheaded the same night in which the daughter of Herodias
danced before the king or at least that no long interval elapsed. If the feast was not at Machaerus,
it was most probably at Julias, which was at no great
distance, and where Herod had a summer palace.
WEB: When the
daughter of Herodias herself came in and danced, she
pleased Herod and those sitting with him. The king said to the young lady,
"Ask me whatever you want, and I will give it to you."
Young’s: and the
daughter of that Herodias having come in, and having
danced, and having pleased Herod and those reclining (at meat) with him, the
king said to the damsel, 'Ask of me whatever thou wilt, and I will give to
thee,'
Conte (RC): And when the
daughter of the same Herodias had entered, and
danced, and pleased Herod, along with those who were at table with him, the
king said to the girl, "Request from me whatever you want, and I will give
it to you."
came in, and
danced, and pleased Herod and them that
sat with him. The
words "of Herodias herself" (KJV) note the
indignation and horror with which a Jew would regard such an act. Dancing-women were abundant, and in such
banquets it was common for them to appear, transparently robed, and executed voluptuous
and impurely-suggestive dances. This was
the Roman fashion--sad and degrading enough, but it was quite another matter to
Jewish eyes when the daughter "of Herodias
herself" condescended to such an exhibition of her charms for the course
delight of the company. It was the work
of her mother, too, who was adapting her wiles to the man who she had to play
upon. [23]
the king said
unto the damsel, Ask of me, whatsoever thou wilt, and I will give it thee. Presumably
sexually aroused, quite drunk, and not thinking for a second just how broadly
his reckless words could be interpreted.
[rw]
WEB: He swore
to her, "Whatever you shall ask of me, I will give you, up to half of my
kingdom."
Young’s: and he sware to her -- 'Whatever thou mayest ask me, I will give to thee -- unto the half of my
kingdom.'
Conte (RC): And he swore
to her, "Anything that you request, I will give to you, even up to half my
kingdom."
Whatsover thou
shalt ask of me,
I will give it thee, unto the half of my kingdom. St.
Augustine says, “The girl dances; the mother rages. A rash oath is made amidst the excitement and
the voluptuous indulgence of the feast; and the savage desires of Herodias are fulfilled." [39]
Surely hyperbole on his part for who would be so audacious (and
tempting their own beheading) as to ask for “half of my kingdom”? But no matter how outrageous, anything that
would be asked--radically short of that--Herod would lose face in front of his
subordinates if he refused to grant. She
couldn’t, literally, ask for “anything”—but she could come close to
it. [rw]
WEB: She went
out, and said to her mother, "What shall I ask?" She said, "The
head of John the Baptizer."
Young’s: And she,
having gone forth, said to her mother, 'What shall I ask for myself?' and she
said, 'The head of John the Baptist;'
Conte (RC): And when she
had gone out, she said to her mother, "What shall I request?" But her
mother said, "The head of John the Baptist."
And she said, The head of John the Baptist. The
prompt reply of Herodias shows that her answer was
ready. The form in which she demanded
his death shows that bitter anger and bloody revenge had been cherished and
kept fresh. In that heart evil seems not
to have been supplanted except by deeper malice.45
The daughter must have been startled by this for surely she was
expecting to get something for herself out of this. Now the daughter has set herself up as
well by asking not “What shall I ask for myself?” but “what shall I
ask?”
WEB: She came
in immediately with haste to the king, and asked, "I want you to give me
right now the head of John the Baptizer on a platter."
Young’s: and having
come in immediately with haste unto the king, she asked, saying, 'I will that
thou mayest give me presently, upon a plate, the head
of John the Baptist.'
Conte (RC): And
immediately, when she had entered with haste to the king, she petitioned him,
saying: "I want you to give me at once the head of John the Baptist on a
platter.
Or: Having
left herself no maneuvering room by the way her question was asked and
recognizing that her mother might prove just as dangerous to her as she was to
the Baptist. [rw]
And asked, saying, I will that thou give me by and by [at once, NKJV]. No
delays; a confirmation, too, of the probability that the prisoner was within
the walls where they were gathered. [23]
In a charger [on a
platter, NKJV] the head of John the Baptist. Here,
no doubt, the “charger" [KJV] was a royal dish of silver or gold. An intimation that
the sight of it would be a feast to her mother and herself. [51]
WEB: The king
was exceedingly sorry, but for the sake of his oaths, and of his dinner guests,
he didn't wish to refuse her.
Young’s: And the
king -- made very sorrowful -- because of the oaths and of those reclining (at
meat) with him, would not put her away,
Conte (RC): And the king
was greatly saddened. But because of his oath, and because of those who were
sitting with him at table, he was not willing to disappoint her.
Not penitent, but
worried and troubled. (1) Because he was outwitted and forced to do
what he had repeatedly refused. (2)
The act was too horrible even for his conscience. He had a dread of the holy man, especially as he
had become acquainted with him during the year's imprisonment. (3) He
was afraid that murdering John might create a rebellion or at least arouse so
strong an opposition on the part of the people as to cripple him in his war
against Aretas.
[51]
Yet for [because of, NKJV] his
oath’s sake. Herod was scrupulous on this point and
yet an adulterer and murderer. [11]
See how men of no
principle, but troublesome conscience, will stick at breaking a rash oath the
plural “oaths,” as in the Revised Version, from which we infer, as the, while
consenting to the worst crimes! [43]
The Greek has most
natural explanation, though not the only possible one, that in his rapturous
excitement Herod repeated his oath, as he did his promise and perhaps over and
over again, as the captivating dance proceeded.
A true enlightened
moralist would have reasoned that a rash oath, although the swearer
could not escape guilt in having taken it, was not binding; but not so this
ruler, who was as superstitious as he was weak and wicked; or he would have
declared that the demand did not fall within the limits of his promise, since
he had no right over the life of an innocent man; but not so did an imperious
eastern monarch, and especially a Herod, look upon men's lives. [45]
and for [because of, NKJV] their
sakes which sat with him. He feared being disgraced in the eyes
of his officers by not keeping his promise and oath to the fair damsel who had
pleased them. [Such] motives evince a cowardly, craven spirit in
the weak and superstitious ruler, who had not the courage to do right, even then the right was according to his own wishes. [45]
he
would not reject her. It should not be forgotten that these men counted
on the king to fulfill his promises to them as well. If the king could set aside such an intensely
worded oath, how easily might he avoid lesser pledges to them? [rw]
WEB: Immediately
the king sent out a soldier of his guard, and commanded to bring John's head,
and he went and beheaded him in the prison,
Young’s: and
immediately the king having sent a guardsman, did command his head to be
brought,
Conte (RC): So, having
sent an executioner, he instructed that his head be brought on a platter.
and commanded
his head to be brought. Surely an unexpected request: it would be immediately and easily known if
an executioner—of all people!—were not carrying out his orders. But if the king wants the head—then the king
will get it! [rw]
And he went and beheaded him in the prison. No
public execution—wouldn’t that have risked a public relations nightmare,
perhaps even an attempted insurrection!—but a prompt action in the prison
itself. Out of sight
of unsympathetic and hostile eyes that would drip with contempt at the act. [rw]
Weymouth: and brought
his head on a dish and gave it to the young girl, who gave it to her mother.
WEB: and
brought his head on a platter, and gave it to the young lady; and the young
lady gave it to her mother.
Young’s: and he
having gone, beheaded him in the prison, and brought his head upon a plate, and
did give it to the damsel, and the damsel did give it to her mother;
Conte (RC): And he
beheaded him in prison, and he brought his head on a platter. And he gave it to
the girl, and the girl gave it her mother.
and the damsel gave it to her mother. The mother wanted it and the daughter made
sure she got it. Somehow one expects it
was with extraordinary speed on her part that she relieved herself of the
grisly trophy! If her mother wished to
gut her quarters with such things, that was up to her, but would even the most
carefully obedient daughter keep it any longer than she absolutely had to? [rw]
St. Jerome relates that when the head
of the Baptist was brought, Herodias barbarously
thrust the tongue through with a bodkin, as Fulvia is
said to have done over and over again the tongue of Cicero; thus verifying what
Gicero had once said while living, that "nothing is more revengeful that a
woman." Because they could not bear
to hear the truth, therefore they bored through with a bodkin the tongue that
had spoken the truth. [39]
WEB: When his
disciples heard this, they came and took up his corpse, and laid it in a tomb.
Young’s: and having
heard, his disciples came and took up his corpse, and laid it in the tomb.
Conte (RC): When his
disciples heard about it, they came and took his body, and they placed it in a
tomb.
they came and took up [took away, NKJV] his corpse and laid
it in a tomb. The taking up of the corpse by the
disciples would seem to intimate that it lay uncared for and unburied until the
disciples showed their respect for it.
Josephus says that after the beheading, the mutilated remains were cast
out of the prison and left neglected. [39]
Alternate
interpretation: Herod, no doubt,
gave the body to John's disciples, for this would accord with his feelings
toward the intrepid preacher. There is no ground for the tradition noticed by
Jerome, that Herod flung the headless body over the prison walls. [8]
WEB: The
apostles gathered themselves together to Jesus, and they told him all things,
whatever they had done, and whatever they had taught.
Young’s: And the apostles are gathered together unto Jesus, and they
told him all, and how many things they did, and how many things they taught,
Conte (RC): And the
Apostles, returning to Jesus, reported to him everything that they had done and
taught.
gathered themselves together unto Jesus. Where? After how long? And what has Jesus been doing the while? No answer is possible. These are gaps in the evangelic history. [17]
and told. Literally,
"reported" or "brought back news." They gave a full account of the execution of
the commission given to them (verses 7-11), telling of both their miracles and
their teaching. [45]
Him all things, both what they had done, and what they had
taught. This served two useful purposes: To keep Him fully up-to-date on their time
working alone and secondly to allow Him the opportunity to correct any errors
they had made either in behavior or teaching.
This would also prepare them for the future, when separate from Him, and for the time after His resurrection when they would
not have the opportunity for such debriefings.
[rw]
WEB: He said
to them, "You come apart into a deserted place, and rest awhile." For
there were many coming and going, and they had no
leisure so much as to eat.
Young’s: and he
said to them, 'Come ye yourselves apart to a desert place, and rest a little,'
for those coming and those going were many, and not even to eat had they
opportunity,
Conte (RC): And he said
to them, "Go out alone, into a deserted place, and rest for a little
while." For there were so many who were coming and going,
that they did not even have time to eat.
to a deserted
place. They could not rest at
and rest a while. Only by alternating expenditure
with recovery could He go from strength to strength. He labored not to exhaustion of body or
unsteadiness of soul. [27]
After any great effort,
the body cries for repose, but still more does the soul's health demand quiet
after exciting and successful work for Christ.
Without much solitary communion with Jesus, effort for Him tends to
become mechanical and to lose the elevation of motive and the suppression of
self which give it all its power. [50]
for there were many coming and going. For the [withdrawal] two motives appear, one
in Mark and one in Matthew. From Mark we
should attribute it to tender care of the apostles, weary from their work, and
to His desire to be alone with them for a little. This is one of the touching illustrations of
His thoughtfulness toward them. In
Matthew it is when Jesus heard of the death of the Baptist that He withdrew
privately to the desert place. Joined with
the other motive was the desire to be in quiet, that He might have leisure for
the thoughts that the death of John suggested.
[23]
and they had
no leisure so much as to eat.
Even the most dedicated servant of
God needs time to “get away from things” and to mentally and physically prepare
for the next bout of action. [rw]
WEB: They went
away in the boat to a deserted place by themselves.
Young’s: and they
went away to a desert place, in the boat, by themselves.
Conte (RC): And climbing
into a boat, they went away to a deserted place alone.
Luke (
by ship
privately [in the boat by themselves, NKJV]. The
implication is: unexpectedly, with no
forewarning. A discrete, unannounced
leaving was the best bet to secure the desire “alone time.” [rw]
WEB: They saw
them going, and many recognized him and ran there on
foot from all the cities. They arrived before them and came together to him.
Young’s: And the
multitudes saw them going away, and many recognised
him, and by land from all the cities they ran thither, and went before them,
and came together to him,
Conte (RC): And they saw
them going away, and many knew about it. And together they ran by foot from all
the cities, and they arrived before them.
And many knew him. It
wasn’t a matter of guess work that this was Jesus. His teaching and healings were so well known
that large numbers recognized Him immediately.
[rw]
And ran afoot thither out of all the
cities. i.e., from many towns in that region, especially
from those that must be passed on the way.
John speaks of Jesus already seated in the mountain, lifting up His eyes
and seeing the crowd approaching, which may be a reminiscence of the fact that
they came, not all at once, but kept streaming in. John also connects the mention of the coming
with the fact that the Passover was at hand.
It may be that some part of the multitude was made up of pilgrims to
Outwent them [arrived before them, NKJV] and came together unto Him. We
have here a striking proof that our Saviour's
popularity had not begun to wane when this occurrence took place; for not only
did the multitudes still throng Him when at home (5:31), but no sooner had he
pushed off in His boat to seek a momentary respite elsewhere than the masses
put themselves in motion to pursue Him. [3]
Weymouth: So when Jesus
landed, He saw a vast multitude; and His heart was moved with pity for them,
because they were like sheep which have no shepherd, and He proceeded to teach
them many things.
WEB: Jesus
came out, saw a great multitude, and he had compassion on them, because they
were like sheep without a shepherd, and he began to teach them many things.
Young’s: and having
come forth, Jesus saw a great multitude, and was moved with compassion on them,
that they were as sheep not having a shepherd, and he began to teach many
things.
Conte (RC): And Jesus,
going out, saw a great multitude. And he took pity on them, because they were
like sheep without a shepherd, and he began to teach them many things.
Trench and Alford
understand this to be said of His coming forth from His solitude. But it is much more natural to apply it to
His coming forth from the ship; for we have no intimation that they now reached
the solitude they sought or found the needed rest. [45]
And was moved with compassion toward
them. Much as He wished to be away
from them a while, He recognized the genuineness of their feelings and their
deep need. So even Jesus modified His preferences to be
of benefit to others! [rw]
Because they were as sheep not having a shepherd. John
had been a shepherd to them for a short time, but he had now been cruelly
murdered. This event, together with the
recent wide-spread labors of the apostles, and the vague expectations connected
with Jesus, conspired to turn all eyes toward Him, but He was not to be the
kind of shepherd they desired. [38]
and
He began to teach them. Giving up the rest He was intending to take
[verses 31-32]. [35]
Healing and teaching
filled up the day until late in the afternoon and the manner in which these
labors are treated by the four evangelists illustrates the striking variety of
their methods as historians. Matthew
says that Jesus “healed their sick,” but he says nothing of teaching (Matthew
many things. The nature of which Mark does not inform us. What
was important was (1) Jesus had changed His plans to be of benefit to others
and (2) even when this occurred, He did not skimp on His teaching—He gave them
“many things” to ponder and consider. [rw]
Weymouth: By this time it was late; so His disciples came to Him, and
said, "This is a lonely place, and the hour is now late:
WEB: When it
was late in the day, his disciples came to him, and said, "This place is
deserted, and it is late in the day.
Young’s: And now
the hour being advanced, his disciples having come near to him, say, -- 'The
place is desolate, and the hour is now advanced,
Conte (RC): And when
many hours had now passed, his disciples drew near to him, saying: "This
is a deserted place, and the hour is now late.
His disciples came to Him and said. The
difference between John and Mark in regard to the conversation of Jesus with
the disciples about finding food for the crowd is easily harmonized. John tells us what Jesus said at the first
sight of the multitude; Mark takes up the narrative at the close of the day. We owe to John the knowledge that the
exigency was not first pointed out by the disciples, but that His calm, loving
prescience saw it and determined to meet it, long before they spoke. [50]
This is a desert [deserted, NKJV] place, and now the time is
far passed. Saying out loud what they had already been
thinking and, quite possibly, discussing quietly among themselves. [rw]
WEB: Send them
away, that they may go into the surrounding country and villages, and buy
themselves bread, for they have nothing to eat."
Young’s: let them
away, that, having gone away to the surrounding fields and villages, they may
buy to themselves loaves, for what they may eat they have not.'
Conte (RC): Send them
away, so that by going out to nearby villages and towns, they might buy
provisions for themselves to eat."
that they may
go into the country round about [surrounding country, NKJV], and into the villages and buy themselves bread. Those who lived in the nearer villages could
return home, but those from the more distant places, including the pilgrims on
their way to the feast [in Jerusalem] would have to buy as here proposed. [45]
for they have nothing to eat. Jesus
and the apostles had left town abruptly and those seeking Him out had
apparently done so just as quickly: there
was no time to arrange to bring anything.
WEB: But he
answered them, "You give them something to eat." They asked him,
"Shall we go and buy two hundred denarii worth
of bread, and give them something to eat?"
Young’s: And he
answering said to them, 'Give ye them to eat,' and they say to him, 'Having
gone away, may we buy two hundred denaries' worth of
loaves, and give to them to eat?'
Conte (RC): And
responding, he said to them, "Give them something to eat yourselves."
And they said to him, "Let us go out and buy bread for two hundred denarii, and then we will give them something to eat."
And they say unto Him, Shall we go and buy two hundred pennyworth [denarii, NKJV]. A
large amount of money then, since a denarius, or
“penny,” was the hire of a day's labor.
Some have supposed that this two hundred "pennyworth" was the
amount of money they had in their common treasury, but it seems rather to be
mentioned as a sum beyond their ability to pay. [11]
of bread. Considering
the constant fluctuation in the relation between money and the commodities
purchased by money, it is in vain to inquire what number of loaves the two
hundred denarii would purchase at that time although
it was evidently the representation of a large supply of bread. [39]
and give them to eat? Bread
was considered adequate in itself to make a decent meal. Perhaps not all one might want to
have, but quite adequate if need be. [rw]
WEB: He said
to them, "How many loaves do you have? Go see." When they knew, they
said, "Five, and two fish."
Young’s: And he saith to them, 'How many loaves have ye? go
and see;' and having known, they say, 'Five, and two fishes.'
Conte (RC): And he said
to them: "How many loaves do you have? Go and see." And when they had
found out, they said, "Five, and two fish."
This was all the apostles themselves had brought (note the “we” in the
“we have here,” Matthew
And when they knew, they say, "Five, and two fishes."
WEB: He
commanded them that everyone should sit down in groups on the green grass.
Young’s: And he commanded them to make all recline in companies upon
the green grass,
Conte (RC): And he
instructed them to make them all sit down in groups on the green grass.
by companies. In an
orderly manner, not all scattered about.
[rw]
upon the green grass. They were in a “desert place”
(verses 32, 35), yet they sat down on the green grass. This shows that the places called deserts in
This [also] shows that
it was spring (cf. also John 6:4); the grass withers early in the summer. [35]
WEB: They sat
down in ranks, by hundreds and by fifties.
Young’s: and they
sat down in squares, by hundreds, and by fifties.
Conte (RC): And they sat
down in divisions by hundreds and by fifties.
by hundreds and by fifties. This
is the fullest account of the way they were placed, though all four Evangelists
intimate that the crowd was arranged in an orderly manner.
Some have thought there
were 50 ranks in breadth and 100 in length, thus making 5,000 (verse 44). Gerlach: "Two longer rows of 100, a shorter one
of 50 persons. The fourth side remained,
after the manner of the ancient's tables, empty and open." Such an arrangement precluded deception. [11]
Alternate
interpretation: Either the
companies consist some of one hundred and others of fifty, each arranged on
three sides of the square according to Roman custom; or they were arranged in
rows, or tiers, so that looking one way there were fifty hundreds, and in the
other one hundred fifties, with sufficient intervals for the passing of food. [51]
WEB: He took
the five loaves and the two fish, and looking up to heaven, he blessed and
broke the loaves, and he gave to his disciples to set before them, and he
divided the two fish among them all.
Young’s: And having
taken the five loaves and the two fishes, having looked up to the heaven, he
blessed, and brake the loaves, and was giving to his disciples, that they may
set before them, and the two fishes divided he to all,
Conte (RC): And having
received the five loaves and the two fish, gazing up to heaven, he blessed and
broke the bread, and he gave it to his disciples to set before them. And the
two fish he divided among them all.
He looked up to heaven and blessed
and brake the loaves. i.e., He blessed God, praised God in
thanksgiving; Luke, "he bless them," the loaves and fishes--invoked
the blessing of God upon them; John, "He gave thanks." It was simply the grateful prayer before
eating, "grace before meat," offered by the host or head of the
family. 23]
And gave them to His
disciples to set before them. There was no disorderly running after the
“loaves and fishes;” Christ’s blessings were received through those He
commanded to impart them. [11]
And the two fishes divided he among
them all. In other words, this is absolutely all they
had to work with—but it turned out to be enough to fill everyone and provide
“leftovers!” [rw]
In depth:
Efforts to naturalize away the miraculous elements of the event [46]. The skeptical explanations of this narrative
are exquisitely ludicrous. One tells us
how, finding themselves in a desert, "thanks to their extreme frugality
they were able to exist, and this was naturally” (what, naturally?) "regarded as a
miracle." This is called the
legendary explanation and everyone can judge for himself how much it succeeds
in explaining to him. Another tells us
that Jesus being greater than Moses, it was felt that
He must have outstripped him in miraculous power. And so the belief grew up that as Moses fed a
nation during forty years, with angels' food, He, to exceed this, must have
bestowed upon five thousand men one meal of barley bread. This is called the mythical explanation and
the credulity which accepts it must not despise Christians, who only believe
their Bibles.
WEB: They all
ate, and were filled.
Young’s: and they
did all eat, and were filled,
Conte (RC): And they all
ate and were satisfied.
and were filled. No one went away
hungry. So ever with God's gospel: there is enough for all and to spare. No one needs imagine that others will have to
go without because he receives all he needs.
[51]
Weymouth: And they carried away broken portions enough to fill twelve
baskets, besides pieces of the fish.
WEB: They took
up twelve baskets full of broken pieces and also of the fish.
Young’s: and they
took up of broken pieces twelve hand-baskets full, and of the fishes,
Conte (RC): And they
brought together the remainder: twelve baskets full of fragments and of fish.
twelve baskets. It
does not become us to pry too curiously into the method of our Lord's working;
but the number of these baskets, namely twelve, seems to suggest that He first
broke the loaves, and in breaking multiplied them, and distributed them into
those baskets--one for each apostle--and that the food, as it was distributed
by the disciples, was more and more multiplied as needed, so that at length
they brought back to Christ as many basketfuls of fragments as they had first
received from Him and much more than the original supply. [39]
full of the fragments and of the fish. These
fragments were probably not the pieces thrown down by the eaters but the surplus
of the broken bread and fishes laid before the groups and left untouched. This face shows that the supply was not
exhausted, but was more than sufficient for the vast number fed. The surplus, however, must be saved. He made food in abundance for their wants but
nothing for waste. [45]
WEB: Those who
ate the loaves were five thousand men.
Young’s: and those
eating of the loaves were about five thousand men.
Conte (RC): Now those
who ate were five thousand men.
"Besides
women and children" (Matthew
Weymouth: Immediately
afterwards He made His disciples go on board the boat and cross over to Bethsaida, leaving Him behind to dismiss the crowd.
WEB: Immediately
he made his disciples get into the boat, and to go ahead to the other side, to
Young’s: And
immediately he constrained his disciples to go into the boat, and to go before
to the other side, unto
Conte (RC): And without
delay he urged his disciples to climb into the boat, so that they might precede
him across the sea to
Messiah would repeat the miracles of
Moses, and this “bread of wonder,” of which they had just partaken, recalled to
the multitudes the manna. They would have “taken Jesus by force and made him a king” (John
And to go to the other side before unto
[This was] the town of
while He sent away the people [multitude, NKJV]. His
object in this was to put an end to the misdirected excitement in His favor
(John
WEB: After he
had taken leave of them, he went up the mountain to pray.
Young’s: and having
taken leave of them, he went away to the mountain to pray.
Conte (RC): And when he
had dismissed them, he went to the mountain to pray.
He departed into a mountain to
pray. The reason given for
His retirement in the John
WEB: When
evening had come, the boat was in the midst of the sea, and he was alone on the
land.
Young’s: And evening having come, the boat was in the midst of the
sea, and he alone upon the land;
Conte (RC): And when it
was late, the boat was in the midst of the sea, and he was alone on the land.
the ship was in the middle of the sea. i.e., out at sea; it doe not imply that they
were in the middle or center of the lake.
Toiling the entire night, they had not, in consequence of contrary winds
(John
and He was alone on the land.
This last statement turns the attention from the ship to the situation
of Jesus, as introductory to what follows.
He was on the land without companion or boat to join them in their
peril. [45]
WEB: Seeing
them distressed in rowing, for the wind was contrary to them, about the fourth
watch of the night he came to them, walking on the sea, and he would have
passed by them,
Young’s: and he saw
them harassed in the rowing, for the wind was against them, and about the
fourth watch of the night he doth come to them walking on the sea, and wished
to pass by them.
Conte (RC): And seeing
them struggling to row, (for the wind was against them,) and about the fourth
watch of the night, he came to them, walking upon the sea. And he intended to
pass by them.
and about the fourth watch of the night. Between
3 and
The Fathers find a fine
spiritual meaning in this. Jerome says,
“The fourth watch is the last." So,
too,
He cometh unto them, walking
upon the sea. By the laws of nature, He would have
sunk in this attempt to walk upon the water.
Thus He proved Himself the Lord of nature. [19]
Paulus,
the rationalist, revived the ridiculous idea that Christ walking on the sea
merely meant Christ walking on the shore, elevated above the sea; but the
interpretation was rightly denounced by Lavater as “a
laughable insult on logic, hermeneutics, good sense, and honesty." Was it because our Lord
simply walked on the shore that the disciples “cried out and were
troubled?" Was it merely for
this that they were “sore amazed at themselves beyond measure and wondered?" Yet such are
the shifts to which unbelief is reduced when it ventures to measure itself
against the acts of Omnipotence. [39]
And would have
passed by them. Why?
Apparently in order that they might see Him in the dim light and have
the opportunity to recognize Him. [23]
Here is one of Mark's
graphic touches by which he adds vividness to the description. It pictures Jesus as walking in a direction
which would have missed the vessel--a circumstance which made His appearance
the more mysterious to the disciples. [38]
Weymouth: They saw Him
walking on the water, and thinking that it was a
spirit they cried out;
WEB: but they,
when they saw him walking on the sea, supposed that it was a ghost, and cried
out;
Young’s: And they having seen him walking on the sea, thought it to
be an apparition, and cried out,
Conte (RC): But when
they saw him walking upon the sea, they thought it was an apparition, and they
cried out.
As Matthew and Mark here
discriminate between an “apparition” and a real bodily appearance of our Lord,
they cannot mean the former when they write of the resurrection of
Christ. [11]
WEB: for they
all saw him, and were troubled. But he immediately spoke with them, and said to
them, "Cheer up! It is I! Don't be afraid."
Young’s: for they
all saw him, and were troubled, and immediately he spake
with them, and saith to them, 'Take courage, I am he,
be not afraid.'
Conte (RC): For they all
saw him, and they were very disturbed. And immediately he spoke with them, and
he said to them: "Be strengthened in faith. It is I. Do not be
afraid."
and were troubled.
A proof
that this story was not due to the over-heated imagination of a few of them. [11]
And immediately he talked with them. In the simplest language of reassurance. [23]
At this point comes in the incident of
Peter's walking upon the water, recorded by Matthew alone (
And saith unto them, Be of good
cheer: it is I; be not afraid. Since
they were agitated and “troubled” by the sight, what they desperately needed
was reassurance and He promptly gave it to them. [rw]
WEB: He got
into the boat with them; and the wind ceased, and they were very amazed among
themselves, and marveled;
Young’s: And he
went up unto them to the boat, and the wind lulled, and greatly out of measure
were they amazed in themselves, and were wondering,
Conte (RC): And he
climbed into the boat with them, and the wind ceased. And they became even more
astonished within themselves.
By
joining them He absolutely ruled out any possibility of a visual hallucination
by one or all of them—not to mention any “misinterpretation” of the nature of
what they had been seeing. [rw]
And they were sore [greatly, NKJV] amazed in themselves
beyond measure and wondered [marveled, NKJV]. His
walking on the sea appeared to them a greater miracle than any He had before
performed. They now acknowledged what
they might have known before, His divine power; for we must understand Matthew
as speaking of the apostles and not of the crew: "And they that were with Him in the ship
came and worshipped Him, saying, Of a truth thou art the Son of God" (Matthew
14:33), a confession not recorded as made hitherto by any except Nathaniel
(John 1:49). [45]
Weymouth: For they had not learned the lesson taught by the loaves,
but their minds were dull.
WEB: for they
hadn't understood about the loaves, but their hearts were hardened.
Young’s: for they
understood not concerning the loaves, for their heart hath been hard.
Conte (RC): For they did
not understand about the bread. For their heart had been blinded.
How rarely do men preserve the
remembrance of the favours and blessings they have
received! If they did, it would give
them trust and confidence when they have most occasion for them. [20]
their heart was hardened. A common phrase for
unbelief. It is here equivalent
to little faith as in the parallel passage in Matthew 14:31. [24]
WEB: When they
had crossed over, they came to land at Gennesaret,
and moored to the shore.
Young’s: And having passed over, they came upon the land of Gennesaret, and drew to the shore,
Conte (RC): And when
they had crossed over, they arrived in the
they came into
the
This
was a small district lying on the northwestern shore of the lake to which it
gave one of its names. Josephus gives
its length along the lake as thirty furlongs and its width as twenty. He describes it as a plain of almost
unequaled beauty and fertility, watered by a copious fountain called
WEB: But no
sooner had they gone ashore than the people immediately recognized Him.
Young’s: and they
having come forth out of the boat, immediately having recognised
him,
Conte (RC): And when
they had disembarked from the boat, the people immediately recognized him.
Gone from their shores, He had still left a vivid mark in their
memories. With His return, they were
determined to take advantage of the opportunity (verse 55). [rw]
WEB: and ran
around that whole region, and began to bring those who were sick, on their
mats, to where they heard he was.
Young’s: having run
about through all that region round about, they began
upon the couches to carry about those ill, where they were hearing that he is,
Conte (RC): And running
throughout that entire region, they began to carry on beds those who had
maladies, to where they heard that he would be.
and began to carry about. "Sometimes,”
says Alford, “misinformed as to the place where He was, and following the rumor
of His presence." Alexander gives a
different explanation: "The meaning
is not that each one was carried from place to place in search f Him, but that
some were carried one way, some another, so as to fall in with Him in some part
of His circuit." The language used
may bear either sense, but the former interpretation implies a rapidity of
movement on the part of Jesus at variance with His uniform custom in other
towns of
in beds. A sort of mat, mattress, or
common rug. [8]
those that
were sick, where they heard he was.
Thereby
manifesting a concern for their fellow man in action rather than mere words. They
knew they needed healing and were going to do their best to take them to the
One who could provide it. [rw]
Weymouth: And enter
wherever He might--village or town or hamlet--they laid their sick in the open
places, and entreated Him to let them touch were it but the tassel of His robe;
and all, whoever touched Him, were restored to health.
WEB: Wherever
he entered, into villages, or into cities, or into the country, they laid the
sick in the marketplaces, and begged him that they might touch just the fringe
of his garment; and as many as touched him were made well.
Young’s: and
wherever he was going, to villages, or cities, or fields, in the market-places
they were laying the infirm, and were calling upon him, that they may touch if
it were but the fringe of his garment, and as many as were touching him were
saved.
Conte (RC): And in
whichever place he entered, in towns or villages or cities, they placed the
infirm in the main streets, and they pleaded with him that they might touch
even the hem of his garment. And as many as touched him
were made healthy.
and besought Him that they might touch if it were but the
border of His garment. Jesus did not pay [detailed] attention to all
of these cases, but merely permitted them, by touching His garments as He
passed, to receive the benefit of His healing powers. [22]
Perhaps the report of
the woman, who had been cured by touching the fringe of Christ's garment,
encouraged these afflicted persons to apply to Him, by His permission, in this
manner. [52]
and as many as
touched Him were made whole. Not some, not a few, but all that
touched Him. [rw]