No One Knows The Hour (part 4)

For the sake of rounding out the Biblical picture, it’s worth noting what Mark presents in association with the fig tree and the mountain.  Mark reports Jesus as saying “Whenever you stand praying, if you have anything against anyone, forgive him, so that you Father in heaven will also forgive your sins” (11:25).  In contrast, and though clearly utilizing the Markan narrative to provide the basis for his own, Luke omits any mention of the fig tree or mountain, moving directly to Jesus return to the Temple courts and the challenge to Jesus’ authority that comes from the temple authorities. 

Though this study will not spill a great deal of ink with conjecture on why Matthew and Mark include the story of the withered fig tree whereas Luke does not, one could surmise that the appearances of the fig tree in the Matthean and Markan narratives, with both (Matthew most likely relying on Mark) connecting the withered fig tree with the mountain to be removed, could possibly have some bearing on the conclusions to be drawn.  Perhaps its appearance and correspondence to the mountain that is in view (the Temple mount, so it is both literal and metaphorical) is somehow linked to Jesus’ insistence that no man knows the day or the hour, which, as has been pointed out, is to be found in Matthew and Mark, but not in Luke.  Certainly, the fig tree did not expect to wither on that day and at that moment---it clearly did not know the hour.  

In addition, it is necessary to acknowledge and report the divergence in the Gospel stories surrounding Jesus’ triumphal entry.  An honest observer does not simply ignore these things and pretend that they are not there, though it is also quite possible to insist that differences in detail do not derail from the overall message of the accounts nor do the differences really present much cause for concern, primarily because the authors (and that world in general) did not operate with the strict, modern, western notions in regards to “doing history”.  Fluidity in reports were acceptable, as long as the major details remained intact, especially when any glaring problems could and would be corrected by the oral/aural community, which was often a far better guardian of stories in that day than was the written word.  

That said, Matthew’s account has already been detailed here quite well.  Owing to the fact that Mark is believed to be foundational for Matthew and Luke’s account, it must be said that it is Matthew’s account that is divergent, rather than Mark’s.  The divergences are accounted for by each author having slightly different goals for the telling of the Jesus story as received by their target audiences in the growing Jesus community that they want to achieve through the delivery of their accounts.  So even though each has the goal of setting forth the story of Jesus, each comes at it from a slightly different angle, which is perfectly understandable.  Honestly, it needs to be said that if each told the story in the same way, the world would have no need for multiple Gospels, and Christendom and the world at large would lack the rich and manifold witness to Jesus provided by these evangelists---not to mention their diverse perspectives and portrayals of Jesus that serve to provide a more complete sense and picture of the one that so many call Lord.

What are those divergences?  For Mark, Jesus does head to the Temple upon the occasion of His triumphal entry into Jerusalem.  However, Mark does not record Him immediately engaging with the buyers, sellers, and money changers, nor making His Jeremiah-esque stand.  In Mark’s telling, this takes place on the following day, which is also the day that Jesus speaks to the fig tree while on His way to Jerusalem.  However, in Mark’s presentation of that detail, and even though the fig tree may indeed have immediately withered, the disciples do not comment on this withering until the following day, which is when Jesus offers up His commentary concerning the fig tree, the mountain, and the need to offer forgiveness.  

Calling His Disciples (part 3)

Strangely, and though there is no mention of fishing in connection to their initial call, it is following the crucifixion, Resurrection, and appearance of Jesus that the Gospel of John provides the first inkling that the disciples had in fact been fishermen (though this fact was probably something that was well known to the early church community and the audience of the author of this Gospel).  In the twenty-first chapter the author writes: “After this Jesus revealed Himself again to the disciples by the Sea of Tiberias.  Now this is how He did so.  Simon Peter, Thomas (called Didymus), Nathanael (who was from Cana in Galilee), the sons of Zebedee, and two other disciples of His were together” (21:1-2).  As an aside, the mention of Nathanael being from Cana in Galilee provides a clue as to why Jesus, His mother, and His disciples were at the wedding feast in Cana, the story of which is presented immediately following Jesus’ words to Nathanael at the close of the first chapter.  Returning to the text of the twenty-first chapter: “Simon Peter told them, ‘I am going fishing.’ ‘We will go with you,’ they replied.  They went out and got into the boat, but that night they caught nothing” (21:3) 

Where Mark, Matthew, and Luke have Jesus calling His first disciples in Galilee, John has them being called outside of Galilee, and there are no boats or fish anywhere in sight.  At the close of their narratives, Mark concludes with the report of the Resurrection, Luke (and Acts) has Jesus speaking to the disciples in Jerusalem, and Matthew has the disciples on a mountain in the Galilee.  John follows Matthew’s account, at least in terms of region, with the final appearance of Jesus to His disciples taking place in Galilee.  Ironically, Mark, Matthew, and Luke have the disciples fishing when Jesus first calls them, and it is an occupation to which they do not return, whereas John, which offers up a wholly different setting at the time of their calls, has the disciples off and fishing after Jesus makes His first post-Resurrection appearance to them, and it is at this time that they catch a great number of fish.      

The only other specific calling of a disciple recorded in the Gospels is that of Matthew, who is also called Levi.  Similar to the presentation of the calling of the first four, Mark reports that “Jesus went out again by the sea.  The whole crowd came to Him, and He taught them” (2:13).  Once again then, Jesus is near the sea of Galilee.  This time though, similar to Luke’s record of the calling of the first four, Jesus is in the act and process of teaching.  “As He went along, He saw Levi, the son of Alphaeus, sitting at the tax booth.  ‘Follow Me,’ He said to him.  And he got up and followed Him” (2:14).  Matthew says “As Jesus went on from there, He saw a man named Matthew sitting at the tax booth.  ‘Follow Me,’ He said to him.  And he got up and followed Him” (9:9).  Luke writes that “After this, Jesus went out and saw a tax collector named Levi sitting at the tax booth.  ‘Follow Me,” He said to him.  And he got up and followed Him, leaving everything behind” (5:27-28). 

As can be seen, the synoptics are essentially univocal in their witness to this particular calling event.  To the contrary though, John does not present the call of Matthew.  In all three synoptic narratives, the calling of Matthew follows the healing of the paralyzed man that had been brought to Jesus by his friends.  In Matthew, there is a significant textual gap between the call of the first four disciples and the call of Matthew, but this gap is not to be found in Mark and Luke, as the call of Matthew comes quickly on the heels of the calling of Simon, Andrew, James, and John.  Not only do all three synoptic accounts of the call of Matthew follow immediately after the healing of the paralyzed man, what follows the record of the call is nearly identical in all three as well.  With the differences to be found in these Gospels, as they frequently diverge in their order of presentation, this nearly identical presentation of three events in sequence, with minor differences in detail, is quite remarkable. 

Calling His Disciples (part 1)

Jesus said to them, “Follow Me, and I will turn you into fishers of people.”  They left their nets immediately and followed Him. – Mark 1:17-18  (NET)

With these words, Scripture offers the first report of the call and response of Jesus’ first disciples.  This occurs as Jesus “went along the Sea of Galilee,” where “He saw Simon and Andrew… casting a net into the sea (for they were fishermen)” (1:16).  Repeating the thrust text of this study then, “Jesus said to them, ‘Follow Me, and I will turn you into fishers of people.’  They left their nets immediately and followed Him” (1:17-18).  To these two are quickly added another two, as we read “Going on a little farther, He saw James, the son of Zebedee, and John his brother in their boat mending their nets” (1:19). 

This story is also told in two of the other Gospels.  In Matthew it is said that “As He was walking by the Sea of Galilee He saw two brothers, Simon (called Peter) and Andrew his brother, casting a net into the sea (for they were fishermen).  He said to them, ‘Follow Me, and I will turn you into fishers of people.’  They left their nets immediately and followed Him.  Going on from there He saw two brothers, James the son of Zebedee and John his brother, in a boat with Zebedee their father, mending their nets.  Then He called them.  They immediately left the boat and their father and followed Him” (4:18-22).  It is unsurprising to find Matthew offering up a bit more information than what is to be found in Mark, as Matthew mentions that James and John are said to be in the boat with their father at the time of their call.  This adds an interesting dimension to the fact of their leaving to follow Jesus, as they are said to have left their father, with whom they are presumed to have been working up until that very moment. 

Luke’s treatment of the call of these particular disciples differs from that of Mark and Matthew, with far more information provided in what is really a different story.  There, Luke reports that “Jesus was standing by the Lake of Gennesaret, and the crowd was pressing around Him to hear the word of God.  He saw two boats by the lake, but the fishermen had gotten out of them and were washing their nets.  He got into one of the boats, which was Simon’s, and asked him to put out a little way from the shore.  Then Jesus sat down and taught the crowds from the boat.  When He had finished speaking, He said to Simon, ‘Put out into the deep water and lower your nets for a catch.’  Simon answered, ‘Master, we worked hard all night and caught nothing!  But at your word I will lower the nets.’  When they had done this, they caught so many fish that their nets started to tear.  So they motioned to their partners in the other boat to come and help them.  And they came and filled both boats, so that they were about to sink.  But when Simon Peter saw it, he fell down at Jesus’ knees, saying ‘Go away from me, Lord, for I am a sinful man!’  For Peter and all who were with him were astonished at the catch of fish they had taken, and so were James and John, Zebedee’s sons, who were Simon’s business partners.  Then Jesus said to Simon, ‘Do not be afraid; from now on you will be catching people.’  So when they had brought their boats to shore, they left everything and followed Him” (5:1-11). 

Luke’s Gospel begins with this statement: “Now many have undertaken to compile an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, like the accounts passed on to us by those who were eyewitnesses and servants of the word from the beginning.  So it seems good to me as well, because I have followed all things carefully from the beginning, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know for certain the things you were taught” (1:1-4).  This would seem to imply that Luke is perhaps a bit more serious about his details, and that he wants his intricate details to be taken very seriously.  As Luke, because of his extensive two-part series (Luke & Acts), is considered to be more of a historian than the other Gospel writers (though this is probably up for debate, depending on what is meant when one seeks to define “history” or “historian”), his account of the call of Simon, Andrew, James and John becomes very interesting, as it is worthwhile to note the substantial differences and the detailed elaborations. 

In Luke’s account, which is presumed to have been built upon Mark’s account as a basis, Jesus is not merely going along or walking by the Sea of Galilee, where He sees these individuals and calls them to join Him.  Rather, the story speaks of Jesus preaching, His getting into Simon’s boat, the command to fish, the great catch, and the call to follow.  It is here that one learns that James and John were Simon’s business partners.  However, if one is surprised or put off that Luke’s presentation is different, though these differences should not cause an observer any real trouble, and if the rendition of the events that is on offer in his work is to be taken as perhaps a more accurate and expanded rendering of the events in question, then it is possible that an observer is going to be flatly shocked when he or she comes to the record of the calling of the first disciples when they come to John’s Gospel. 

Presentations Of Jesus (part 2 of 2)

Take, for instance, a story that makes its way into all four Gospel portraits of Jesus, which is the feeding of the five thousand.  All four of the Gospel accounts present the feeding in much the same form.  However, after the story of the feeding, Luke diverges completely from the story-line on offer in Matthew, Mark, and John.  John maintains the same story-line following the feeding, though it differs in a significant detail as it relates to the purposes of this study. 

In each case, it should be acknowledged that the author uses the story of the feeding, along with what follows, within the goals that they have set for the overall presentation of Jesus that they intend to set before the respective audiences for which they are composing their written account (which will be based on a hugely reliable oral tradition and likely other ironically and potentially less reliable written records---an oral tradition was subject to correction and maintenance by the community, whereas a written record could be used to propagate and disseminate information that stood outside of the oral tradition, with no means for immediate correction). 

As Mark’s narrative is generally considered to be the oldest, being foundational for both Matthew and Luke, it is worthwhile to take a look at what is to be found there.  Operating within a full realization that there is a purpose related to the structuring of the narrative, the sixth chapter of Mark records that Jesus feeds a multitude through the multiplication of bread and fish, doing so by the Sea of Galilee.  Then, drawing the feeding together with what comes after, and doing so for the purpose of the author’s narrative, Mark goes on to report that “Immediately Jesus made His disciples get into the boat and go on ahead to the other side, to Bethsaida, while He dispersed the crowd” (6:45). 

Having retired to the mountain to pray after sending off His disciples, it is said that from His vantage point Jesus could observe His disciples on the water.  “He saw them straining at the oars, because the wind was against them” (6:48a).  Mark then reports that Jesus came to His disciples, “walking on the sea” (6:48c), which caused great fear amongst those men.  Ultimately, “He went up with them into the boat, and the wind ceased” (6:51a).  Matthew reports nearly the same story, but adds Peter’s attempt to walk on the sea, which is not to be found in Mark.  That’s not to say that somehow one of the authors got it wrong, but that the authors had different purposes for their tellings of the Jesus story. 

Luke moves in a different direction, omitting the second part of the story that is found in the other Gospels, not because he did not believe it, but because it did not fit with his overall movement and aims.  John’s is fundamentally the same, reporting a rough sea and a strong wind (6:18), though there is no report of the ceasing of the wind once Jesus gets into the boat.  Instead, John reports that “immediately the boat came to the land where they had been heading” (6:21b).  Clearly however, John’s report, like that of Matthew and Mark, is meant to demonstrate the power of the Creator God at work in Jesus, which is to be expected if He is indeed the Messiah of Israel. 

So what’s the point?  It is at this point that one returns to the idea that the Scriptures were undoubtedly searched by both Jesus and those that would write the Gospel accounts, so as to make sense of the mission and of the reports of that mission.  Such thoughts, together with the stories of the feeding of the multitude, the walking on water, and the calming of the wind, lead to the Psalms.  In the seventy eighth Psalm, keeping in mind the purposely structured Gospel narrative of feeding and then the control of nature and the desire to show forth their understanding of Jesus as the manifestation of the Creator God in the flesh, while also acknowledging that this was a reflection on the exodus and wilderness experience of Israel, marked similarities with the Gospel accounts of these occurrences are to be found in the reading: “He rained down manna for them to eat; He gave them the grain of heaven.  Man ate the food of the mighty ones.  He sent them more than enough to eat.  He brought the east wind through the sky, and by His strength led forth the south wind” (78:24-26).