3rd Sunday after Epiphany
Mark 1:14-20
Exegetical Notes by Brian Stoffregen
Repenting and believing are ways of life, not a simple door to pass
through once.
Mark 1:14-20
3 Epiphany B
3 Epiphany B: Mark 1:14-20 -- exegetical notes
Our text can be divided into three sections:
(a) Jesus’ proclamation (1:14-15)
(b) The calling of Peter and Andrew (1:16-18)
(c) The calling of James and John (1:19-20)
Note that in NRSV, there is a space after verse 15, thus implying that
verses 14-15 are more connected with the preceding verses, i.e., the
conclusion to the prologue. However, the RCL, by included these verses
with what follows suggests that they mark the beginning of Jesus’
public ministry.
JOHN AND JESUS
“After John was arrested”—the Greek word for “arrested” is παραδίδωμι
(paradidōmi)—the word that is used for Jesus’ “betrayal” or “handing
over” (3:19; 9:31; 10:32; 14:10, 11, 18, 21, 41, 44; 15:1, 10, 15).
John is Jesus’ precursor in terms of message—“repentance;” in terms of
“being handed over;” and in terms of death. This verse also illustrates
that Jesus “comes after” the Baptist (1:7).
It may also be that John and Jesus are both precursors to the fate of
the disciples who will face “being handed over” (13:9, 11).
James R Edwards (The Gospel according to Mark) comments:
The arrest of John and the beginning of Jesus’ ministry are
intentionally correlated to show that the gospel is proclaimed and
known in adversity and suffering, not in ease and comfort. Jesus’
announcement of “good news” (1:14) in the immediate context of the
arrest and eventual execution of righteous John epitomizes Mark’s
presentation of the gospel. [pp. 44-45]
THE “GOSPEL”
Surprisingly, the noun, εὐαγγέλιον euaggelion = “gospel,” is not all
that common in the Gospels! The statistics and references follow.
Mt -- 4 times (all with κυρύσσω - kērussō = “to proclaim”): 4:23; 9:35;
24:14; 26:13
Mk – 7[8] times (3[4] with κυρύσσω - kērussō marked with * ) 1:1, 14*,
15; 8:35; 10:29; 13:10*; 14:9*; [16:15*]
Lu -- 0 times
Jo -- 0 times
The verb, εὐαγγελίζομαι (euaggelizomai) = “to proclaim the gospel,” “to
evangelize” occurs as follows:
Mt -- 1 time: 11:5
Mk -- 0 times
Lu -- 10 times: 1:19; 2:10; 3:18; 4:18, 43; 7:22; 8:1; 9:6; 16:16; 20:1
Jo -- 0 times
What is “the gospel” in Mark? Note that the parallel passage in Matthew
(4:12-17) does not include the two phrases of our text with εὐαγγέλιον
(euaggelion).
First of all, traditionally these Greek words referred to victory in
war. The messenger would run back from the front lines and shout,
“We’ve won!” That was good news for the king. I suggested in a sermon,
that the opening verse of Mark might be translated, “The beginning of
the victory of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.” Starting with the idea of
a “victorious” hero, we might better see the irony Mark intends for his
readers in this book. Among other things, it ends with silence, not a
shout of victory.
Secondly, εὐαγγέλιον (euaggelion) is something that is proclaimed
(κυρύσσω - kērussō) (1:14; 13:10; 14:9; 16:15). That suggests that it
is not a doctrine or even a teaching to be studied. It’s a
declaration—a shout!—fans yelling and screaming and jumping up and down
when their team wins a championship. (Again, the silence at the ending
of Mark’s “Gospel” is quite ironic.)
Thirdly, it is something that is to be believed (1:15). We are to
believe what has been declared. For example, we can respond to the
declaration, “God forgives all your sins,” either by believing the
words or calling the speaker a liar.
Fourthly, it is something that motivates our lives—acting “for the sake
of the gospel” (8:35; 10:29). Properly speaking, when one believes
something, that belief makes a difference in their lives. If one
believes, “Honesty is the best policy,” we would expect them to be
honest—their actions express their belief—perhaps more accurately than
their words. As I’ve quoted from Verna Dozier before, “It isn’t enough
to ask, ‘What do you believe?’ but “What difference does it make that
you believe?’” We also say, “Actions speak louder than words.”
According to legend, St. Francis of Assisi advised: “Preach the Gospel
at all times. If necessary use words.”
The verbs “proclaiming” and “saying” are both present participles,
indicating that these were ongoing actions of Jesus.
JESUS’ SPEECH
The content of Jesus short speech can be outlined as:
A. Announcement
1. The time has been fulfilled
2. The rule of God has come near
B. Appeal
1. Repent
2. Believe in the gospel
WORDS IN THE ANNOUNCEMENT
The verbs in A.1. and A.2. are both perfect, which indicates a past
action with continuing effects in the present. The perfect can be
translated with a present or with a perfect. The NRSV does both with
these two phrases: “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God has
come near.” (The phrase could just as rightly be translated, “The time
has been fulfilled and the kingdom of God is near.”)
The phrase, “The time has been (or is) fulfilled” is only in Mark. The
word for time is καιρός (kairos), It is used in 11:13 and 12:2 to refer
to the “time of harvest”—an image that usually refers to the time of
judgment. It is also used in 13:33. I translate vv. 32-33: “Concerning
that day or hour, no one knows; neither the angels in heaven nor the
son, except the father. Watch, stay awake, for you do not know when is
the time.”
The “time” referred to in ch. 13 is “The Son of Man coming in clouds
with great power and glory.” We know “when the time is.” It is now. The
“time has been (or is) fulfilled.” It is like scriptures “being
fulfilled” (14:49) -- they are coming true. They are happening.
βασιλεία (basileia) can refer to the area ruled by a king (e.g.,
“kingdom”); or it can refer to the power or authority to “rule” as
king. We probably shouldn’t interpret the “kingdom of God” as a
place—such as the place we go when we die; but as the ruling power that
emanates from God. Eugene Boring (Mark) quotes others who define it as
“The reigning presence of God” (51).
The verb ἐγγίζω (eggizō) is difficult to translate in this passage. It
means “to come near”. It can refer to space, as one person coming close
to another person. The same perfect tense is used of the betrayer
“coming near” to Jesus (14:42) in the Garden of Gethsemane. The present
tense is used of the disciples “coming near” to Jerusalem (11:1). The
word can also refer to time coming near, as “it’s almost time”.
The difficulty is with the perfect tense of the verb, which, as I wrote
earlier, indicates a past action with continuing effects in the
present. When we say that “The rule of God has come near.” That implies
that God’s rule is near or perhaps, “God’s rule has arrived.” Edwards
(The Gospel according to Mark) makes this interesting statement: “In
Jesus of Nazareth the kingdom of God makes a personal appearance” [p.
47]. In this case, the kingdom is not a place or a power, but a person.
I like Luther’s explanation to the second petition of the Lord’s
Prayer. “God’s kingdom comes on its own without our prayer, but we ask
in this prayer that it may also come to us.” God’s kingdom has come
near; it is near; it has arrived. We pray that it may come to us; that
we are incorporated into God’s ruling power.
Ched Myers (Binding the Strong Man: a Political Reading of Mark’s Story
of Jesus) comments about this coming kingdom.
...in 1:15, Jesus announces the awaited moment of God’s intervention:
the “time is fulfilled”. The kingdom’s arrival is “close at hand,” an
expression unique in the New Testament, connoting profound imminence,
even liminality. Yet in 1:16, we are once again frustrated. Instead of
a kingdom epiphany, the second act opens with Jesus wandering by the
sea, bidding some common laborers to accompany him on a mission. The
world appears still very much intact! Mark is obviously aware of the
risk involved in his appeal to prophetic and apocalyptic traditions,
for they also were being used to bolster the triumphalistic
eschatological expectations of Jewish nationalism. For this reason,
Mark pursues a narrative strategy that consistently frustrates the
equation between epiphany and victorious holy war. And again, a more
careful reading of his narrative symbolics confirms that Jesus is
indeed commencing his assault upon the old order, as the next scene
shows. [p. 131, his comments on the next scene will come a bit later in
this note]
More simply stated, Boring (Mark) translates the phrase: “… here comes
the kingdom of God,” with the explanation: “… Mark’s view that the
kingdom is still future but so near that it already affects the
present.” (p. 49)
THE APPEAL
The two verbs in the second part of Jesus’ proclamation are present
tense imperatives. That implies continued or repeated actions. “Keep on
repenting!” “Keep on believing.” Repent and believe are not like a door
that we pass through once, e.g., I repented and I believed, so now I’m
in the kingdom. Rather they are part of an ongoing lifestyle of the
people to whom the rule of God has come near.
To repeat something I’ve shared in earlier notes about repentance.
Repentance properly understood is an “I can’t” experience, rather than
an “I can” experience. If repentance is promising God, “I can do
better,” then we are trying to keep ourselves in control of our lives.
If we can do better, we don’t need a gracious God, only a patient One
who will wait long enough for us to do better. When we come before God
confessing, “I can’t do better,” then we are dying to self. We are
giving up control of our lives. We are throwing our sinful lives on the
mercy of God. We are inviting God to do what we can’t do
ourselves—namely to raise the dead—to change and recreate us.
The words μετανοέω (metanoeō - verb) and μετάνοια (metanoia - noun) are
infrequent in Mark. The noun occurs only at 1:4 in reference to John’s
baptism. The verb is in our text and in 6:12. My literal translation of
6:12: “And going out, they [the 12] proclaimed (κηρύσσω - kērussō) so
that (ἵνα - hina) they might repent.” Repentance is the result of the
proclamation. It is the power of the Word of God (as Law) to kill. To
lead us to confess, “I can’t.”
However, the flip side of the “I can’t” is “believing the gospel” =
“God can”. In Mark the synagogue leader believes and his 12-year-old
daughter is restored to life (5:36). The father of a son with an
unclean spirit believes (but prays for help with his unbelief) and his
son is cured (9:23-24). Little ones believe (9:42). However, the
promise is given to those whose faith is as large as a mustard seed
that they will be able to move mountains into the sea. I don’t know
about others, but my faith has never been large enough to move even
little molehills. I think that the core message of Mark is the
statement/prayer of the father, “I believe! Help my unbelief.”
Williamson, (Mark, Interpretation Commentary) offers this analogy which
“may capture some (not all) dimensions of this summary of the preaching
of Jesus.”
In a crowded airline terminal, hundreds of persons are scurrying in
dozens of directions. Above the steady buzz of noise a voice booms
through a loud-speaker, “Flight 362 is now arriving at gate we. Will
passengers holding tickets for New York please check in at gate 23; you
will be boarding soon.” Some people, of course, never hear the
announcement and continue on their way. Others hear it but, having
reservations on another flight, pay no attention. Some, however, who
want to go to New York and who have been nervously awaiting such an
announcement, look up expectantly, check their ticket for the flight
number, gather their baggage, turn around and set out with some urgency
for gate 23. [p. 43]
It is about our openness to hear and believe and act on the
proclamation.
Douglas John Hall (Bound and Free: A Theologian’s Journey) writes about
the necessity of “our becoming and being a thinking faith.” I think it
relates to these two commands to repent and believe.
There is a problem today that is found not only in Christianity but in
most of the religions, as well as in many nonreligious ideologies. I
will call this the problem of certitude. Its corrective is the
importance of Christianity’s being a thinking faith—and, more
specifically, the importance of doubt in the life of faith.
The people who attacked the United States on September 11, 2001, were
apparently inspired by absolute certainty with respect to their cause.
They found that certainty in their religious belief. Their religion
functioned for them as an antidote against all self-doubt, all
consciousness of the limitations of knowledge, all awareness of the
precariousness of human judgment. ... No one religion, and not religion
as a whole, has a monopoly on what (for want of a better word) we call
fundamentalism. Fundamentalism, whatever the origin of the term, has
come to mean a position of such exactness and certitude that those
embracing it—or, more accurately, those embraced by it—feel themselves
delivered from all the relativities, uncertainties, indefiniteness, and
transience of human existence. They are provided, they fell, with a
firm foundation—a fundamentum—greater than their own finitude, greater
than any observations of any of the sciences, greater than the
collective wisdom of the race. [pp. 99-100]
He then states that biblical religion (Jewish and Christian) refuses to
offer such certitude. What God offers as an alternative to certitude is
trust. “God reveals Godself as one who may be trusted” [p. 101].
Recognize that the Greek word for “believe” (πιστεύω - pisteuō) carries
an element of trust in it, could we then interpret repent (μετανοέω -
metanoeō) = “to change one’s thinking” to be a movement away from
personal certitude? Which then leads to trusting the trustworthy One?
THE CALLS
How are the call stories related to Jesus’ proclamation? One
possibility, given what follows the calls, is the authority and power
of Jesus’ words to do what he says. Immediately following the calls:
he teaches in the synagogue with authority (1:22)
he rebukes and casts out an unclean spirit with a word (1:25)
he heals Simon’s mother-in-law (1:31)
he cures many sick and casts out many demons (1:34)
he retreats for private prayer, but is interrupted (1:35-37)
he heals a leper (1:41)
he forgives and heals a paralytic (2:5, 11)
Note that these all come from texts that are assigned during the
Epiphany Season.
Given the power of Jesus’ words in these following events, it is not
surprising that his invitation to follow is met with immediate
obedience (also with Levi in 2:14). These are indications that the
kingdom, that is “the power” of God to rule is here. It is a power that
rules over people and spirits and diseases. With a word from Jesus,
they succumb to that power.
Jesus does not encounter these fishermen in the religious sphere, but
in the midst of their everyday life where they really live. Were they
certain about what they were getting themselves into, or did they
follow as a matter of trust with uncertainty? I think the latter is
more likely.
ANDREW AND PETER, JAMES AND JOHN
The fact that later we are told that Andrew and Peter have their own
house (1:29) and that James and John have hired hands (1:20) indicates
that these were not poor, destitute fishermen, but that they were
prosperous at their trade.
Literally, Jesus does not ask them “to follow” him; but “Come behind
me.” The word for behind (ὀπίσω - opisō) can be a spatial term, to
stand or walk behind someone. It can be a temporal term, to come at a
time after something else. This might be the meaning behind John’s use,
“The one who is more powerful than I is coming after me” (1:7). It can
also be a status term, behind (or under?) in terms of rank or
importance. Jesus’ rebuke of Peter, “Get behind me Satan” (8:33), is
probably concerned with Peter trying to assume too much
importance—trying to be ahead of Jesus.
The command, “Come behind me,” may be a way of saying, “Make Jesus the
most important thing in your life.” Even one’s own self comes in second
behind Jesus.
This understanding of the phrase may be supported by their reaction. We
are told that Andrew and Peter, “immediately leaving the nets, they
followed him.” Their successful occupations take a back seat to Jesus.
James and John “leaving their father Zebedee in the boat with the hired
hands, they go behind him.” Their family relationships take a back seat
to Jesus.
The word for “follow” (1:18) is ἀκολουθέω (akoloutheō)—from which we
get “acolyte”. Besides its literal meanings of following or
accompanying, it also has a figurative meaning of being a disciple.
Peter indicates later that they have left everything to follow Jesus
(10:28). In contrast, the rich man is not able to part from his wealth
and give to the poor and follow Jesus (10:21).
In a stewardship newsletter article, I raised the issue about
“sacrificial giving.” A meaning of sacrifice is “to give up something
valuable for the sake of something considered even more valuable.” I
challenged: “Consider what valuable things you have given up because of
your giving to the church. If you can’t think of anything, ... “ (I’ll
let you make your own conclusion.)
Could (or should) a similar challenge be raised about our following
Christ? Andrew and Peter leave their occupations. James and John leave
their father. Family and jobs are usually quite high on our priority
lists. How can we make them “come behind” Jesus in importance?
Coming with Jesus meant work. (Being a disciple is more than just going
to heaven when I die in the sweet by and by.) They were to “fish for
people”. An interesting approach to the “fish for people” image is to
talk about what kind of bait would work to attract people. I title a
sermon once, “Worms Won’t Work.” However, that is not the way these
fishermen fished. They used nets. They didn’t use bait. The fish didn’t
have a choice of “to eat or not to eat”—“to bite or not to bite” - “to
be hooked or not.” They were dragged in a net either to the shore or
into a boat. They were dragged from life in the water to their death in
the air.
Perhaps it isn’t so bad for parents to “drag” their children to church.
Maybe we should “drag” more people into church, whether or not they
want to come. Put up roadblocks on the street and force the cars into
our parking lots. Used armed ushers in uniform to march them into the
worship service. (For some reason, I’m afraid that people forced to
church in these ways might get a distorted picture of a loving and
caring and compassionate God.)
This may also indicate that the coming of the Kingdom is out of our
control. We are going to be “caught” in its coming whether we like it
or not.
Smith (Matthew, Augsburg Commentary) says:
In the ancient world fishing was a metaphor for two distinct
activities: judgment and teaching. Fishing for people meant bringing
them to justice by dragging them out of their hiding places and setting
them before the judge at the end of the world. And fishing was also
used of teaching people, of the process of leading them from ignorance
to wisdom. Both cases involve a radical change of environment, a break
with a former way of life and entrance upon a new. [p. 72]
Generally we view being captured, like in a net, a negative thing; but
we also talk about being “captured by love”. The relationship of love
is often something out of our control. It happens to us. When its power
runs its full effect, it means a change in life—marriage is as much a
dying to the old life as it is the beginning of a new life. That new
life brings with it a bunch of new relatives, whether we want them or
not. Being captured by Jesus’ irresistible call meant an end to the old
life and relations for the fishermen, so that they might start begin a
new life as followers of Jesus. (See Mark 10:29-30). However, Ben
Witherington III (The Gospel of Mark: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary)
makes this observation:
It is significant that though they respond to the call here, they do
not fully take up the tasks entailed for some time. They must first be
“made” fishers of human beings—shaped and molded and trained in the
requisite skills. [p. 85]
A wonderful comment by Hare (Matthew, Interpretation series): “Our task
is to share a faith that is exciting enough to be contagious.” [p. 31]
However, to return to Ched Myers (Binding the Strong Man), he offers a
different interpretation of this familiar phrase:
There is perhaps no expression more traditionally misunderstood than
Jesus’ invitation to these workers to become “fishers of men” (1:17).
This metaphor, despite the grand old tradition of missionary
interpretation, does not refer to the “saving of souls,” as if Jesus
were conferring upon these men instant evangelist status. Rather, the
image is carefully chosen from Jeremiah 16:16, where it is used as a
symbol of Yahweh’s censure of Israel. Elsewhere the “hooking of fish”
is a euphemism for judgment upon the rich (Am 4:2) and powerful (Ez
29:4). Taking this mandate for his own, Jesus is inviting common folk
to join him in his struggle to overturn the existing order of power and
privilege.
...The point here is that following Jesus requires not just assent of
the heart, but a fundamental reordering of socio-economic
relationships. The first step in dismantling the dominant social order
is to overturn the “world” of the disciple: in the kingdom, the
personal and the political are one.... This is not a call “out” of the
world, but into an alternative social practice. [pp. 132-133]
After looking briefly at the call of Levi (2:13f.;), Myers ends his
comments with:
Mark’s call-paradigm contrasts sharply with the traditional method of
rabbinic recruitment, as noted by E. Schweizer (1964). Normally the
student sought the teacher and followed only for as long as it took to
attain rabbinic status himself. The call of Jesus, however, is
absolute, disrupting the lives of potential recruits, promising them
only a “school” from which there is no graduation. This “first” call to
discipleship in Mark is an urgent, uncompromising invitation to “break
with business as usual.” The world is coming to an end, for those who
choose to follow. The kingdom has dawned, and it is identified with the
discipleship adventure. [p. 133]
R. T. France (The Gospel of Mark) notes that Jesus’ call is closer to
the model of Elijah calling of Elisha (1 Ki. 19:9-21), then states:
“Rabbis did not call their followers; rather, the pupil adopted the
teacher. Jesus’ peremptory summons, with its expectation of radical
renunciation even of family ties, goes far beyond anything they would
be familiar with in normal society. It marks him as a prophet rather
than a rabbi. [p. 96]
I do think that Jesus’ call involves a radical departure from “business
as usual.” It is also a call away from certitude to trusting in
something different and, as of yet, unseen—namely the full arrival of
the kingdom of God. I think that understanding Jesus’ call in these
ways will become more and more crucial as our society seems to be
becoming more and more secular and driven by other gods—often gods who
promise certainty.
Boring (Mark) notes: “The followers of Jesus are not a volunteristic
society for promoting good, but those whose business-as-usual lives
have been disrupted by a draft notice” (p. 60)
To conclude with some comments in a past sermon:
What God promises us fish, who are dragged out of the water in the nets
to die, is a resurrection, a new life, a new family, a new future, all
under God’s control, all within the Rule of God, which has come near in
Jesus.
As I related earlier, we have very little control over our own lives,
but as fish caught in the net of God’s love, we can trust that we are
under God’s control. We have to believe that being captured by God’s
love, that responding to the command to repent and die to self, that
being raised to a new life by God, is not only right for us, but a
message we need to share with the entire world.
I’m afraid that if we did drag people into church or force their cars
into our parking lot, and their bodies onto our pews, they might miss
the gospel message we are trying to share with them. I’m sure that we
can come up with better ways of catching people with the nets of God’s
love. Amen.
Brian Stoffregen
Faith Lutheran Church, 2215 S 8th Avenue, Yuma, AZ 85364
e-mail: brian.stoffregen@gmail.com
Copyright © 2012 Brian Stoffregen, All rights reserved.