Saturday, August 3, 2013

ONLINE BIBLE STUDY: "Scandal in the Home Town?" THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO MARK, CHAPTER 6, VERSES 1-6.



Immediately after three accounts of impressive healings, and just before an account of Jesus' sending out his twelve disciples on their own mission forays, the Gospel According to Mark offers a brief report of Jesus' disappointing visit to his home town (which Mark curiously does not identify).  Matthew and Luke both report the same incident in their gospels, but those accounts offer somewhat different details and emphasis.  According to Mark's brief account, Jesus led his disciples to his home town, where on the Sabbath, he began teaching in the synagogue.  Many who heard him were "astounded." (verse 2).  Although the phrasing recalls the earlier astonishment in Capernaum that Jesus taught "as one with authority, and not as the scribes," here the astonishment in Jesus' hometown seems to have been of a different character.  Immediately, the listeners began asking questions about his credentials.  "Where did this man get all this!  What is this wisdom that has been given to him?  What deeds of power are being done by his hands!"  That seems odd.  Why would Jesus' former neighbors refer to him as "this man"?  Why would they ask such questions, if they had heard about Jesus' earlier miracles and expected something similar to happen in their midst?

The Gospel According to Luke describes the crowd in Nazareth as admiring Jesus, at least at first.  "And all spoke well of him and were amazed at the gracious words that came from his mouth.  Is this not Joseph's son?" (Luke, 4:22).  Mark does not report anyone in his home town speaking well of Jesus or praising his public speaking ability.  What does Mark think was on the minds of the synagogue congregation?

The words Mark attributes to the listeners are fairly ambiguous.  The ancient Greek written language contained no punctuation marks, and so we should remember that all the punctuation marks in modern English translations of the Bible have been inserted by the translators.  In this passage, the text gives very different impressions, depending on which punctuation marks are used.  For example, "What deeds of power have been done by his hands?" may sound like a simple request for information, while "What deeds of power have been done by his hands!" may sound like an exclamation of praise.  Moreover, the comments could have been laced with sarcasm, which is hard to suggest, with any kind of punctuation.  "What deeds of power are being done by his hands?"  "What's with this guy?" and "Where did he get that?"  or "Who does he think he is?" would not be sincere requests for information at all; they would be expressions of annoyance or disbelief.  Mark reports that "they took offense at him."  Why would the crowd have responded to Jesus with such unprovoked hostility?

A possible hint might be hidden in verse 3 of Mark's account:  "'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 took offense at him."  Some ancient manuscripts render the opening part of that sentence as, "the son of the carpenter and of Mary..."  Luke and Matthew both include references to a father (Matthew 13:53-58; Luke 4:16-30).  But most ancient manuscripts of Mark contain no reference to Joseph.  In biblical Galilee, identifying any man as the "son of" his mother was very unusual, since the usual formula for a full name in one's home town would be "[name], son of [father's name]."  It is possible that the omission of a reference to "the son of Joseph the carpenter" is simply an accidental drafting or copying mistake.  After all, in the days before printing presses, all books were copied by hand.

Perhaps, though, the unusual reference to Jesus as "the carpenter, the son of Mary and the brother of James..." does not really reflect any accidental omission of something like "the son of Joseph the carpenter, ..."  Perhaps the phrasing reflects instead a local sense of scandal about the circumstances of Jesus' birth.  Maybe the villagers' failure to acknowledge Jesus as the son of Joseph was intended as an insult, because it was widely suspected that Mary had become pregnant before her marriage to Joseph.   Even if the listeners in the crowd were not suspicious about Jesus' parentage, they may have been highly skeptical about the reports from other towns that Jesus was a prophet, or perhaps even the Messiah.  How could Jesus be someone so special?  They had watched him grow up.  How could a mere carpenter, who had even once been reported to be crazy (see Mark Chapter 3), and who didn't even have legitimate parentage, have done the mighty deeds that people claimed he had done?  How could such a man ever be taken seriously as a prophet or possible Messiah?   If that was their thinking, what did the people in Jesus' home town miss, by refusing to give him a chance?

Do you find individuals or groups whose background is so distasteful or disreputable that you cannot imagine them actually doing or saying something admirable?  Can you think of a politician you cannot trust, on any subject?  Are there reports of wonderful accomplishments attributed to particular individuals that you dismiss out-of-hand as totally unbelievable? Why do we tend to "type-cast" people?

Are there individuals you have known for a long time, whom you could not imagine becoming a famous athlete, a movie star, or a Nobel Prize winner?  Would it feel embarrassing or irritating to learn that a younger brother or sister, or someone you had once trained for their job, had been chosen for a great honor, rather than you?

Mark reports in verse 5 that Jesus "could do no deed of power there, except that he laid his hands on a few sick people and cured them."  Was it really not possible for Jesus to do any "deed of power" there, because of the people's lack of faith?  Why does Mark say that Jesus was "amazed" at their unbelief?  Wouldn't he have been able to predict their reaction, having known them all for so long?

In all events, Jesus did not linger, but immediately set off teaching "among the villages." (Verse 6).  He also called the twelve together and began to send them out, two by two.  He instructed them to go to individual houses, rather than synagogues, and whenever rejected, simply to "shake the dust" of that place off their feet.  In what ways could his own reaction to rejection in his hometown help prepare the disciples to deal with the possibility of rejection?  If he could use his own experience of rejection by old neighbors to help train his disciples, was his visit to his home town really a failure?  In what ways should modern disciples expect to deal with rejection (and even failure) in ministry?  How can we avoid becoming timid, in the face of experiences of rejection and embarrassing failures?  How might we use our own experiences of rejection or failure to help others?