6 Jesus left there and went to his hometown, accompanied by his disciples. 2 When the Sabbath came, he began to teach in the synagogue, and many who heard him were amazed.
“Where did this man get these things?” they asked. “What’s this wisdom that has been given him? What are these remarkable miracles he is performing? 3 Isn’t this the carpenter? Isn’t this Mary’s son and the brother of James, Joseph,[a] Judas and Simon? Aren’t his sisters here with us?” And they took offense at him.
4 Jesus said to them, “A prophet is not without honor except in his own town, among his relatives and in his own home.” 5 He could not do any miracles there, except lay his hands on a few sick people and heal them. 6 He was amazed at their lack of faith.
“Where did this man get these things?” they asked. “What’s this wisdom that has been given him? What are these remarkable miracles he is performing? 3 Isn’t this the carpenter? Isn’t this Mary’s son and the brother of James, Joseph,[a] Judas and Simon? Aren’t his sisters here with us?” And they took offense at him.
4 Jesus said to them, “A prophet is not without honor except in his own town, among his relatives and in his own home.” 5 He could not do any miracles there, except lay his hands on a few sick people and heal them. 6 He was amazed at their lack of faith.
For the community who assembled the Gospel of Mark, this story seems to touch a question I can imagine they would be often be asked by those who followed more mainstream Judaism in whatever part of the diaspora they would have lived. "Why have we not heard of this Jesus that you follow?" This would be a legitimate question as the historical records of the time although they reference John the Baptist, hold not a single reference to Yeshua Ha Nozri, Jesus of Nazareth, other than the Gospels. He just wasn't that well known or consequential a figure.
It also addresses an issue around the authority of Jesus' teaching in that community. The stories in the Gospel of Mark have to this point based the authority and legitimacy of the teachings of this un-ordained Rabbi on him being a Chasidium, a Rabbi who can dispense the mercy of God in terms of miracles. The more dramatic Jesus' ability to call on God's power, the more credible his teaching. The people in Jesus' hometown in the story express how they know his origins, his family, and trade. They know he doesn't have the background, credentials and pedigree to be able to give his own teaching. Everything depends on the validating miracles, and that is seen as limited here.
I can imagine sceptics asking this Jesus assembly sect why they can't perform similar miracles to validate the truth of their claims about Jesus' teachings. Here's where the catch 22 introduced in this story comes in. Jesus' miracle power is limited by the people's lack of honour and faith in him. So, you can only get the miracles that would validate having faith if you already have that faith without validation in the first place.
So, what would "faith" that would merit the bestowing of God's miracle working mercy mean to this community? And how metaphorically was this community speaking in terms of the mercies of God dispensed through the miracles of Jesus? If we look at the last group of miracles in the Gospel, the calming of the storm can be interpreted as the teachings of Jesus bring order out of chaos, the exorcism of the legion as his teaching removing that which would make them unclean without priestly ritual, likewise the woman with the flow of blood, and the raising of Jairus' daughter could be seen as the new life and wholeness brought by his teaching. So, then, what is the "faith" required to access the benefits of Jesus' teachings?
The Greek word translated here as "lack of faith" is ἀπιστία or apistia meaning disbelief or unfaithfulness. Although disbelief in Jesus' authority as a teacher and ability as a miracle worker would seem to be the obvious use, I think that the interpretation of the word as "faithlessness" in terms of being disloyal, or breaching a promise, might shed some light. The story has Jesus identify himself as a prophet, "a prophet is not without honour...". Several Old Testament prophets, most notably Hosea, Jeremiah, Amos, and Elijah, preached against Israel’s unfaithfulness, characterizing it as spiritual adultery, idolatry, and covenant violation. They warned of divine judgment and impending exile, while often calling for repentance and highlighting God's enduring love despite the nation's betrayal.
I am going to posit that the authors of Mark are suggesting that those who are faithful in heart to their relationship with God are able to "hear" Jesus' teachings as truth and access the benefits. The Gospel talks about this earlier when Jesus tells his disciples that "the secret of the kingdom of God" is given to them, while those "outside" hear everything in parables, seeing but not perceiving. The Gospel also talks about the need for spiritual ears. Jesus frequently in this Gospel states that, "Whoever has ears to hear, let them hear". So, looked at this way, the people of Nazareth did not have the faithfulness of heart to look past the familiar and recognize the spiritual authority of Jesus' "amazing" teachings and would not have received the benefits.
No comments:
Post a Comment