Thursday, August 30, 2007

Stilling The Storm In The Synoptics :: Redaction And Significance

STILLING THE STORM IN THE SYNOPTICS

Who is Jesus? This has been the question of the ages. Who was and who is this man who lived and died over 2000 years ago in Jerusalem? It is a question that began during Jesus’ own lifetime with his own contemporaries. In the gospel of Mark, in humble amazement at Jesus’ power over nature, even his own disciples question one another with the words Τίς ἄρα οὗτός ἐστινwho then is this? Apparently for them it was still a question, even after they had witnessed so many great things.

Exegesis of Mark 4:35-41

Mark records in minute detail a magnificent gospel tradition that is loaded with Christological references, the stilling of the storm. In verse 35, Mark records the time of the event with the words ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ὀψίας γενομένης[1]on that day, when evening had come. Mark uses the genitive absolute ὀψίας γενομένης to refer back to 4:1, indicating that the following event happened on the evening of the same day on which Jesus had been teaching by the Sea of Galilee. Jesus requested that his disciples take him across to the other side of the sea— Καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς . . . Διέλθωμεν εἰς τὸ πέραν. Mark uses λέγειhe says, as an historical present, perhaps to present the story in a more vivid manner, thereby drawing his readers into the story with him, as is his usual style.[2]

Next Mark records that the disciples do as Jesus asked and left the crowd on the shore, taking him with them—καὶ ἀφέντες τὸν ὄχλον παραλαμβάνουσιν αὐτὸν (v. 36). Here Mark makes a rather unusual comment. He uses the words ὡς ἦν ἐν τῷ πλοίῳ—as he was in the boat; this either refers to the manner in which they took him in the boat, “as he was,” or to the situation surrounding their taking him with them, he was already “in the boat.” The ESV says, “they took him with them in the boat, just as he was” (Mk. 4:36, ESV) indicating the manner in which they took him. But it is more likely that ὡς ἦν ἐν τῷ πλοίῳ refers back to v. 1, indicating that Jesus was still in the boat where he had been all day. Perhaps Mark senses the need to elaborate in light of v. 10 where he makes reference to Jesus being alone.[3]

Mark also speaks of other boats (ἄλλα πλοῖα ἦν μετ᾽ αὐτοῦ) being there (v. 36). R. T. France asserts that this remark reflects a mere a “circumstantial reminiscence” on the part of Mark’s eyewitness source, i.e. Peter.[4] France may be correct, but it may be that Mark is letting his readers know that what is about to take place in the story did not only affect Jesus and his disciples, but others as well. Perhaps Mark wants to communicate to his readers a sense of community in which this event took place, thereby identifying with the Christian community in the midst of suffering where all parties involved are affected in some way.[5]

In v. 37 Mark uses another historical present (γίνεται), to introduce the great storm of wind—λαῖλαψ μεγάλη ἀνέμου, a storm so great that the waves were beating against the boat and filling it up with water—τὰ κύματα ἐπέβαλλεν εἰς τὸ

πλοῖον, ὥστε ἤδη γεμίζεσθαι τὸ πλοῖον. Mark is indicating that the situation was potentially life threatening, which gives the reader a sense of the urgency of the situation ands sets the reader up for the following statement about Jesus in the midst of this turmoil.

Apparently, Jesus was not affected by the storm because he was in the stern of the boat asleep on a cushion—καὶ αὐτὸς ἦν ἐν τῇ πρύμνῃ ἐπὶ τὸ προσκεφάλαιον καθεύδων (v. 38). Contrasted here is the emotional/spiritual state of Jesus with that of his disciples. As Jesus was fast asleep, in total trust and dependence on the Father, the disciples, in an almost accusatory manner, cry out to Jesus, Διδάσκαλε, οὐ μέλει σοι ὅτι ἀπολλύμεθα;—teacher, is it of no concern to you that we are perishing? If in fact Mark is writing specifically to the persecuted Christians in Rome, then this language would hit home with those who were suffering their own “storms” and wondering if Jesus was with them or not. Mark uses two more historical presents here, ἐγείρουσινthey are waking, and λέγουσινthey are saying, again drawing the reader into the action as if it were taking place right now.

It is certain that Mark was familiar with the Old Testament story of Jonah. In fact, the language is so similar, and given the fact that Mark elsewhere quotes the LXX (e.g. Mk. 1:3; 4:12; 7:6-7), it may be unreasonable to think that he does not mean to make a comparison. Mark uses the same word, ἐφοβήθησαν, to describe the disciples’ fear as Jonah 1:5 uses to describe the sailors on the boat there. Both groups were afraid that they were perishing (Jon. 1:6). Even the structure is similar in regard to the reporting of the fear of those on the two boats. In Jonah the men were “afraid”—ἐφοβήθησαν, because of the storm, and in vv. 10 and 16 they were “greatly afraid”—ἐφοβήθησαν . . . φόβον μέγαν (Jon. 1:1-16, LXX). Both groups of men were more afraid after the miracle had taken place than they were before.[6]

Jonah’s captain woke him up asking Τί σὺ ῥέγχεις;why do you snore?[7] In other words, what in the world are you doing down here asleep when we about to die in this storm! The disciples’ tone with Jesus is similar. The language employed by both authors is comparable. Jesus’ sleep, like Jonah’s, serves to highlight the central figure in the story, and the helplessness of the other people.[8]

In response to their pleas Jesus takes immediate action: καὶ διεγερθεὶς ἐπετίμησεν τῷ ἀνέμῳ καὶ εἶπεν τῇ θαλάσσῃ, Σιώπα, πεφίμωσο—and waking up he rebuked the wind and said to the sea, “Quiet down! Be still!” (v. 39). Mark shows that Jesus not only cares for the situation, but he also has the power to control the situation. The result was immediate. Mark records, καὶ ἐκόπασεν ὁ ἄνεμος καὶ ἐγένετο γαλήνη μεγάλη—and the wind stopped and there was a great calm (v. 39b). Mark is contrasting λαῖλαψ μεγάληa great storm, with γαλήνη μεγάληa great calm, perhaps to show his readers that Jesus can bring good out of the worst situations in life.

Then, after Jesus rebuked the wind and the sea, he rebuked his disciples. Mark records Jesus asking them, Τί δειλοί ἐστε; οὔπω ἔχετε πίστιν; Why are you afraid? Do you not yet have faith? (v.40). Jesus’ rebuke for their cowardly, fear invokes an even greater fear than what they had on account of the storm. Mark says, καὶ ἐφοβήθησαν φόβον μέγανand they feared a great fear, i.e. they were greatly afraid (v. 41). Mark’s use of fobeJomai can indicate great fear as in being terrified, or great reverence. If he means that the disciples were filled with reverence, it means that they were in awe at what Jesus had done. If Mark means that they were terrified, which seems to better fit the context, then it means that the disciples were greatly distressed at what Jesus had said to them after he rebuked the storm. Were they in danger of not having faith at all? This becomes to them something more terrible than a deadly storm at sea. Mark’s point then to his audience may be “Watch out how you respond to the trials of your life.”

All that had happened in those moments led them to question one another asking, Τίς ἄρα οὗτός ἐστιν ὅτι καὶ ὁ ἄνεμος καὶ ἡ θάλασσα ὑπακούει αὐτῷ;who then is this that even the wind and the sea obeys him? (v.41b). The disciples’ question is the central point in the story, and shows Mark’s concern with Christology. Perhaps here Mark has in mind Psalm 107:23-30 (Ps. 106:23-30, LXX). According to the Psalmist it is the works of the LORD—τὰ ἔργα κυρίου (LXX), which of course is hwhy in Hebrew (Ps. 107: 24; 106:24, LXX) that made the storm be still (Ps. 107: 29; Ps. 106:29, LXX). Who is this Jesus? He is the Son of the true and living God, the Lord of heaven and earth, the God of the Old Testament[9] who alone has the power to control even nature, and who cares for his followers in their tribulation, and who acts to bring good out of bad for the glory of God. Mark refers readers to imagery found in O.T., and thereby equates Jesus with Yahweh. Mark’s Christology is of the highest variety. Jesus is God.

Mark recounts this story, not just to write down in an orderly fashion the oral traditions of the gospel, but also to speak to the church to encourage them in the midst of its tribulation.[10] Origen said:

“For as many as are in the little ship of faith are sailing with the Lord; as many as are in the bark of holy church will voyage with the Lord across this wave-tossed life; though the Lord himself may sleep in holy quiet, he is but watching your patience and endurance: looking forward to the repentance and to the conversion of those who have sinned. Come then to him eagerly, instant in prayer.”[11]

Mark has theological, historical, and pastoral concerns as he relates the story of Jesus stilling the storm to his readers.[12]

Synoptic Comparison

Of the three accounts of the stilling the storm narrative in the synoptic gospels Mark’s is the longest, Luke’s is the closest to the Markan account, and Matthew’s is the shortest, and most interpretive of the three. Luke’s is the most straight forward from a historical standpoint. He seems to intentionally omit details that Mark includes, such as the other boats around, and the cushion on which Jesus was sleeping. The only elements of the story that are truly unique to Luke is that he indicates that Jesus wanted to go to the other side “of the lake” (τῆς λίμνης), and the way the disciples address Jesus (Ἐπιστάτα ἐπιστάτα), which is close to that of Mark, and that he notes that the disciples were both fearful and marveling (φοβηθέντες and ἐθαύμασαν). Matthew, however, has much to say that is different from either Mark or Luke.

Matthew’s context is different from Mark’s. Matthew records in v. 18, Ἰδὼν δὲ ὁ Ἰησοῦς ὄχλον περὶ αὐτὸν ἐκέλευσεν ἀπελθεῖν εἰς τὸ πέρανand Jesus, seeing the crowd around him, gave orders to go away to the other side. This language is unique to Matthew, except for εἰς τὸ πέραν, which occurs in all three synoptics. Luke is closer to the Markan account, although he is less specific concerning the exact day (ἐν μιᾷ τῶν ἡμερῶν) and simply has Jesus and his disciples together in the boat. Luke and Matthew both use ἐμβαίνω, where Mark does not because Jesus is already in the boat.[13]

What is also unique to Matthew is that two men approach Jesus after this. A scribe and one of his disciples (μαθητής) came to him wishing to follow (ἀκολουθέω) him, and yet wanting Jesus to wait for them while they go and do other things first (vv. 19-21). Then in v. 23, Matthew records, kαὶ ἐμβάντι αὐτῷ εἰς τὸ πλοῖον ἠκολούθησαν αὐτῷ οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦand after he got into the boat his disciples followed him. So, whereas the first two men could not yet follow Jesus, the disciples did so immediately. This shows Matthew’s concern with discipleship, which is a major theme in his gospel.[14]

According to Gunther Bornkamm, Matthew alters Marks story and makes it a symbolic picture of discipleship. Matthew uses the catchword, ἀκολουθέω and gives it a richer meaning.[15] Matthew uses σεισμὸς, a term usually applied to situations of eschatological distress[16] to describe the storm, whereas Mark and Luke both call it a λαῖλαψ ἀνέμου. For Mark, according to Bornkamm, the story is a straight forward miracle story and centers on the miracle itself with language used and contrasts made. Luke seems to be more concerned with the history of the tradition, but Matthew seems to be more the preacher. Matthew uses ἄνθρωποι in v. 27, which is unique to his gospel, to shift the focus from the disciples to other men, perhaps to speak to those who would hear this preached. According to Bornkamm, Matthew was the first exegete and interpreter of Mark.[17]

Other than Matthew’s use of σεισμὸς, no real distinction exists between the authors’ description of the facts of the storm. All three report the arising of a great storm and the fact that Jesus was asleep. What is different in all three is how the disciples react to Jesus being asleep. While similar in the fact that they wake him up asking for help, they are all unique in how the disciples address Jesus when they wake him up. Mark has the title of general and familiar respect—dιδάσκαλε, followed by the irreverent query—οὐ μέλει σοι ὅτι ἀπολλύμεθα; and Luke has perhaps the more generic term for a person of high status—Ἐπιστάτα ἐπιστάτα, ἀπολλύμεθα. But Matthew is most unique in his address. Matthew records the crying out of the disciples as a prayer—Κύριε, σῶσονLord, save. Mark’s is the most harsh, and shows the frantic fear in the hearts of the disciples, Luke the historian merely reports that they woke Jesus up to inform him of their peril, but Matthew has the true disciples, i.e. followers of Jesus voice their fright in the form of faithful prayer.

In regard to Jesus’ response to the disciples Luke and Mark are the most similar. In Mark Jesus uses the stern rebuke Τί δειλοί ἐστε; οὔπω ἔχετε πίστιν;, indicating that the disciples might not yet have faith. Luke is less harsh—Ποῦ ἡ πίστις ὑμῶν;—where is your faith, indicating that they may have faith, missing or misplaced though it is. In both Mark and Luke Jesus calms the storm and then speaks to his disciples about their faith. But in Matthew, Jesus speaks to the disciples in the midst of the storm, perhaps to show the interaction between Jesus and his followers during tribulation, calling them ὀλιγόπιστοιmen of little faith, rather than no faith or misplaced faith. Perhaps Matthew wants to comfort his readers with the notion that they do indeed have faith, they only need to exercise more of it.

Reporting on Jesus’ rebuke of the storm Matthew and Luke are almost identical. Mark, however, focuses more on Jesus’ command. He alone records the words Σιώπα, πεφίμωσο. Here again Mark is probably adding emphasis for effect, or perhaps he is simply recounting the eyewitness observations of Peter.[18] The three synoptics are almost identical in reporting the result of Jesus’ command, i.e. ἐγένετο γαλήνη μεγάλη, the only exception being Luke’s omission of the adjective μεγάλη.

Where Mark recounts that the disciples were greatly afraid (ἐφοβήθησαν φόβον μέγαν), and Luke has them marvelling in the midst of their fear (φοβηθέντες δὲ ἐθαύμασαν), Matthew has no mention of the disciples fear at all, except for Jesus’ question to them after they woke him up. Most unique to Matthew is that he, as was mentioned above, now turns the attention from the disciples to the other men who were there. Matthew says these other men marveled (οἱ δὲ ἄνθρωποι ἐθαύμασαν). Presumably these were the same men who were in Mark’s ἄλλα πλοῖα.

The wording of the last verse in this passage is nearly identical in all three gospels. All end with Mark’s question: Τίς ἄρα οὗτός ἐστιν ὅτι καὶ ὁ ἄνεμος καὶ ἡ θάλασσα ὑπακούει αὐτῷ;who then is this that even the wind and the sea obeys him? What is special is who Matthew has asking it. In Mark and Luke it is assumed that the disciples saying to one another (λέγοντες πρὸς ἀλλήλους), “who is this man.” In Matthew, it is the men (οἱ ἄνθρωποι) who are not only marveling at Jesus, but also asking the Christological question. What is also unique to Matthew is the adjective pοταπός, a term meaning “what sort?” or “what kind,” and denoting a sense of wonder and awe.[19] With Matthew’s ending it is as if he turns the attention from the disciples in their isolated crisis to believer’s of all the ages who will hear this gospel tradition preached. Such a shift in the ending is fitting for Matthew who wants every reader or hearer to see in this story what it means to be a true disciple of the true and living God, Jesus Christ.[20]

For Matthew, who writes primarily to a Jewish audience,[21] and for Luke who is concerned with God’s role in salvation and the life of the church in relation to God and each other, especially Gentile believers who want to know the truth about the gospel,[22] and for Mark who possibly writes to the persecuted Christians in Rome, the focus of the passage is on Jesus Christ. He is to be followed, believed in, worshipped, feared, trusted by all people everywhere. The Christological question at the end of each account is meant to be pondered[23] by all who read it and hear it, and the inevitable conclusion for all true followers of Jesus is Σὺ εἶ ὁ Χριστὸς ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ ζῶντοςyou are the Messiah, the Son of the living God (Matt. 16:16).

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Aland, Kurt. Synopsis of the Four Gospels, English Edition (New York: Ameican Bible Society, 1982, 1985).

Blomberg, Craig L. The New American Commentary. Vol. 22, Matthew (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1992).

Bock, Darrell L. Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Vol. 3a, Luke (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1994).

Bornkamm, Gunther; Barth, Gerhard; and Held, Heinz Joachim. Tradition and Interpretation in Matthew (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1963).

Brooks, James A. The New American Commentary. Vol. 23, Mark (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1991).

Danker, Frederick William (ed.). A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and other Early Christian Literature. (BDAG), 3rd edition (Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 2000).

Edwards, James R. The Pillar New Testament Commentary, The Gospel According to Mark (Grand Rapids/Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2002).

Feiler, P. F. The Stilling of the Storm in Matthew: A Response to Gunther Bornkamm. Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, v. 26.4 (Dec. 1983).

France, R. T. The New International Greek Testament Commentary, Mark (Grand Rapids/Cambridge: The Paternoster Press, Eerdmans, 2002).

Guelich, Robert A. Word Biblical Commentary. Vol. 34a, Mark (Dallas: Word Books Publisher, 1989).

Hanger, Donald A. Word Biblical Commentary. Vol 33a, Matthew (Dallas: Word Books, 1993).

Lane, William L. The New International Commentary on the New Testament, Mark (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974).

Marshall, I. Howard. The New International Greek Testament Commentary, Luke (Grand Rapids: The Paternoster Press, Eerdmans, 1978).

Nolland, John. The New International Greek Testament Commentary, Matthew (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005).

Oden, Thomas C. and Hall, Christopher A. (eds). Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture. Vol. 2, Mark (Downers Groves: IVP, 1998).

Stanton, Graham. A Gospel for a New People: Studies in Matthew (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1992).

Stanton, Graham. The Gospels and Jesus, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002).

Stanton, Graham, ed. The Interpretation of Matthew, 2nd ed. (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1995).

Stein, Robert H. The New American Commentary. Vol. 24, Luke (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1992).

Wallace, Daniel B. Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1996).

WWW.APOSTLESBIBLE.COM



[1] All scripture quotations (Greek) are taken from the Nestle Aland 27th edition. Unless otherwise noted, translation is the author’s own.

[2] See Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1996), 526-532. Here Wallace mentions that Mark uses the historical present more than any other New Testament author, probably reflecting the level of his Greek and reflecting his style of writing. Also, William L. Lane, The New International Commentary on the New Testament, Mark (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974), 26.

[3] R. T. France, The New International Greek Testament Commentary, Mark (Grand Rapids/Cambridge: The Paternoster Press, Eerdmans, 2002), 223.

[4] Ibid., 223.

[5] James R. Edwards, The Pillar New Testament Commentary, The Gospel According to Mark (Grand Rapids/Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2002), 152. It is argued here that Mark was writing to the persecuted church in Rome, as is argued by many scholars, and that he is trying to identify with his suffering readers in this story. See also James A. Brooks, The New American Commentary, Vol. 23, Mark (Nashville:Broadman Press, 1991), 23-30, and William L. Lane, The New International Commentary on the New Testament, Mark (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974), 15-25.

[6] Brooks, The New American Commentary, Vol. 23, Mark, 4:41. See also P. F. Feiler, The Stilling of the Storm in Matthew: A Response to Gunther Bornkamm, JETS v. 26.4 (Dec. 1983), for a further discussion of the parallels between Jonah and the Psalms, and the gospel account (Feiler deals mainly with the Matthean account).

[7] Translation of LXX was aided by http://www.apostlesbible.com/books/j32jonah/j32c01.htm.

[8] France, NIGTC, Mark, 223.

[9] Edwards, PNTC, Mark, 148.

[10] Robert A Guelich, Word Biblical Commentary, Vol. 34a, Mark (Dallas: Word Books Publisher, 1989), xli-xliii.

[11] Origen, On Matthew, Homily 6, as quoted in Thomas C. Oden, and Christopher A. Hall, (eds), Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture, Vol. 2, Mark (Downers Groves: IVP, 1998).

[12] James A. Brooks, The New American Commentary, Vol. 23, Mark (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1991), 23-30.

[13] I. Howard Marshall, The New International Greek Testament Commentary, Luke (Grand Rapids: The Paternoster Press, Eerdmans, 1978), 333.

[14] John Nolland, The New International Greek Testament Commentary, Matthew (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005), 369-370.

[15] While scholars such as Stanton agree with Bornkamm’s thesis, P. F. Feiler disagrees, claiming that Bornkamm’s hypotheses are “open to question.” See Feiler, The Stilling of the Storm in Matthew: A Response to Gunther Bornkamm, JETS v. 26.4 (Dec. 1983).

[16] Ibid., 370.

[17] Gunther Bornkamm, Gerhard Barth, and Heinz Joachim Held, Tradition and Interpretation in Matthew (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1963), 53-56. Bornkamm’s work is also referenced in more recent works; see Graham Stanton, ed. The Interpretation of Matthew, 2nd ed. (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1995), 123-124, and Graham Stanton, A Gospel for a New People: Studies in Matthew (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1992), 24, and Graham Stanton, The Gospels and Jesus, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002), 30-32.

[18] Edwards, PNTC, Mark (Grand Rapids/Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2002), 147.

[19] See BDAG, 3rd edition, 856.

[20] See introduction to Donald A. Hagner, Word Biblical Commentary, v. 33a, Matthew (Dallas: Word Books, 1993).

[21] Craig L. Blomberg, The New American Commentary, Vol. 22, Matthew (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1992), 34.

[22] See Darrell L. Bock, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament, Vol. 3a, Luke (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1994), 14-43, and Robert H. Stein, The New American Commentary, Vol. 24, Luke (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1992), 26-49.

[23] Bock, BECNT, Vol. 3a, Luke (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1994), 764.

No comments: