Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadLange Commentary - Mark 8:10 - 8:21
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
______
1. Return to the Galilean Shore. Conflict; Return; the Leaven of the Pharisees and the Leaven of Herod. Mar_8:10-21
(Parallel: Mat_16:1-12)
Mar_8:10. Dalmanutha was a small place, not otherwise known; it lay probably in the district of Magdala, where, according to Matthew, Jesus landed. Robinson (3:514) leaves it undecided whether or not the present village of Delhemija is its modern representative. The specifications of locality by the two Evangelists, respectively, are not to be referred to any hypothesis of earlier and later accounts: Matthew’s narrative has a more general cast, and Mark’s a more special, in these respects. The landing was manifestly in a desert and unfrequented place; and the reason of this was, that the Galilean party of Pharisees were on the alert to seize Jesus, in order to bring Him under a judicical process; for this purpose having many spies abroad. The first illustration of this is found in Mar_2:6; the second, Mar_3:22; the third (in connection with Mar_6:29-31), Mar_7:1. That allegation touching neglect of purifyings, which the Pharisees, in connection with the scribes from Jerusalem, made against Him, is carried out here into its last issues.
Mar_8:11. And the Pharisees came forth.—Meyer: “Out of their dwellings in that country.” People generally come out of their dwellings; but these men came forth as spies out of a hiding-place; and their coming was proof that the most extreme care as to the circumstances of the landing of Jesus, in a quiet place and in the dead of night, could no longer protect the Lord from their eyes (see on Matthew and Leben Jesu, 2:875). On the western side of the sea there might be, here and there, rich mansions, belonging to Herodian courtiers, which were well adapted to be loopholes of observance for the political and hierarchical party. According to Mat_16:1-2, the Sadducees were leagued with them. The act, therefore, was not merely an act of the Pharisaic school, but the act of the priests and politicians. Mark merges the Sadducees in the Pharisees; for they hypocritically played the Pharisee, inasmuch as they demanded a sign from heaven, although they believed in no such thing.—And began.—They had made their arrangements for a decisive contest, which began with the demand of the sign from heaven. For this sign, see on Matthew, p. 287.
Sighed deeply in His spirit.—Comp. Mar_7:34. He sighed so deeply, not merely in general sorrow for the hardened unbelief of these men, but also in the feeling that the decisive crisis of severance from the predominant party had come. For the demand of a sign from heaven was a demand that He should, as the Messiah of their expectation, accredit Himself by a great miracle; thus it was fundamentally similar to the temptation in the wilderness, which He had repelled and overcome. But His deep sigh also signifies here the holding in of His judicial power, the silent resolution to enter upon the path of tribulation. Hence the refusal of the sign is immediate, and in the form of an affirmation most strongly uttered. It is to be observed that, the article being wanting, the nature of the sign from heaven is left free to Him: He was to perform a sign from heaven, which should be acknowledged as the sign from heaven.
Mar_8:15. And the leaven of Herod.—See on Matthew; and for the combination of Pharisees and Herodians, compare the notes on Mar_3:6. The one passage depends on the other; and it is observable how Mark both times gives marked prominence to this hypocritical and malignant combination of extreme parties. Meyer concludes from Mat_14:2 that Herod was no Sadducee. But that passage must not be pressed too far. Herod certainly coincided with the anti-scriptural, anti-Messianic, Hellenizing universalism of the Sadducees, although he did not adhere to their party in its dogmatic views and coloring. Thus we have here only two aspects of the same idea. The Jewish dependence upon traditions and human ordinances, and the Jewish free-thinking, form in their respective principles the two kinds of leaven which the disciples were to guard against. Compare on Matthew.
2. As it regards the desired sign from heaven, it is to be observed further: 1. As they asked for a sign from heaven, they demanded the decisively attesting sign expected from heaven. 2. The consequence of this authentication would have been, that Christ must have come forward as a Messiah in their sense. Hence it is said that they tempted Him. The demand of a sign from heaven was like the temptation in the wilderness. The Lord had hitherto, since that time, escaped any such demand. If He now refused it, His death was certain. 3. The demand was so far not absolutely hostile, as they were still disposed to accept Christ, if He would adapt Himself to their views, and become a party instrument for their purposes. (See on Matthew.) 4. The sign from heaven which Christ denied to the Pharisees, stood in close relation with the sign of Jonas. The denial of the one was the announcement of the other. 5. What He denied to the Pharisees, He provided soon afterwards for the three chosen disciples on the Mount: the heavenly sign of His transfiguration.
3. The sighs of Jesus.—The Lord’s sigh (Mar_7:34) was the sigh of self-devoting mercy to the world; His deep sigh (Mar_8:12) was the restraint and holding back of His judicial power over the world, under the holy resolution to suffer for it. The sigh of the Lion of Judah over the hardening of His enemies: the prophecy of His path of suffering, but also the prophecy of the world’s judgment. The groaning of His spirit was, 1. a sighing from the depths of His being, 2. in the all-embracing glance of His consciousness over the path of His own suffering, and the path of the world’s wretchedness.
4. The return of Jesus.—Not without a plan, but as the result of His last experience, Jesus now returns back to the eastern bank. It is clear to His consciousness that He must now go up to confront His death. He therefore needed solitude, that He might regulate the process of His departure. And to this there was necessary, 1. the confirmation of the disciples in faith for the establishment of the new Church, and 2. the provision that His death should take place at the right time and in the right way.
Starke:—Many desire new wonders; and when they have thought they have seen them, have not yet turned to God.—It is not becoming to prescribe to God the means by which we are to arrive at divine knowledge and blessedness.—Hedinger:—Ingratitude drives Christ away.—Quesnel:—It is a fearful judgment when the truth altogether forsakes men, and they are left to themselves.—Forgetfulness gives an opportunity for new instruction; and therefore even their failings should be turned to account by believers.—Cramer:—Faithful teachers should, after the example of the Great Shepherd, diligently warn their sheep against false doctrine and false teachers (against every evil leaven to the right or left).—Out of one error many others gradually arise, so that the whole system of religion may become perverted.—Quesnel:—Concerning the tendency to Sadduceism among courtiers.—The weaker our faith is, the more anxious and troubled we are about bodily need, and the more likely to make spiritual possessions of less account.—Osiander:—Ministers must be always ready to exhort their hearers with severity, and to rouse them out of the sleep of security.
Braune:—When, after a joyful event, or the attainment of a great success, one is suddenly opposed by an obstinate contradiction, the result is often great disquietude or blank despondency. The Lord, whose case this was on the present occasion, knew very well what He would do, and did it without any restraint. Let all men learn this. They need the lesson in their family circles, and in their civil and political relations, whether more or less exalted.—Scarcely had Jesus ended with His enemies, when He must begin again with His friends.—Before His spirit rose the whole wickedness of His enemies’ spirit, so perverse in itself, pervading with evil the whole of the people, and invading even His disciples. It had already seized and possessed the mind of Judas, 1Co_5:7-8.
Schleiermacher:—The Redeemer often uses the idea of leaven, as something of which only a little is needed in order to make the whole like itself.—In truth, He was the leaven, in the form of a servant indeed, destined to penetrate the whole mass of mankind and all human life by the divine power dwelling in Him;—If ye use only a little of the leaven of the Pharisees, ye will very soon be pervaded throughout with its influence.—The leaven of Herod: the family of Herod was a foreign one; they held to the law, and affected much devotion to ceremonial ordinances, in order to attach the people more firmly to themselves. The disciples must not use Christianity as something that might exert a good influence upon their external condition.—We must be pure disciples of the Master, and desire nothing but the pure kingdom of God.—Gossner (on Mar_8:19):—This is a test. They had the whole history in their head and memory, but they did not understand how to apply it.
Footnotes:
Mar_8:13—The ðÜëéí precedes ἐìâÜò , according to B., C., D., L., Ä . Åἰò ôὸ ðëïῖí (Recepta), or åé ̇ ò ðëïῖïí (Lachmann, after A., E., F.), wanting in B., C., L., D., and omitted by Tischendorf [and Meyer].
Mar_8:16.—The ëÝãïíôåò wanting in B., D., and Itala; and B., Itala read ἕ÷ïõóéí for ἕ÷ïìåí . So Lachmann and Tischendorf.
Mar_8:17.—̓́ Åôé in B., C., D., L., Ä ., [Lechmann, Tischendorf, Meyer.]
Mar_8:21.—Lachmann: ðῶò ïὔðù , according to A., D., M. Tischendorf merely ïὔðù , according to C., L., D. So Meyer.