The disciples had not yet understood the lessons that Jesus sought to teach them. Mark constructed his Gospel to show that in His discipleship training Jesus repeated lessons to train them. One writer noticed the following repetitive parallel structure in this section of the Gospel.186
This miracle repeated the lesson of the feeding of the 5,000 for the disciples who had not learned what they should have from the former miracle (vv. 17-21).187
8:1-3 Jesus and His disciples were still in the Decapolis region east of the lake. Three days had passed and the crowds were now hungry having exhausted the provisions they had brought with them. Perhaps Jesus waited three days to see if the disciples would ask Him to feed this crowd as He had fed the former one (6:31-44). They did not. Jesus' compassion for the multitude led Him to articulate their plight. Still the disciples did not ask Jesus to meet the need. Even the similar surroundings did not jog the disciples' memories.
8:4 Why did the disciples not catch on? Probably several months had passed since Jesus fed the 5,000. People tend to forget even great events. Moreover depending on Jesus rather than relying on self is a very difficult lesson to learn especially when one has a limited perception of who Jesus is. Furthermore Jesus' reluctance to perform miracles may have discouraged the disciples from asking Him for help.188Their question revealed their blindness. Rather than thinking about sending the crowds away, they despaired of finding enough bread to satisfy everyone in that wilderness (Gr. eremon, cf. 6:32). At least they referred their question to Jesus this time (cf. 6:37).
8:5 Jesus asked them the same question He had voiced before He fed the 5,000 (6:38). Even this did not remind the disciples to trust Jesus to provide for their need.
8:6-7 Mark explained exactly what Jesus did more particularly than Matthew did (Matt. 15:36). This reflects his typical interest in detail.
"Comparing Jesus' prayers offered before these two feeding miracles shows that the first included the Jewish blessing of looking toward heaven (6:41), whereas the second was a simple thanksgiving (8:6)."189
8:8-9 Jesus' provision was again typically adequate and abundant but not excessive.
Critics of the Bible have argued that Matthew and Mark told the story of one miraculous feeding twice and made mistakes that account for the differences in the accounts.190However the differences between the two stories are so great that most Bible students believe Jesus fed two different groups of people on two separate occasions.
Jesus and the disciples returned to Galilee by boat after they had fed the 5,000 (6:45-56). They did the same thing after feeding the 4,000. The exact location of Dalmanutha is unknown, but it must have been near Magadan (Magdala?) on the west side of the lake (Matt. 15:39).
Matthew's account of this incident is fuller than Mark's. Probably Mark just summarized it here to parallel 7:1-23 and so advance his theme of discipleship training.
8:11 Matthew noted that the Sadducees accompanied the Pharisees (Matt. 15:1). They came out from Jerusalem again to argue, not to learn. They asked Jesus to provide some celestial confirmation of His divine authority. They had previously concluded that His power came from Satan (3:22). The miracles that Jesus performed did not convince them. They were not requesting another one of these but a different type of verification perhaps similar to those God gave the Israelites at Mt. Sinai to authenticate Moses as His servant. They did this to subject Jesus to a trial (Gr. peirazo) that would reveal His true character. They hoped to expose Him as a phony.
". . . the Sadducees were a wealthy, conservative party concentrated in Jerusalem. Their members were from aristocratic families of patrician and priestly stock. They refused adherence to the tradition of the elders and advocated a rigorous application of the law of Moses to the life of the nation. In general, they espoused a political and religious policy, including cooperation with Rome, aimed at preserving the status quo."191
8:12 The Greek word translated "sighing deeply"is anastenazo.
"It describes Jesus' grief and disappointment when faced with the unbelief of those who, because of their spiritual privileges, ought to have been more responsive to him."192
The spirit was Jesus' human spirit. The contemporary Jews who opposed Jesus constituted the generation to which He referred. He refused to give the type of sign they requested because the evidence that He had presented was more than adequate to convince an open-minded person. Jesus distinguished between miracles (Gr. dynamis) and signs (Gr. semeion) by using the second word here. He had given plenty of miracles to bolster faith. He would not give a sign to those bent on disbelieving. From this Mark's readers were to learn that Jesus' miracles were ample proof of His deity.
8:13 Jesus again left unbelievers (cf. 4:35; 7:24). He departed for the northeast coast of the lake.
This incident was and is a lesson to disciples on the importance of accepting the evidence that Jesus has given concerning His supernatural person.
This pericope parallels and recalls Jesus' teaching about bread when He cast the demon out of the Phoenician girl (7:24-30). In both cases leavened bread metaphorically represented teaching. The Gentile woman wanted Jesus' teaching and so presented a positive example for the disciples. The Jewish religious leaders rejected Jesus' teaching and advanced false teaching, which Jesus warned His disciples to avoid.
8:14 The one loaf of bread also recalls the two miraculous feedings of multitudes. A shortage of bread should have been no great concern to the disciples in view of Jesus' supernatural powers.
8:15 Jesus evidently used the leaven in the loaf of bread as an object lesson to illustrate the pervasive corrupting teaching of the Pharisees and of Herod. The teaching of the Pharisees was that Jesus received His authority from Satan rather than from God (3:22; cf. 7:8-13). It was a denial of His role as God's anointed Servant, Messiah. The teaching of Herod Antipas, what he believed and articulated, was likewise that Jesus was not the Messiah. Herod told others that Jesus was just John the Baptist come back to life (6:14-16). The Pharisees and Herod, though so different from each other in many respects, promoted the same heretical view that Jesus was not the Messiah, much less divine.193
8:16 The disciples' interest in the problem of lack of food contrasts with Jesus' fervent concern over unbelief (cf. vv. 12, 15). Spiritual truth failed to impress them because they had minds that were not open to it (v. 17).
8:17-21 Jesus strongly rebuked His disciples for their lack of spiritual understanding. In view of the two miraculous feedings they had witnessed, they should have understood who He was. As God had provided bread abundantly for the Israelites in the wilderness, Jesus had provided bread abundantly for them in another wilderness. The conclusion should have been obvious. Jesus was the prophet that Moses predicted would follow him and supersede him. He was the divine Messiah.
"His rebuke was not because of their failure to grasp the meaning of His warning (v. 15), but at their failure to understand the meaning of His presence with them."194
It was extremely important that the disciples perceive who Jesus is. Without that perception they could not serve Jesus as the apostles He needed. Jesus' use of questions forced them to interact with the implications of what they had heard and seen.
The incident ends with a question but no answer. Mark leaves the reader hanging. The answer is of utmost importance. Peter finally verbalized it in verse 29.
Mark is the only evangelist who recorded this miracle. It corresponds to the healing of the deaf man with the speech impediment (7:31-36), the only other miracle that Mark alone recorded. This is the only miracle in Mark that was not instantaneous; it happened gradually. Sight is a common metaphor for understanding. The disciples should have seen the deaf man as a picture of themselves unable to comprehend what Jesus said. This blind man also represented them in their inability to understand what Jesus showed them (cf. v. 21). Jesus could and would make them whole as He healed these two physically limited men.
8:22 As mentioned above, Bethsaida Julius stood on the northeast shore of the lake (cf. 6:45). Evidently friends of the blind man led him to Jesus.
8:23-24 Apparently Jesus led the man out of Bethsaida so He could establish a personal relationship with him (cf. 5:35-43; 7:31-37) and perhaps to avoid publicity (cf. v. 26). His willingness to follow Jesus demonstrated his faith. This was evidently one of only three miracles that Jesus did in private that Mark recorded. In all three cases, some disciples were present.
The English translations permit a rather unpleasant interpretation of what Jesus did, namely spitting in the man's face and placing His hands on his head or shoulders. The Greek text allows us to interpret the data differently. Probably Jesus applied a small quantity of His spittle to the man's eyes with His fingers. This action would have made it clear to the blind man that Jesus was restoring his vision. Perhaps the saliva told the man that this healing came out of Jesus' mouth (cf. Gen. 1:3, 6, et al.).
Jesus asked the man, "Do you see anything?"to get him to state what he saw for the disciples' benefit. Evidently the man had lost his vision; he appears not to have been blind from birth. He knew what trees looked like. Blindness from disease was and still is common in many eastern countries.
8:25 Why did Jesus heal the man gradually in stages? Perhaps He did so to show that He could heal in any manner He chose.195Perhaps the man was fearful, and Jesus healed him as He did to accommodate his needs.196Perhaps He did so to illustrate for the disciples that He chose to give spiritual perception one step at a time. Probably Jesus had more than one reason.
"Is this miracle paradigmatic of Jesus' struggle with the disciples? Is Jesus' earthly ministry stage one, during which time Jesus must contend with the disciples who are at once committed to him but afflicted with incomprehension? Is the time following Easter stage two, when Jesus shall have led the disciples, like this man, to see everything clearly'?"197
Mark was careful to record that the man "looked intently"(NASB). Human responsibility played a part in this healing as does gaining spiritual understanding. Nevertheless it is God who is ultimately responsible for the perception.
8:26 Probably Jesus gave this order to safeguard His mission (cf. 1:44-45; 5:43; 7:36). The man appears to have lived somewhere other than in Bethsaida.
With this miracle Jesus fulfilled another aspect of messianic prophecy. The divine Messiah would open blind eyes (Isa. 35:5-6).
The healing of the deaf man with the speech impediment resulted in a confession of Jesus' greatness that fell short of identifying Him as God (7:37). The healing of the blind man was the incident that God used to open the disciples' eyes to the biblical messianic identity of Jesus that Peter articulated.
Mark further highlighted the cause and effect relationship between these last two events by structuring the pericopes similarly. First, he presented the circumstances (vv. 22, 27). Second, he described partial sight and understanding (vv. 23-24, 28). Third, he recorded the giving of sight and understanding (vv. 25, 29). Fourth, he noted Jesus' command to remain silent (vv. 26, 30).198
8:27-28 Jesus and his disciples continued traveling north from Bethsaida toward Caesarea Philippi that stood about 25 miles away. Jesus asked the question in verse 27 with a view to asking the second question in verse 29. The popular answers to Jesus' first question all reflect an inadequate view of Him. Perhaps few people believed that Jesus was the Messiah, so the disciples did not even mention that possibility.
8:29 Jesus stressed "you"when He asked this question. He wanted to know whom the disciples, in contrast to the multitudes, believed He was. Peter spoke for the disciples. The other disciples evidently agreed with his statement and made no objection. This is the first time in Mark that Peter acted as spokesman for the Twelve. Yet from this time on, Peter was the prominent representative of the other disciples.199
". . . Peter's name, Rock,' is ironic, for he thinks he is like a rock. He happens to be the opposite of what his nickname suggests, for he falls asleep and later falls apart under the incriminating remarks of a maid of the High Priest."200
"Christ"is the English transliteration of the Greek christosthat translates the Hebrew masiahmeaning "anointed one."Originally this Hebrew term had a broad meaning and included anyone anointed by God including priests, kings, and prophets. Later in the Old Testament it came to have the technical meaning of the divine Davidic king who would appear to deliver Israel and establish a worldwide kingdom (Ps. 110:1; Dan. 9:25-26). In Mark, Jesus rarely used this term Himself (cf. 9:41; 12:35; 13:21), and He never used it of Himself. Probably He avoided it because of its political connotations and the popular misunderstanding of it, but Jesus accepted the title when others applied it to Him (cf. 14:6-62; John 4:25-26).
". . . the title . . . was particularly fitted to express his true relation both to the OT and to the people of God. . . . the title, applied to Jesus, designates him as the true meaning and fulfillment of the long succession of Israel's anointed kings and priests, the King and Priest . . .; the Prophet anointed with the Spirit of God, who fulfills the long line of Israel's prophets, and the One in whom the life of the whole nation of Israel finds its fulfillment and meaning, in whom and for whose sake the people of Israel were, and the new Israel now is, the anointed people of God."201
The timing of this question in Jesus' ministry was very important. The disciples had believed that Jesus was the Messiah from the beginning of their contact with Him (John 1:41, 51). However their understanding of the Messiah then was the traditional one of their day, namely that of a political leader. The multitudes likewise failed to understand that Jesus was much more than that. The religious leaders where becoming increasingly antagonistic. The disciples were about to receive new revelation regarding Jesus that would have costly implications for them. Therefore it was necessary for them to confess Jesus' identity clearly and unmistakably now.
Why did Mark only record that Peter said, "You are the Messiah,"rather than his complete statement, "You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God"(Matt. 16:16)? Mark's emphasis throughout his Gospel was on Jesus' humanity, as we have seen. By omitting the last part of Peter's statement, Mark did not mean that Peter failed to acknowledge Jesus' deity. This is precisely what Peter was confessing. However in Mark the term Messiah includes the concept of deity, as it does in the Old Testament. When the disciples said they had found the Messiah before Jesus called them to be His disciples, they used the title in the popular way (John 1:41, 51). Mark did not record those statements. He presented the disciples using the term "Messiah"in its true biblical meaning for his Gentile readers.
"For the Christians of Rome who read Mark, the confession You are the Messiah' was precisely their profession of faith . . ."202
Peter's confession constitutes a high-water mark in the disciples' understanding of and commitment to Jesus. They still had much to learn about the significance of Jesus being the Messiah that the Old Testament promised and its implications. Nevertheless now Jesus could build on their faith and commitment.
". . . Jesus' identity is progressively unveiled in three stages, though only from the standpoint of the reader. . . .
"The first stage in the progressive disclosure of Jesus' identity is the confession of Peter on behalf of the disciples (8:27-30)."203
8:30 Probably Jesus instructed the disciples to tell no one about Him for at least two reasons. First, such an announcement would have hindered His mission. Second, the disciples would not have been able to cope with the questions and opposition such an announcement would generate. They still held many popular misconceptions about Israel's Messiah that Jesus needed to correct. Jesus proceeded to continue preparing them so they could represent Him effectively.
"At the center of his Gospel Mark placed Peter's confession that Jesus is the Messiah. Up to this point the underlying question had been, Who is He?' After Peter's declaration on behalf of the Twelve, Mark's narrative is oriented toward the Cross and the Resurrection. From now on the underlying double question was, What kind of Messiah is He, and what does it mean to follow Him?' This crucial passage is the point to which the first half of the book leads and from which the second half proceeds."204
