Turning Points

We can now see the rough outline of the course of events in Jesus' ministry. The period of popularity came first, the time when the crowds thronged about him wherever he went, following him out even to desert places. The quickly spreading reports brought the people not only from thickly settled Galilee, but from Judæa to the south and beyond Jordan to the east and the districts about Tyre and Sidon to the north (Mark 3:7, 8). There were various reasons for this. John the Baptist had already stirred the people and they were ready to listen. Many were moved without doubt by Jesus' message. But there were less creditable reasons too. They hailed him as a healer and worker of signs.

Side by side with this popularity there were from the beginning misunderstanding and criticism and opposition. The opposition came from the Pharisaic party, headed by their professional teachers, the scribes. On the part of the latter there was jealousy, on the part of both the opposition to a religion that was directly opposed to the authority of law and tradition for which they stood. Meanwhile Jesus realized how little real understanding the people showed. Even his family and friends looked upon him as one beside himself. He confounded the Pharisees at first, but they persisted in the attack. They charged him with being in league with the devil. Leaders from Jerusalem came down to watch him, perhaps sent by the Sanhedrin (Mark 7:1). These accused him of violating the rules of their religion and so sought to stir up the people against him. And finally opposition came from another quarter. The Jewish leaders got in touch with adherents of Herod (Mark 3:6).

Herod had put John to death, why should he not lay hold of this new disturber? He himself had begun to ask about Jesus, and to wonder superstitiously whether this were not John come to life again.

Meanwhile the tide was turning with the people. The opposition of the leaders was taking effect. Jesus had refused to listen to their clamor for signs or let himself become a mere healer. Some perception of his real message must have come to them; it was not what they wanted to hear. The fourth Gospel preserves a tradition of how the crisis came. Together with the first three Gospels, it tells the story of how Jesus fed the multitude, moved by pity for the crowds that had gathered, hungry and far from home. Such a deed stirred them with enthusiasm and they wanted to make him king (John 6:15). It showed how little his teaching had accomplished, how hopeless the task was of doing anything with the populace. What John states the other Gospels imply. Matthew and Luke give his lament over Capernaum, Bethsaida, and Chorazin. These had been the center of his work. Here he had done his preaching and healing. But the repentance that he had looked for had not come. "Woe unto thee, Chorazin! woe unto thee, Bethsaida! for if the mighty works had been done in Tyre and Sidon which were done in you, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes" (Matt 11:20-24; compare Luke 10:13-15).

And so there came the first turning point in Jesus' plan of work. He decided to leave Galilee. On the one hand was the failure of his appeal to the people. On the other, the danger that threatened from Herod. The leaders of church and state were both lying in wait for him. How he regarded the latter is shown by a passage which Luke has preserved, though he assigns it to a later time (Luke 13:31-33). Some Pharisees had told him of the danger from Herod. His answer was: "Go and say to that fox, Behold I cast out demons and perform cures today and to-morrow, and the third day I am perfected. Nevertheless I must go on my way today and to-morrow and the day following." It was not a counsel of fear that moved him to leave Galilee. His life was in God's care who had planned its "today and to-morrow and the day following." But neither would he be reckless of danger and tempt God (Matt 4:5-7).

But while he had not moved the people to repentance or won them to his message, his ministry had not been a failure. Side by side with his denunciation of the cities there is his thanksgiving for those who had seen and believed: "I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou didst hide these things from the wise and understanding, and didst reveal them unto babes" (Matt 11:25). During these days Jesus had gathered around him the circle of disciples, and these now went with him on his journey. Here was his work for the next weeks, to use the quiet of the days thus spent together for the instruction and training of these men upon whom so much was to depend.

The course of their wandering, according to Mark, was northward from Galilee through the regions about Tyre and Sidon, then southward again to the Sea of Galilee and down to Decapolis, probably passing on the east side of the lake. This journey into Gentile lands raises the question of Jesus' relations to those outside of Israel. Was this another turning point from Israel to the Gentiles? The one incident that we have from Jesus' stay in the region of Tyre and Sidon points the other way (Mark 7:24-30; Matt 15:21-28). Jesus had entered a house and did not wish his presence known. His fame had reached these parts, however, as appears from the statement that among the crowds in Galilee there had been visitors from these districts of Tyre and Sidon. And so a woman, a Gentile, who heard of his presence, searched him out and implored his help for her daughter. According to Matthew's report, Jesus at first was silent, and then in answer to her persistence said: "I was not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel. But she came and worshiped him, saying, Lord, help me. And he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread and cast it to the dogs. But she said, Yes, Lord: for even the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their master's table." The harshness of Jesus' answer is more apparent than real. The term he used for the Gentiles was not the opprobrious epithet, "dogs," but the diminutive, "little dogs"—a rather playful term. But though he yielded to the woman and praised her faith, yet there remains his first unwillingness, so unlike his usual attitude, and his statement that he was sent only to the Israelites.

How did Jesus conceive his relation to those outside of Israel? Did he proclaim a kingdom that was only for Israel? We must discriminate in our answer. Jesus felt that his own mission was to, Israel, and when he sent the twelve out upon their special mission he limited them in the same way: "Go not into any way of the Gentiles, and enter not into any city of the Samaritans" (Matt 10:5, 6). Just what Jesus' reason for this was we cannot say with certainty. It may have been a limitation of territory, that he did not wish to work outside of the bounds he had set. He did not refuse to help Gentiles as such, for he had already healed the centurion's servant (Matt 8:5-13), and the Samaritan leper was cleansed as freely as the others (Luke 17:11-19). There may have been the conviction that Israel, the people of the law and of special privilege, must first be called to repentance. How could he expect a response from the Gentiles, when Israel did not answer to his message?

One thing is clear—there was no national limitation in Jesus' thought of the Kingdom. John had declared that membership in Israel was not enough (Matt 3:8, 9). Jesus approved and went farther. He promises deliverance not from the empire of Rome but from the kingdom of evil. And the Kingdom is to belong not to Jews or to Greeks, but to the poor in spirit, the meek, the merciful, the pure in heart (Matt 5:3-9). Moreover, it is the idea of God that rules Jesus' thinking and not that of the Kingdom. And God is not the Lord of Israel, but the Father of all men. Neither in the nature of God nor in Jesus' conception of religion is there anything national or limited. His religion is universal.

Whatever the reason for limiting his work to Israel, Jesus' own attitude was not limited in its sympathies. He rejoiced over the faith of the pagan centurion and the Syrophoenician woman, and over the Samaritan leper that came back to speak his gratitude (Luke 7:1-10; 17:11-19). His own experience showed him Israel's refusal and the open hearts outside his people. He condemned the Jews with examples taken from the Gentiles, Nineveh and the Queen of Sheba, Naaman and the widow of Sarepta, and the Samaritan who proved the neighbor to the man that fell among thieves (Matt 12:41, 42; Luke 4:25-27; Luke 10:30-35). For the most part the examples come in the latter part of his ministry, when his heart was moved alike by the response that he found among individual Gentiles and Samaritans whom he touched, and by the unresponsiveness of Israel. It is in the last Jerusalem days that he speaks of the temple as "a house of prayer for all the nations," and declares in the parable of the vineyard, "The kingdom of God shall be taken away from you, and shall be given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof" (Mark 11:17; Matt 21:43). Even before this he had said, when praising the centurion's faith, "Many shall come from the east and the west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven; but the sons of the kingdom shall be cast forth into the outer darkness" (Matt 8:11, 12). The great commission, therefore, which Matthew reports as being given by the risen Christ, is in harmony with Jesus' principles: "Go ye therefore, and make disciples of all the nations" (Matt 28:19).

The second turning point in Jesus' work that fell within these days came at Cæsarea Philippi (Mark 8:27-38). It marked, not a change in his plans, but a stage in their progress. It probably fell within the later days of this period of wandering. Jesus had turned back again after having come south to Decapolis, and had led his company far to the north, where lay the city of Cæsarea Philippi among the headwaters of the Jordan. Here came perhaps the greatest hour in Jesus' ministry. The cities of Galilee had not turned at his preaching. The established forces of his native land were against him, Pharisees on the one hand, Herodians on the other. His life was in danger. He must have been considering before this the road to Jerusalem and what it would mean for him. He had turned from other work to give himself to these men. He had asserted no claims. He had lived with them and taught them and loved them. Did they understand him? What did they think of him? Would they be true to him? It was one thing to call him Master at the height of his popularity. What would they say about the fugitive and wanderer?

Here at last he puts them to the test. "Who do men say that I am? And they told him, saying, John the Baptist; and others, Elijah; but others, One of the prophets. And he asked them, But who say ye that I am? Peter answereth and saith unto him, Thou art the Christ." It was no allegiance of lips that Jesus wanted. It was no personal honor that he craved. Christ means Messiah, Anointed One, but it was not this title that he wished. He had brought them to see that the hope of Israel lay in him, in what he was and what he stood for. They had much yet to learn, but he had bound them to himself; and they had made the confession not in some hour of triumph when the multitudes wondered at his healings, but here in his hour of loneliness and reversal. It was the moral and spiritual power of his own person which had wrought this.

It is not easy to overestimate the importance of this scene which Mark has given us so simply. It has been called the hour of Christianity's birth. The Christian religion has always been more than a sum of teachings coming from its founder, or an ideal of life set forth by him. He himself has been the center, as one in whom men put their trust, upon whom they built their hopes. It was the first Christian confession. It was, indeed, the beginning of the Christian Church.

The story of Cæsarea Philippi makes certain one other fact—that Jesus had not previously proclaimed himself as Messiah or allowed himself thus to be proclaimed. Our Gospels here state explicitly: "Then charged he the disciples that they should tell no man that he was the Christ" (Matt 16:20). Later he publicly proclaimed himself as Messiah by the mode of his entrance into Jerusalem; but that was at the close. It is true that there are earlier references to the Messiahship on the lips of Jesus or accepted by him from others; but it must be remembered that the Gospels were written not to give the record of Jesus' life in chronological order, but to set him forth as Messiah and Saviour, that men might believe on him. It was natural, therefore, that the writers should use these terms in the earlier as well as latter part of his ministry, just as we find them indifferent to the order of time in arranging their materials, whether of works or teaching.

Directions for Reading and Study

Read John 6. Note the difference in the style of Jesus' speech as reported here, and the difference in circumstances and form of Peter's confession. Note, however, the similar outline of events, giving in order Jesus' popularity, his withdrawal for a time, the falling away, and the confession of Peter.

The woes over the cities: read Matt 11:20-25; Luke 10:13-15, 21. Note that these cities have not only been reduced to ruins, but that even their site has been a matter of dispute.

As to Jesus' wanderings, read Mark 7:24-31; Matt 15:21-28.

As to Jesus and the Gentiles, read Matt 8:5-13; Luke 17:11-19; Matt 12:41, 42; Luke 4:25-27; 10:30-35.

As to the confession at Cæsarea Philippi, read Mark 8:27-38; Matt 16:13-20.

Read the story of the feeding of the multitudes given in Mark 8:1-9. Compare with that of Mark 6:30-44. Note points of resemblance and contrast. Some scholars consider these stories doublets, describing the same event with such changes as might easily come from oral tradition. Give reasons for or against this view. Would the disciples have asked the question of Mark 8:4 if the feeding of the five thousand had occurred but a little while before?