Mark 3:7-19a

The Kingdom Is Opposed (1) – Jesus Abandons the Towns

Mark 3:7-12 – Jesus Beside the Sea

Mark temporarily relieved the tension. Jesus and the disciples left synagogue and township behind and walked out to the lake and the open air. In Mark’s mind this venue was congenial.

Pharisees, and perhaps also the officials of Herod, had reason to be concerned. The popularity of Jesus was remarkable. Mark mentioned that crowds came not just from neighbouring Galilee but also from the Jewish heartland: Judea and Jerusalem. People also came from Gentile areas: from Idumea in the south, from beyond the Jordan to the east, and from the region around Tyre and Sidon to the north-west.

Mark’s description of the crowd spoke of the vast ocean of need confronting Jesus, specifically the sick, but also other victims of the evil endemic in the mood and institutions of the culture. Jesus’ ministry was clearly conducted in the midst of a people oppressed and marginalised. It brought not just health but hope.

Whatever their effect on the plotting Pharisees and Herodians, Jesus’ obvious truth, integrity and compassion stirred the evil spirits of the age, who recognised his uniqueness, even as they sought to oppose it.

The Kingdom Is Opposed (2) – Jesus Forms An Alternative Community

Mark 3:13-19 – Jesus Selects the Twelve

Jesus and his disciples went up into the hills. By not identifying the mountain, Mark gave it a symbolic meaning.

Moses, too, had gone up the mountain during the time when, under the direction of God, he was shaping the dispirited descendants of the twelve patriarchs of Israel. Elijah had also gone up the mountain, at a time when the northern Kingdom of Israel had apostatised and Elijah had been overcome with despair, only to be reassured by God that there was indeed a faithful remnant in Israel. It would be on another mountain that Mark would show Jesus, at a decisive moment in his ministry, conversing precisely with both Moses and Elijah (9:2-13).

Mark had already mentioned frequently the fact that Jesus had a group of disciples. From these Jesus selected twelve especially. Why twelve?

By appointing twelve, precisely as twelve, Mark may have been conveying the sense that Jesus was in the process of recalling the nation to the original insights and values that had first shaped it. However, Jesus’ vision was not one of restoration, but of radical reform. Jesus did not specifically want to re-establish the social and political practices of the tribal confederacy - civilisation had developed inexorably since then. He wanted to re-state and re-capture the essence of God’s original dream.

It is instructive to note what Mark had to say about the disciples. Jesus chose those whom he wanted, and they came to him.

Jesus’ tactics were being refined. As previously Jesus had taught specifically by his actions, he did so again. He began to give structure to community.

There may also have been other quite practical reasons why Jesus called this community of twelve together and why Mark placed the event precisely where he did. In the face of significant opposition, Jesus may have felt the need for support himself. Certainly his disciples would have needed support, his own support initially, but also the support of each other.

Jesus wanted them. That said something wonderful about Jesus and his vulnerability; it also said something wonderful about them. As Mark says, they came to him, willingly and whole-heartedly.

They were to be with him; they were to be sent out; they were to have authority over demons. Their “job description” was enlightening and the ordering was informative.

They were firstly to be with him. The authority for their role would be drawn from their contact and familiarity with him. Their mutual friendship would provide their motivation and strength. Only then would they be equipped to be sent out. This sending by Jesus was the reason they were called apostles (an apostle is “one who is sent”). Their mission would be to encounter and to overcome the evil of their world. 

Mark would use the term apostle on only one other occasion in his narrative. He preferred to use the general terms “disciples” or “ the twelve”. On the other occasion that he would use the term, it too would be in the context of the actual mission around the villages of Galilee (6:7-13). But before they ventured forth, there was more they had to learn.

The composition of the twelve appeared to have been a living enactment of the inclusiveness that defined Jesus’ message. 

The calling of Peter, Andrew, James and John has already been mentioned (1:16-20). Their response had been immediate and total. 

Levi had also been called to follow Jesus (2:14), but his name did not appear on the list. Given their former professions, for them to have been able to accept each other in friendship spoke much for the power of their shared loyalty to Jesus, and perhaps of the transforming power of Jesus’ love for them. 

Jesus called James and John Sons of Thunder, referring perhaps to their aggression and spontaneity. Justification for this would be noted later (10:35-45).

One of the Simons was identified as a zealot, generally understood to refer to one of a group of Jews who actively and violently opposed Roman occupation of Israel. They became a more significant force some years after Jesus’ death as the Roman occupation became more repressive. They were somewhat like contemporary “freedom fighters” or “terrorists”. Barabbas, mentioned in the account of Jesus’ crucifixion, may have belonged to such a group. Presumably Simon, a zealot, would have had great difficulty in relating to Levi, given that tax collectors closely collaborated with the regime.

Mark also commented that Judas Iscariot was eventually to betray Jesus. Nothing was said about how or why this would come about. Mark would have the reader assume that Jesus recognised his potential for service and chose him for that purpose. His eventual betrayal of Jesus would have been a deep source of disappointment and hurt to Jesus. Mark made no suggestion that Jesus had any inkling of Judas’ future choice. He was a free agent; Jesus respected his freedom. In this case Jesus’ hope and trust were betrayed.

Nothing more is known of the rest of those mentioned.

There was no woman among the twelve. There were women, however, among the disciples of Jesus. Why not among the twelve? Mark gave no answer, but if the symbolic meaning of the twelve indicated above reflected in fact the mind of Jesus, then the reason was obvious enough. The twelve were to represent the founding patriarchs. For that reason they were male.

It is also important to realise that the twelve had no monopoly on apostleship. That was certainly a significant dimension of their role, but it was by no means exclusive. Other disciples would also be apostles. As will be seen at the conclusion of Mark’s narrative, it would be women who would fulfil the role of apostles to the apostles! Three of them would be sent to bring the news of the resurrection to the frightened disciples and Peter (16:6-8).

During the lifetime of Jesus, however, in the general patriarchal society, women simply would not have been listened to. They were not allowed to address synagogue assemblies or to join in discussions that took place there.

If the current Church wrestles with inclusiveness, the struggle has had a significant precedent.

Next >> Mark 3:19b-21