Source: https://fascinatedbytheword.wordpress.com/
Timestamp: 2019-04-22 12:51:17+00:00

Document:
The disciples are mentioned four times (vv 32, 33, 36 [2x]).
Thus the story moves from Jesus healing the people by himself to Jesus feeding the people with the help of the disciples. The turning point is the dialogue between Jesus and the disciples in which Jesus shares his concern for the people who have nothing and asks the disciples what they have. The central question: “Where would we get so many loaves of bread in a desolate place to satisfy such a great multitude?” is answered in the following verses. By recognizing that what they have is not enough, but allowing Jesus to multiply the little they do have, the disciples become co-workers with him.
What makes the biblical texts so fascinating is – among other things – the fact that they are characterized by great intentionality. Every word and phrase is there for a reason and has been purposefully placed in a certain position in the text. This is true not only for individual passages, but also for collections of texts such as biblical books. It is therefore absolutely worthwhile to trace a certain word or phrase through an entire book and note possible patterns that emerge. An example I came across recently is the term “cave” in Genesis. A quick search in a concordance or Bible software program reveals that this term occurs eleven times in the book. The first occurrence is in Gen 19:30 where Lot and his two daughters leave the city of Zoar and move to a cave in the mountains. The other ten occurrences are found in Gen 23, 25, 49 and 50 and all describe the cave of Machpelah which Abraham bought from Ephron the Hittite. Thus there are two caves in Genesis: the cave of Lot and his family and the cave of Abraham and his family. This is interesting in light of the fact that the author of Genesis seems to be comparing and contrasting the two men throughout the Abraham narrative in Gen 12-25. A careful look at the eleven “cave passages” suggests that they, too, highlight the contrast between Lot and Abraham.
While the cave of Abraham and his family is mentioned multiple times and seems to play an important role for the family even after the death of Abraham, the cave of Lot and his family is mentioned only once and forcefully illustrates the change of Lot’s fortunes. The once wealthy man who dwelled in the cities of the plain (Gen 13:12; 19:29) has lost everything save his two daughters with whom he must take refuge in a cave because he is afraid to live in Zoar (Gen 19:30). Yet in an ironic twist this place of refuge becomes a place of shame as Lot’s own daughters make him drunk and become pregnant from their father (note the repetition of the terms “father” and “to lie (with)” throughout the story in vv. 30-38). Seeing no other way out of their dilemma the daughters take matters into their own hands in order to preserve Lot’s lineage. Thus they exhibit the same attitude as their father who chose for himself the whole plain (Gen 13:11).
Abraham, on the other hand, waits on God in chapter 13, whereupon he is given the promise that he and his descendants will possess the whole land (Gen 13:15-17). In contrast to Lot, Abraham does not flee to a cave in fear after the death of his wife, but legally buys one from the Hittites in order to ensure that his wife will receive a proper and honorable burial. The purchase is significant, for the piece of land on which the cave is situated, is the first property Abraham owns in Canaan and is thus closely connected to the divine promise of chapter 13. At the same time the story in Gen 23 not only shows how wealthy Abraham is but also how much the sons of Heth respect him, again contrasting him to Lot who is ridiculed and threatened by the men of Sodom (Gen 19:9). And while Lot’s two daughters sleep with him in the cave, the two sons of Abraham bury him in the cave when he dies (Gen 25:8-9). While the story of Lot thus closes on a sordid and shameful note as his daughters fail to put their hope in God, Abraham’s story ends with rest and honor as well as with hope and faith in God’s promise that Abraham’s seed (which God miraculously provided for him!) will one day possess the land.
In my last post I raised the question why the author of Gen 11:10-26 placed Peleg at the center of the genealogy. In order to begin answering this question it’s important to realize that Gen 11:18 is not the first time Peleg is mentioned. He is first introduced in Genesis 10. In that chapter the descendants of Noah’s sons Japheth, Ham and Shem are listed. Though the line of Japheth is mentioned first, most of the chapter is devoted to the lines of Ham and Shem. The sections about the descendants of these two sons both begin with a list of names. Starting in v. 6 four sons of Ham are mentioned, then five sons of Cush as well as two sons of Ragma for a total of eleven names. Then another son of Cush is listed (v. 8). His name is Nimrod and he is the twelfth individual that is mentioned. Interestingly, more information is provided about this man – a full four verses are devoted to him. No other individual in the entire chapters gets more attention than Nimrod. He is described as a powerful hunter who possessed a kingdom and built great cities like Nineveh (vv. 9-12). Clearly, Nimrod was a very powerful and important person who had made a name for himself. Everybody knew who Nimrod was.
The section on the descendants of Shem also begins with a list of names. Five sons of Shem are mentioned, then four sons of Aram (vv. 22-23). This is followed by three more individuals: Arpachshad fathers Shelah and Shelah fathers Eber. According to v. 25 Eber has two sons: Peleg and Joktan. This is the same Peleg that is mentioned in Gen 11:18. Interestingly, he is the – you guessed it – twelfth individual in the section about Shem’s descendants. And once again the usual pattern is interrupted for a brief aside: in his days the earth/land was divided (v. 25). Thus it seems that the author has intentionally arranged the two sections in such a way as to highlight Nimrod and Peleg and invite the reader to compare the two men. Apart from the fact that no offspring is mentioned in connection with either individual (in Peleg’s case this is highlighted even more by the fact that his brother Joktan fathers thirteen sons), they don’t seem to have much in common. In fact, next to Nimrod Peleg is a nobody. There is no mention that he accomplished anything great. No mention that he was powerful or important. No mention about anything that he did. Instead he is connected to the division of the earth/land and stands in the shadow of his very fruitful brother.
Yet that is not the full story. Though Nimrod is powerful and important he is also connected to the men of name before the flood (Gen 6:4, the only previous occurrence of the term “mighty one”) as well as to the tower builders at Babel in Gen 11 who defy God and seek to make a name for themselves (through the terms “Babel,” “land of Shinar,” and “build”). In light of this it seems likely that the author wants to present Nimrod as an example of an individual who seeks to achieve greatness without God (note also that the name Nimrod means “rebel”). Yet such greatness does not last. As already mentioned, there is no indication in the text that Nimrod had a son. Even if he did, his family is never mentioned again, just like the tower builders and the great men before the flood. Peleg, on the other hand, appears again in Genesis 11 at the very center of the genealogy in vv. 10-26. In this way the author highlights the fact that Peleg did father a son (in contrast to Nimrod) and in so doing became part of the chosen line (in contrast to Joktan) from which Abram emerged whose name God would make great (Gen 12:2) and whose offspring is the subject of the rest of Scripture. Thus Peleg, who was originally associated with division, became a channel/canal (the meaning of his name) of God’s blessing and the forefather of him through whom God sought to overcome the division and reunite humanity. Not bad for a “nobody”.
The genealogy contains exactly 12 names. This is interesting in light of the fact that the nation of Israel will emerge from this particular line. Even before the sons of Jacob, Israel is thus associated with the number 12.
There are exactly 10 generations from Shem to Abraham. This connects this genealogy to the previous genealogy in Gen 5 where there are 10 generations from Adam to Noah. Both genealogies end with someone fathering three sons. In contrast to the genealogy in Gen 5, the genealogy in Gen 11 does not mention death. The emphasis is thus much more on life. This makes sense because the judgment has already taken place (Gen 11:1-9), whereas in Gen 5 the judgment (the flood) is about to happen. The death notices in Gen 5 thus prepare for the judgment Gen 6-8 (and provide a contrast to Enoch who does not die), while the genealogy in Gen 11 marks a new beginning after the judgment (from a literary perspective!). This makes the death of Haran in the following section (11:27-32) even more striking.
The genealogy is framed by individuals who give birth to a son at the age of 100. According to v. 10 Shem fathered Arpachshad when he was 100 years old. According to Gen 21:5 Abraham was 100 years old when Isaac was born.
The numbers 3 and 4 occur frequently: 35, 34, 32, 30 (3x), 403 (2x), 430. Terah has three sons. The number 30 occurs three times. Arpachshad is the third son of Shem mentioned in Gen 10:22. The names Shem and Terah, which frame the genealogy occur three times each. All the other names between these two individuals are mentioned four times. The verb “beget”/”father” is mentioned three times in connection with each individual (except for four individuals: Terah, Abram, Nahor, Haran). 3 x 4 = 12 – a highly significant number for Israel. 3 + 4 = 7 – a highly significant number for the world and for Israel which is a microcosm of the world. The last number mentioned in the genealogy is the number 70. According to Gen 10 the world consists of 70 nations. According to Gen 46:27 all the persons of the house of Jacob (Israel) who went to Egypt were 70.
The numbers 2 and 9 occur frequently: 29, 32, 119, 200, 207, 209. The number 403 occurs twice. Arpachshad is born two years after the flood. The verb “live” is mentioned two times in connection with each individual (except for Shem, Terah, Abram, Nahor, Haran). There are nine individuals who father sons, as well as nine smaller numbers (100 and lower). Also, the life of each individual is divided into two parts: the period before the birth of a son and the period after the birth of that son. Thus the birth of the son becomes very significant (note that it is mentioned two times in each case!) In each case the period after the birth of the son is longer than the period before the birth. The birth of the son “prolongs” life. Life is thus connected to fruitfulness. Again, no death is mentioned, giving the impression that this life that is made possible through the birth of the son does not end – sound familiar?
The total lifetimes as well as the ages when people father sons decrease (note the pattern: 100, 35, 30, 34, 30, 32, 30, 29, 70 – there is an interval of 1 between 35 and 34, an interval of 2 between 34 and 32, and an interval of 3 between 32 and 29). The most significant drop occurs between Eber and Peleg. While the individuals up to Eber all live over 450 years, the individuals after Peleg all live under 250 years. Thus it seems that the genealogy is divided into two parts. Interestingly, the numbers 3 and 4 occur frequently in the first part, the numbers 2 and 9 in the second part. At the center of the genealogy seems to be the statement in v. 18: And Peleg lived 30 years and fathered Regu (Note that there are four individuals who father sons before Peleg and four individuals that father sons after Peleg. Also, there are eight numbers before and eight numbers after v. 18 – four smaller numbers and four larger numbers! Furthermore, the verb “live” occurs eight times before and eight times after v. 18 and the verb “beget”/”father occurs eleven times before and eleven times after this verse – meaning that the term occurs for the twelfth time in v. 18!).
If v. 18 is indeed at the center of the genealogy, why would the author want to highlight Peleg and the fact that he fathered a son?
Note how the passage moves from him (vv. 53-54a) to them (vv. 54b-57a) and back to him (vv. 57b-58). In this way the main focus of the passage is on what they say and in particular on their three questions concerning Jesus’ family. The questions imply that they know him, that he is one of them. They want to put Jesus in a box because this gives them security and power over him. If he is one of them, then he is just another human being and there is no need to respond to his teaching. Instead this teaching becomes an offense. How dare he, the son of a simple carpenter, teach them? How dare he call them to repent?
Through their questions they imply that they know him, yet the truth is that they don’t know him or don’t want to know who he really is. Because they focus solely on the earthly realm and refuse to consider the divine origin of Jesus, they are unable to answer their question where he got this wisdom and power. Ironically, the answer is found in their own questions at the heart of the story. Notice, for example, that they only mention Jesus’ mother by name, but not his father. They do not call Jesus the son of Joseph, but the son of the carpenter (v. 55). Significantly, Mary is only mentioned by name previously in connection with Jesus’ birth in Matthew 1 and 2. There she is repeatedly referred to as the mother of Jesus, while Joseph is never referred to as his father (see 1:18; 2:11, 13, 14, 20, 21). This seems to be intentional in order to highlight what is clearly stated in 1:20: “that which is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit.” Thus the wording of the first two questions in 13:55 reminds the attentive reader of Jesus’ true identity as the Son of God that was first revealed at the beginning of the gospel.
The people of Nazareth also mention Jesus’ brothers by name. That the names are given here is significant for a number of reasons. First, three of the four names (James = Jacob, Joseph, and Judas = Judah) are also found in the genealogy in Matthew 1 which shows that Jesus is the son of David and the son of Abraham and therefore the Son of God (both Isaac and Solomon were sons of God – see Gen 21:1 and 2 Sam 7:12-14). Significantly, this reminder that Jesus is the son of David and therefore a new Solomon comes right after Jesus demonstrates that he is indeed “more than Solomon” (12:42) by teaching the people in parables (13:1-52) and thereby revealing his wisdom (cf. Solomon’s proverbs). This focus on Solomon is also interesting in light of the first question in 13:55 where Jesus is called the son of the carpenter. The Greek term tektōn can mean “carpenter” but also more generally “craftsman” or “artist” and occurs a number of times in connection with the building and maintenance of the temple in the Old Testament (1 Ki 7:14; 2 Ki 12:12; 22:6; 1 Chr 22:15; 2 Chr 24:12; Ezra 3:7). Of particular interest is 1 Ki 7:14 where Hiram, the son of a tektōn (!) from Tyre, a man filled with wisdom (!) comes to Solomon to help him build the temple.
These allusions to the building of the temple are significant, for they confirm what has already been hinted at throughout the gospel of Matthew and will be made explicit later in the New Testament, namely that Jesus, the new Solomon and the new Hiram, the son of the ultimate tektōn, is also in the process of building a temple (see e.g. 1 Cor 3:16-17; Eph 2:21). This house(hold) of God consists not of Jesus’ literal family but of his spiritual family, i.e. those who do the will of his father (Matt 12:50; note the connection between 12:46-50 and 13:53-58 through the shared family vocabulary and the fact that the two passages frame the parables in 13:1-52). In light of this it does not appear accidental that three of the four names of brothers in 13:55 are also names of disciples (James, Simon, Judas), who are Jesus’ true brothers and therefore part of his spiritual family. Furthermore, all four names remind of the founding fathers of Israel (Jacob, Joseph, Simeon, Judah). They, too, are the true spiritual brothers of Jesus and belong to the household of God, the spiritual Israel of which Jesus is the foundation. It is this Israel that the people of Nazareth refuse to be a part of. They prefer to view Jesus as simply one of their own, when he instead calls them to be one of his own.
So what about us? What about us who have grown up with Jesus, who have lived next door to him all our lives just like the people of Nazareth? Who is he to us? Has he become so familiar to us that we, too, have a hard time recognizing who he truly is? Do we think we know him, when in fact we don’t? Are we in danger of viewing him as simply another member of our community so we don’t have to deal with his radical call to become a part of his community?
Who is this Jesus – to you?
What connections do you see between Matthew 13:53-58 and the following episode about the death of John the Baptist in 14:1-13? Why has Matthew placed these two narratives next to each other? What point is he trying to make?
Read John 1:19-51 and 2:12-25. What connections do you see to John 2:1-11?
According to v 1 the wedding was on the third day. Take a look at 1:19-51. What do you notice? What important event is John alluding to through this sequence? What similarity is there between this event and the way the miracle occurs in John 2:1-11? What “day” does John want us to see the wedding as taking place? Why? What is associated with this day? Also take a look at John 11:6, 17 and 12:1. What is the significance of these parallels for the story in John 2?
Read John 1:43-51. Why is it interesting that the sign at Cana is preceded by a story about a man named Nathanael?
Read John 2:13-22. Which words and phrases also occur in John 2:1-11? How do these connections point to the deeper meaning of the wedding story?
Read John 1:50; 2:22, 23 and also take a look at 4:48-50 and 20:29. What issue is addressed in these verses? What role does this issue play in John 2:1-11? Why would this issue be particularly important for John, who was writing at the end of the first century A.D.?
Read the story several times. What allusions to previous stories in the Bible do you see?
According to v 1 the wedding was on the third day. Why does the story begin in this way? What is the significance of the third day in the Bible? Where is it mentioned in the Old Testament? What does that have to do with the story in John 2?
Take a look at v 11. Why is this miracle called a “sign”? What is a sign? How is this term used in the Bible? Take a look at Genesis 9:12, Exodus 3:12, 4:8, 12:13, 31:3 und Matthew 24:3 und 24:24. What does that mean for the interpretation of John 2:1-11?
Read John 1:51. What story is Jesus alluding to here? What is he saying about himself through the allusion? What is he comparing himself to? How does the story in John 2:1-11 illustrate this truth? What promise is given to the person in the story that is alluded to? How does this prepare for the story in John 2:1-11?
Here are some study questions for the story about the wedding at Cana in John 2:1-11.
Read the story several times. Underline all words and phrases that occur more than once. Do you notice any patterns?
How many scenes are there? Which characters occur in the different scenes? Are there any similarities and/or contrasts between certain characters or scenes?
Based on your insights so far, what is the structure of the story? Which part of the story is emphasized through the structure? Why? How does the structure help you to understand the story better?
Read the story several times and take note of repeated words and phrases. What are the keywords in this story?
Why does Jesus begin his ministry at a wedding? What does this say about him and his ministry? What is associated with a wedding? What does it symbolize? Where else does the term “wedding” occur in the New Testament? What do you notice? How does this impact the story in John 2?
Take a look at v 4. Why does Jesus respond like this? Why does he call his mother “woman”? Is he being rude? What issue does he address through his question? What was his mother in danger of thinking/doing? Remember that he had left home for good shortly before.
Why does Jesus say that his hour has not yet come? What is the hour of Jesus in the gospel of John? Why does Jesus allude to this particular event in this story? What does this suggest about the miracle in John 2?
Read the story several times and write down all the characters that are mentioned. Do you see any similarities or differences between certain characters?
The mother of Jesus plays a significant role in this story. Where else does she appear in the gospel of John? What connection is there between this event and the story in John 2? Also think about what the mother of Jesus (and mothers in general) is strongly associated with in the gospels? How does this event play into the story in John 2? Take note of John 3:3-9, for example.
Compare the mother of Jesus and the headwaiter. How are they similar? How are they different?
Compare the servants and the disciples. How are they similar? How are they different? What is the function of the servants in the story with regard to the disciples? Take note of John 4:48-50 and 20:29.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.