With the recent spike in readers, I doubt most of you are identifiably Presbyterian. Perhaps not even identifiably Christian. I actually want to put up content that will appeal to my broader readership, though there will probably still be a great many references to my own ghetto [Reformed Evangelical pastorate] in this blog.

What I’m about to say, however, is mainly meant to appeal to anyone with any sense of literature and any interest in how the Bible “works” in that regard.

When I originally wrote my commentary on Mark for Canon Press, I relied heavily on the work of Austen Farrar. My view of Scripture is not identical to Farrar’s, but in terms of his actual reading of the text (as opposed to his theory about it), I found him often to be a model for how to treat the Bible.

One of the things Farrar did was see that there are double cycles in Mark’s Gospel, beginning with the healing miracles. Let me show you how this works.

In Mark chapter 1.16-20, Jesus calls four disciples by name at their work by the sea. (Since their work is fishing, one doesn’t really think much about the fact that they are by the sea, but stay tuned). After calling the four, Mark records four healing stories. There are times when Mark mentions a bunch of healings, but his stories about the healing of particular individuals stands out. (Unlike Matthew and Luke, Mark never tells of the exorcism of a pair of demoniacs or twelve lepers).

After these four healings are completed, we find Jesus back by the sea again calling someone while in the middle of their word. Levi is called from his money table and before we have yet another calling by the sea.

Thus:

Jesus calls 4 named disciples
– casts out unclean spirit,
+ raises up Simon’s mother-in-law from sick bed
– cleanses unclean leper
+ raises up paralytic from bed to walk.

Jesus calls 1 named disciple
+ stretches out withered hand.

You will notice I put some marks in my diagram to relate these healings to one another. In Mark’s gospel there are no “evil spirits” but only “unclean spirits.” Exorcisms are related conceptually by this terminology to cleansings. Leprosy, incidentally, was probably not the modern disease we know by that name. In Leviticus, “leprosy” is something that afflict not only people, but houses or clothing.

A couple of things about this:

First off, our next calling takes place again by the sea, but this time also on a mountain (Mark 3.7-19). Jesus calls twelve but Levi is named Matthew. This gives us eight rather than seven new names. And it just so happens there are eight more healing stories in the rest of the Gospel. Calling leads to restoration in the way Mark tells his story.

Secondly, if we look at the rest of the miracles we might see who the healing of the man with the withered hand (Mark 3.1-6) fits with what comes before.

Since the first miracle is an exercism, lets see what happens if we list all the miracles beginning a new line with each exorcism:

Thus:

• casts out unclean spirit, raises up Simon’s mother-in-law from sick bed, cleanses unclean leper, raises up paralytic from bed to walk, stretches out withered hand.
• casts out legion from grave-dweller, cleanses woman with issue of blood, raises up Jairus’ daughter
• casts out unclean spirit from daughter, heals deaf-mute, heals blind man
• casts our unclean spirit from son, heals blind man

So far so good, but I left out some details. For one thing, in the last exorcism the unclean spirit in the son specifically makes him deaf and dumb. We have a movement here from

exorcism, healing of a deaf-mute, healing of a blind man

to

exorcism of a deaf-mute, healing of a blind man

Now, can anyone possibly believe that Mark didn’t notice the pattern here? We narrow down from three miracles to two miracles because the first two of the first cycle are both reproduced in the first healing of the second cycle.

Now put this together with our first five miracles:

> exorcism, restoration, cleansing, restoration to walk — restoration of hand
> exorcism, cleansing, restoration to life from death — ?
> exorcism, restoration of deaf-mute — restoration of blind man
> exorcism of deaf-mute — restoration of blind man

You will need to read my book to get more details worked out, but my point here is that Mark is quite intent on portraying the restoration of the whole man. He complements unparalyzed feet with outstretched hand. He later complements with the restored voice and hearing with restored seeing.

If we see these as four cycles with complements added on, then the reason we are missing that complement in the second cycle isn’t too hard to understand. Hands complement feet and eyes complement ears and mouth for a functioning head, but there is no need to complete a resurrection.

But after the raising of Jairus’ daughter, Mark’s accounts of physical restorations change focus. He moves from body to head. He is apparently to move toward a climax in these accounts and this is how he deals with the raising of Jairus’ daughter. Once you have told of a resurrection, how can you “heighten” your story to climax in the resurrection of Jesus (which would be the fourteenth healing miracle)? Mark’s answer is to stop talking about people who were bed-ridden or missing a functional limb and tell about the head.

As I said, I deal with this much more thoroughly in my book. My actual reason for reviewing all this, however, is so that in another post I can actually improve on my book to some extent. I have come farther along since I wrote it.

But that will be for another time.