Making Sense of the Disciples’ Misunderstanding of Bread in Mark 6:52 (Part I)

Bread from Heaven and the Wilderness Generation in Mark 6–8 | Introduction and Scriptural Framework

A few years back, I taught an introduction to Scripture class during which I chose Mark as the Gospel to be representative of the Synoptics—Matthew, Mark, and Luke. There are a number of reasons why: (1) Mark was most likely the first Gospel written; (2) Matthew and Luke are heavily dependent on Mark; (3) being the shortest, Mark is the easiest to get through in part of a semester; and (4) I know Mark best of the three. That said, when we arrived at Jesus walking on water (6:45–52), the closing narrator’s remark (vv. 51–52) baffled me:

|51| καὶ ἀνέβη πρὸς αὐτοὺς εἰς τὸ πλοῖον καὶ ἐκόπασεν ὁ ἄνεμος, καὶ λίαν [ἐκ περισσοῦ] ἐν ἑαυτοῖς ἐξίσταντο· |52| οὐ γὰρ συνῆκαν ἐπὶ τοῖς ἄρτοις, ἀλλʼ ἦν αὐτῶν ἡ καρδία πεπωρωμένη.

|51| and (Jesus) boarded the boat,¹ and the wind ceased. And, (the disciples) were exceedingly amazed [because of the extraordinary (sight)]² among them, |52| for they did not understand the bread,³ but their hearts were hardened. (KSV)

I had never really thought about what the Gospel writer was trying to convey here. Then, I got to thinking, “What in the world does bread actually have to do with Jesus’s theophanic walking on water?” Sure, the feeding of the five-thousand just occurred in the previous narrative, but again, what does that have to do with Jesus walking on water?! Are the disciples not allowed to be amazed for the simple fact they witnessed something miraculous? For Mark, the answer seems to be: “no, because bread.”

Icon of Jesus Walking on Water (Matt 14:22–23) | Frustratingly, almost every depiction is of Matthew’s account of Peter failing...

The final phrase confounded me further, “their hearts were hardened.” What does Pharaoh have to do with this (Exod 11:10)? Or, does it have anything to do with Pharaoh?

This verse became exceedingly more and more exasperating as we progressed through Mark 6–8. I could not let it go, so I kept digging into commentaries to see what others had to say. Unfortunately, most every commentator said what I essentially told my class, “Yeah, this is weird. It’s connected to the previous pericope. Moving on...” What a wholly unsatisfying answer; this verse is a niggling explanation that is meant to clear up the ambiguity, yet it achieves the exact opposite. It injects such befuddlement that it feels as if the author wantonly included it to vex the audience upon their first read—and the tenth, twentieth, and one-hundredth based upon the dearth of a satisfactory exposition. 

As such, I have a solution to what this passage means and the purpose it serves in Mark 6–8. Each narrative unit—pericope—will be examined, highlighting how “bread” (ἄρτος) is a connective word used by Mark to illustrate that all these passages are dependent on the Feeding of the Five-thousand—really the Exodus account of God providing miraculous bread, the Hebrews witnessing His glory, and them not understanding.

I cannot hope to delve into each passage in one entry, so I will be breaking up my argument into multiple publications:⁴

1. Introduction & Scriptural Framework (i.e., critical OT texts)

2. The King’s Banquet in the Wilderness: The Feeding of the Five-Thousand (6:30–44)

3. Exodus Typologies: Jesus Walking on Water (6:45–52)

4. Eating Bread with Defiled Hands: The 10 Commandments, the Tradition of the Elders, and What Defiles a Man (7:1–23)

5. Bread for God’s Children and the Dogs: The Syrophoenician Woman (7:24–30)

6. The King’s Banquet in the Wilderness: The Feeding of the Four-Thousand (8:1–10)

7. This Generation Demands a Sign (8:11–13)

8. The Yeast of the Pharisees and Herod (8:14–21)

9. Synthesis and Conclusion

This is obviously a long-term project that will take some time to produce. I have written much of this already, but I want to expand it to be a more fleshed out exegetical exploration. So, now I will introduce the main thesis and discuss the significant passages of the Exodus for understanding Mark 6–8.

Nota Bene: It might be helpful to understand how I structure Mark, which you can read here. It is not necessary, but my introduction to Mark and outline of the Gospel’s structure could help situate this work.

Introduction

Through a narrative-critical approach,⁵ this study tracks an undercurrent in Mark 6–8 wherein the author intentionally referenced critical Exodus motifs to delineate Christ’s early ministry. Specifically, Mark implemented “bread” as a signifier of Christ’s identity and the revelation of the Kingdom of God since chapters 6–8 are purposefully structured around the manna from heaven account and the wilderness generation. Various Exodus themes and echoes throughout help explain why the disciples and others fail to perceive.⁶

When read through this lens, the reference to bread in 6:52 becomes intelligible; the insiders—the disciples—and the outsiders—the crowds, Pharisees, et al.—of the Gospel are akin to the wilderness generation. Both feast upon the bread miraculously given in the wilderness, but they fail to comprehend or even recognize the glory of Christ/God. It is crucial to note, Mark works with a template of conflated ideas, meaning he mixes multiple stories and concepts to concoct his thematic appeals. Just one source is not the nucleus of Mark’s thought, but rather he draws on a bricolage of Old Testament texts to solidify these resonances.⁷ As such, the various stories that have been compiled and grouped together to form Mark 6–8 must be read as a cohesive whole.⁸ Each of these pericopes have been placed together in order to showcase the underlying importance of the Exodus and bread from heaven,—both tacitly and explicitly—culminating in Mark 8:14–21. In turn, each of the narrative segments will be explored to illustrate how Mark wove these features into his Gospel.

The prominent themes that have their basis in the Exodus include bread, the request for a sign, testing, misunderstanding, hardened hearts, the satisfaction of the consumers, and the revelation of glory. Mark 6–8⁹ contains a network of allusions to the manna from heaven (Exod 16:1–36) and the wilderness generation (Exodus–Deuteronomy, esp. Num 14:1–25, 32:13; Psalm 78 [77], 95 [94]),—images that implicitly compare Jesus’s hearers to the stubborn and rebellious generation who ate of the bread supernaturally provided them, but failed to believe—which all contribute to a proper interpretation of 6:52. Although v. 52 is a targeted emphasis, my argument covers Mark 6–8 and beyond (e.g., the Last Supper, 14:17–25). Ultimately, to decipher the meaning of Mark 6:52, it is critical to realize that Mark engineered a matrix of references in the surrounding narratives, contingent on the wilderness generation. The broader thesis comprises interpreting the linkage of bread and misunderstanding in the Gospel, and why Mark chose to implement this Exodus imagery in his narrative to present an enigmatic Jesus and befuddled crowds.

Scriptural Framework

In order to grasp fully the argument, it is paramount to have a working understanding of the major texts that discuss the Exodus and the Wilderness Generation. There will not be an extensive breakdown of each text, but the themes and ideas that are prominent in Mark will be highlighted.

The Miraculous Feeding in the Desert | Exod 16:1–36

The manna from heaven account (Exod 16:1–36) is the foundational text for understanding the miraculous multiplication of bread in Mark 6:30–44, and it is the nucleus for the theme of bread and misunderstanding in chapters 6–8. This event is revelatory, yet also practical, for God sustained the lives of the Hebrews when they were hungry in the wilderness.

After Moses had led the Hebrews out of Egypt and across the Red Sea, the people began to complain— “on the fifteenth day of the second month” (16:1, RSV)—since they were without food:

~~

Nota Bene: I will provide both the Hebrew (Masoretic Text [MT]) and the Greek (Septuagint [LXX]) in this discussion, but the Greek is more important. There is debate¹⁰ on which version the NT authors used,—the Hebrew or the Greek OT—but Mark appears reliant on the Greek for his arguments.

~~

|2| And the whole congregation of the people of Israel murmured against Moses and Aaron in the wilderness (MT: בַּמִּדְבָּֽר; LXX: lacks “in the wilderness”), |3| and said to them, “Would that we had died by the hand of [YHWH] in the land of Egypt, when we sat by the fleshpots and ate bread (MT: לֶ֖חֶם; LXX: ἄρτους) to the full (MT: לָשֹׂ֑בַע; LXX: εἰς πλησμονήν); for you have brought us out into this wilderness (MT: אֶל־הַמִּדְבָּ֣ר; LXX: εἰς τὴν ἔρημον) to kill this whole assembly with hunger.” (Exod 16:2–3, RSV)

Even after the Lord’s deliverance of the people from Pharaoh’s clutches, the people failed to appreciate the power of God—the plagues and the crossing of the Red Sea should have been fresh in their minds.¹¹ Regardless, the people bemoaned their plight, wishing for death since they could have their fill of bread in Egypt, as opposed to their lack of sustenance in the wilderness.

The following text is rather redundant since God explains what he wants Moses to tell the people, and then Moses tells the people almost verbatim what God just said. It is worthy to note, though, that Moses and Aaron add to what the Lord instructed:

|4| Then the Lord said to Moses, “Behold, I will rain bread from heaven (MT: לֶ֖חֶם מִן־הַשָּׁמָ֑יִם; LXX: ἄρτους ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ) for you; and the people shall go out and gather a day’s portion every day...

[Moses and Aaron repeat God’s directive, then add:] |7| “and in the morning you shall see the glory of the Lord (MT: אֶת־כְּב֣וֹד יְהוָ֔ה; LXX: τὴν δόξαν κυρίου), because he has heard your murmurings against the Lord...” (Exodus 16:4, 7, RSV)

Even though the people grumbled against Moses and God, the Lord promised to provide for his people by raining down miraculous bread from heaven. When the leaders of the Hebrews relate this back to the people, they add that the “glory of the Lord” will be witnessed in this life-sustaining event, this epiphany. It reveals to the people that YHWH is their God, their Lord who delivered them from Egypt.

The narrative continues with the promise of fulfillment again, elaborating on God’s sustaining power,

|10| And as Aaron spoke to the whole congregation of the people of Israel, they looked toward the wilderness (MT: אֶל־הַמִּדְבָּ֑ר; LXX: εἰς τὴν ἔρημον), and behold, the glory of the Lord (MT: כְּב֣וֹד יְהוָ֔ה; LXX: ἡ δόξα κυρίου) appeared in the cloud. |11| And the Lord said to Moses,... |12| in the morning you shall be filled with bread (MT: תִּשְׂבְּעוּ־לָ֑חֶם; LXX: πλησθήσεσθε ἄρτων); then you shall know that I am the Lord your God (MT: וִֽידַעְתֶּ֕ם כִּ֛י אֲנִ֥י יְהוָ֖ה אֱלֹהֵיכֶֽם; LXX: γνώσεσθε ὅτι ἐγὼ κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν).’” (Exod 16:10–12, RSV)

Now, it may seem repetitious to highlight these same themes, but the narrative itself underscores their importance by reiterating the points continually. The remainder of the chapter speaks more of rules and regulations, the consumption of quail,—also supplied miraculously—the naming of this heavenly bread (manna), and the preservation of a portion for generations to come.

Overall, the main takeaways for Mark 6–8 are:

1. The Wilderness (location)

2. Bread (from heaven)

3. The people having their fill (satisfaction)

4. Revelation of Glory (that YHWH is their God)

As we shall see when exploring the pericopes in Mark that contain Exodus themes and bread, these facets will appear repeatedly. The wandering generation, though, was not satisfied by this miraculous feeding, as can be seen in a similar manna account in Numbers 11.

Manna Falling from Heaven | Nüremberg Bible | Germany, 15c.

A Second Telling of The Miraculous Feeding in the Desert | Num 11:1–15

There are fewer formative parallels with this second manna account in the Pentateuch, but for thoroughness, it must be explored briefly. Similar to Moses and the Hebrews fleeing Egypt, they depart from Mt. Sinai—“in the second year, in the second month, on the twentieth day of the month” (Num 10:11, RSV)—and after only a few days’ time, the Hebrews are once again disgruntled with what the Lord provided for them:

|11:4| Now the rabble that was among them had a strong craving; and the people of Israel also wept again, and said, “O that we had meat to eat! |5| We remember the fish we ate in Egypt for nothing, the cucumbers, the melons, the leeks, the onions, and the garlic; |6| but now our strength is dried up, and there is nothing at all but this manna (MT: אֶל־הַמָּ֥ן; LXX: μάννα) to look at.” (Num 11:4–6, RSV)

Note, their complaint is similar to that in Exodus, but much expanded. The author lists more of what the people had in Egypt other than meat. This is followed by a description of what manna was, which then leads to the Lord becoming enraged by their complaints. 

The main feature for our purposes is the people’s dissatisfaction with the mana. Even though God provided for them in the wilderness, it was not sufficient for them. God, in turn, gathers 70 elders together with Moses, and he acquiesces to their request for meat, providing them quail. Despite the people not satisfied with the signs and wonders of the plagues, the parting of the Red Sea, and the miraculous bread given in the wilderness, the Lord still provides for them.

Signs, Wonders, and Disbelief in Numbers & Deuteronomy

The narratives that we will examine in Numbers and Deuteronomy do not relate specifically to the manna from heaven accounts. Rather, the emphasis of these stories is on the wilderness generation and how they are described. Bread from heaven is a critical red thread through Mark 6–8, but the description of the people that parallels the wilderness generation is also key. These two elements, once combined, make the echoes and resonances clearer in Mark.

The Spies Return, the People Rebel | Numbers 14:1–25

To set the scene, the Hebrews have come to the Promised Land, and Moses has sent spies to scope out the area. Upon their return, the people rebelled and wished to return to Egypt because they viewed the requisite militaristic conquest to be too formidable. They claim, “Would that we had died in the land of Egypt! Or would that we had died in this wilderness!” (Num 14:2b, RSV). After more insubordination and grumbling, God responds,

How long will this people (MT: הָעָ֣ם הַזֶּ֑ה; LXX: ὁ λαὸς οὗτος) despise me? And how long will they not believe (MT: לֹא־יַאֲמִ֣ינוּ; LXX: οὐ πιστεύουσίν) in me, in spite of all the signs (MT: הָֽאֹת֔וֹת; LXX: τοῖς σημείοις) which I have wrought among them? (Num 14:11, RSV)

Although the context has changed for the Hebrews, their offense remains the same. This people/generation still does not believe in the power of God, regardless of the numerous signs—read: marvels, wonders, etc.—he has performed to save them. They fail to recall the plagues, the parting of the Red Sea, and the bread from heaven—that God was their Savior (e.g., Ps 78 [77]:22; 106 [105]:8, 10, 21). He supplies whatever the Hebrews need whenever they bleat like sheep, demanding sustenance or salvation, yet they never grasp fully what the Lord has done for them.

In turn, God wished to decimate his people out of total exasperation. Moses then interceded to spare his people, to which God replied,

|20| “...I have pardoned, according to your word; |21| but truly, as I live, and as all the earth shall be filled with the glory of the Lord (MT: כְבוֹד־יְהוָ֖ה; LXX: ἡ δόξα κυρίου), |22| none of the men who have seen my glory and my signs (MT: אֶת־כְּבֹדִי֙ וְאֶת־אֹ֣תֹתַ֔י; LXX: τὴν δόξαν μου καὶ τὰ σημεῖα) which I wrought in Egypt and in the wilderness (MT: וּבַמִּדְבָּ֑ר; LXX: ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ ταύτῃ), and yet have put me to the proof these ten times and have not hearkened to my voice, |23| shall see the land which I swore to give to their fathers; and none of those who despised me shall see it. (Num 14:20–23, RSV)

This generation—an often derided pariah, an example of unfaithfulness—will be excluded from entering the land of promise because of their lack of faith. Despite all the miraculous wonders the Lord has performed, they will doubt what their God is capable of doing for them. As such, this generation who witnessed God’s glory and signs—e.g., the bread from heaven—in the wilderness will not inhabit the land of milk and honey because they do not believe. Throughout their sojourn from Sinai to the Promised Land, they continued to doubt and test the Lord, so now they will be punished for their insubordination.

Signs and Wonders in Deuteronomy

Briefly, signs and wonders are a constant appeal in Deuteronomy to remind the people what the Lord did for them in Egypt and in the wilderness. Although the bread from heaven account is not the particular emphasis in these verses, it is worthy to note that God’s salvific actions must be told to the Hebrews again and again. The wilderness generation failed to remember the deeds the Lord had done for them:

Or has any god ever attempted to go and take a nation for himself from the midst of another nation, by trials, by signs, by wonders, (MT: בְּאֹתֹ֨ת וּבְמוֹפְתִ֜ים; LXX: ἐν σημείοις καὶ ἐν τέρασιν) and by war, by a mighty hand and an outstretched arm, and by great terrors, according to all that the Lord your God did for you in Egypt before your eyes? (Deut 4:34, RSV)

and the Lord showed signs and wonders (MT: אוֹתֹ֣ת וּ֠מֹפְתִים; LXX: σημεῖα καὶ τέρατα μεγάλα), great and grievous, against Egypt and against Pharaoh and all his household, before our eyes; (Deut 6:22, RSV)

the great trials which your eyes saw, the signs, the wonders, (MT: וְהָאֹתֹ֤ת וְהַמֹּֽפְתִים֙; LXX: τὰ σημεῖα καὶ τὰ τέρατα) the mighty hand, and the outstretched arm, by which the Lord your God brought you out; so will the Lord your God do to all the peoples of whom you are afraid. (Deut 7:19, RSV)

his signs and his deeds (MT: וְאֶת־אֹֽתֹתָיו֙ וְאֶֽת־מַעֲשָׂ֔יו; LXX: τὰ σημεῖα αὐτοῦ καὶ τὰ τέρατα αὐτοῦ) which he did in Egypt to Pharaoh the king of Egypt and to all his land (Deut 11:3, RSV)

and the Lord brought us out of Egypt with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm, with great terror, with signs and wonders (MT: וּבְאֹת֖וֹת וּבְמֹפְתִֽים; LXX: ἐν σημείοις καὶ ἐν τέρασιν) (Deut 26:8, RSV)

Alongside the characteristic features of Exodus 16, we must add from the Pentateuch the emphasis of signs and wonders for the wilderness generation. This is a key aspect of the Hebrews’ wandering in the wilderness, for God continually performed signs for them, yet they did not believe.¹²

The Defiant History of Israel in the Psalms

The psalms are incredibly important for understanding how the ancient Israelites understood their prehistoric origins, for frequently the psalmists would summarize and enlarge what happened in the Torah, revealing additional details and potentially developed beliefs. Psalm 78 (77) is critical for our current study, but we will explore two additional psalms since they, too, highlight features that will be significant in Mark.

The Rebellious Generation in the Wilderness | Psalm 78 (77)

~~

Nota Bene: You will notice that the numbering of the psalms sometimes has two numbers, as above. This is because the numbering in the Hebrew (Masoretic Text [MT]) differs from the Greek (Septuagint [LXX]). So, if you see a psalm number followed by a parenthetical or brackets with another number, it is to note that the MT and LXX differ.

~~

This particular psalm is an abbreviated and poetic retelling of Israel’s defiant history. That, despite witnessing all the miraculous signs and wonders of the Lord, they still fail to believe. The primary focus is centered on the wilderness generation who were supplied miraculous bread, yet still rebelled and tested the Lord. Near the end, the psalmist describes their arrival to and establishment of the Promised Land, but the generations following still rebelled and tested the Lord. All in all, the work is meant to emphasize that God will not abandon his people. The author insists that all generations should teach their children these lessons,¹³

|7| so that they should set their hope in God,

and not forget the works of God,

but keep his commandments;

|8| and that they should not be like their fathers,

a stubborn and rebellious generation (MT: דּוֹר֮ סוֹרֵ֪ר וּמֹ֫רֶ֥ה; LXX: γενεὰ σκολιὰ¹⁴ καὶ παραπικραίνουσα),

a generation whose heart was not steadfast,

whose spirit was not faithful to God. (Ps 78 [77]:7–8, RSV)

With this in mind, the psalmist lists numerous examples from Israel’s history to showcase how unfaithful “their fathers, a stubborn and rebellious generation,” were. The text proceeds recounting several “marvels” (MT: פֶ֑לֶא; LXX: θαυμάσια) in vv. 12–16 that illustrate he is their God—e.g., the parting of the Red Sea and providing them water—and

|17| Yet they sinned still more against him,

rebelling against (MT: לַֽמְר֥וֹת; LXX: παρεπίκραναν) the Most High in the desert (MT: בַּצִּיָּֽה; LXX: ἐν ἀνύδρῳ).

|18| They tested (MT: וַיְנַסּוּ; LXX:  ἐξεπείρασαν) God in their heart

by demanding the food (MT: אֹ֥כֶל; LXX: βρώματα) they craved.

|19| They spoke against God, saying,

“Can God spread a table in the wilderness? (MT: בַּמִּדְבָּֽר; LXX: ἐν ἐρήμῳ)

|20| He smote the rock so that water gushed out

and streams overflowed.

Can he also give bread (MT: לֶ֭חֶם; LXX: ἄρτον),

or provide meat for his people?” (Ps 78 [77]:17–20, RSV)

Interestingly, v. 20 differs slightly in the Septuagint:

μὴ καὶ ἄρτον δύναται δοῦναι 

ἢ ἑτοιμάσαι τράπεζαν τῷ λαῷ αὐτοῦ;

Is He also not able to give bread

or prepare a table for his people? (KSV)

Now, this may seem inconsequential, but it is a shift from the Hebrew, where “table” is not present. The word is “meat” (שְׁאֵ֣ר), but the verb—in the RSV, “provide”—means “prepare” in the hifil, which it is here (יָכִ֖ין); this may have been what led to the shift in the LXX. That said, it was a conscious decision by the translator to shift “meat” to “table,”—to prepare meat might have been understood as to prepare the table—or there is a difference in the recensional material no longer extant, i.e., the Hebrew text he had contained “table” rather than “meat,” and so that is what he translated. There is no way for us to know for certain, but the phraseology, “prepare a table (ἑτοιμάσαι τράπεζαν)” will play a potential role in Mark’s Gospel.

Regardless of the lexical shift, the retelling emphasizes the rebellious nature of the Hebrews, how they craved food that they did not have. The psalmist puts a phrase in their mouth, “Can God spread a table in the wilderness,” which is a poetic way of questioning the Lord’s ability to supply food for them in the wilderness. It further emphasizes the preposterous, ungrateful attitude of the Hebrews because food alone would not be satisfactory; they, too, would desire a table.¹⁵ This is also illustrated when, after receiving their bread, they demand meat. The cycle continues: The Hebrews complain > God Provides > the Hebrews are satisfied > the provision was insufficient > the Hebrews complain > etc.

Miracle of the Manna | Tintoretto, c 1577 | Scuolo Grande di San Rocco, Venice

With that, the psalmist continues,

|21| Therefore, when the Lord heard, he was full of wrath;

a fire was kindled against Jacob,

his anger mounted against Israel;

|22| because they had no faith in God (MT: כִּ֤י לֹ֣א הֶ֭אֱמִינוּ בֵּאלֹהִ֑ים; LXX: ὅτι οὐκ ἐπίστευσαν ἐν τῷ θεῷ),

and did not trust his saving power.

|23|Yet he commanded the skies above,

and opened the doors of heaven;

|24| and he rained down upon them manna to eat,

and gave them the grain/bread of heaven (MT: וּדְגַן־שָׁ֝מַ֗יִם; LXX: ἄρτον οὐρανοῦ).

|25| Man ate of the bread of the [powerful]¹⁶/angels (MT: לֶ֣חֶם אַ֭בִּירִים; LXX: ἄρτον ἀγγέλων);

he sent them [bread]/[provisions]¹⁷ in abundance (MT: לָהֶ֣ם לָשֹֽׂבַע; LXX: ἐπισιτισμὸν... εἰς πλησμονήν)...

[Providing of Meat]

|29| And they ate and were well filled (MT: וַיִּשְׂבְּע֣וּ מְאֹ֑ד; LXX: ἐφάγοσαν καὶ ἐνεπλήσθησαν σφόδρα),

for he gave them what they craved...

[Destruction of the People]

|32| In spite of all this they still sinned;

despite his wonders they did not believe (MT: וְלֹֽא־הֶ֝אֱמִ֗ינוּ בְּנִפְלְאוֹתָֽיו; LXX: καὶ οὐκ ἐπίστευσαν ἐν τοῖς θαυμασίοις αὐτοῦ).

The wrath of God is predicated on their lack of faith; they did not believe in his ability to provide sustenance in the wilderness. Even though the Hebrews have already witnessed the previous marvels, they did not trust in God. In spite of this incredulity, the Lord rains down manna, the “bread of heaven,” in plenty and provides quail so that they may be satisfied.

The final verse of this section highlights the Hebrews’ failure: they are unwilling to believe regardless of what God does for them. The miraculous provision of bread was insufficient for swaying them to have faith in the Lord; his wonders were not so wondrous in their eyes.

This is further highlighted in vv. 40–41,

|40| How often they rebelled (MT: יַמְר֣וּהוּ; LXX: παρεπίκραναν) against him in the wilderness (MT: בַמִּדְבָּ֑ר; LXX: ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ)

and grieved him in the desert (MT: בִּֽישִׁימֽוֹן; LXX: ἐν γῇ ἀνύδρῳ)!

|41| They [turned away from] and tested (MT: וַיָּשׁ֣וּבוּ וַיְנַסּ֣וּ אֵ֑ל; LXX: ἐπέστρεψαν καὶ ἐπείρασαν τὸν θεὸν) [God ...],¹⁸

and provoked the Holy One of Israel.

Following this, the psalmist highlights once again that the Hebrews tested the Lord for they did not remember the signs and wonders he did in Egypt. The psalm concludes similarly, but it relates to the Hebrews who have settled the Promised Land.

Our list of features grows:

1. Wonders/marvels performed by God¹⁹

2. Rebellious generation

3. The people tested the Lord

4. No faith/not believing in God (despite his signs and wonders)

Psalm 78 (77) is not the only historical psalm, but there are two others worth noting: Psalm 105 (104) and Psalm 106 (105).

Additional Historical Psalms | Psalms 105 (104) & 106 (105)

The first is relevant for one verse alone,

וְלֶ֥חֶם שָׁ֝מַ֗יִם יַשְׂבִּיעֵֽם

καὶ ἄρτον οὐρανοῦ ἐνέπλησεν αὐτούς·

And he satisfied/sated²⁰ them with bread from heaven.²¹ (Ps. 105 [104]:40b, KSV)

There is little to say for this one verse but to emphasize bread from heaven and satisfaction are two key elements in this historical psalm. When the psalmist composed this one verse to reflect the manna from heaven incident, this is what he emphasized. 

In turn, Psalm 106 (105) is similarly lacking. Though, the wilderness generation is called out because, when they departed Egypt, they “did not consider [God’s] wonderful works” (v. 7 | MT: נִפְלְאוֹתֶ֗יךָ; LXX:  τὰ θαυμάσιά σου). The psalmist lists a few deeds the Lord performed for their benefit, but 

“they had a wanton craving in the wilderness (MT: בַּמִּדְבָּ֑ר; LXX:  ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ), 

and put God to the test (MT: וַיְנַסּוּ־אֵ֝֗ל; LXX: ἐπείρασαν τὸν θεὸν) in the desert (Ps 106 [105]:14, RSV)

The remainder of the psalm is a diatribe for how bad the wilderness generation was, but it is paramount for our current study to focus on these two verses. They repeat the aspects we have focused on thus far: the marvels God performed, the hunger of the people in the wilderness, the satisfaction from heavenly bread, and they tested the Lord.

Conclusion

As we read through Mark 6–8, it will become abundantly clear how reliant the Second Evangelist was on the Old Testament broadly, the Exodus in particular. These are the major texts that need to be read and understood prior to progressing through Mark’s narrative. Other prominent stories from the Exodus will be showcased as necessary,—such as in Jesus’s walking on water—but this will serve as a solid foundation for moving forward.

Icon of Jesus Feeding the Five-Thousand

Now, I want to establish those features from above that are paramount for perceiving the resonances and echoes in Mark 6–8:

1. Bread (from heaven)

2. In the wilderness, desert

3. The satisfaction of the consumers/had their fill

4. Signs & wonders/marvels

5. Revelation of God’s glory

6. This (rebellious) generation, people

7. Testing/putting God to the test

8. Not believing (despite witnessing God’s marvels); a lack of faith

The germ of these themes resides in Exodus 16, but these aspects continue to develop in the rest of the Pentateuch and Psalms. From this cursory exploration, I want to underscore, highlight, and emphasize this significant point: this wilderness generation was rebellious and put God to the test, regardless of the signs, wonders, and marvels he performed for the people, especially the raining down bread from heaven to satiate them. No matter what the Lord performed for his people, the Hebrews continued to test and not believe.

It is necessary to establish this OT framework—the wandering generation in the wilderness—prior to reading through Mark 6–8. With this knowledge fresh in mind, it will become readily apparent that Mark was tacitly referencing the Exodus throughout, which, in turn, helps us better understand the misunderstanding that is so prevalent in this unit and why Mark thought “bread” was a reasonable explanation for the disciples’ amazement and incomprehension of Jesus’s wondrous walking on water.

---

If you want to keep reading about the wilderness generation in Mark and more about the New Testament and its world, would you kindly subscribe?

1. Lit. “came up toward them into the boat.”

2. Common in Greek, words have been omitted that we would usually not exclude in English. The idea being, they are astounded because of the extraordinary event that just happened before them.

3. “Bread” is plural, so commonly it is translated as “loaves.” I choose to translate all instances of ἄρτος in chs 6–8 as “bread” in order to show the connectivity based on this word.

4. Just to note, this could be—and would have been—a book. So, this will take quite some time to accomplish. I have an article length write-up, which is around 10,000 words. This final project will certainly eclipse that number.

5. Although redaction and form criticism can be fruitful in this discussion, I instead focus on how this verse fits into the narrative in its final form. The foremost redaction critical approach to this verse is Q. Quesnell The Mind of Mark (Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1969).

6. As Quesnell Mind, 277 stated in his conclusion, “The possibility of a highly elaborate code, cypher or allegory which no one has yet mastered, can never be absolutely ruled out.” He believed it to be unlikely that such a connective theme exists, but this article presents a cohesive postulation.

7. A perfect illustration comes from the composite quotation at the beginning of the Gospel, which draws from Isaiah, Exodus, and Malachi. All these echoes work together in concert to construct a unified theme in Mark’s Gospel. Mark is less concerned with an exact parallel from a singular source; rather, he has a structured machination to serve this purpose. Problematically, it is by inference that we are able to reconstruct these nebulous concepts.

8. The Gospel of Mark was composed not as a history, but more like a theological novel, akin almost to historical fiction. The ordering of events may or may not have played out in the manner in which Mark presents them, assuming the author did not fabricate any of the stories. It should be understood, first and foremost, the Gospels are not historical accounts. The authors did not intend on the readers consuming their material as if it was all historically and factually accurate. If we compare the Synoptics—Matthew, Mark, and Luke—they contain many of the same narrative events. They are not always told in the same order; they do not all contain the same messages. This leaves us in a bit of a conundrum if they are meant to be historical texts: someone then has to be wrong.

9. A. Meyer, “Die Entstehung des Markusevangelium” in Festgabe für Adolf Jülicher (Tübingen: Mohr, 1927) called 6:30–8:21 “the bread-section” because of the catchword, “bread.” He emphasized Old Testament food laws, whereas I explore the narrative significance throughout Mark. Additionally, many commentators reference the wilderness generation in these individual pericopes, but they fail to realize how connected these narratives are to this unifying theme of misunderstanding. It is worth noting the parallelism of stories in 6:30–8:26, as illustrated by M. Boring, Mark (Louisville: Westminster, 2012), 179–80).

10. See T. Law, When God Spoke Greek (Oxford: Oxford, 2013).

11. Similarly, see W. Propp, Exodus 1–18 (New Haven: Yale, 2008), 599. He expounds more on the “murmuring” tradition.

12. Philo emphasizes this point as well: 

For though they had already experienced an infinite number of blessings which had befallen them unexpectedly and out of the ordinary course of affairs, they ought, in his opinion, not to have allowed themselves to be led away by any specious or plausible complaints, but to have trusted in him, as they had already received the clearest possible proofs that he spoke truly about everything. (Life of Moses 1.196)

Translation from, C. Yonge, The Works of Philo (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1995), 477.

13. As F. Hossfeld and E. Zenger, Psalms 2 (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2005), 295 comment, “Verses 7–8 name the fundamental perspective for the whole historical narrative and present Israel’s ideal behavior as paradigm. This ideal is described in a mixture of Wisdom language and Deuteronomistic formulations: Israel is to put its trust in God—an expression that appears only four other times in the OT (Ps 49:14; Prov 3:26; Job 8:14; 31:24).”

14. LSJ II. “crooked, i.e., unjust, unrighteous.”

15. On “table” in the wilderness, M. Tate, Psalms 51–100 (Dalla: Word, 1998), 282 comments, “19.b. Frequently translated as “spread a table” (cf. Ps 23:5). The word for “table” (שׁלחן) probably originally referred to a leather hide spread on the ground for the serving of food. However, other references indicate that it can be used with the idea of a “table” in our sense of the word (e.g., Ps 69:23; Exod 25:23, 27, 28, 30; 30:27; 37:10; 1 Kgs 7:48; Ezek 40:41, 42).”

16. I am shifting from “angels” in the RSV just to show lexically that is not what is present. For why “angels” is there, see HALOT, “angel Ps 78:25 (לֶחֶם אַבִּירִים, Sept. = manna, Wisd 1620, Yomab 75b).”

17. I have altered the RSV for both the Hebrew and the Greek because I want to highlight the lexical significance of what is in the text. The MT retained “bread,” whereas the LXX translator chose—seemingly—to shift away from a third usage within three lines of “bread” (ἄρτον). Note

MT: Grain... bread... bread

LXX: Bread... bread... provisions

18. I changed the RSV quite a bit here, “They tested him again and again.” The sense is correct, but I want to show that 2 verbs were used, not just one. I, personally, also disagree with how this was rendered. Sometimes paraphrasing or adding words is necessary to convey a thought in English, but that is not the case here. I’m rather curious why this decision was made.

19. This is splitting the categories a bit because the account in Exodus 16 states that God’s glory would be revealed in the manna from heaven raining down. That said, this text specifically notes the wonders that God did, such as the plagues and parting of the Red Sea. As such, the two are related, but I am treating them as distinct categories.

20. Although LSJ III. claims “to be satiated” is in the pass, whereas the act is “to fill quite full,” the intention is obvious: God satisfied them with bread. MT has וְלֶ֥חֶם שָׁ֝מַ֗יִם יַשְׂבִּיעֵֽם, which also translates to, “he satisfied them with bread from heaven.”

21. Instead of an objective genitive, it could be rendered as a descriptive genitive, “heavenly bread.” A subjective genitive—“heaven’s bread”—is least likely.