14<\/strong>. had forgotten<\/em> ] In the hurry of their unexpected re-embarkation they had altogether omitted to make provision for their own personal wants.<\/p>\n Mar 8:14<\/span><\/p>\n Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees.<\/em><\/p>\n –<\/p>\n The leaven of the Pharisees<\/strong><\/p>\n Our Lords warning against false doctrine.<\/p>\n I. <\/strong>A suggestive figure of speech. Leaven.<\/p>\n (1)<\/strong> A suggestive figure of the power of influence, good or bad.<\/p>\n (a) <\/strong>Aggressive.<\/p>\n (b) <\/strong>Subtle in its aggressiveness.<\/p>\n (c) <\/strong>Unless resisted, all-conquering in its subtlety.<\/p>\n (2)<\/strong> Our Lords suggestive use of this figure.<\/p>\n (a) <\/strong>To represent the powerful influence of erroneous doctrine.<\/p>\n (b) <\/strong>To represent the danger to which His disciples were exposed from erroneous doctrines, notwithstanding their superior advantages, arising from the instructions He gave them.<\/p>\n II. <\/strong>A suggestive example of the exercise of bad influence.<\/p>\n (1)<\/strong> Its agency. Pharisees.<\/p>\n (a) <\/strong>The secret of their power.<\/p>\n 1. <\/strong>Their ecclesiastical, social, and political position.<\/p>\n 2. <\/strong>Their great pretensions to piety-in fasting and prayer.<\/p>\n (2)<\/strong> Its method. Doctrine.<\/p>\n (a) <\/strong>Public teaching a great power for good or evil.<\/p>\n (b) <\/strong>As the respect felt for the Pharisees enhanced their power, so our respect for either the genius or supposed sincerity of a public teacher enhances his power.<\/p>\n (3)<\/strong> An imperative duty in view of this fact. Prove all things: hold fast that which is good. (D. C. Hughes, M. A.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n The leaven of the Pharisees and the Sadducees<\/strong><\/p>\n This caution was probably suggested by His late interview with the Pharisees and the Sadducees.<\/p>\n I. <\/strong>The doctrine of the Pharisees chiefly hinged upon two tenets.<\/p>\n 1. <\/strong>Acceptance with God on the ground of legal performances.<\/p>\n 2. <\/strong>The obligation of the tradition of the elders. These led to multiplied observances of a legal kind, pride and boasting, hypocrisy, laxity of morals.<\/p>\n II. <\/strong>The doctrines of the Sadducees, here called the leaven of Herod, were opposed to these. Notice only three, as having a practical influence. They denied-<\/p>\n 1. <\/strong>The separate existence of the soul.<\/p>\n 2. <\/strong>The resurrection of the dead.<\/p>\n 3. <\/strong>The superintending providence of God.<\/p>\n These led to the removal of restraint to vicious indulgences. Sadduceeism characterized the generation which has disappeared. Phariseeism the present.<\/p>\n III. <\/strong>Their doctrines are compared to leaven.<\/p>\n 1. <\/strong>They affect the whole character.<\/p>\n 2. <\/strong>The whole mass of society. Take heed, etc. The one, sanctimoniousness; the other, licentiousness. (Expository Discourses.<\/em>)<\/p>\n Verse 14<\/span>. Now<\/B><\/I> the disciples <\/B>had forgotten to take bread<\/B><\/I>] See all this, to Mr 8:21<\/span>, explained at large on Mt 16:4-12<\/span>. In the above chapter, an account is given of the Pharisees, Sadducees<\/I>, and Herodians<\/I>.<\/P><\/p>\n We met with this whole history, with some additions, in Mat 16:5-12<\/span>; <\/P> See Poole on “Mat 16:5<\/span>“, and following verses to Mat 16:12<\/span>. It teacheth us both a lesson of human frailty, and what is our Christian duty: of our frailty, in not considering the works of the Lord for us, so as to make any use of them for the time to come. God doth his great works of providence to he had in remembrance, and that not only with respect to himself, that he might be glorified by us upon the remembrance of them, and this not only by our rejoicing in him, but also by our trusting in him, and not desponding under such like difficulties as God by any of them hath delivered us from. And also with respect to our duty, that we might in present exigences relieve ourselves from former experiences: and if we do not thus conceive of Gods dispensations, we do not perceive, nor understand, the meaning and will of God in them; though we have eyes we see not, though we have ears we hear not, and in remembering we remember not, our remembrance is of no benefit, no advantage at all unto us. Our Saviour, indeed, did not at all speak here of bodily bread; though he did bid them beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Herod, he spake to them about the doctrine of the Pharisees, and so Matthew tells us they (after this reproof) considered, though he (after his accustomed manner) spake to them under a parabolical expression. Saith he: What though you have forgotten to bring bread, do not you know, have not I, by two miraculous operations, taught you that I am able to furnish you with bread, though you have none, or such a quantity as is very insufficient? God expects of us that we should so keep in mind his former dispensations of providence to us, under straits and difficulties, as to trust in him when his providence brings us again into the like difficulties, yet not declining the use of any reasonable and just means for providing for ourselves. Thus David knew, and understood, that God had delivered him from the lion and the bear, while going against Goliath, 1Sa 17:31-58<\/span>; he made it a ground of his confidence: so also Psa 116:8<\/span>; and Paul, when he concluded God would deliver because he had delivered. God, when he brake the heads of leviathan in pieces, gave him to be meat to the<\/I> people inhabiting the wilderness, <\/I>Psa 74:14<\/I><\/span>; he intends former mercies to be food for his people in following straits and exigences. <\/P> <\/p>\n 14. Now the disciples had forgottento take bread, neither had they in the ship with them more than oneloaf<\/B>This is another example of that graphic circumstantialitywhich gives such a charm to this briefest of the four Gospels. Thecircumstance of the “one loaf” only remaining, as WEBSTERand WILKINSON remark, wasmore suggestive of their Master’s recent miracles than the entireabsence of provisions.<\/P><\/p>\n Now the disciples had, forgotten to take bread<\/strong>,…. At Dalmanutha, or Magdala, or whatever place in those parts they were at, before they took shipping, as was their usual method.<\/p>\n Neither had they in the ship with them more than one loaf<\/strong>; for thirteen passengers of them. The Persic version reads the whole thus: “and they forgot to take bread with them, not indeed one loaf, and there was no bread with them in the ship”; [See comments on Mt 16:5]<\/span>.<\/p>\n Bread <\/B> (<\/SPAN><\/span>).<\/P> Loaves <\/B>, plural.<\/P> More than one loaf <\/B> ( <\/SPAN><\/span>). Except one loaf. Detail only in Mark. Practically for thirteen men when hungry. <\/P> <\/p>\n The one loaf is a detail given by Mark only. <\/P> 22 – 26. Peculiar to Mark.<\/P> <\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n LEAVEN (PUTREFACTION) OF THE PHARISEES V. 14-21<\/p>\n 1) “Now the disciples had forgotten to take bread,”<\/strong> (kai epelathonto labein artous) “And they(the disciples) forgot to take bread,” to take food as they crossed the sea to the Bethsaida area. They had come to the Christ-like concept “let tomorrow take care of itself,” Mat 6:25-34<\/span>.<\/p>\n 2) ”Neither had they in the ship with them more than one loaf.”<\/strong> (kai ei me hena artonoukeichon meth’heauton en to ploio) “And except one loaf they had with themselves no other food on the ship.” Mark alone mentions the one loaf, see Mat 6:11<\/span>; Mat 6:33<\/span>.<\/p>\n 5. WARNING AGAINST THE LEAVEN OF THE PHARISEES. 8:14-21<\/strong><\/p>\n TEXT 8:14-21<\/strong><\/p>\n And they forgot to take bread; and they had not in the boat with them more than one loaf. And he charged them, saying, Take heed, beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and the leaven of Herod. And they reasoned one with another, saying, We have no bread. And Jesus perceiving it saith unto them, Why reason ye, because ye have no bread? do you not perceive, neither understand? have ye your heart hardened? Having eyes, see ye not? and having ears, hear ye not? and do ye not remember? When I brake the five loaves among the five thousand, how many baskets full of broken pieces took ye up? They say unto him, Twelve. And when the seven among the four thousand, how many basketfuls of broken pieces took ye up? And they say unto him, Seven. And he said unto them, Do ye not yet understand?<\/p>\n THOUGHT QUESTIONS 8:14-21<\/strong><\/p>\n 385.<\/p>\n Why does Mark mention the fact that they had forgotten to take bread?<\/p>\n 386.<\/p>\n Why mention at this time the leaven of the Pharisees?<\/p>\n 387.<\/p>\n Define in your own words: The leaven of the Phariseesthe leaven of Herod.<\/p>\n 388.<\/p>\n Why connect the word leaven with the subject of bread?<\/p>\n 389.<\/p>\n How did Jesus know of the reasoning of their hearts?<\/p>\n 390.<\/p>\n Note please the three questions of Jesus in Mar. 8:17<\/span>discuss each one as they relate to the apostlesas they relate to us today.<\/p>\n 391.<\/p>\n Distinguish between the use of the eyesearsmemory in the process of understanding.<\/p>\n 392.<\/p>\n Why refer to the feeding of the 5,000 and the 4,000?<\/p>\n 393.<\/p>\n Do you believe the apostles did understand after Jesus rebuked them?<\/p>\n COMMENT<\/strong><\/p>\n TIMESummer A.D. 29. PARALLEL ACCOUNTMat. 16:5-12<\/span>.<\/p>\n OUTLINE1. Forgot to take bread on their trip, Mar. 8:14<\/span>. 2<\/span>. Jesus said: beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Herod, Mar. 8:15<\/span>. 3<\/span>. The disciples thought He referred to their supply of bread, Mar. 8:16<\/span>. 4<\/span>. Jesus rebuked them for their lack of spiritual perception, Mar. 8:17-18<\/span>. 5<\/span>. Why worry about physical bread when I fed 5,000 & 4,000 with a few loaves? Mar. 8:19-20<\/span>. 6<\/span>. Do you now see I refer to something more important than physical bread?, Mar. 8:21<\/span>.<\/p>\n ANALYSIS<\/strong><\/p>\n I.<\/p>\n FORGOT TO TAKE BREAD ON THEIR TRIP, Mar. 8:14<\/span>.<\/p>\n 1.<\/p>\n Left in haste.<\/p>\n 2.<\/p>\n Had with them in the boat only one loaf.<\/p>\n II.<\/p>\n JESUS SAID: BEWARE OF THE LEAVEN OF THE PHARISEES AND HEROD, Mar. 8:15<\/span>.<\/p>\n 1.<\/p>\n This was given as an order.<\/p>\n 2.<\/p>\n This was given as a warning.<\/p>\n III.<\/p>\n THE DISCIPLES THOUGHT HE REFERRED TO THEIR SUPPLY OF BREAD, Mar. 8:16<\/span>.<\/p>\n 1.<\/p>\n They reasoned or conversed among themselves as to what He meant.<\/p>\n 2.<\/p>\n They agreed He must have reference to buying bread from their enemies.<\/p>\n 3.<\/p>\n But then this is no danger because we have no bread.<\/p>\n IV.<\/p>\n JESUS REBUKED THEM FOR THEIR LACK OF SPIRITUAL PERCEPTION, <\/span>Mar. 8:17-18<\/span>.<\/p>\n 1.<\/p>\n He read their minds.<\/p>\n 2.<\/p>\n Why are you worried about your bread supply?; what I have said does not refer to your bread.<\/p>\n 3.<\/p>\n Are you still void of depth?<\/p>\n 4.<\/p>\n Are you yet without understanding?<\/p>\n 5.<\/p>\n Is your heart stone?<\/p>\n 6.<\/p>\n What has happened to the eyes, ears, and memory of your heart?<\/p>\n V.<\/p>\n WHY WORRY ABOUT PHYSICAL BREAD WHEN I FED 5,000 AND 4,000 WITH A FEW LOAVES? Mar. 8:19-20<\/span>.<\/p>\n 1.<\/p>\n When I fed the 5,000 how many baskets were left over?12.<\/p>\n 2.<\/p>\n And how many for the 4,000?7.<\/p>\n VI.<\/p>\n DO YOU NOW SEE I REFER TO SOMETHING MORE IMPORTANT THAN PHYSICAL BREAD? Mar. 8:21<\/span>.<\/p>\n EXPANATORY NOTES<\/strong><\/p>\n I.<\/p>\n FORGOT TO TAKE BREAD ON THEIR TRIP.<\/p>\n Mar. 8:14<\/span>. The neglect to take a supply of bread was doubtless the result of their haste in again setting out; and, in that view of the matter, Jesus himself was responsible for it, since he had hurried them away.<\/p>\n II.<\/p>\n JESUS SAID: BEWARE OF THE LEAVEN OF THE PHARISEES AND HEROD.<\/p>\n Mar. 8:15<\/span>. It is Mark alone who mentions the one loaf that they had with them in the boat; plainly a touch of definite remembrance from one who was present.And he charged them. The emphatic word is peculiar to Mark.Taie heed, beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, and of the leaven of Herod. In Matthew, of the Pharisees and Sadducees. From this grouping it has sometimes been inferred that Herod was a Sadducee; but that seems too definite a conclusion to draw from such premises. Undoubtedly, Herods position was such as to give him more in common with the Sadducees than with the Pharisees, and the Sadducees may have been the Herodians of Galilee; but Herod Antipas was probably too much of an indifferentist to hold very strongly the doctrines of any Jewish sect.The leaven is expressly, according to Matthew, the doctrine of the Pharisees and Sadducees, or of the Pharisees and Herod. But doctrine (didache) is an active word rather than a passive, and refers rather to the teaching than to the substance of what was taught; and when used of Herod it must be substantially equivalent to influence.The warning must be understood in the light of what had just occurred, for it must certainly have been suggested by the demand for a sign from heaven. To the corrupting influence of Pharisaism and Sadduceeism or of political Herodianismi.e. to the spirit that was manifested in these formsit was due that Israel had departed from God, and had so lost all spiritual sense of him as to be clamoring for signs from heaven. So the warning means, Beware of the unspiritual, irreligious, godless teaching through which it has come to pass that God is no longer recognized. Reflecting on the conversation that had sent him, disheartened, back from Galilee, he thought of his own disciples, who were but too prone to a similar unbelief; and he said to himself, They must not be possessed by the ungodly blindness that cannot perceive a spiritual meaning and is dependent upon signs to show them God and truth. Yet the land is full of it under the influence of this unholy teaching, and it cannot fail to be working as a leaven in their minds. Therefore he spoke in warning.<\/p>\n III.<\/p>\n THE DISCIPLES THOUGHT HE REFERRED TO THEIR SUPPLY OF BREAD.<\/p>\n Mar. 8:16<\/span>. According to the most probable reading, adopted by the revisers, we may translate, And they reasoned, or considered, together, saying, We have no bread. The common English version, It is because we have no bread, represents the spirit of their utterance perfectly, though not a good translation. They dimly supposed he must mean that food received from the hands of his enemies was to be rejected, because of the unworthiness of those who might offer it: if Pharisees and Herodians were so defiled, they were not fit persons for them to obtain food from. There is a childish naivete in their self-questioning which testifies to the absolute originality and truthfulness of the record, and so to the genuineness of the question that followsa question that assumes the reality of the two previous miracles (Plumptre). They tried to understand him, but this low and uncharacteristic meaning was all that they could find, as if he had said, You will have bread to buy, and you must be careful from whom you buy it, and had forbidden them to eat the bread of his enemies.<\/p>\n IV.<\/p>\n JESUS REBUKED THEM FOR THEIR LACK OF SPIRITUAL PERCEPTION.<\/p>\n Mar. 8:17-18<\/span>. Marks report here is much more full than Matthews. The last two questions of Mar. 8:17<\/span> are peculiar to Mark, and so is the whole of Mar. 8:18<\/span>, with the exception of the last word; so are the responses of the disciples in Mar. 8:19-20<\/span>, and so is Mar. 8:21<\/span>. The translation of Mar. 8:18-19<\/span>, according to Tischendorfs text, is, Having eyes do ye not see, and having ears do ye not hear, and do ye not remember when I broke the five loaves unto the five thousand, and how many baskets full of fragments ye took up? The readings of Mar. 8:21<\/span> vary, but, according to the most probable, the question is simply, Do ye not yet understand? These questions of Jesus are sharp and cutting, full of surprise and indignation. So far as the record goes, they are the sharpest words that he ever spoke to the twelve. We can scarcely wonder at his indignation, for he saw already in them the leaven of the Pharisees, the same blindness that had just disheartened him, in their inability to perceive a spiritual meaning. They were like the generation that was described in chap. Mar. 4:12<\/span>, which, having eyes, saw not, and having ears, heard not.<\/p>\n V.<\/p>\n WHY WORRY ABOUT PHYSICAL BREAD WHEN I FED 5,000 AND 4,000 WITH A FEW LOAVES?<\/p>\n Mar. 8:19-20<\/span>. Whatever meaning they might have found in his warning, the one that they did find was one that their experience with him ought to have rendered impossible. They had been with him twice when he fed thousands from a handful, yet they were talking perplexedly among themselves, as if he could possibly be thinking of where the food was to come from. His rebuke means, When you are with me, and I am responsible for your want of food, you need have no anxiety, and you may know that whatever I may say refers to something else than the way in which food is obtained. They ought, moreover, to have known that he who had plainly abolished distinctions of food (chap. Mar. 7:15<\/span>) would not now set up a new distinction of a personal or sectarian kind, and teach them that they would be defiled by food bought from ungodly men. Surely it would seem to be asking but very little to ask that they should understand him well enough to escape such an idea. Here was indeed the unspiritual heart, upon which the spiritual thought seemed almost wasted. More than in the case of his townsmen at Nazareth, he marvelled because of their unbelief. If Christian teachers find even their brethren slow of perception in spiritual things, they may hear their Master saying to them, in the spirit of Joh. 15:18<\/span>, Ye know that they misunderstood me before they misunderstood you.<\/p>\n VI.<\/p>\n DO YOU NOW SEE I REFER TO SOMETHING MORE IMPORTANT THAN PHYSICAL BREAD?<\/p>\n Mar. 8:21<\/span>. In Matthew the final question, Do ye not yet understand? is expanded into a direct intimation that the warning did not refer to bread. Matthew adds also that they did at last perceive that he was warning them against the teaching or the principles of the Pharisees and Sadducees. But it is quite certain that they did not take in his full meaning, and that when the subject was dropped he knew that his utterance had not reached its aim. He had had to expend the energy that might have been given to the work of enforcing an idea in the vain effort to get it apprehended, and then to withdraw baffled by the unreceptiveness of his hearers. It was not his method to urge truth upon them faster than they were able to receive it. Joh. 16:12<\/span> illustrates his real method: I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.Observe, again, the distinct reference in these questions to the two separate miracles of feedinga reference which cannot possibly be removed from the passage without utterly destroying one of the most vivid and self-witnessing scenes in the whole Gospel narrative. Observe, again, too, that in referring here to the first miracle Jesus employs the word cophinus in mentioning the baskets, and in referring to the second the word spuris, preserving the very distinction that has been made in the two narratives of Mark. (W. N. Clarke)<\/p>\n FACT QUESTIONS 8:14-21<\/strong><\/p>\n 434.<\/p>\n Who was responsible for the lack of food?<\/p>\n 435.<\/p>\n What definite indications of an eye-witness do we have in this section?<\/p>\n 436.<\/p>\n Are we to conclude that Herod was a Sadducee from Matthews reference to the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees? What are we to conclude?<\/p>\n 437.<\/p>\n Please explain the distinctive influence of each of these groups; (1) Pharisees (2) Sadducees (3) Herodians.<\/p>\n 438.<\/p>\n How does the request for a sign from heaven relate to this warning of Jesus?<\/p>\n 439.<\/p>\n As they reasoned among themselves what conclusion did they form?<\/p>\n 440.<\/p>\n What is it that testifies to the absolute originality and truthfulness of the record?<\/p>\n 441.<\/p>\n Why was Jesus so sharp with the disciples?<\/p>\n 442.<\/p>\n What particular attitude in the hearts of the disciples disappointed Jesus the most?<\/p>\n 443.<\/p>\n When the subject was dropped was Jesus satisfied that His teaching was understood? Discuss.<\/p>\n 444.<\/p>\n How is the use of the two words for baskets as used in this record an indication of two incidents of feeding the multitudes?<\/p>\n <\/p>\n SUMMARY 8:14 to 9:50<\/strong><\/p>\n The two miracles recorded in the preceding sectionthe cure of the blind man at Bethsaida (Mar. 8:22-26<\/span>), and the casting out of the obstinate demon (Mar. 9:14-29<\/span>)are additional demonstrations of the divine power of Jesus. They are not mere repetitions of former proofs, but they possess peculiar force in that the blind man was cured by progressive steps, each one of which was a miracle in itself, and in that the demon in question was one of peculiar power and obstinacy.<\/p>\n The foreknowledge of Jesus is again displayed in his two predictions concerning his own death (Mar. 8:31-33<\/span>; Mar. 9:30-32<\/span>), and with his foreknowledge, his predetermined purpose to submit to death at the hands of his enemies.<\/p>\n But the crowning argument of the section is contained in the account of the transfiguration. If the testimony of those who witnessed his scene is not false testimony, his divine majesty and his God-given right to be heard in all that he chooses to speak, are established beyond all possibility of a mistake.<\/p>\n End of Part First.<\/p>\n We have now reached the close of the first general division of Marks narrative. Hitherto, after a few introductory statements in the first chapter (Mar. 1:1-13<\/span>), all the incidents which he records occurred in Galilee, or in the regions immediately adjoining, Now the writer leaves Galilee, and returns to it no more. (McGarvey)<\/p>\n (14) Now the disciples.<\/strong>Better, and the disciples,<\/em> in close connection with the preceding verse, and not as the beginning of a new section.<\/p>\n More than one loaf.<\/strong>Another detail peculiar to St. Mark.<\/p>\n ‘And they forgot to take bread. And they had no more than one loaf in the boat with them.’<\/p>\n In spite of our natural curiosity we are not told who had forgotten to take the bread. Someone was responsible and had failed in their responsibility. Perhaps it was all of them, each leaving it to the other. But however that may be they had realised to their dismay that they were now entering Gentile territory with only one loaf between them.<\/p>\n So Jesus will now take the opportunity to draw their attention to the fact that they were not only short of bread, but also of the bread of truth. (This in preparation for the awakening soon to come at Caesarea Philippi and its high mountain (Mar 8:27<\/span> to Mar 9:8<\/span>)).<\/p>\n In the context which has preceded this episode the disciples have been thwarted by only having five loaves and then seven loaves. Thus this description of their being down to ‘one loaf’ might be intended to indicate that they have now reached the end of their resources. What they should of course have remembered was that the Syro-phoenician woman had only needed crumbs.<\/p>\n The Conversation in the Boat (8:14-21).<\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n But the Pharisees and Herodians are not the only blind ones. As attention now turns to the Apostles they too are seen to be lacking in understanding. They are seen as being disturbed about having little ‘bread’ when what they should have been concerned about was false ideas. They are told by Jesus to beware of being satisfied with ‘the leaven of the Pharisees and the leaven of Herod’, a leaven or teaching whose futility is evidenced by their seeking of a sign. There may be in this an awareness on the part of Jesus that the Pharisees and Herodians had been putting out feelers towards some of the disciples. But however that may be they are perplexed at what He means, thinking only in terms of physical bread, revealing that they too are still spiritually unaware, both deaf and blind. They have still not learned the lesson of the loaves, that He is the Messiah and the One Who has brought a truth which is contrary to, and superior to, the teaching of the Pharisees and Herodians. Jesus has yet much to do in order to prepare them for the future.<\/p>\n Analysis.<\/p>\n a <\/strong> And they forgot to take bread. And they had no more than one loaf in the boat with them. And He charged them saying, “Take notice. Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and the leaven of Herod” (Mar 8:14-15<\/span>).<\/p>\n b <\/strong> And they reasoned one with another, saying, “It is because we have no bread” (Mar 8:16<\/span>).<\/p>\n c <\/strong> And Jesus perceiving it says to them, “Why do you reason because you have no bread? Do you not perceive, nor understand?<\/p>\n d <\/strong> “Have you your heart hardened?”<\/p>\n c <\/strong> “Having eyes do you not see, and having ears do you not hear? And do you not remember?<\/p>\n b <\/strong> When I broke the five loaves among the five thousand, how many baskets full of broken pieces did you take up?” They say to Him, “Twelve”. “And when the seven among the four thousand , how many basketfuls of broken pieces did you take up?” And they say to Him, “Seven”.<\/p>\n a <\/strong> And He said to them, “Do you not yet understand?”<\/p>\n Note that in ‘a’ He warns them of the leaven of the Pharisees and of Herod, and in the parallel is concerned because they do not understand. In ‘b’ they reason that this must be because they have no bread, and in the parallel He asks them whether they have forgotten how He had produced bread at will. In ‘c’ He is concerned at their lack of understanding and perception, and in the parallel because they neither see nor hear. In ‘d’ He is concerned at the hardness of their hearts.<\/p>\n Jesus Warns His Disciples of the Leaven of the Pharisees ( Mat 16:5-12<\/strong><\/span><\/strong> ) Mar 8:14-21<\/span><\/strong> gives us the account of Jesus warning His disciples of the leaven of the Pharisees and of Herod. Perhaps the Pharisees represented extreme Judaism while Herod represented extreme worldliness.<\/p>\n Mar 8:17-18<\/strong><\/span> <\/strong> Comments – <\/em><\/strong> Jesus refers to the blindness of the Jews in an earlier passage when teaching on the parable of the sower. Now His uses this Old Testament passage to rebuke His disciples for their slowness in understanding.<\/p>\n Mar 4:12<\/span>, “That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them.”<\/p>\n The disciples’ worry about bread:<\/p>\n v. 14<\/strong>. Now the disciples had forgotten to take bread, neither had they in the ship with them more than one loaf.<\/strong><\/p>\n v. 15<\/strong>. And He charged them, saying, Take heed, beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the leaven of Herod.<\/strong><\/p>\n v. 16<\/strong>. And they reasoned among themselves, saying, It is because we have no bread.<\/p>\n <\/strong> The departure from the region of Dalmanutha or Magdala had been very hurried. Their course was directed to a country which did not offer much in the form of food. A single loaf, probably one left over from the previous day, was all the provisions the disciples had in the boat. Note: The Lord literally lived up to the precept He had given that the believers should take no thought for the morrow, just as He had taught them to pray for the food which was enough for this day, which would sustain life till the next morning. But that one lonely loaf of bread was on the mind of the disciples like a heavy load. Jesus, meanwhile was concerned about much more important things. The encounter with the Pharisees had given Him food for anxious thought with regard to His disciples. Here was a real danger menacing His disciples and the believers of all times. And so He turned to His fellow-passengers and charged them, gave them the earnest precept to keep their eyes open, to watch, to beware against the leaven of the Pharisees and also that of Herod. It was a figurative, proverbial saying, which was in general use among the Jews, since they often applied this word to something foreign to a substance, something that might cause fermentation and rotting, 1Co 5:6<\/span>. “With this expression something should be indicated that in itself is small and insignificant, but when mixed with other things exerts a most extensive influence, which can scarce be resisted. The Lord warns against the pharisaic and Herodianic leaven. Theirs is a hypocritical manner, that emphasizes the external appearance, that pretends to be strict in worship and yet transgresses and sets aside God’s commandments; their blindness in spiritual things should be indicated, which they gloss over with a show of sanctity. Before one is aware of it, the whole heart is filled with it, even if one has made only the slightest concession. But just as earnestly the Lord feels constrained to warn against the leaven of Herod. This reigning family professed adherence to the tenets of the Jewish Church, but its members drove out the devil of Pharisaism with an equally wicked devil; they wanted to introduce among the Jews the heathenish, loose, dissolute life, of which we had an example in the birthday festival of Herod Antipas. Instead of a hypocritical religion they introduced the religion of the flesh. Also in this respect the disciples of Christ must beware of the slightest beginnings.”<\/p>\n But the disciples were as dense as usual. They received the charge in silence and then talked the matter over among themselves quietly, lest the Master should hear. The conclusion they arrived at was this, that the words of the Lord were a reprimand because they had neglected to bring enough bread along. That one fact was worrying them. And, like them, the believers of all times find it very hard to separate their minds from the cares of this life. Christ, the Lord of heaven and earth, was with them in the boat, but that did not reassure the disciples. He is with us just as surely, according to His promise, even though His physical. visible presence has been withdrawn, but our hearts are usually just as badly beset by our concern for daily food.<\/p>\n Mar 8:14-21<\/span> . See on Mat 16:5-11<\/span> , whose narrative is less concise and more explanatory.<\/p>\n ] quite as in Mat 16:6<\/span> , and therefore not: viderunt se oblitos esse<\/em> (Fritzsche, Kuinoel). The disciples<\/em> (Mar 8:15<\/span> ) form the subject, as is evident of itself; for they ought to have taken care as to the provision of bread, but forgot<\/em> it.<\/p>\n . . .] a statement, which is quite in keeping with the peculiarity of Mark, and perhaps proceeds from Peter (in opposition to Hilgenfeld).<\/p>\n Mar 8:15<\/span> . is absolute<\/em> ; and . . . . belongs only to , the construction of which with (comp. Mar 12:33<\/span> ) is not, with Tittmann, Synon.<\/em> p. 114, and Kuinoel, to be analysed: avertere oculos<\/em> , but: take heed on account of<\/em> , etc. Comp. (Mat 16:6<\/span> ); (Xen. Cyr.<\/em> iii. 3. 53), al.<\/p>\nFuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible <\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
PLACEOn the lake of Galilee.<\/p>\nFuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n