Where did Jesus walk on the water?

I received a thoughtful e-mail asking a good question. While I'll answer the question online, this is one where a picture can actually be very helpful. So I thought it might be best to include the answer here.

Question: In mark 6:45-52 is the story of Jesus walking on water and hopping into the boat with the disciples. the passage says that the disciples where in the MIDDLE of the lake. From my understanding of where the disciples started from and where they were going, they should not be in the MIDDLE of the lake. I would like for you to explain to me where I am in error geographically. So far the best I can do is to think that the MIDDLE refers to the disciples being halfway to their destination, but I really do not think that this is a correct interpretation either. This has been bugging me for a while.

Answer: Thanks for the question! I believe the answer can be found by understanding the fluid nature of the Greek word mesos. It can mean "in the middle," but it doesn't have to refer to the exact geographical center of an area. It can also mean "in the midst." According to The Complete Word Study Dictionary, the use of mesos with the preposition en (i.e., en mesos, which is the phrase used in Mark 6:47) usually means "in the midst" or "among." They illustrate this use with the following passages from the Gospels.
Matthew 10:16 "Behold, I send you out as sheep in the midst of wolves"
Matthew 14:6 "the daughter of Herodias danced before them" (lit. "in the midst of them")
Matthew 18:2 "called a child to Himself and set him before them" (lit. "in the midst of them")
Matthew 18:20 "where two or three have gathered together in My name, there I am in their midst"
Mark 9:36 "taking a child, He set him before them (lit. "in the midst of them"), and taking him in His arms, He said to them"
Luke 2:46 "they found Him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the teachers"
Luke 8:7 "And other seed fell among the thorns" (lit. "in the midst of the thorns")
Luke 10:3 "behold, I send you out as lambs in the midst of wolves"
Luke 22:27 "But I am among you (lit. "in the midst of you") as the one who serves"
Luke 22:55 "And after they had kindled a fire in the middle of the courtyard"
Luke 24:36 "He Himself stood in their midst"
John 8:3 "brought a woman caught in adultery, and having set her in the midst"

In these passages I think we can see that the normal understanding of the word is not "exact center" but "in the midst" in the sense of being surrounded by whatever it's in the midst of.

As we look at all the passages that record the incident with the disciples on the Sea of Galilee (Matthew 14; Mark 6; and John 6), I think they can be harmonized quite well. The feeding of the 5,000 took place on the NE side of the Sea of Galilee (to the east of Bethsaida), and the disciples were heading toward Capernaum, on the NW side of the lake (John 6:17). Jesus had advised them to take a route along the northern edge of the lake, which would have taken them by Bethsaida. But a strong wind was blowing against them, and it pushed them out into the center part of the lake. I say this for two reasons. First, John 6:19 says they had rowed "25 or 30 stadia." A stadia was 607 feet, so John said they had rowed somewhere between 2.9 and 3.4 miles. (Note that John is providing an approximation, saying the event happened around 3-3.5 miles from the point of origin. Second, Mark 6:53 tells us where they actually ended up. They landed at "Gennesaret." This is the Greek translation of the Hebrew word Kinneret, which is the Hebrew name for the Sea, the name of an OT city on the west side of the sea, and the name of the plain just to the south of that city. My point here is that the disciples ended up to the south and west of their original destination.

The photo at the top is a screen shot from Google Earth showing these locations. I've also drawn a line in the sea that is 3 miles long. The disciples were trying to row along the northern shore, but the wind was blowing them out into the lake. Rowing for three miles should have taken them almost to Capernaum, but they had been blown south so they were now "in the midst of the lake"…several miles off shore. After Jesus arrives on the scene, they finally made it to land, either at the site of Kinneret or on the Plain of Gennesaret.

Sorry to go into such detail, but I hope you find this explanation helpful!

Charlie

Slanted reporting by BBC

There was a time when I thought the BBC--the British Broadcasting Company--was a standard for objective reporting of world news. Sadly, I learned long ago this is not the case. But I'm still surprised when I come across blatant examples of biased reporting coming from the BBC.

As I write this from Israel, I'm shaking my head at the BBC report I just read. The headline reads "New Israeli air strike into Gaza after 'ceasefire.'" The headline suggests that Israel violated its ceasefire with Hamas. The opening summary paragraph also lays blame on Israel for breaking the ceasefire. "One Palestinian was killed in a new Israeli air strike in Gaza, hours after Egypt apparently brokered a ceasefire."

So what's the problem? Well, the reality is that the Israeli air strike targeted a terrorist squad preparing to fire a rocket into Israel. It was the terrorists who were going to break the ceasefire, and Israel responded with the air strike to prevent that attack. The BBC finally says this...twenty paragraphs into a twenty-five paragraph story! And even then they couch it in a way that casts doubt on Israel's motives. "Israel's military said its aircraft 'targeted a terrorist squad... that was preparing to launch long-range rockets'." Come on BBC! Don't you think this might just be a little relevant to the story?!?

Do you want a more accurate account of the event? Try reading the Jerusalem Post article on the same subject. Their headline reads, "IDF strikes Gaza cell attempting to launch rocket at Israel."

The BBC ought to blush with shame at its lack of objectivity on this story!

Mobile Sukkah Brigade

This picture, with accompanying article, in Ynetnews caught my attention. While it might look like a convoy of ice cream trucks, it's actually a group off-road trucks leased by the Chabad movement, one of the largest groups within Orthodox Judaism.

Each truck has a portable sukkah mounted in back. The trucks are now traveling throughout Israel to help people celebrate the Feast of Sukkot. (In Leviticus 23 Israel was commanded to live in booths during the seven-day Feast of Sukkot.) On their website, Chabad also provides instructions on how to build a sukkah for those Jews who might not have been observant in the past but who would now like to celebrate the feast.

I was encouraged by the article...though I also felt a need to go out and order a large soft serve chocolate-and-vanilla ice cream!

Who Owns the Promised Land?

This past week Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said he knows the answer to all the problems in the Middle East. “If the backers of the Zionist regime want to solve the issue...the solution is simple...everyone should go home.” Of course, he was referring to the Jews, and he was saying they are outsiders and intruders in the Middle East, sent from the West to colonize land that truly belongs to the Palestinians.

So are these the ravings of a demagogue that ought simply to be ignored? I believe it’s important for us to have an answer to his message and not just dismiss it as the rantings of some nut. I say this because many in the Middle East agree with what he is saying. To not give an answer is to let others assume he has made a valid--and unanswerable--point.

The Jewish people weren't sent to the Middle East from Europe following World War II as Ahmadinejad suggests. The Jewish presence in the land goes back thousands of years. And there are other legitimate reasons for supporting the Jewish right to a national homeland. I can think of five.

1. Let's start with the Bible. The Bible makes it clear that the land is the historic homeland of the Jewish people. God gave the title deed to Abraham's descendants through Isaac, and God never abrogated that promise. I realize some might not accept the Bible, so here are additional reasons that support Israel's right to the land.
   
   
2. Let's begin by assuming legitimacy belongs to those who occupied the land first. The Hittites, Perizzites, Canaanites, Jebusites, and other "ites" were there first...but they have disappeared from history. The Jewish people are the oldest surviving occupants of the land. If it belongs to the oldest surviving owners, then it belongs to the Jews.
   
   
3. Or maybe legitimacy should be granted to the group who lived in the land for the longest period of time. The Jewish people (from Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob through the first and second temple periods...and again since 1948) lived in the land for nearly 1,700 years. The Muslims came out of the Arabian peninsula to conquer the land, and they controlled the land for about 1,400 years. If it belongs to those who have lived their longest, then it belongs to the Jews.
   
   
4. Or maybe we should give the land to those who have been the majority in the land most recently. Currently 70% of all the Jews living in the land are native-born Israelis. This is the land of their birth. In contrast, most Palestinians alive today have never set foot in the land. They were born elsewhere. So if it belongs to the largest group that was actually born there, then it belongs to the Jews.
   
   
5. Or maybe we should just resort to the dictum that "possession is nine-tenth of the law." The one who ends up with the land is the presumed rightful owner. Like Abraham and the cave of Machpelah, the Jewish people gained much of the land they held prior to 1947 by purchasing it. But they gained the remaining land they now possess by fighting a series of defensive wars against armies who set out to destroy them. So if actual possession is a legitimate mark of ownership, then the land belongs to the Jews.
   
   

The bottom line is that Ahmadinejad is wrong on all counts. The Jewish people do have a historic right to live in the land, and Israel is as a legitimate nation. And that's why we need to challenge Ahmadinejad's statements.

What Does Islam Teach?

If you are willing to invest about an hour and a half of your time, I would strongly recommend you watch the online video, Islam: What the West Needs to Know. This video uses the Qur'an and other Islamic texts to explain what Islam teaches. Is it a religion of peace? Watch the video and decide for yourself.

Then share the link with others!

The Dead Sea Scrolls Online

Six months ago the Israel Museum and Google teamed up to digitize and publish online the Dead Sea Scrolls. They just released the firstfruits of their labors at a website called, appropriately enough The Digital Dead Sea Scrolls.

The site contains five Dead Sea Scrolls digitized thus far, including the Great Isaiah Scroll, the Community Rule Scroll, the Commentary on Habakkuk Scroll, the Temple Scroll, and the War Scroll. The site is still a work in progress, and thus far only the Isaiah Scroll is searchable by verse in English, but the site is still worth checking out! As it matures and develops, more material will be added...and additional resources for English-only readers will hopefully be provided.

Take the site for a "test ride" in the following way.

1. Open the Great Isaiah Scroll and click twice on the "zoom in" button (lower right) to magnify the text.
2. Scroll along the numbers at the bottom of the window (each number represents one stitched-together leather section of the scroll) until you reach number 32.
3. Navigate to the bottom of the page and look for a handwritten notation at the very bottom (below the text) that looks like a backward "6." This identifies the column where Isaiah 39 ends and Isaiah 40 begins.
4. Look at the last two lines of that column. On the right side, in the margin between these two lines, is what looks like a horizontal line with the letter "O" resting on it. That mark identifies the specific spot where chapter 39 ends (on the left side of the next-to-last line) and chapter 40 begins (the right side of the very last line).

Apart from not having the vowel points, a first-year Hebrew student could read the last line (from right to left) as saying "Comfort. Comfort my people says your God…."

So why is this significant? It indicates that when this scroll was copied (sometime around 130-100 B.C.) there was no indication that Isaiah 1--39 and 40--66 were thought to be two separate books by multiple authors (a common view among critical scholars today). Had the scribe thought this to be so, it seems most natural that he would have ended the Isaiah 1--39 portion and then begun the new book at the top of the next column. Nothing in the manuscript supports the idea that Isaiah was anything more than a single book at the time this copy was made! (And since this was a copy made from an earlier work, we can logically push the date back even further in time.) In short, this manuscript creates major problems for those who hold to the theory of multiple authors for the Book of Isaiah.

One last suggestion. Click the "zoom out" button for the scroll to return to the original size. And then hover your mouse over the text. Doing so will highlight the individual verses in the scroll. By clicking on the highlighted section you can read a translation of that particular verse. It gives those who can't read Hebrew a sense of what it is like to read from the text.

This site is definitely worth bookmarking...and returning to at frequent intervals!

Ahmadinejad's Eschatology

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad spoke this past week before the UN General Assembly. And once again he presented his distorted views of the past, the present, and the future. The press focused on his denial of the Holocaust, his conspiracy theories on the September 11 attacks, and his ugly tirades against Israel and the United States...and the mass exodus of delegates in protest.

But most in the press missed Ahmadinejad's comments about the future...and what he believes the future holds. Over the years he has remained remarkably consistent in his focus on what the future holds...and on his call for all nations to "come to faith" before it's too late.

Here are some of his closing comments from last week's speech as he called on nations to rally together to advance his view of the future...

A future that will be built when humanity initiates to trend [sic] the path of the divine prophets and the righteous under the leadership of Imam al-Mahdi, the Ultimate Savior of mankind and the inheritor to all divine messengers and leaders and to the pure generation of our great Prophet.

The creation of a supreme and ideal society with the arrival of a perfect human being who is a true and sincere lover of all human beings, is the guaranteed promise of Allah.

He will come alongside with Jesus Christ to lead the freedom and justice lovers to eradicate tyranny and discrimination, and promote knowledge, peace, justice freedom and love across the world. He will present to every single individual all the beauties of the world and all good things which bring happiness for humankind.

And what can Iran do to help hasten the coming of this Islamic messiah? "Our great nation stands ready to join hands with other nations to march on this beautiful path in harmony and in line with the shared aspirations of mankind."

Two thoughts came to mind as I read his speech. First, to understand Ahmadinejad and Iran one must understand what he truly believes will take place in the future. These statements are not simply platitudes for the Islamic masses. Ahmadinejad believes what he is saying, and the actions he and Iran have taken over the years are designed to hasten the coming of these Islamic end times. What he didn't bother to say directly in his public remarks is that fact that these end times are also supposed to include the destruction of Israel and the Jews. Anyone who minimizes Ahmadinejad's statements simply doesn't realize how seriously he believes in this future.

Second, there is also a sense in which his words are a rebuke to Christians who are afraid to share publicly God's message of eternal life through Jesus Christ. Ahmadinejad is more willing to speak boldly for his own false views than Christians are to share the revealed truth of God's Word. What could God accomplish if we were as bold in sharing our faith as he has shown himself to be in promoting Islam?

Ahmadinejad views the future as a matter of life and death...of choices that will bring with them eternal consequences. And in that sense I agree with him. Unfortunately, we know from the Bible that his view of the future will not lead to eternal life.