Mark tells us that Jesus left the synagogue and entered Peter’s home. In the previous study of Mark’s narrative we left Jesus in a synagogue in Capernaum. The problem is, according to John 1:44, both Peter and Andrew lived in Bethsaida. Is this a contradiction? No, it is not, and I’ll explain why below. The exact locations of both Capernaum and Bethsaida are believed to be as shown in the map posted with this study, but at the end of the day, these are our best guesses, based upon what we are told in Josephus[1] and other histories. Notice that Capernaum is located in Galilee, under the jurisdiction of Herod Antipas, while Bethsaida, a short distance to the east of the lake, lay in the Tetrarchy of Philip, Herod Antipas’ brother. Nevertheless, some scholars, in an effort to ward off a contradiction try to make Bethsaida a seaport of Capernaum, but this is contrived, in my opinion.
To begin with, we need to understand two things. First whether Jesus was in Capernaum or Bethsaida in Mark 1:29 is a minor detail, which would have been unimportant to Mark’s audience in Rome;[2] and secondly, we must not force modern literary rules upon the Biblical text in order to force a contradiction (cp. John 10:35). Folks back then wrote differently. Strict chronology wasn’t important, and footnotes, which might explain what they were doing, weren’t invented yet.[3] What was important to the ancient authors was that the literary work, which might be composed of many parts, blended seamlessly together. Notice:
“For, though all parts must be independently perfected, when the first is complete the second will be brought into essential connection with it, and attached like one link of a chain to another; there must be no possibility of separating them; no mere bundle of parallel threads; the first is not simply to be next to the second, but part of it, their extremities intermingling. Brevity is always desirable, and especially where matter is abundant; and the problem is less a grammatical than a substantial one; the solution, I mean, is to deal summarily with all immaterial details, and give adequate treatment to the principal events; much, indeed, is better omitted altogether.”[4]
Probably, Mark began his record of Jesus’ ministry with what the Lord did in the synagogue in Capernaum, but Jesus’ next act in Mark’s account is Jesus leaving a synagogue in Bethsaida and entering Peter’s home. While this may have confused the people who knew the geography of Galilee, such as those who lived in Capernaum or Bethsaida, it wasn’t confusing to the Romans who knew nothing of the topography of Galilee. Mark recorded the two events seamlessly together, which was according to the literary method in use during the first century AD. In other words, Mark didn’t ignorantly place a contradiction into his narrative, nor could it be shown one actually exists, except according to the opinions of those who desire to judge Mark’s work according to modern literary technique. There certainly wasn’t a contradiction according to the literary rules in use during the first century AD, and we need to keep this in mind throughout our study of Mark’s Gospel narrative.
_______________________________________________________
[1] Josephus: Antiquities of the Jews 18.2.1 [28]
[2] See my earlier study: To Whom Did Mark Write His Gospel?
[3] Richard Jugge, a sixteenth century British printer, is believed to have invented footnotes, which were first used in the Bishop’s Bible (1568). See: Chuck Zerby; The Devil’s Details: A History of Footnotes; (2002); New York: Simon & Schuster
[4] Lucian of Samosata (cir. 120 AD to 180 AD); The Way to Write History 55-56; (emphasis mine)
Smoodock's Blog 