Mark 08 : 17 - 21 "30, 60, 100"

[Morne]

Hi there,

Another question:

What is the significance of 30, 60 and 100. Jesus used that often when He referred to trees bearing fruit etc. saying that they'll yield fruit 30 fold, 60 fold and 100 fold.

Is it a figure of speech in the Jewish language, or does it have a special meaning.

Thanks

Morné

[Mark]

There is no parallel in the to the usage of 30, 60 and 100. Whether or not it is a 1st Century idiom is open for speculation. Be careful, though. Many have come up with such ideas "based upon archaeological evidence" that they frankly pulled out of the air because it sounded good and managed to get their paper published.

It could be that Messiah specifically chose a sequence that had no other specific relevence (as opposed to 10, 50 and 100 or 40, 80, 120) so that his audience would not be looking for some deeper symbolic meaning than what He was actually saying.

[Morne]

mark said:

There is no parallel in the to the usage of 30, 60 and 100. Whether or not it is a 1st Century idiom is open for speculation. Be careful, though. Many have come up with such ideas "based upon archaeological evidence" that they frankly pulled out of the air because it sounded good and managed to get their paper published.

It could be that Messiah specifically chose a sequence that had no other specific relevence (as opposed to 10, 50 and 100 or 40, 80, 120) so that his audience would not be looking for some deeper symbolic meaning than what He was actually saying.

Good point! Thanks

I didn't think there was any significance, but I wanted to check with you guys first.

[R' Y'hoshua Moshe]

What is the significance of 30, 60 and 100.

I think it merits further study. Thank you for bringing it up.

Shalom,

Reuel

[Morne]

Pleasure Reuel, let me know when you find something.

In the meantime I have another question, hehe

This time from Mark chapter 8, where Jesus is telling His disciples to beware of the yeast of the of the Pharisees, and they thought he was talking about literal yeast, He then says this:

And when Jesus knew it, he saith unto them, Why reason ye, because ye have no bread? perceive ye not yet, neither understand? have ye your heart yet hardened? Having eyes, see ye not? and having ears, hear ye not? and do ye not remember? When I brake the five loaves among five thousand, how many baskets full of fragments took ye up? They say unto him, Twelve. And when the seven among four thousand, how many baskets full of fragments took ye up? And they said, Seven. And he said unto them, How is it that ye do not understand?
(Mar 8:17-21)

I'm afraid I don't understand either...
Twelve probably refers to die twelve disciples or the twelve tribes of Israel. But what is the seven? And how does it tie in with the context of the chapter?

Thanks

Morné

[Nachshon]

The twelve baskets refer to the twelve tribes of Israel. This is apparent when you realise that the entire miracle of the feeding the five thousand is parallel to the laws of the Jubilee. (They sat in groups of fifty, five loaves, two fish, i.e. five years of normal provision from the land, and two years of supernatural provision. Etc.) The feeding of the four thousand is exactly parallel to the mannah in the wilderness. (The Aramaic even says, in Mark 8:2, that Yeshua wished he had "somthing" for them to eat. That "something" is the Aramaic word mannah.) four thousand is a multiple of fourty, the number of years that they ate mannah.
But what is leaven representative of? It's helpful if we go to another account. Mark doesn't give as much information as others did. Matt. 16:12, "then they understood that He said not to beware of the yeast of bread, but of the teaching of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees." (AEINT)
He is telling them to beware of false teachings. The P'rushim (Pharisees) for their additions to , and the Zaduqey (Sadducees) for their teachings against the resurrection and angels.
I think that the writings of the "New Testament" are so much better understood when we realise that Yeshua's followers made up a separate sect within first century Judaism. Just like we can look in the Talmud and see polemics against the Saducees and N'tzarim, we can look in the "NT" and see polemics against the Saducees and Pharisees. We can also look in the DSS and see polemics against the Saducees and Pharisees.

Shabbat shalom,
Nachshon

[Morne]

Thank you Nachson. The explanations you gave make a lot of sense.

In terms of the feeding of the 5000. Would it be tenable to say that it could also refer to the gentiles? the gentiles being the masses eating the bread, which is ofcourse refers to the Body of Jesus bruised for the iniquities of all? And that God has not rejected the Jews, because there remains enough to fill the twelve baskets, as per Romans 9,10 and 11.

Concerning 'leaven'. I think it's interesting to think what exactly leaven does. It puffs up the bread, making it larger, but without substance. It fills it with air. It reminds me of how false religions or unbiblical doctrines generally tend to be self-centered.
Is that more or less how you interpret that, as well?

Shalom!

Morné

[Nachshon]

I don't think so, because then it would probably have been 7,000, not 5,000. This would represent the 70 nations. Just my thoughts. The numbers work so well when you relate it to Jubilee, it just makes more sense than any other explanation I've heard.

A friend of mine used to refer to leaven as something that "eats the sweet and gives off gass."
In other words, yes, I agree with you.

[Morne]

Nachshon,

Where can I read about the 70 nations. I recall reading in Jasher that Joseph had to climb the 70 steps to Pharaoh's throne and each step represented a language of the land.

I understand that when G-d confused the languages at the tower of Babel He divided the people into 70 nations according to their language(70).

That makes sense to me, because the Bible says:
Gen 46:27 And the sons of Joseph, which were born him in Egypt, were two souls: all the souls of the house of Jacob, which came into Egypt, were threescore and ten.

In my Bible(Afrikaans Old Translation) threescore and ten is translated as 70. Is this correct?

So the house of Jacob consisted of 70 people.

The Bible also says:
Deu 32:8 When the most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel.

This makes sense to me, but isn't it more likely that 70 then refers to all people and not just the gentiles?

This is becoming a very interesting discussion.

Shalom

Morné

[Morne]

Something else I thought of is that the language of the populus in Yeshua's time was Greek, and the version of the Old Testament used in that time was called the LXX, named after the 70 priests who translated/compiled it. So in that regard there's another reference to 70.

[Nachshon]

The only place I would reccomend for reading about the 70 nations is Genesis.
Yes, your Bible is correct. a score is twenty, so three score and ten is seventy.
It is possible that it refers to them all, including Israel, but I've not studied the idea of the seventy nations enough to say for certain.
Some other interesting seventies are the seventy elders of the Great Sanhedrin, the seventy disciples that Yeshua sent out, and the seventy bulls that were sacrificed at Sukkot.

However, you are wrong about the common language of the first century. The Dead Sea Scrolls are in Hebrew and Aramaic, not Greek. this suggests that the language of the time was either Hebrew or Aramaic. Josephus stated that the Jews had a difficult time and were greatly discouraged to learn Greek, and only a few were good at it, or got any benefit from it. Acts tells us that the Romans were suprised that Paul spoke Greek. The church fathers including Eusebius and Jerome tell us that Matthew was written in Hebrew for the benefit of the Jewish people. They spoke Hebrew, not Greek.
For another thing, the story of the seventy priests translating the LXX is probably a myth. Most scholars now think that the LXX was translated by different translators over a period of time and finally collected in about the late first century B.C.E. The claims of seventy priests all translating it separately and coming up with the exact same translation (the story told by Eusebius) is most definately a fantasy.

Shalom,
Nachshon

[Morne]

Hi Nachson,

I'm sure the Jews would have a difficult time learning Greek, but doesn't that show they needed to learn it for some or other reason? If Greek wasn't the official language, why did they trouble themselves with it?

The fact that the Dead Sea Scrolls were in Hebrew and Aramaic doesn't disprove Greek as the official language at the time, at best it only proves that some people spoke Hebrew, much like a Vietnamese website cannot disprove English as the official language today.

As for Matthew being written in Hebrew, it makes perfect sense, because that particular Gospel was written for the Jews. Hence the strong focus in that Gospel on Jeshua's royalty as King of the Jews, and ofcourse His geneaology through Joseph.

But if we look at the Gospel of John, all the Hebrew words(such as Rabbi John 1:38) are explained, proving that it was written in Greek, or atleast a non-Hebrew language.

There are many Greek words such as 'pharisee', 'hipocrite' etc. The name Jeshua gave Peter(Petros) is a Greek name. Mark's real name was John, but he was called Markus, a Greek name, etc.

Also Paul's quotes from the old testament are not from the Hebrew old Testament, but instead from the Greek Old Testament.

I'm not trying to add credence to Greek or anything like that, and I'm certainly not trying to discredit Hebrew or the Hebrew old Testament, but I'm doubtful that Greek was not the official language in Jeshua's time.

As for the LXX not compiled by the 70 priests, you could be right, I wouldn't know, but it would make sense to me if it did, in lieu of the 70 nations etc. that we discussed earlier.

You have helped me find something interesting that I'd always wondered about. It puzzled me why Jeshua said that we should forgive 70 X 7 times those who trespass against us, and while I was searching for occurrences of seventies in the Bible I found the answer.

Cain's son Lameg said that whoever trespasses against him will be avenged 77 times (Gen 4:24).

So in other words, Christ was referring to Lameg's vengefulness and countered his proclamation with the instruction to forgive exceedingly.
Am I making the right connection?

Shalom

Morné

[Nachshon]

Whoah, hold on, you've switched from "common" to "official." Greek was the official language. No doubt about it. But it was not the common language.

You are correct. A Hebrew document does not prove that Greek was less common. However, when we have only Hebrew/Aramaic documents from the first and second centuries in Palestine, and no serious Jewish works in Greek except and until Philo and Josephus, we have to suppose that Greek was not common.

Your comment on Matthew actually defeats all of your own arguments.

Not necessarily. Some of these glosses do not appear in the ancient Aramaic versions, and those that do translate it from Judean Aramaic to Galillean Aramaic, which were two very different dialects.

Those are irrelevant, since the Greek is a translation it is only natural that they would translate these things.

Actually, they follow what is called the Common Text. This text is seen in the Samaritan , 4QExod, and the Peshitta TaNaKh. It is a text that is well known to scholars, but that no one else hears about. Quite a fascinating study.

That is probable.

[Ruchamah]

Shalom all!

I heard a MOST interesting understanding on this passage from Bill Cloud i believe and i thought you might like to hear it:

The passage in qwestion of course is about fruit bearing.
Well, Abraham had Isaac at age 100 (Gen. 21), Isaac had Jacob at age 60 (Gen 25) and Jacob, in the person of Joseph, had Mannashe and Ephraim when he was 30 (Gen 41).

Pretty kewl!

Ruchamah

[Morne]

Thank you, Ruchamah. That is indeed a very good and a very interesting connection.