[ p. 196 ]
WANDERINGS IN DECAPOLIS
Mt. xv. 29-xvi. 12 ; Mk. vii. 31b-viii. 26.
On the completion of His Phoenician ministry He addressed Himself anew to His frustrated purpose and sought another retreat where He might resume His interrupted converse with the Twelve. There was now no privacy for Him in Phoenicia, since the land was ringing with His fame ; and it is written that on leaving Sidon “He went toward the Sea of Galilee across the Region of Decapolis” (Decapolitana Regio). This was not a geographical area. It was a wide stretch of territory reaching from Damascus in the north as far south as Philadelphia (Rabbath-Ammon ), and extending eastward to Kanatha near the border of the Arabian desert, and comprehending the districts of Itursea, Trachonitis, Gaulanitis, Batanaea, Auranitis, and Gilead. In the course of Alexander the Great’s conquest it had been occupied by Greek settlers, and for the security of their commerce, chiefly against Bedawin incursions, their cities had formed a defensive league. Others joined later, but originally, as the name Decapolis implies, there were ten cities in the confederacy—Damascus and Hippos in the north, Gadara, Raphana (precise site now unknown), and Kanatha in the east, Scythopolis (the only confederate city west of the Jordan), Pella, Dion, Gerasa, and Philadelphia in the south.
From Sidon our Lord journeyed south-eastward till [ p. 197 ] He crossed the Phoenician frontier and passed into Gaulanitis, where He held southward and travelled through the uplands eastward of the Lake of Galilee. It seemed likely that in a country mainly peopled by native Syrians and Greek settlers He would go unrecognised ; but He was escorted from Phoenicia by enthusiastic followers, and their plaudits published the fame of the gracious Healer. The crowd increased as He went, and though He would fain have escaped, His compassion once more conquered His reserve. Somewhere to the east of the Lake a peculiarly pitiful case was presented to Him—a poor creature afflicted with deafness and a stammer in his speech, and evidently weak also in understanding, since it is written that he was “brought” or rather “borne” to Him like a paralytic or an infant (cf. Mk. ii. 3, x. 13). The sight of him and the entreaties of his friends touched the Lord’s heart and He addressed Himself to his cure. Trust in the Healer was always the condition of healing, and He set Himself first of all to win the poor soul’s confidence (cf. Mt. xiii. 58). Apparently he was frightened and excited by the throng of strangers, and the Lord took him and his friends apart from the crowd and soothed his alarm. Kind words he could not hear, but he could feel the touch of a kind hand; and as one caresses a timid animal, so the Lord fingered his deaf ears and, to awaken within him the hope of healing, dealt with him after the manner of an ancient physician. It was universally believed in those days that there was medicinal efficacy in saliva, and He moistened His finger and smeared the stammering tongue. Thus the poor creature conceived that both his infirmities were being treated, and the [ p. 198 ] kindness of the Lord’s face inspired him with confidence. All this was merely preliminary. God alone could work the miracle, and the Lord looked up to Heaven with a sigh. Only a sigh, but the sigh was a sympathetic prayer. Epphatha, He said in the Aramaic vernacular which a Jew instinctively employed in moments of tender emotion— epphatha, “be opened” ; and immediately the deaf ears heard and the babbling lips spoke distinctly.
He enjoined silence regarding the miracle and stole away to the hillside and seated Himself there with the Twelve in the hope that the crowd would disperse. But His injunction was disregarded. The tidings spread, and for the next three days the people flocked to Him from near and far with their sick—blind, deaf, crippled, and every sort, and laid them at His feet; and He healed them all. Betwixt the sick folk and their friends and the curious spectators there was an assemblage of over four thousand. Had they been Jews, they would have acclaimed Him the Messiah; but they were Gentiles, and it is written that “they glorified the God of Israel,” recognising by the wonders of His grace that He was greater than their heathen deities.
It was a lonesome spot among the wild uplands, and some of them had come a long distance. They had come scantily provided, and they were now in sore need. “I have compassion for the crowd,” said our Lord to the Twelve. “They have been three days in attendance upon Me, and they have nothing to eat. I do not wish to send them away fasting lest they faint on the road.” Remembering what had happened on the plain of Bethsaida, they understood [ p. 199 ] what was in His mind. “Where,” they answered, confessing their impotence and leaving all to Him, “can we get loaves enough in a wilderness to satisfy so large a crowd ?” All the provision they had with them was seven loaves and some dried fish. Bidding the folk recline on the hillside. He took these and blessed them and served them out, and again the scanty store grew in His hands, and again it amply sufficed. There was enough and to spare. Even as after the feeding of the five thousand the remaining fragments filled twelve baskets, so now they filled, not seven “baskets,” but—as the Evangelists are careful to observe, though our English Version ignores the significant distinction—seven “maunds.” Nowhere else does the word occur in the New Testament save in the story of the escape of Saul of Tarsus Ac from Damascus after his conversion, when he was lowered in “a maund,” a wicker hamper, over the city-wall. A maund was generally larger than a basket, but it is not the size of the maunds that is in question here. The point is rather that it was the Twelve who collected the fragments after the feeding of the five thousand, and the twelve baskets which they filled were, as we have seen, the bread-baskets which they carried after the fashion of Jewish travellers; but here it was the people who collected the fragments, doubtless for the supply of such as had come far and required provision for their homeward journey. They were a crowd of Gentiles and had no baskets ; and probably those wicker maunds in which the fragments were collected for distribution as need demanded were hastily woven on the spot.
[ p. 200 ]
The wonderment which so striking a miracle occasioned dispelled the Lord’s hope of finding privacy in that neighbourhood, and He recognised the necessity of betaking Himself elsewhither. But how was He to escape from the people who were thronging about Him and would follow Him wherever He might go, publishing His fame ? It was an embarrassing situation, and the perplexity which He and the Twelve now experienced is reflected in the obscurity of the narrative at this stage. It is written that “He sent the multitude away and got on board the boat with His disciples.” What boat ? They had not there on the eastern side of the Lake as at Capernaum one of their own always in readiness ; and it seems that He despatched some of His disciples from the inland to the shore to procure a boat, and then, stealing away from the multitude, He hastily embarked and set sail with the Twelve. And whither did they direct their course ? (Mt. xv. 39 R.V.) St. Matthew says that “He came into the bounds of Magadan” and St. Mark that “He came into the parts of Dalmanutha.” Both these localities are now unknown, and they would be little known even then, since He was seeking an unfrequented spot. There is a place on the Jordan some four miles inland from the southern end of the Lake and about a mile north of the confluence of the tributary Yarmuk (Hieromax) called Ed Delhemiyeh ; and it may well be that this is the ancient Dalmanutha, while Magadan was the name of the district. Thus, putting off from the eastern shore, they sailed to the southern end of the Lake, and there beached the boat and travelled inland.
In that quiet neighbourhood they would find the [ p. 201 ] seclusion which He desired; but their retreat was soon invaded. Dalmanutha was in the territory of Herod Antipas, and news of His arrival reached the ears of the Pharisees at Capernaum and the Sadducees at Herod s capital of Tiberias, w r here, as we have seen, they went by the name of the Herodians ; and presently a company of these His inveterate enemies appeared on the scene and would have opened a controversy. Professing perplexity, they requested that He would “display to them a sign from Heaven,” some striking miracle which would irrefragably attest His Messianic claims. It was the third occasion on which they had presented this challenge, and it is instructive to observe how He received it on each successive occasion. The first was at the beginning of His ministry after His expulsion of the traffickers from the Temple-court (Jo. ii. 18,19). This was bold assertion of His Messiahship, and the rulers in all sincerity required an attestation of His claim (Rom. i. 4). He granted them then a sign, though another sort of sign than they expected—a prophecy of His Death and Resurrection, that consummation which, in St. Paul’s phrase, would “define Him ‘Son of God in power’ The second occasion was at the beginning of the second year of His ministry, when a like challenge was presented by the Pharisees at Capernaum (Mt. xii. 38-42; Lk. xi. 16,29-32). It was no longer an honest appeal for evidence, since the rulers were now His avowed and malignant adversaries ; and He met it with a stern rebuke : “It is an evil and adulterous generation that seeks after a sign ; and no sign will be given it but the sign of Jonah.” The prophet’s message was the only sign granted to the [ p. 202 ] Ninevites of old, and it had sufficed to win them to repentance; and His message, more appealing than Jonah’s, was the only sign which the Lord would grant His generation. And now on this the third occasion His answer is a curt and contemptuous refusal. Their obduracy grieved Him and He drew a deep sigh. “Why,” He exclaimed, “is this generation seeking after a sign ? Verily I tell you, no sign shall be given this generation.” [1]
It were vain to tarry longer at Dalmanutha. Only in the far north could He hope for privacy, and thither He would now betake Himself. Apprehensive of further molestation He hurried the Twelve down to the shore of the Lake where they had left their boat, and such was their haste that they forgot ere embarking to procure provisions. Setting sail, they steered for the upper end of the Lake. It was a long run of some thirteen miles, and as the boat glided on her way. He conversed with them. It is no wonder that His thoughts were occupied with the rencontre at Dalmanutha ; for it was indeed a painful incident. His assailants were Pharisees and Herodians, representatives of the two parties which both politically and religiously were sundered by a wide gulf of mutual antagonism ; yet they were banded against Him. It was an unholy alliance, revealing what diverse forces were leagued against His Kingdom—the passions of blind bigotry and worldly ambition. “See !” said He to the Twelve, “beware of the leaven of the [ p. 203 ] Pharisees and the leaven of Herod.” It was a warning against the subtle working of those evil passions in their own souls, and they should have understood it; for the metaphor was familiar: was it not a proverb in those days that “a little leaven leavens the whole mass” ? (Cf. Gal. v. 9; 1 Cor. v. 6) But their minds were occupied with a practical concern ; and catching the word “leaven,” they fancied that He was upbraiding them for putting off without bread. Their dulness vexed Him. Surely they had profited little by all that they had heard and seen when so trivial a matter troubled them. “Do you not yet understand ?” He remonstrated. “Do you not remember the five loaves of the five thousand and the twelve baskets ? and the seven loaves of the four thousand and the seven maunds ? How do you not understand that it was not about loaves that I spoke ?”
They reached the head of the Lake and disembarking took their way northward. Fully a mile inland lay the town of Bethsaida, formerly a poor village but recently adorned by the Tetrarch Philip and, though still but a village for size, raised to the dignity of a city and styled Bethsaida Julias in honour of the Emperor Augustus’ daughter Julia. They would have avoided it but that they must replenish their empty baskets; and as they passed through it, He was recognised and a blind man was brought to Him for healing. Foreseeing the embarrassment which would arise if He healed him publicly, He grasped his hand and conducted him out of the village ; and when He was clear of it and remote from observation, He addressed Himself to his cure, seeking first, as in the case of +he deaf stammerer, to win his trust by playing [ p. 204 ] the part of a physician. He moistened the sightless eyes with saliva, and then, holding him in His kindly grasp, asked him if he made out anything. The man had got his sight, but he was naturally bewildered by this his first perception of external things. In his blindness he had formed notions of these, like that other blind man the philosopher tells of who, being asked his notion of scarlet, answered that he conceived it as like the loud blare of a trumpet, construing colour whereof he had no perception in terms of his faculty of hearing. Even so had this blind man his subjective notions of external appearances, and the reality surprised him. “I make out the men,” said he; “for I see them as trees walking about.” They did not correspond with his notion of men. They were liker his idea of trees, but he recognised them for men because they were walking about. The Lord passed His hands over his eyes and completed the cure : the man saw everything clearly and recognised what he saw.
Had the miracle been published in the village, a crowd would quickly have gathered and pursued Him, but He averted this embarrassment. The man dwelt in the country outside Bethsaida, and He bade him and his friends go straight home.
Cf Mk. viii. 12. Mt.’s report is doubly confused : (1) by the introduction into the Received Text of a saying spoken in another connection (Mt. xvi. 26, 3; cf. Lk. xii. 54-56) and absent here in the best authorities ; (2) by assimilation to His answer on the previous occasion (cf. Mt. xii. 39 ; Lk. xi. 29). ↩︎