Jesus Remembered: Christianity in the Making, vol. 1

THE QUESTION OF JESUS' SELF-UNDERSTANDING §15.7
them by' (6.48); the statement of intention makes for an awkward moment, not
least since he then did not pass them by. 336 The statement that 'they thought they
saw a ghost (phantasma)' 331 also can hardly be explained from the OT background
and fits awkwardly. Of course, the repeated description of their fear
('cried out', 'were terrified', 6.49-50) heightens the drama and prepares the way
dramatically for the subsequent resolution (cf. Luke 24.37; Acts 12.9). But if
truth be told, the story at this point reads more like a straight ghost story than
anything else. Noticeable here is pantes — 'they all saw him' (6.50) — a characteristic
feature in ghost stories. Finally there is the curious discordance between
the two endings: according to John's version, 'they wanted to take him into the
boat', and John leaves it unclear whether the wish was realized (contrast Mark
6.51); instead those in the boat find that they 'were suddenly at the shore' (John
6.21). All in all the impression is given of a dream-like state, of movement and
encounter impressionistic rather than clearly recalled. 338
Consequently, I find myself wondering whether behind even the two seamiracles
we can detect some half-remembered experience which provided the
basis and stimulus for the theological elaboration which gave the traditions their
definitive character. 339 As with the feeding of the large crowd, were there those
of the disciples who experienced one or more dangerous journeys across the lake
as a miracle of rescue or revelation? Here again, we should not assume originally
non-miraculous accounts which were only later reworked as miracles. Strauss's
point carries weight here too. And despite the theological overlay being impenetrable
at most points, some reminiscences do still seem to poke through. 340 Possibly
then here too we have to envisage traditions given the shape which still de-
336. Matthew omits the phrase; perhaps the statement of intention worked too much
against the epiphany theme, which otherwise we would expect him to have found congenial.
337. See BDAG, phantasma.
338. In Jesus and the Spirit 73 and 380 n. 27 I note the parallel of operatio in distans
brought forward by Rudolf Otto. B. J. Malina, 'Assessing the Historicity of Jesus' Walking on
the Sea: Insights from Cross-Cultural Social Psychology', in Chilton and Evans, eds., Authenticating
the Activities of Jesus 351-71, warns against limiting discussion to literary parallels,
evaluates the episode as an example of altered states of consciousness, and concludes: 'As reported
in the Gospels, the incident has all the hallmarks of historical verisimilitude and should
be ranked as a historically authentic episode' (369).
339. I see no grounds for taking the two sea-miracles as variants of each other (see
Meier, Marginal Jew 2.996-97 n. 110).
340. However, Meier concludes firmly: 'the walking on the water is most likely from
start to finish a creation of the early church, a christological confession in narrative form'; 'the
stilling of the storm is a product of early Christian theology' (Marginal Jew 2.921, 933). Similarly
Pesch, Markusevangelium 1.276, 362-63. Twelftree, Jesus, is content to leave the question
of the origin of the stilling of the storm 'open' (317), though he presses a little more for a more
positive conclusion in regard to the walking on the water (321-22).
688