Personality (For Christmas)

Mar 2:1

It was noised that He was in the house. This Christmas morning we may say, It was noised that He was in the world. Never forget that there was a great noise made about this birth. One angel began it, and suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly hosts, singing and shouting and praising God, and saying, Glory to God in the highest! and all heaven throbbed and quivered under that triumphant anthem. Jesus Christ, then, did not come noiselessly into the world; so far as He Himself was concerned, there was little or no noise, but the moment it was hinted that He was in the world-house, the earth, a visible manifestation of the invisible Deity, there was noise enough, musical noise, a great multitudinous acclaim. There are some times when people cannot be silent; indeed, there are some times when silence would be a species of blasphemy.

I. It was noised that He was in the world to bring you good tidings of great joy; for unto you is born this day in the house of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord. And all heaven was not orchestra enough to announce the infinite blessing. Have we ever been caught in that passion? or are we only those coldblooded folks who have to be carried in the ship as ballast?

II. It was noised, not only that He was in the world, but presently that He was the foremost Mar. in the world. In a sense the only Man, because without Him there could be no life. People began to say concerning Jesus, ‘Never man spake like this Man’. He became the pronoun that stood for the only noun there is, the Deity.

III. It was noised that He was in the house and the world; that He was not only in the house-world or world-house, but that He stood alone in it and gradually drew away from all other men that He might ascend the throne which He created. But in a sweet domestic sense it is often noised that He is in the family circle, in the little house, in our house where the cradle is, and where the little school-books are scattered about, and where the aged folks are that are now wondering what there is just across the river.

IV. Is it noised that Jesus Christ is in our house? What do they say? They say, knowing our family life, that Jesus is in that house because of its order, its temper, its resignation, its whole method and economy of existence; they say that only the presence of Jesus Christ in that house could have made such a death. There never was a death-bed scene like it except under the same circumstances, the same deep consciousness of the same majestic and tender Personality.

V. One day it will be noised that He is on the throne. Tempest shall tell it to tempest, and ocean to ocean, and world to world, and planet to planet; and there shall go forth a great, grand, solemn cry, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdom of our God and of His Christ And they shall cry in every tongue, Hallelujah! and Bethlehem shall culminate in heaven.

Joseph Parker, City Temple, Pulpit, vol. II. p. 272.

References. II. 1-12. W. M. Taylor, The Miracles of Our Saviour, p. 122. Archbishop Trench, Notes on the Miracles of Our Lord, p. 166. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture St. Mark I.-VIII. p. 61. John Laidlaw, The Miracles of Our Lord, p. 178. II. 3. W. H. Hutchings, Sermon-Sketches, p. 83. F. Hastings, Christian World Pulpit, vol. lxiv. 1903, p. 132. II. 3-5. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. lii. No. 3016.

Vicarious Faith

Mar 2:5

The healing of the man sick of the palsy is an instance of vicarious faith. By ‘vicarious’ we mean something done for and instead of another. The vicarious sacrifice of Jesus Christ means that Christ suffered in our stead, and died for our sins. This palsied man received both the forgiveness of his sins and the healing of his body, through the faith of the men who brought him. Seeing their faith, He saith, not to them, but ‘unto the sick of the palsy, Son, thy sins are forgiven’.

I. Instances of Vicarious Faith.

1. There came to Jesus in Capernaum ‘a centurion beseeching Him and saying, Lord, my servant lieth in the house sick of the palsy, grievously tormented. And He saith unto him, I will come and heal him’.

2. On another occasion there came from Capernaum to Cana of Galilee a nobleman whose child was sick, and he besought Jesus ‘that He would come down and heal his son; for he was at the point of death’.

3. There is another instance where a father’s faith prevailed for an only child. In the incident at the foot of the Mount of Transfiguration Jesus threw back the healing of the demoniac boy upon the faith of the father.

4. Still more striking is the faith of the Greek woman in the district of Tyre and Sidon.

II. The Operations of Vicarious Faith. Vicarious faith begins by making the needs of another its own. Fellowship of woe precedes vicariousness in faith. The affliction of the child is the continual grief of the parent. The sinless One carried away the world’s sin by taking it unto Himself. He was made sin for us.

III. Vicarious Faith in the Work of Salvation. When Jesus saw the faith of the men who brought their palsied friend, He did not begin by commanding the sick man to take up his bed and walk, but by announcing the forgiveness of his sins. ‘Seeing their faith, He saith to the sick of the palsy, Son, thy sins are forgiven.’ However startling it may seem, this man received the forgiveness of his sins through the faith of others. It is true no man can be saved by proxy, but it is also true we are saved vicariously. There is a human as well as a Divine element in the process of soul-birth, and every man’s salvation begins in the faith of another.

Vicarious faith never despairs. It seeks desperate cases, and delights to bring the palsied and devil-possessed to the feet of Christ.

IV. Vicarious Faith is the Foundation of all Prevailing Intercession. How often the Apostle Paul entreats the prayers of his spiritual children!

The power of such prayer may be gathered from the promise of Christ to His people. ‘Again I say unto you, that if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of My Father which is in heaven.’

Faith reaches the perfection of its power in vicarious exercise. It seems in its concern for others to attain a Divine quality and to command Divine power.

Doubtless some will say, surely there are limitations to this faith. If by limitations is meant conditions, then there are limitations. That for which faith is exercised must be in the will of God, and must be assured to the soul by the Spirit of God.

S. Chadwick, Humanity and God, p. 290.

References. II. 5. R. J. Campbell, Christian World Pulpit, vol. lxxiv. 1908, p. 36. II. 5-7 H. Rix, Sermons, Addresses, and Essays, p. 90. II. 10. C. Perren, Revival Sermons in Outline, p. 286. F. C. Spurr, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xlv. 1894, p. 117. J. B. Slack, A Book of Lay Sermons, p. 19. A. G. Mortimer, The Church’s Lessons for the Christian Year, part ii. p. 235. II. 10, 11. C. A. Briggs, The Incarnation of the Lord, p. 3. II. 12. J. McNeill, Christian World Pulpit, vol. lxiii. 1903, p. 182. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxi. No. 1269. II. 13-22. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture St. Mark I.-VIII. p. 70.

The Quests At Christ’s Own Table

Mar 2:15

I. This is to my mind the most unique passage in the New Testament. It is the only instance I know in which Jesus plays the part of host or entertainer. Everywhere else He is a guest; here, for the first and last time, we meet Him in His own house, at His own table. It was not a communion table. The disciples were there; but publicans and sinners were there also. Around that table there must have been a great diversity of theological opinion. The disciples and the publicans had no dogmas in common; yet they both sat at Christ’s board.

II. What enabled them to sit together? We can understand how men can ‘sit together in heavenly places’ in the sense of a common faith. But what bound in one these souls so different? It was their love for the Son of Man. It was their love for the earthly Christ the brother-Christ, the Christ of the street and of the lane. The publicans and sinners were not yet dreaming of salvation. They were seeking no supernatural help. It was the natural in Christ which they loved the voice, the gait, the manner, the countenance. They loved Him for less than He was worth. The private friends of a poet may be unable to appreciate any poetry; yet the man may be very dear to them, and he will accept their outside fondness. So did Jesus accept a love for that which was His least possession. It was a love for something inferior, but it was not an inferior love.

III. Do not measure the strength of love by its cause. Many of these publicans would have gone to the stake as readily as the disciples though they would have gone for another motive. The love in the disciple was fire on the mount, the love in the publican was fire on the plain; but a fire on the plain may be as hot as a fire on the mount. Jesus saw the difference, but He accepted both.

G. Matheson, Messages of Hope, p. 218.

Failure

Mar 2:17

There is no question that Jesus looked upon His mission as to all men, and yet He says distinctly that it is only a mission for sinners, the obvious inference being that all have sinned.

Although, however, the sinfulness of human nature is one in different ages, and individuals, it manifests itself in different forms, and in the teaching of Jesus we have very full notice of the forms in which it displayed itself in His time.

I. There were the sins of the publicans and sinners. These were sins of the senses, what St Paul calls the sins of the flesh, as distinguished from what he calls the sins of the mind, open sins that cannot hide themselves. Such sins are most fully described in the parable of the prodigal son; in fact, the prodigal is simply an image of the sins of the flesh, their course, and their consequences.

II. There were the sins of the Pharisees. These are what Paul would have called sins of the mind, as distinguished from sins of the flesh, but they are not less deadly. There is another character besides the prodigal in the parable of the prodigal son. It is the prodigal’s brother, and shall we not say with truth that he was as far away from his father as even the prodigal was, if not farther? In fact, Jesus Himself said distinctly to the Pharisees, ‘The publicans and sinners enter into the kingdom of heaven before you,’ meaning that it was easier to make them Christians than to make the Pharisees followers of Christ The distinctive sin of the Pharisees was hypocrisy. ‘Pharisee’ and ‘hypocrite’ are interchangeable terms.

III. The sins of the Sadducees. What was the sin of the Sadducees? It is depicted in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus. People sometimes ask what Dives did that he should be consigned to the flames of Gehenna. All that is said about him is that he was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day. Wherein consisted his sin? It was negative, and Jesus was very severe on negative sins. It was just that he did nothing. He made no use of his means and talents. He did nothing for his fellow-men. He did nothing for God. He was wrapped up in Himself.

IV. The sentiments of Jesus on the subject we have before us are most impressively given in the three parables in the fifteenth chapter of St Luke, and if you want to know the mind of Christ on man’s failure, I would say brood deeply upon these three parables the parable of the lost sheep, the lost coin, and the lost son. As the lost coin has fallen away from its usefulness, so man is not doing the lifework for which his Maker intended him; and as the lost son was wasting his substance in riotous living, so every sinner can be accused of misusing and misspending the talents which God has given him. And yet, just as the lost coin, though hidden among dust and dirt, was not itself a lump of dirt, but a piece of precious metal; and as the prodigal, though far from his home and his father and his obedience, was still a son, so the soul of man, in spite of its sin, is infinitely precious, and its destiny is Divine and eternal.

J. Stalker, Christian World Pulpit, vol. lvii. 1900, p. 76.

References. II. 17. D. Fraser, Metaphors in the Gospels, p. 95. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxiii. No. 1345. II. 18. C. H. Thomas, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xlv. 1894, p. 149.

Mar 2:19

Samuel Rutherford once wrote this sensible advice to Marion M’Naught, after the latter’s dangerous illness. ‘Remember you are in the body, and it is the lodging-house; and you may not, without offending the Lord, suffer the old walls of that house to fall down through want of necessary food. Your body is the dwelling-place of the spirit; and therefore, for the love you carry to the sweet Guest, give a due regard to His house of clay. When He looseth the wall, why not? Welcome, Lord Jesus! But it is a fearful sin in us, by hurting the body by fasting, to loose one stone or the least piece of timber in it, for the house is not our own. The bridegroom is with you yet; so fast as that also you may feast and rejoice in Him.

References. II. 19. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture St. Mark I.-VIII. p. 75. II. 19, 20. N. Bushnell, Christ and His Salvation, p. 176. II. 20. F. B. Woodward, Sermons (1st Series), p. 69. A. G. Mortimer, The Church’s Lessons for the Christian Year, part ii. p. 235. II. 21, 22. D. Fraser, Metaphors in the Gospels, p. 106. II. 22. J. Stuart Holden, The Pre-Eminent Lord, p. 47. II. 23-28. W. H. Murray, The Fruits of the Spirit, p. 430. II. 23-28; III. 1-5. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture St. Mark I.-VIII. p. 87. II. 24. Marcus Dods, Christian World Pulpit, vol. liii. 1898, p. 43.

The Sabbath

Mar 2:27

I. You may notice these words in two ways.

1. ‘The Sabbath was made for man.’ That is, for the benefit of man; just as the golden sun that scatters his light over the world was made for man, so in the same sense was the Sabbath made for man.

2. The Sabbath was made for the whole human race. It does not say that the Sabbath was made only for the Jew; it was made for man. It is like the sun, a universal blessing.

II. In what follows I desire shortly to prove to you the proposition that the Sabbath was made for man.

1. For his body. Those who keep horses know quite well that, if they are to be wrought up to their strength, you must give them rest one day in seven. So it is with man; if he has to work up to his strength, he requires one day of rest in seven. Does not this prove that He that made our bodies has also appointed the Sabbath for the whole human race; for had He pleased He could have made our bodies of iron. The greater part of men work up to their strength, therefore they require one day of rest in seven. It is the same with the mind, it requires one day of rest in seven. The same thing is true of the soul. If there be a God, and if there be a Church of redeemed men, then it is agreeable to reason that they should worship Him with the whole mind and strength and will. Then, if it be agreeable to reason that you are to worship Him with your whole heart, it requires a time for it, and that a set time, and it requires that it be regular.

2. The Sabbath was made for man according to the example of God. We are told in the second of Genesis of God making the Sabbath. Now it seems to me quite plain that, if God rested on the first Sabbath, it was made for His creatures; it could not be for Himself. ‘Hast thou not heard, that the everlasting God, the Creator, fainteth not, neither is weary?’ It is a very common thing for Sabbath-breakers to say that it is a Jewish ordinance. But the first Sabbath dawned on a sinless world two thousand years before ever the mention of a Jew was heard of.

3. I would show you that the Sabbath was made for man from the command that God gave concerning it When God brought Israel out of Egypt to the rocky mount of Sinai He there gave them a clear revelation of His holy law; and it is said, that ‘It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made’. And in the very bosom of it was written, ‘Remember the Sabbath Day to keep it holy’. When Christ came into the world, He said, ‘I came not to destroy the law, but to fulfil it’.

4. That all God’s children love the Sabbath Day. God said to Israel, ‘My Sabbaths you shall reverence’. And the Prophet Ezekiel says: ‘He gave them a Sabbath to be a sign between them and Him’; it marked them out as God’s peculiar people.

5. It is those that are God’s enemies who hate the Sabbath Day.

R. Murray McCheyne, British Weekly Pulpit, vol. II. p. 63.

References. II. 27. T. H. Ball, Persuasions, p. 133. C. J. Ridgeway, Plain Sermons on Sunday Observance, p. 64. H. D. M. Spence, Voices and Silences, p. 259. W. F. Cobb, Church Times, vol. xl. 1898, p. 273. II. 27, 28. M. H. James, Plain Sermons on Sunday Observance, p. 52. R. Allen, The Words of Christ, p. 231. F. Pickett, Christian World Pulpit, vol. lxxiv. 1908, p. 148. III. 1-5. Archbishop Trench, Notes on the Miracles of Our Lord, p. 257. S. A. Tipple, The Admiring Guest, p. 44. III. 1-6. W. M. Taylor, The Miracles of Our Saviour, p. 148. J. Laidlaw, The Miracles of Our Lord, p. 189. III. 3, 5. H. E. Brierley, Christian World Pulpit, vol. lxxiv. 1908, p. 243.

Fuente: Expositor’s Dictionary of Text by Robertson

Mar 2:14

The chosen Apostles themselves misunderstand and misinterpret their Master. Peter, after being told that his confession is the rock on which the Church should be built, is spoken of as a tempter and an offence to his Master, as one who savours not of the things which are of God, but of those which are of men. John is twice rebuked, once for his revengeful spirit, once for his short-sighted ambition. Judas’s treachery is predicted. All the twelve are warned that they will fail at the hour of Christ’s trial, and that warning, like the more individual prediction addressed to Peter, is certainly most unlikely to have been conceived after the event. In a word, from beginning to end of the Gospels, we have evidence which no one could have managed to forge, that Christ deliberately chose materials of which it would have been impossible for any one to build a great organization, unless he could otherwise provide, and continue to provide, the power by which that organization was to stand.

R. H. Hutton, Theological Essays, p. 150.

Fuente: Expositor’s Dictionary of Text by Robertson

Christ Under Criticism

[An Analysis]

Mar 2

The Gospel has a word to crowds as well as individual men. The Gospel is universal in its doctrines, and hence can be preached to all classes at all times and in all places. It is also particular in its application of truth, so that it can be addressed to any single human being. When Jesus Christ saw crowds, his business was to preach the word to them. Christians should endeavour to get Jesus Christ’s view of crowds of men. To the Christian heart a crowd is a most exciting scene. The histories, the passions, the purposes, the designs of a great crowd, who can tell but God! Yet the Gospel is adapted to all.

3. And they come unto him, bringing one sick of the palsy, which was borne of four.

4. And when they could not come nigh unto him for the press, they uncovered the roof where he was: and when they had broken it up, they let down the bed wherein the sick of the palsy lay.

5. When Jesus saw their faith, he said unto the sick of the palsy, Son, thy sins be forgiven thee.

6. But there were certain of the scribes sitting there, and reasoning in their hearts,

7. Why doth this man thus speak blasphemies? who can forgive sins but God only?

8. And immediately when Jesus perceived in his spirit that they so reasoned within themselves, he said unto them, Why reason ye these things in your hearts?

9. Whether is it easier to say to the sick of the palsy, Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Arise, and take up thy bed, and walk?

10. But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins (he saith to the sick of the palsy),

11. I say unto thee, Arise, and take up thy bed, and go thy way into thine house.

12. And immediately he arose, took up the bed, and went forth before them all; insomuch that they were all amazed, and glorified God, saying, We never saw it on this fashion.

(1) The helplessness of some men: all helplessness traceable to sin. (2) The social usefulness of other men; we can all carry sufferers to Christ, even when we cannot heal them ourselves. To point a sinner to Jesus Christ is a good work, to carry a little child to the Saviour is to execute a most blessed mission. (3) The possibilities of earnestness; these men uncovered the roof in their determination to approach the Healer. Some would have gone away, saying they would return on a more favourable occasion; some would have given up the endeavour altogether; these earnest men had an object in view, and were resolved on its accomplishment. All men can get to the Saviour if they so determine, however many be the apparent or real difficulties in their way. (4) The vigilance of Jesus Christ over human action. Notwithstanding the crowds, and his engagement in addressing them, Jesus Christ saw what was being done in this particular instance; he knew the meaning of the extraordinary movement that was taking place, and the reward which he gave to the earnest men was great. (5) The censorious spirits of technical observers. The scribes accused the Saviour of blasphemy; they could not understand his inspiration, and it is always a misfortune to be misunderstood. Whoever determines to live the highest life, determines also to expose himself to the heavy penalties of misinterpretation. Jesus Christ did not deny their inference regarding his claim to the Godhead; he did not instantly disclaim any pretence to be as God; on the contrary, he so asserted his power as to justify the astounding inference of the scribes. Particular notice should be taken of this as an incidental proof of Jesus Christ’s Godhead. To have allowed even tacitly the rightness of such inferences as were forced upon the scribes was, apart from his divinity, nothing short of a blasphemous assertion on his part. Jesus Christ works in much the same manner in relation to spiritual diseases. We can get no higher than himself; he is exalted to be a Prince and a Saviour, and he gives according to his sovereign will in response to human faith. The fulness of Jesus Christ’s power is shown in the perfect ease with which he works his miracles. He speaks the recreating word, and yet there is within him no sign of exhaustion or insufficiency. Sinners should learn from this incident not to be discouraged because there are technical reasoners in their way, who are fertile in the suggestion of objections; those who bore the sick of the palsy on this occasion did not listen to the reasonings or the objections of those by whom they were surrounded. If any man in going to Jesus Christ can be detained in the way to listen to the criticisms and counsels of those who are opposed to Christ, the probability is that he will never reach the Saviour. It is true that in this instance the scribes were reasoning in their hearts, and not openly so that they could be heard by a crowd; it is also true in our own day that many reason aloud against the possibility of Jesus Christ’s saving sinners; those therefore who are conscious of sin ought to be put on their guard against subtle and persistent objectors. Had the man been unconscious of a deep and distressing want, he and his friends might have listened to captious reasoning; but his necessity was so urgent that nothing less than a personal interview with Christ would satisfy him.

It is the same with the deadlier palsy of sin. If it be not to us the most terrible reality in our nature if we do not so comprehend its horribleness as to loathe it unutterably if we do not feel the moral agony which it inflicts until we cry out almost in despair “What shall we do to be saved? ” it is almost certain that we shall be turned aside by frivolous critics. The first thing to be done is to feel bitterly and inexpressibly the infinite abomination of sin. No progress in our approach to Jesus Christ can be made until we have come into this experience of the exceeding sinfulness of sin. In proportion as a man’s estimate of sin is low will he be indisposed to find Jesus Christ; when his sin fills his heart with sorrow and despair, he will be resolved to surmount all obstacles that would interrupt his course toward the Saviour. The great result of the cure wrought upon the palsied man will be repeated on a broader scale in the consummation of Jesus Christ’s ministry. It is said that “The people were all amazed, and glorified God, saying, We never saw it on this fashion.” So shall it be in the end of all things; there will be one universal ascription of glory to him who has redeemed the human race from sin, and given it eternal life. Here is contention at the beginning; men see things only in shadow and outline; whilst the process is going on they are victimised by their own impatience, and oftentimes interrupt the Saviour, and show their utter want of self-control; but when the whole work is finished, there will be throughout the universe a sense of thankful and glad amazement.

13. And he went forth again by the seaside; and all the multitude resorted unto him, and he taught them.

14. And as he passed by, he saw Levi the son of Alphus sitting at the receipt of custom, and said unto him, Follow me. And he arose and followed him.

The Saviour was not content with an occasional great effort, as we are apt to be. He is now found teaching the multitudes. Here is an illustration of the twofold ministry of Jesus Christ, namely, doing good to the bodies and also to the minds of men. We are left to infer what is meant by this word taught. It is clear from the whole course of Jesus Christ that he regarded all men as requiring teaching; and it is also clear that he set himself forth as the Teacher who alone could reveal the highest truths of the universe. The Christian minister is to be emphatically a teacher; he can only teach truly and successfully as he repeats the lessons which he finds in the life of the Saviour. Teaching is more difficult than preaching. In teaching there must be inquiry into the special circumstances of the learners, and an encountering of the particular difficulties of those who come to be taught. The preacher has to a large extent to deal with general truths, he has to make bold universal proclamations; whereas the teacher may have to go into special adaptation of the divine truth to the distinctive circumstances of the individual case. The teacher requires to be not only thoroughly intelligent and intensely devoted to his work, but to be long-suffering in his spirit and method of service. Men cannot be taught truth offhandedly; their prejudices must be studied, their capacities must be considered, and there must be such skilful balance in the offering of truth as shall meet different degrees of culture and sensibility.

In the 14th verse we turn once more to the individual case. In the 13th verse we have a multitude receiving instruction; in the 14th verse we have one man specially called; This is the way Christian ministers and teachers must work. We cannot all be like our Master, having equal facility in addressing crowds and persuading individual hearers. Some men have a gift of speaking so as to hold great multitudes under their dominion; others, again, have a most useful talent in speaking to the individual life and conscience. Levi was called from the receipt of custom; the great point is to consider, not what a man is called from, but what he is called to. We are all called from sin; we look not so much to that as to the infinite glory which is set before us as the outcome of Christian faith and love and service.

The same verse might be used as showing what can be done in the way of incidental work for Christ. We learn that Jesus Christ “passed by,” as if this circumstance occurred quite casually, and not in the working out of a set purpose. It does not seem to have been part of the plan; yet undoubtedly it was so in the mind of Christ, to whom nothing could happen by chance. There is, however, a lesson to us, that we are to be always on the outlook for the good of men whom we are passing by in the various ways of life. Wherever we see a man we see an opportunity of speaking a word for Christ, and of calling men to a higher life. Courage and prudence are equally required in the discharge of these incidental services. There is a modesty that is immodest, and there is a forwardness which is but the courage of humility.

15. And it came to pass that as Jesus sat at meat in his house, many publicans and sinners sat also together with Jesus and his disciples: for there were many, and they followed him.

16. And when the scribes and Pharisees saw him eat with publicans and sinners, they said unto his disciples, How is it that he eateth and drinketh with publicans and sinners?

These verses show that Jesus Christ lived under a constant fire of criticism. This was not unnatural. If we have escaped criticism it may be because we have escaped Christianity.

Criticism will always be provoked by an intensely Christian spirit. Men are apt to think that Jesus Christ took upon himself all criticism, and so relieved his followers from the remarks of those who are now opposed to them. This should be shown to be a deadly error. Those who criticised Jesus Christ were men of good outward standing; yet they were destitute of moral purity: such men are always most forward in giving opinions about the conduct of other people. Where there is a high moral character there will be prolonged forbearance of other people’s weaknesses; but where the outward habit is in excess of the inward principle there will be no lack of censorious criticism.

In the case of Jesus Christ it is clearly shown that where there is moral purity there is noble independence of public opinion. Jesus went boldly into such houses as he elected as his temporary residences, he sat openly with publicans and sinners; and the reason of what in other men would have been defiant bravado was the intense and incorruptible purity of his own heart. Men can only brave public criticism surely and serenely in proportion as they are right. Righteousness is peace.

17. When Jesus heard it, he saith unto them, They that are whole have no need of a physician, but they that are sick: I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

Jesus hears all the objections that are urged against him. He sees all the objections that are in the heart before they are formed into words. Of him it may be said, “Thou knowest my thoughts afar off.” Jesus Christ does not look upon one opinion as secret and another as public; to him the whole story of human life is an open page, on which the noonday sun is shining. Jesus Christ has an instant answer to all objections: witness the case in point. From this answer we may see (1) Duty of doing good avowedly not going about it in an indirect manner as if we were making an experiment, but boldly and distinctly, approaching it with a set purpose of spending our best energy upon it. (2) We may see it to be our duty to go to those who are least cared for. We are only working in the line of the Saviour’s mission as we begin at the very lowest point in the social scale. We cannot do fundamental and permanent good by beginning at the top or in the middle; we must get down to springs and causes, we must begin at the very deepest point of human apostasy, and work our way steadily upward; there is a temptation even in Christian work to stop short of the lowest depth of human necessity. (3) Jesus Christ shows it to be our duty to associate with those whom we seek to save: he sat with them, he talked to them, he asked them questions, he made himself their personal friend, and so attained over them personal supremacy. This practice levels a deadly blow at the theory of doing good by proxy. It is comparatively easy to send other men on errands of mercy; but we are only working in Christ’s spirit in so far as we are prepared to go ourselves, and openly identify our whole influence with the cause of fallen men. Where there is this intense personal consecration, there will, of course, be a disposition to engage as much co-operation as possible; our duty is to see that we do not find in co-operation an excuse for personal negligence. Jesus Christ answered his opponents almost invariably by laying down a great principle. He did not trust to uncommon reasonings, or work according to the special mood of the day. He had intense personal conviction, to which he constantly referred in explanation and defence of his ministry. Ministers are only strong up to the degree in which they know precisely what they have come to do; Jesus Christ said he came for the express purpose of healing the sick and calling sinners to repentance. Unity in this as in all other things is strength. When a man works with divided heart, his work ends in failure.

18. And the disciples of John and of the Pharisees used to fast: and they come and say unto him, Why do the disciples of John and of the Pharisees fast, but thy disciples fast not?

19. And Jesus said unto them, Can the children of the bridechamber fast, while the bridegroom is with them? as long as they have the bridegroom with them they cannot fast.

20. But the days will come when the bridegroom shall be taken away from them, and then shall they fast in those days.

21. No man also seweth a piece of new cloth on an old garment: else the new piece that filled it up taketh away from the old, and the rent is made worse.

22. And no man putteth new wine into old bottles: else the new wine doth burst the bottles, and the wine is spilled, and the bottles will be marred: but new wine must be put into new bottles.

(1) There should be difference between Jesus Christ’s disciples and the disciples of all other men. It is noticeable how soon those differences were detected by the critics of the day. The differences should be as broadly marked now as they were in the days of Jesus Christ’s visible ministry. (2) Those differences should find their explanation in Jesus Christ, not in the expression of the disciples themselves. Jesus Christ takes upon himself the responsibility of determining the public attitude of his disciples. They must be joyful or sad according to the spirit which he puts into them, or the temporary discipline to which he subjects them. There is a time when it is right for the disciples to be glad and triumphant, joyful as men who are at a wedding feast in the presence of the bridegroom; there is also a time in which they must bow down their heads in pensiveness and sad wonder about the future. The difficulty in many cases is for the heart to realise that, alike in joy and in sorrow, it may be working out the beneficent purposes of the Saviour. (3) The illustration about pieces of cloth and the different wines shows the perfect uniqueness of Christianity: there is to be no patching, there is to be no compromising. Christianity is to have a distinctiveness and speciality of its own; the ancient make and the modern variation are not to be put together as part and parcel of Christian truth; Christianity is to stand out alone complete in its indivisible and perfect unity. In this case again we see how Jesus Christ throws himself back upon great principles, and finds in the simplicity of nature and the integrity of truth the surest defence of his Church.

23. And it came to pass, that he went through the corn fields on the sabbath day, and his disciples began, as they went, to pluck the ears of corn.

24. And the Pharisees said unto him, Behold, why do they on the sabbath day that which is not lawful?

25. And he said unto them, Have ye never read what David did, when he had need, and was an hungered, he, and they that were with him?

26. How he went into the house of God in the days of Abiathar the high priest, and did eat the shewbread, which is not lawful to eat, but for the priests, and gave also to them which were with him?

27. And he said unto them, The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath:

28. Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath.

Jesus is still living under the fire of criticism already referred to. In this particular interview it is made clear (1) That all critical inquiries are not to be condemned. This question on the part of the Pharisees was not at all unnatural. Men ought to be called upon to give explanations of habits that are opposed to the public sentiment and usages of their times. Jesus Christ does not resent the inquiry as if it proceeded from a wicked spirit. Let it be inferred from this that there are right questions to be put concerning the Christian religion and the practice of Christians. There are questions that are bad in their spirit and bad in their purpose; there are also questions which come quite naturally out of the extraordinary development of Christian conviction and impulse. Jesus Christ shows by his answers that he considered human life to be above all technical law. The disciples were an hungered as they passed through the corn fields. David was an hungered when he ate the shewbread; there are courses in human life when men are apparently or really lifted above the current of law and usage, and when life becomes to itself a determining law. (2) The perfect and inalienable supremacy of Jesus Christ is asserted in the last verse. He proclaims himself Lord over time, over institutions, and over human affairs. This great claim is not to be overlooked in estimating the dignity of Jesus Christ’s personal ministry. Could any mere man have proclaimed his lordship over the Sabbath day? A man cannot be Lord of the Sabbath without being Lord of something beyond. God does not distribute these lordships; the Lord of the Sabbath is also the Lord of hosts.

Prayer

Jesus, Son of David, have mercy upon us! Our hands are withered, the whole head is sick, the whole heart is faint: come to us in thy healing power, and make us young again. We would be born of water and of the Spirit; we would know in its effects the process of regeneration. Not by works of righteousness which we have done, for we can do none, but according to thy mercy must this washing of regeneration be effected. We know that thy purpose towards us is love; whatsoever the discipline may be, the end is our perfection; thou wilt have us in Christ Jesus, thou eternal Father, perfect, accepted, sanctified: may we, knowing the purpose and the end, even joyfully accept the process in all its painfulness. Thou dost not finish thy work to-day or tomorrow; but on the third day thou dost perfect thy purpose amongst men; then they see the topstone brought on, and hear the song of angels and the benediction of God; then hast thou rest and joy, and all thy people are filled with contentment. Jesus, never leave us, never withdraw from us even for one moment: only in thy presence are we safe; only under thy blessing can we grow in all holy progress; we are too weak to be left alone, the enemy is too strong for us, temptations are thick beyond all counting, and urgent with desperateness. Keep near us, abide with us, break bread to us in our hunger, and in the very manner of the breaking of the bread we shall see thee, and know thee to be the Lord. Help thy servants in the ministry to see thy will, to understand the meaning of thy kingdom, and to reveal what thou hast told them in all simplicity and sincerity, so that men may hear and fear, and turn unto the Lord in great multitudes. Help thy servants to bear all the difficulties, burdens, temptations of the ministry; and grant unto all thy Church in all its sections and departments a plentiful rain from heaven, that it may rejoice in the acknowledgment of thy blessing, in the recognition of thy love, and the bestowal of thine approval. Help us to read thy word aright, to receive it joyfully and gratefully, and to repeat it in consecrated and progressive lives. This our prayer we say at the Cross of Christ, the altar of the universe, the one way into heaven because the one way to pardon for guilty souls. At that Cross we tarry for God’s great answer. Amen.

Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker

XXVI

OUR LORD’S GREAT MINISTRY IN GALILEE

Part I

Harmony pages 85-39 and Mat 4:17-25 ; Mat 8:2-17 ; Mat 9:2-26 ; Mar 1:14-2:22 ; Mar 5:22-43 ; Luk 4:14-5:39 ; Luk 8:41-56 ; Joh 4:46-54 .

We now come to our Lord’s great ministry m Galilee. We will take a sort of preview of this whole division and then follow it up with more detailed discussions. The general theme of this division of the Harmony is “The kingdom of heaven.” We are prone at times to fall into errors of interpretation concerning the kingdom similar to those which led ancient Israel so far and so harmfully astray concerning the advent of the Messiah. Either we so fill our minds with the sublimity of world redemption, as applied to the race, in the outcome, so satisfy our hearts with rhetorical splendor in the glowing description of universal dominion that we lose sight of its application to individuals in our day, and the responsibilities arising from the salvation of one man, or we so concentrate our fancy upon the consummation that we forget the progressive element in the development of the kingdom and the required use of means in carrying on that progress. The former error breeds unprofitable dreamers the latter promotes skeptics. The preacher is more liable to be led astray by the one, the average church member by the other.

Perhaps the most unprofitable of all sermons is the one full of human eloquence and glowing description excited by the great generalities of salvation, and perhaps the most stubborn of all skepticism is that resulting from disappointment as not witnessing and receiving at once the very climax of salvation, both as to the individual and the race.

Such a spirit of disappointment finds expression in words like these: “The prophecies here of the kingdom are about 1,900 years old. Nineteen centuries have elapsed since the Child was born. Wars have not ceased. The poor are still oppressed. Justice, equity, and righteousness do not prevail. Sorrow, sin, and death still reign. And I am worried and burdened and perplexed. My soul is cast down and disquieted within me.” In such case we need to consider the false principles of interpretation which have misled us, and inquire: Have we been fair to the Book and its promise?

Here I submit certain carefully considered statements: (1) The consummation of the Messiah’s kingdom was never promised as an instantaneous result of the birth of the Child. (2) The era of universal peace must follow the utter and eternal removal of things and persons that offend. This will be the harvest of the world. (3) Again, this consummation was never promised as an immediate result, i.e., without the use of means to be employed by Christ’s people. (4) Yet again, this aggregate consummation approaches only by individual reception of the kingdom and individual progress in sanctification. (5) It is safe to say that the promises have been faithfully fulfilled to just the extent that individuals have received the light, walked in the light and discharged the obligations imposed by the gift of the light. These receptive and obedient ones in every age have experienced life, liberty, peace, and joy, and have contributed their part to the ultimate glorious outcome. (6) And this experience in individuals reliably forecasts the ultimate race and world result, and inspires rational hope of its coming. This is a common sense interpretation. In the light of it our duty is obvious. Our concern should be with our day and our lot and our own case as at present environed. The instances of fulfilment cited by the New Testament illustrate and verify this interpretation, particularly that recorded by Matthew as a fulfilment of the prophecies of Isaiah 4-13 inclusive, of his gospel. What dispassionate mind can read these ten chapters of Matthew, with the parallel passages in Mark and Luke, without conceding fulfilment of Isaiah’s prophecies uttered seven centuries before?

Here is the shining of a great light, brighter than all of the material luminaries in the heavens which declare the glory of God and show his handiwork. This is, indeed, the clean, sure and perfect law of the Lord, converting the soul, making wise the simple, rejoicing the heart, enlightening the eyes, enduring forever, more desirable than gold and sweet “r than honey in the honeycomb. Here are judgments true and righteous altogether.

Here in sermon and similitude the incomparable Teacher discloses the principles and characteristics of a kingdom that, unlike anything earth-born, must be from heaven. Here is a fixed, faultless, supreme, and universal standard of morality. The Teacher not only speaks with authority and wisdom, but evidences divinity by supernatural miracles, signs, and wonders. But there is here more than a teacher and wonder worker. He is a Saviour, a Liberator, a Healer, conferring life, liberty, health, peace, and joy. To John’s question John in prison and in doubt the answer was conclusive that this, indeed, was the one foreshown by the prophets and there was no need to look for another: “Go and tell John the things which ye hear and see: the blind receive their sight, and the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear, and the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached to them. And whosoever shall find no occasion for stumbling in me, blessed is he” (Mat 11:1-4 ).

The special matter here most worthy of our consideration is that the kingdom of heaven was not expanded by instantaneous diffusion over a community, a nation, or the world, regardless of human personality, activity, and responsibility ill receiving and propagating it, but it took hold of each receptive individual’s heart and worked out on that line toward the consummation.

To as many as received him to them he gave the power to become the sons of God. Those only who walked in the light realized the blessings of progressive sanctification. To the sons of peace, peace came as a thrilling reality. From those who preferred darkness to light) who judged themselves unworthy of eternal life, the proffered peace departed, returning to the evangelists who offered it.

The poor woman whom Satan had bound for eighteen years experienced no imaginary or figurative release from her bonds (Luk 11:10-16 ). That other woman, who had sinned much, and who, in grateful humility, washed his feet with her tears was not forgiveness real and sweet to her? That blind Bartimeus who kept crying, “Jesus, thou Son of David, have mercy on me” did he not receive real sight? That publican, who stood afar off and beat upon his breast, crying, “God, be merciful to me, the sinner” was he not justified?

And when the Galilean disciples went forth in poverty and weakness preaching his gospel, did they not experience the Joy of the harvest on beholding the ingathering of souls? And when they saw even demons subject to them through the name of Jesus, was not that the joy of victory as when conquerors divide the spoil?

When the stronger than the strong man armed came upon him and bound him, might not our Lord justly say, “As lightning falls from heaven, I saw Satan fall before you”? And just so in our own time.

Every conversion brings life, liberty, peace, and joy to the redeemed soul. Every advance in a higher and better life attests that rest is found at every upward step in the growth of grace. Every talent or pound rightly employed gains 100 per cent for the capital invested, and so the individual Christian who looks persistently into the perfect law of liberty, being not a forgetful hearer but a doer of the Word, is blessed in every deed. Willing to do the will of God, and following on to know the Lord, he not only knows the doctrine to be of God, but experimentally goes on from strength to strength, from grace to grace, and is changed into the divine image from glory to glory.

In the light of these personal experiences he understands how the kingdom of God is invincible, and doubts not the certain coming of the glorious consummation foreshown in prophecy and graciously extended, in the hand of promise. His faith, staggering not through unbelief, takes hold of the invisible, and his hope leaps forward to the final recompense of the reward.

The opening incident of the Galilean ministry is the healing of the nobleman’s son, the second miracle of our Lord in Galilee, and a most remarkable one. The nobleman was Herod’s steward, maybe Chuza, as many suppose, but that is uncertain. The nobleman manifested great faith and it was amply rewarded. This is an illustration of the tenderness with which Jesus ministered to the temporal needs of the people, thus reaching their souls through their bodies. The effect of this miracle was like that of the first: “He himself believed, and his whole house.”

The next section (Luk 4:16-31 ) gives the incident of his rejection at Nazareth. The account runs thus: “And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up: and he entered, as his custom was, into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and stood up to read.” How solemn, how sad in its immediate result how pathetic that scene in Nazareth when the Redeemer announced his mission and issued his proclamation of deliverance: The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, Because he anointed me to publish good tidings to the poor: He hath sent me to proclaim deliverance to the captives, And recovering of sight to the blind, To send crushed ones away free, To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord.

Oh! what a day when this scripture was fulfilled in the hearing of the captives I But the Spirit on him was not on them.

As Jewish widows in Elijah’s day, perished of famine, through unbelief, and left to Sarepta’s far-off widow in a foreign land to believe and be blessed with unfailing meal and oil, as Jewish lepers, through unbelief, in Elisha’s day died in uncleanness and loathsomeness while touching elbows with One having power to heal, leaving to a Syrian stranger to wash in Jordan and be clean, so here where Jesus “had been brought up,” the people of Nazareth shut their eyes, bugged their chains and died in darkness and under the power of Satan died unabsolved from sin, died unsanctified and disinherited, and so yet are dying and shall forever die.

The Year of Jubilee came to them in vain. In vain its silver trumpets pealed forth the notes of liberty. They had no ear to hear, and so by consent became slaves of the Terrible One forever.

This brings us to church responsibility and ministerial agency in the perpetuation of this proclamation of mercy. As Paul went forth to far-off shores, announcing in tears, yet with faith and hope and courage, the terms of eternal redemption, so now the churches find in the same mission their warrant for existence, and so now are we sent forth as witnesses to stand before every prison house where souls are immured, commissioned “to open the eyes of the prisoners that they may turn from darkness to light and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive remission of sins and an inheritance among them that are sanctified by faith in Christ.” Ours to blow the silver trumpets and proclaim to captives the year of jubilee. Ours is the evangel of liberty ours to make known that “if the Son of God make men free, they shall be free indeed.”

Leaving Nazareth, Jesus went to Capernaum, where he made his residence from which he radiates in his ministry in Galilee, teaching and healing on a large scale. His work here in Zebulun and Naphtali is a distinct fulfilment of Isa 9:1-2 , in which he is represented as a great light shining in the darkness. By the sea of Galilee near Capernaum he calls four fishermen to be his partners Peter, Andrew, James, and John, two sets of brothers. Here he announces his purpose for their lives to be fishers of men. What a lesson! These men were skilled in their occupation and now Jesus takes that skill and turns it into another direction, toward a greater end, “fishers of men.” Here he gives them a sign of his authority and messiahship in the incident of the great draught of fishes. The effect on Peter was marvelous. He was conscious of Christ’s divinity and of his own sinfulness. Thus he makes his confession, Luk 5:8 : “Depart from me; for I am a sinful man, O Lord.” But our Lord replied to Peter: “Fear not, from henceforth thou shalt catch men.” Later (Joh 21 ), when Peter and his comrades went back to their old occupation, the risen Lord appeared to them and renewed their call, performing a miracle of a similar draught of fishes.

In Section 28 (Mar 1:21-28 ; Luk 4:31-37 😉 we have his first case of healing a demoniac. What is the meaning of the word “demoniac”? It means demon-possessed, and illustrates the fact of the impact of spirit on spirit, many instances of which we have in the Bible. Here the demons recognized him, which accords with Paul’s statement that he was seen of angels. They believed and trembled as James says, but they knew no conversion. The lesson there is one of faith. The effect of this miracle was amazement at his authority over the demons.

In Section 29 (Mat 8:14-17 ; Mar 1:29-34 ; Luk 4:38-41 ) we have an account of the healing of Peter’s mother-in-law, which incident gives us light on the social relations of the disciples. Peter was married, the Romanist position to the contrary notwithstanding. Further scriptural evidence of his marriage is found in 2Co 8:5 . It is interesting to compare the parallel accounts of this incident in the Harmony and see how much more graphic is Mark’s account than those of Matthew and Luke. There is a fine lesson here on the relation between the mother-in-law and the son-in-law. Peter is a fine example of such relation. Immediately following the healing of Peter’s wife’s mother those that had sick ones brought them to Jesus and he healed them, thus fulfilling a prophecy of Isaiah, that he should take our infirmities and bear our diseases. Our Lord not only healed their sick ones, but he cast out the demons from many, upon which they recognized him. But he would not let them speak because they knew that he was the Christ.

The effect of our Lord’s great work as described in Section 29 was that Peter tried to work a corner on salvation and dam it up in Capernaum. This is indicated in the account of the interview of Peter with our Lord as described in Section 30 (Mat 4:23-25 ; Mar 1:35-39 ; Luk 4:42-44 ). Here it is said that Jesus, a great while before day, went out into a desert place to pray, and while out there Peter came to him and complained that they were wanting him everywhere. To this our Lord responded that it was to this end that he had come into the world. So Jesus at once launched out and made three great journeys about Galilee. His first journey included a great mass of teaching and healing, of which we have a few specimens in Sections 31-36, which apparently occurred at Capernaum, his headquarters. A second journey is recorded by Luke in Section 47 (Luk 8:1-3 ) and a third journey is found in Section 55. (For Broadus’ statement of these tours, see Harmony, p. 31.)

Here we have the occasion of one of the special prayers of Jesus. There are four such occasions in his ministry: (1) At his baptism he prayed for the anointing of the Holy Spirit; (2) here he prayed because of the effort to dam up his work of salvation in Capernaum; (3) the popularity caused by the healing of a leper (Sec. 31 Mat 8:2-4 ; Mar 1:40-45 ; Luk 5:12-16 ) drove him to prayer; (4) the fourth occasion was the ordination of the twelve apostles. The immense labors of Jesus are indicated in Mat 4:23-24 . These labors gave him great popularity beyond the borders of Palestine and caused the multitudes from every quarter to flock to him. Attention has already been called to the popularity caused by the healing of the leper (Sec. 31) and Jesus’ prayer as the result.

In the incident of the healing of the paralytic we have a most graphic account by the synoptics and several lessons: (1) That disease may be the result of sin, as “thy sin be forgiven thee”; (2) that of intelligent cooperation; (3) that of persistent effort; (4) that of conquering faith. These are lessons worthy of emulation upon the part of all Christians today. Out of this incident comes the first issue between our Lord and the Pharisees, respecting the authority to forgive sins. This was only a thought of their hearts, but he perceived their thought and rebuked their sin. From this time on they become more bold in their opposition, which finally culminated in his crucifixion. Let the reader note the development of this hatred from section to section of the Harmony.

In Section 33 (Mat 9:9-13 ; Mar 2:13-17 ; Luk 5:27-32 ) we have the account of the call of Matthew, his instant response and his entertainment of his fellow publicans. Here arose the second issue between Christ and the Pharisees, respecting his receiving publicans and sinners and eating with them. This was contrary to their idea in their self-righteousness, but Jesus replied that his mission was to call sinners rather than the righteous. This issue was greatly enlarged later, in Luk 15 , to which he replied with three parables showing his justification and his mission. In this instance (Mat 9:13 ) he refutes their contention with a quotation from Hosea which aptly fitted this case: “I desire mercy, and not sacrifice.”

Then came to him the disciples of John and made inquiry about fasting, to which he replied with the parable of the sons of the bride chamber, the interpretation of which is that we should let our joy or sorrow fit the occasion, or set fasting ments and old bottles, the interpretation of which is to let the form fit the life; beware of shrinking and expansion.

In Section 35 (Mat 9:18-25 ; Mar 5:22-43 ; Luk 8:41-56 ) we have the account of his healing of Jairus’ daughter and the healing of the woman with the issue of blood. Usually in the miracles of Christ, and in all preceding miracles, there was the touch of some kind between the healer and the healed. We are informed that great multitudes of people came to Jesus with this confidence, “If I but touch him I shall be healed.” Accordingly we find that Christ put his fingers on the eyes of the blind, on the ears of the deaf, or took hold of the hand of the dead. In some way usually there was either presence or contact.

We will now consider the special miracle connected with the fringe of the garment of Jesus which the Romanists cite to justify the usage concerning the relics of the saints. In Num 15:38 we have a statute: “Thou shalt put fringes on the wings or ends of the outer garment,” and this fringe had in it a cord or ribbon of blue, and the object of it was to remind the wearer of the commandments of God. The outer garment was an oblong piece of cloth, one solid piece of cloth, say, a foot and a half wide and four feet long. The edge was fringed on all the four sides, and in the fringe was run a blue thread, and the object of the fringe and of the blue thread also was to make them remember the commandments of God. The statute is repeated in Deu 22 . Again in Deu 6 is the additional law of phylacteries, or frontlets little pieces of leather worn between the eyes on which were inscribed the commandments of God. The people were taught to instruct their children in the commandments of God: “And they shall be as frontlets between thine eyes, and thou shalt put them upon thy door posts, and when thou goest out and when thou comest in, and when thou sittest down and when thou gettest up, and when thou liest down, thou shalt at all times teach thy children the Word of God.” Now, because of these statutes a superstitious veneration began to attach to the fringe and to the phylacteries. So we learn in Mat 23 , as stated by our Saviour, that the Pharisees made broad the phylacteries between their eyes and enlarged the fringe of the outer garment. They made the fringe or tassel very large. They did it to be seen of men. The law prescribed that when the wearer should see this fringe on his garment he should remember the commandments of the Lord his God. But these Pharisees put it on that others might see it, and that it might be an external token to outsiders of their peculiar sanctity and piety. What was intended to be a sign to the man himself was converted by superstition into a sign for other people. Hence this woman said within herself, “If I but touch that sacred fringe the border of his garment.” She could not go up and touch the phylactery between his eyes, in case he wore one, but he did wear the Jewish costume with the fringe or border on his outer garment, and she could reach that from behind. She would not have to go in front of him. She argued: “Now, if I can in the throng get up so that I can reach out and just touch that fringe, I shall be saved.” We see how near her thought connected the healing with the fringe of the garment, because by the double statute of God it was required on the Jewish garment to signify their devotion to his Word the matchless Word of Jehovah. Mark tells us that she was not the only woman, not the only person healed by touching the border of his garment (Mar 6:56 ). Her sentiment was not an isolated one. It was shared by the people at large. Multitudes of people came to touch the fringe of his garment that they might be healed.

The question arises, Why should Christ select that through contact with the fringe on his outer garment healing power should be bestowed? He did do it. The question is, why? There shall be no god introduced unless there be a necessity for a god. There shall be no special miracle unless the case demands it. Why? Let us see if we cannot get a reason. I do not announce the reason dogmatically, but as one that seems sufficient to my own mind. Christ was among the people speaking as never man spake, doing works that no man had done. He was awakening public attention. He was the cynosure of every eye. They came to him from every direction. They thronged him. And right here at this juncture Jairus had said, “Master, my little girl, twelve years old, is even now dead. Go and lay thy hand upon her that she may live.” He arose and started, the crowd surging around him and following him, and all at once he stopped and said, “Who touched me?” “Master, behold the crowd presseth thee on every side, and thou sayest, who touched me?” Here was a miracle necessary to discriminate between the touches of the people. “Who touched me?” Hundreds sin sick touched him and were not saved. Hundreds that had diseases touched him and were unhealed. Hundreds that were under the dominion of Satan looked in his face and heard his words and were not healed. It was touch and not touch. They touched, but there was no real contact. They rubbed up against salvation and were not saved. Salvation walked through their streets and talked to them face to face. The stream of life flowed right before their doors and they died of thirst. Health came with rosy color and bright eye and glowing cheek and with buoyant step walked through their plague district) and they died of sickness. But some touched him. Some reached forth the hand and laid hold upon the might of his power. This woman did.

Poor woman! What probably was her thought? “I heard that ruler tell him that he had a little girl twelve years old that was just dead, and he asked him to go and heal her, she twelve years old, and for twelve years I have been dead. For twelve years worse than death has had hold on me and I have spent all my money; have consulted many physicians. I have not been benefited by earthly remedies, but rendered worse. Twelve years has death been on me, and if he can heal that, girl that died at twelve years of age, maybe he can heal me twelve years dead. If that ruler says, ‘If you will but go and lay your hand upon her even now she will revive,’ what can I do? In my timidity, in the ceremonial uncleanness of my condition, in my shame, I dare not speak. I cannot in this crowd, for if they knew that I were here they would cast me out; for if any of them touch me they are unclean in the eyes of the law. I cannot go and kneel down before him, and say, ‘Master, have mercy on me.’ The ceremonial law of uncleanness forbids my showing my face, and if I come in contact with his power it must be with a touch upon the garment. And I beg for that. I say within myself, that if I but touch the fringe with its blue thread in it that reminds him of God’s commands, I shall be healed.”

There was the association of her healing with the memento of the Word of God. There was the touch of her faith, that came into contact with that Word of God and with him. So her faith reasoned, and virtue going out from him responded to her faith. And she felt in herself that she was healed. Well, he healed her and there it stands out one of the most beautiful lessons in the Word of God. Oh, what a lesson! Some will say at the judgment, “Lord Jesus, thou hast taught in our streets and we have done many wonders in thy name,” and he will say, “I never knew you.” “You were close to the Saviour. You did not touch him. You were his neighbor. You did not touch him.” There were many lepers in Israel in the days of Elisha, the prophet lepers that could have been healed of leprosy by an appeal to the power of God in Elisha. They died in leprosy, but Naaman came from afar and touched the healing power of the prophet and was healed. There were many widows in Israel whose staff of life was gone, whose barrel of meal was empty, whose cruse of oil had failed, and here was the prophet of God, who by a word could supply that empty barrel, that failing cruse, but they did not touch him. They did not reach out in faith and come in contact with that power. The widow of Sarepta did, and her barrel of meal never failed, and her cruse of oil never wasted. Now, the special miracle: It was designed to show that if there be a putting forth of faith, even one finger of faith, and that one finger of faith touches but the fringe, the outskirts of salvation only let there be a touch, though that touch covers no more space than the point of a cambric needle “let there be the touch of faith and thou art saved.”

In the midst of this stir about the woman the news of the death of Jairus’ daughter burst forth upon them with the request to trouble not the Master any further. But that did not stop our Lord. He proceeded immediately to the house to find a tumult and many weeping and wailing, for which he gently rebuked them. This brought forth their scorn, but taking Peter, James, and John, he went in and raised the child to life and his praise went forth into all that land.

QUESTIONS

1. What is the general theme of this division of the Harmony?

2. What common errors of interpretation of the kingdom? Illustrate.

3. What was the offspring of these errors respectively and who the most liable to each?

4. What, perhaps, was the most unprofitable sermon and what was the most stubborn skepticism?

5. How does such disappointment find expression?

6. Give the author’s statements relative to the kingdom,

7. Where do we find the fulfilment of Isaiah’s prophecies relative to the kingdom?

8. What specific prophecy in Isaiah fulfilled in Matthew?

9. Where do we find the principles of the kingdom disclosed?

10. What great office did our Lord fill besides teacher and wonder worker and what proof did he submit to John the Baptist?

11. What thing most worthy of special consideration in connection with the kingdom?

12. What the opening incident of the Galilean ministry, what its importance, what its great lesson and what its effect?

13. Give an account of our Lord’s rejection at Nazareth.

14. Why was he thus rejected?

15. By what incidents in the lives of the prophets does he illustrate the folly of their unbelief?

16. What is the church responsibility and ministerial agency in the proclamation of mercy?

17. Where does Jesus make his home after his rejection at Nazareth and what his first work in this region?

18. Recite the incident of the call of the four fishermen and its lessons.

19. What was Christ’s first case of healing a demoniac and what the meaning of the term “demoniac”? Illustrate.

20. What was the lesson of this miracle and what was its effect?

21. Recite the incident of the healing of Peter’s mother-in-law and give its lessons.

22. What were the great results of this miracle and why would not Christ allow the demons to speak?

23. How did Peter try to work a “corner” on salvation and how did our Lord defeat the plan?

24. How many and what journeys did Jesus make about Galilee?

25. Give the four special prayers of Jesus here cited and the occasion of each.

26. Describe the incident of the healing of the paralytic and its les sons.

27. What issue arises here between our Lord and the Pharisees and what was the final culmination?

28. Give an account of the call of Matthew, his entertainment, the second issue between our Lord and the Pharisees and how Jesus met it.

29. What question here arises, how was it brought up, how did our Lord reply and what the meaning of his parables here?

30. What double miracle follows and what was the usual method of miracles?

31. What was the law of fringes and phylacteries and what were their real purpose?

32. Why should Christ select that through contact with the fringe on his outer garment healing power should be bestowed?

33. What, probably, was the thought of this woman as she contemplated this venture of faith?

34. What was the great lesson of this incident of her healing?

35. Describe the miracle of raising Jairus’ daughter and its effect.

Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible

1 And again he entered into Capernaum after some days; and it was noised that he was in the house.

Ver. 1. And it was noised ] The Son of righteousness could as little lie hidden as the sun in heaven.

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

1. ] , after an interval of some days: see reff.

, in doors ; as , to the country , ch. Mar 16:12 : = , , the practice of omitting the art. after a preposition being universal, and apparently regulated by no assignable rule. See examples in Middleton, ch. vi. 1, which however in later Greek are by no means limited to the class of nouns there mentioned, but are found with nouns of all classes of meaning.

The combines motion with the construction, ‘that he had gone home, and was there.’

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

Mar 2:1-12 . The palsied man (Mat 9:1-8 ; Luk 5:17-26 ).

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

Mar 2:1 . Thereading of [4] [5] [6] (W.H [7] ) with for in T. R., and omitting before , gives a ruggedly anacolouthistic construction (“and entering again into Capernaum after days it was heard that He was at home”), which the T. R. very neatly removes. The construction of the sentence, even as it stands in the critically approved text, may be made smoother by taking not impersonally, but as referring to Jesus. He entering, etc., was heard of as being at home (Schanz and Holtzmann alternatively). , again, a second time, Mar 1:21 mentioning the first. He has not been there apparently since He left it (Mar 1:35 ) on the preaching tour in Galilee. , after days, cf. Gal 2:1 ; classical examples of this use of in Wetstein and Elsner. The expression suggests a short period, a few days, which seems too short for the time required for the preaching tour, even if it had been cut short by hostile influence, as is not improbable. The presence of scribes at this scene is very significant. They appear hostile in attitude on Christ’s return to Capernaum. They had probably been active before it. Fritzsche translates: interjectis pluribus diebus . For a considerable time would be the appropriate phrase. We get rid of the difficulty by connecting with (Kloster.), the resulting meaning being that days elapsed after the arrival in Capernaum before people found out that Jesus was there. He had been absent possibly for months, and probably returned quietly. or (T. R.) = at home (in Peter’s house presumably); suggests the idea of entrance.

[4] Codex Sinaiticus (sc. iv.), now at St. Petersburg, published in facsimile type by its discoverer, Tischendorf, in 1862.

[5] Codex Vaticanus (sc. iv.), published in photographic facsimile in 1889 under the care of the Abbate Cozza-Luzi.

[6] Codex Regius–eighth century, represents an ancient text, and is often in agreement with and B.

[7] Westcott and Hort.

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

Mark Chapter 2

Mar 2:1-12 .

Mat 9:1-8 ; Luk 5:17-26 .

After an interval spent in desert places with such as flocked to Him by the fame which kept Him from any city, we find our Lord once more in Capernaum; and at once crowds besiege, not the house only, but the very door, to hear the word He was speaking. Alas, Capernaum! wert thou not exalted to heaven? Art thou not brought down to hell? The mighty works done in thee were less mighty than the Word which thus attracted thee, as of one that had a pleasant voice and could play well on an instrument; and yet all fell on heedless hearts and unploughed consciences; and they knew not, though they did know, and will yet, that a prophet, and more than a prophet, was among them. But if the mass listened only with their ears, there was faith which persevered in face of difficulties, and failed not to make its suit to Jesus. What could seem more desperate? The leper at least could come to Him, could beseech, could kneel down to Him: how could the paralytic pierce the throng which severed him from the Saviour? If he could not come himself, he could be brought. And so it was. They come bringing the paralytic on his couch, which was borne of four. “And when they could not come near to Him on account of the crowd, they uncovered the rooftid=31#bkm28- where he was; and when they had dug it up, they let down the couch on which the paralytic lay.” O Lord, how sweet, how refreshing to Thy heart this confidence in Thee, this most eloquent, even if unuttered, appeal to Thy love and power! It was faith, not alone of the patient, but of his bearers; and faith, now as ever, gets not only what it asks, but far more and better. “When Jesus saw their faith, he says to the paralytic, Son, thy sins are forgiven [thee].”*

*”Thee”: so Acorr, with later uncials and most cursives. Edd. omit, with BD, etc.

Yes! this was the root of the evil, deeper than either leprosy or paralysis – sin – which man accounts so small a matter, a mere moral scar on the surface! What was sin not to Him who on the cross was made sin? Who put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself? Filled with love, and in view of the faith which has there sought Him out, He acts in the sovereignty of grace and pronounces the wondrous words, “Son, thy sins are forgiven [thee].” He who knew all men, and did not commit Himself to them; He who knew God and His handiwork, commits Himself to faith. It may be weak faith, but it is of God, and His eye was quick to see it, and to bless it according to all the love of His heart. “Son, thy sins are forgiven [thee].”

But Satan, too, had his congregation there. “Certain of the scribes were sitting there and reasoning in their hearts, Why does this man thus speak? He blasphemes. Who can forgive sins but God only?” They were wise in their own conceits; they were judges of law and Gospel, and neither doers of the one nor believers of the other. They were worse. Rejectors of Christ and His mercy, their proud reason disdained the blessed truth of God; their proud self-righteousness spurned and hated that grace of which they never knew the need. The amplest evidence of holy power, the power of God, in opposition to Satan and in compassion to man, had been vouchsafed; but what of that to reasoning scribes, used to the world as it is, and jealous of their own religious importance? One here below pronouncing the forgiveness of sins to a miserable sinner who had not even sought it! This was in their eves startling, blasphemous, an encroachment on God’s prerogative. Not that they cared for God or loved man, but they hated Jesus for His grace; and if it were the truth, their occupation was gone. But no, it could not be; it was unheard of since the world began: “Why does this man thus speak? he blasphemes.tid=31#bkm29- Who can forgive sins but God only?” Ah! there was the secret; the glory of Jesus was unknown, His Divine dignity entirely left out of the account. The principle they urged was true, the application fatally false. How often this is the rock on which religious unbelievers split and perish!

“Thus speak? he blasphemes”: so Edd. with BDL, Amiatine of Vulg., Memph.; whilst ACG, etc., Syrpesch hcl Arm. Goth. AEth. have “Why does he thus speak blasphemies?”

And yet forthwith He gave them evidence of what and who He was; for He perceived in His spirit that they so reasoned in their hearts, taxed them with their hidden thoughts, and appealed to themselves whether it was easier by a word to convey forgiveness or a bodily cure. Which claim was readiest? Who but a Divine person, or the wielder of Divine power, could say either the one or the other? They were equally easy to God, alike impossible to man. “But that ye may know,” says He [in evident reference to Psa 103:3 ], “that the Son of mantid=31#bkm30- hath power [, the right as well as the ability] on earth to forgive sins (He says to the sick of the palsy), Arise, and take up thy couch, and go to thine house. And immediately he arose, took up his couch, and went out before them all, so that all were amazed, and glorified God, saying, We never saw it thus.” The outward sign of power guaranteed the gift of grace and both betokened that He who spoke was the Son of man on earth.

It will be observed that, though the Lord does here appropriate to Himself the double character of mercy, which Israel are yet to attribute to Jehovah in Psa 103 , it is not as Christ or Messiah, properly speaking, but as “Son of man.” So He was ever wont to speak. It is the title of His manhood, both in suffering rejection and in glory; as such He blesses faith here, as such He will judge unbelief by-and-by (Joh 5 ). Thus He vindicated on earth, by the powers of the world to come, that mercy which forgave the sinful soul before them. What a withering rebuke to cavilling scribes! What a triumphant testimony to the gospel of grace in the name of Jesus! And God does not now leave Himself without a witness, where His Spirit carries to the heart the power of that name, and a witness that fails not to tell on the consciences where there are eyes to see the holy strength and liberty of one previously degraded in sin, and shame, and folly. Sin withers the man, as well as covers him with guilt. He who pardons communicates life and power, to the glory of God; and this as Son of man, the name of mercy to the ruined that bow to Him.

Mar 2:13-17 .

Matt, 9: 9-13; Luk 5:27-32 .

The next scene, after the record of His teaching by the seaside, still more opens and manifests the outflowing of grace: the call of Levi, the publican (or Matthew, as he calls himself). What a step and change! From the tax-office to follow Jesus, soon to be an Apostle when the Twelve were ordained (chapter 3)! No trade, no name, was more scandalous in Israel. This was the very occasion for grace, as our Lord proves by His choice. Nor was this all, for as Jesus reclined at table in his house, “many tax-gatherers and sinners lay at table with Jesus and His disciples; for they were many, and they followed Him.” In Pharisaic eyestid=31#bkm31- He could not have gone lower in familiar love, unless He had turned outright to the Gentiles; for shepherds were not more an abomination to the Egyptians than tax-gatherers were to the scribes and Pharisees. Hence, when they saw Him eat with these reprobates, they say, not to Jesus, but to His disciples (for only pride and mischief were in their hearts), “How is it that He eateth and drinketh with tax-gatherers and sinners?” But this effort to undermine Him with His followers, and so to shake them, only draws out from the Lord His own strong, increasingly strong, expression of grace, as well as His exposure of His and their enemies’ self-destructive pride: “When Jesus heard it, he says to them, They that are strong have no need of the physician, but they that are ill. I have not come to call [the] righteous, but sinners.” On their own showing, what claim had they on all He had to bestow?

Mar 2:18-22 .

Mat 1:14-17 ; Luk 5:33-39 .

Next, a similar spirit of dishonesty and ill-will, which entangles the disciples of John also, goes to Jesus about His disciples; for they and the Pharisees, who used to fast,tid=31#bkm32- came to Him asking why His disciples did not. But the Master stands up in their behalf, and shows that a wisdom above their own led them in their weakness. Where was the sense, the propriety, the reverence in lasting if the Bridegroom was there? John Baptist had announced better things; but Pharisaism despised Jesus, and had no heart for the joys of His presence. Let them all learn, however, that days were coming when He should be taken away, and then should they fast in that day.

In truth, the whole scene intimated to those who had ears to hear the grave economical change that was at hand, and that Messiah’s presence now was but transitional. His call of Levi and His eating and drinking with publicans were no dark signs that Israel as such were lost: the disciples’ enjoyment of His brief stay before His taking away plainly signified the abrupt and impending catastrophe – seemingly His, but really theirs; and the verses that follow bear witness to the new character of God’s ways therein, and to their incompatibility with Judaism. Neither its displayed form nor its inner power can blend with the old thing: the kingdom of God, being not in word but in power, must have a new and suited vehicle wherein to work. Legal forms only prove their weakness if there be the energy of the Holy Ghost. The worn-out Jewish garment and old skins disappear: new wine demands new skins.tid=31#bkm33- Christianity, in its principle and its practice, is a fresh and full development of Divine blessing. It was not a question of mending the old, but accepting the new.

Mar 2:23-28 .

Mat 12:1-8 ; Luk 6:1-5 .

The incident of the first Sabbath Day is here recorded, which, in point of fact, took place at this very time; for we must constantly bear in mind that Mark pursues the thread of history. Our Lord is intimating the break that was about to take place with Judaism, and the introduction of the new character and power of the kingdom of God. Now, this is a very serious truth always, but it was peculiarly solemn to Israel. What more perplexes a godly person than the very thought of God changing His mind? What difficulty greater than the notion that God could, as it were, unsay or undo what He had previously laid down? And I think there ought to be great delicacy in dealing with souls where we find there is a godly jealousy as to this, even though it may be ignorant and not without prejudice. But, still, it was the evident fact that what God set up for a specific purpose in Israel never fully reflected His own mind. Eternal truth, breaking through the clouds of Judaism, shone out in the person of Christ, and is now verified in experience as well as faith by the Spirit’s working in the children of God.

In a word, it was never the purpose of God to reveal Himself and bring out all His mind in connection with the Jews, but with the Church. Christianity, and not Judaism, is the expression of God’s mind. Christ Himself, properly speaking, is the image of the invisible God, and Christianity is the practical present result. It is the application of the life, mind, and affections of Christ to the heart and walk of those who are brought to God; and this, founded on His work and correspondent to His place in heaven by the Spirit sent down. All through the Jewish system, as well as before it, there were souls waiting for Christ, and the only persons that ever honoured God in the Jewish system were those who, by faith, were above that system. Those alone walked blameless in the various ordinances of the law who looked for the Messiah. It was this expectation, given by the Spirit of God, which lifted them above the earthly thoughts, the grovelling desires, the selfishness of nature. It raised them above themselves, if one may so say, as well as above their fellows, for there is always Divine power in Christ; and although it was far more fully displayed after Christ came, yet, as one may see before the sun rises there is such a thing as the dawn, and streaks that betoken the coming day, so those who looked by the faith of Christ beyond the mere passing shadows which met and satisfied the religiousness of nature – those only honoured God even in the outward ordinances of Israel. It is the same principle now as ever, but in a fuller way, because nothing is more certain than that the righteousness of the law is fulfilled in the saint of God, in the Christian. But how is it fulfilled? Never merely by endeavouring to keep the law. It never was fulfilled in that way, nor can be. In point of fact, as we know, the men that were thus jealous for the law were themselves the greatest and bitterest of the enemies of the Lord Jesus. You know it was fleshly pride as to the law which blinded them into the delusion that even our blessed Lord Himself did not sufficiently honour it. We easily gather that Paul was taxed with the same reproach; and Stephen, too, was stoned to death because of this fertile and fatal mistake. So that we may lay it down as a fixed point that the men who put the ordinances, or the outward regulations of God, in the place of God and Christ Himself are men that never keep it; even as Stephen told the Jews that they received the law by the disposition of angels, and had not kept it. These were the men whose voices were loudest about it to those who really honoured God in that law as well as in the faith of the Messiah.

Take every believer – I do not say on every occasion, for there is, sad to say, a danger of our own nature working, and that nature neither believes in Jesus nor keeps the law, but is a law-breaking, Christ-denying thing: the flesh is enmity against God Himself, and nature working its own way always dishonours God – but take the believer, not when he is yielding to his own corrupt nature; take him where, in truth alone, so to speak, we can rightly think of a believer as such, in the exercise of his faith, in the manifestation of the new life which the grace of God has given him, and what is the character of this life? It cleaves to God, it delights in His word, it loves His will, it is attracted by whatever manifests Him. All proves that the believer loves God in heart and soul, loves Him better than himself – for he hates himself, and is ready to own, lust so far as faith is in operation, his own folly, his frequent and shameful failure, while he seeks to justify and cleave to God, and delights to make Him known. How comes this? It is that Divine principle of life, the energy of the Spirit of God, acting in the new man which enjoys each thing that flows from and displays God, and is the exercise of the new nature which we derive from God. Again, the believer, just in proportion as he has Christ before his soul, walks in the Spirit according to the will of God. If he has not Christ before him, it is as if he had no new nature. Life is there, but it is only Christ that maintains, and manifests, and brings it out, giving its full exercise and scope. The believer’s heart goes out towards misery – yea, towards poor guilty sinners. Flesh despises and hates, or is indifferent; but the new nature, under the Spirit’s power, goes out in compassion and desire for another’s blessing. There, I say, is love again; and thus you have the two great moral principles, love to God and love to man. The believer, and the believer alone, walks in them. If he has Christ in his eye, he has them in his heart, and the Holy Ghost strengthens him to walk accordingly. It is thus that the righteousness of the law is fulfilled in those that walk after the Spirit. The Spirit of God is careful to show it is fulfilled in them that walk after the Spirit, not in such as only stand for the law.

Take the Jew, to whom the law was given. Does he manifest real love? I do not say that some are not upright men, possessed of natural benevolence. The question now is of the manifestation of active love to God and man. If men have merely the law before them, what then? The Jew himself is the most striking example and proof that flesh is good for nothing; he is bent upon his own things in this world, coveting a place everywhere, loving money, and so on, of which we are all of us apt to be guilty by nature. Undoubtedly this is the case with the mere unconverted Israelite or the nominal Christian, in whom the Holy Ghost does not act. Unless Christ, either as an object of hope before He came or now since He has come as the object of faith, be before the heart, there is no reality, nor can be, because the flesh is a false and hating thing. Unless a man have a new nature distinct from and above his own, there never is true – that is, Divine – love. The one means of accomplishing the law is to have Christ before and above us, yet in that our portion by faith. Hence it was that Enoch and Noah, and the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, who never heard of the law, yet obeyed and pleased God. Were they not holy and godly men? Certainly they were. What made them so? The faith of the woman’s seed, the promised Son, the Messiah. Then, when the law was given, what was it that made Moses and Aaron saints of the Lord? The law? Never. It was Christ. It was having Him before their soul. Not that God’s law was not honoured, but what enabled them to delight in the expression of God’s mind – be it what it might – was their looking for and believing in God’s blessed promise of the coming Deliverer, the Kinsman-Redeemer. And now He is come, that which has delivered us from wrath and judgment delivers us also, in proportion as it is the object of our souls, practically from self and the world, from corruption and violence of every kind. Let Christ be forgotten by a believer, what is the effect? He shows the pride, vanity, foolishness, malice, of the old man. It is not, of course, what is proper to him as a believer, but what belonged to him as a man before he believed. Self is allowed to come out and show its own hateful colours when Christ is not the one standard and object who fills the mind’s eye and heart.

Now, our Lord, at this very time, brings out, in His pointed acts connected with the Sabbath Day, an illustration of what has been before us, and I take this opportunity of dwelling on it a little in a practical way and also doctrinally, seeking the instruction for our own souls that the Lord gives us in these incidents. It is. true that the first and primary object was to fill up what He had already shown. To put a new piece upon an old garment would only make the rent worse; so to pour new wine into old bottles would only risk the loss both of the wine and the bottles. The attempt to mix the new forms and spirit of the kingdom of God with the old ways of Judaism, would only end, not in mending Judaism, nor in preserving Christianity, but in the ruin of both. And this precisely has been the issue in the history of Christendom. The palpable failure of the outward Christian profession is the practical evidence of this truth. What Satan aimed at was to mingle together the old Jewish ordinances with Christian truth, and the result is such painful confusion that the light of truth and the grace of God are utterly darkened – such a complete jumbling together that simple souls are perplexed, to their exceeding loss and damage. They cannot in such a state see the difference between grace and law, and what it is to be brought under the name of Christ. All these things are dim before them, and hence ensues uncertainty of soul and powerlessness practically in glorifying God.

Our Lord follows this up by the instruction of the Sabbath Day. “It came to pass that He went through the corn-fields on the Sabbath, and His disciples, as they went, began to pluck the ears of corn. And the Pharisees said to Him, Behold, why do they on the Sabbath that which is not lawful?” Now, it is clear that there was no law of God against the case. The censure was a law of their own, and a notion of men which looks upon an outward fact and makes a system of it – man’s constant danger. It is quite true that God had ordained upon the Sabbath Day rest for man and beast, but there was no ground whatever from the law ‘ of God to forbid a hungry man, as he passed through a field, from plucking the ears of corn to satisfy his want – nay, it was thoroughly according to the beneficence of God to provide from His’ people’s plenty for such urgent need. There was remarkable care in Israel for the stranger, the bereaved, and the suffering. The poor in the land were not to be forgotten in the joy of harvest, and an express ordinance of God forbade their making clean riddance of the corners of the field. But how came it to pass that there should be famished Israelites thus passing through a cornfield? And if such want existed, was it God or His enemy who turned the Sabbath Day into an iron vice for afflicting the sad at the will of heartless religionists? Thus it was that the Pharisees, in their pretended desire to honour God on the one side, showed, on the other, their complete ignorance of His heart and character, which breathed the fullness of mercy towards want and wretchedness; all was set aside by the miserable codicil that man added to the will of God. But there was One on earth who at once detected the forger’s hand that presumed to meddle with the first testament. The Lord stands up for the guiltless. “Have ye never read what David did when he had need and hungered, he and they that were with him? how he went into the house of God in the days of Abiathar. – [the]* high-priest,tid=31#bkm34- and ate the shewbread, which it is not lawful save for the priests to eat, and gave also to them that were with him?”

*”[The]”: Edd. omit with BL, etc. It is inserted in C, etc., and in cursives 1, 33, 69. is neutral.

Our Lord here points to the rejection of the object of God’s counsels – of David, for instance, in his day, who was the anointed king, even while he was the despised one and hunted for his life upon the mountains of Israel. He and his company typified Jesus, and Jesus was found now in circumstances morally similar to those of David, anointed, but not yet come to the crown. Thus it is that the Lord vindicates the disciples and maintains the principle that when God’s witness is refused it is madness for the rejectors to pretend to be glorifying God. Were they then despising a greater than David? For such to talk about the Sabbath Day, in order to lay heavier burdens on the righteous, what was it in God’s eyes? The Lord of glory was upon earth, and how came it that His disciples wanted even ears of corn to stay their hunger? What a tale this told! How was it that the disciples of Jesus were thus miserable? How out of course must be the foundations for the Lord and His disciples to lack the most ordinary necessaries of life! Who were these praters of malicious words about the Sabbath Day that could forbid even this scanty pittance, while God’s mercy would refuse to none, and least of all on that day? But that the Pharisees, rejecting the Lord Jesus, their own Messiah – that they should have the face to abuse the Sabbath against His disciples! David, when he was in destitution because of the wickedness of Saul, who held the throne in an evil way – David and his followers could eat the shewbread, which was only, had things been in order, for the priests. If thus the hallowed bread became common, what was the past to the present? In the presence of the evil that despises God’s beloved and faithful witnesses in the earth, the outward ordinances of the Lord lose their application for the time being. The sanctity of ritual disappears before the rejection of the Lord and His people.

“And He says to them, The Sabbath was made on account of man, and not man on account of the Sabbath.” The Sabbath was not intended to be a means of increasing the sufferings of poor man. If God sanctified it after the creation, and enacted it at the giving of the law, was it that God wanted to make His people miserable? On the contrary, not only in its higher character and beside the thought of His rest, of which it is a type, the Sabbath was made for man. Pharisees might turn the Sabbath into an engine for torturing man, but, in God’s mind, the Sabbath came in most mercifully. There were the days of labour which God Himself had known something of in figure, for there was a time when He had wrought and made the earth; and God Himself was pleased to rest on the Sabbath, and to sanctify it. Then sin came in, and God could no longer own it, and His word is silent. We read of the Sabbath no more until God takes up His people in delivering mercy, and gives them manna from heaven. Then the Sabbath Day becomes again a marked thing, and rest follows, the type of Jesus sent down from above. It disappears from the beginning of the first book of Scripture and reappears in the second. God makes rest once more. He was giving to man in grace when He brought Israel out of Egypt. Of this the Sabbath was the appropriate sign. But Israel, understanding not the grace of God, accepted the conditions of His law. They took their stand upon their own righteousness when God gave them the Ten Commandments, and the consequence was that man under law failed miserably, dishonouring God, setting up calves of gold, bringing discredit, shame, and scandal upon the name of God throughout the whole world. This is no more than we have each done. The Israelites made this fatal mistake when they surrounded Mount Sinai. Instead of reminding God of His promise to Israel, instead of confessing that they could not be trusted, and that it is only the mercy of God that enables anyone to do His will, they, on the contrary, undertook boldly to earn the promised blessings by their own obedience. But they broke down increasingly, till it came to the crisis of David’s rejection in Israel. God showed where His heart was, as He loves to do at such a time. Granted that the shewbread was only for the priests, yet for them to keep their consecrated bread and let the anointed king starve would be strange homage to God and the king. And now the Son of David, the Lord of David, was there, and more rejected, more despised, than David himself.

The Lord, after He has thus drawn out of Scripture the true lesson for the day, brings out the general beneficent object of God in the Sabbath for all days. “The Sabbath was made on account of man.” The Pharisees thought and spoke as if man was made for the Sabbath, to be put under it thus; but the Sabbath was made for man’s good and rest, raising his thoughts above the mere labour of his hands. But He brings in another principle: “The Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath also.” He connects that with the Sabbath being made for man, but breaks out into a greater truth: the person of Christ is above all ordinances. His glory, even as the rejected man, eclipses all the twinkling rites instituted by the Lord Himself. I have no hesitation in saying that the Lord who gave the law at Sinai, and He who afterwards was born and lived a man upon the earth, was the same blessed Divine person. He who always acted throughout the Old Testament in government, who came down and suffered and died upon the cross in grace, He now maintains, not merely that He is Lord of the Sabbath in virtue of being Divine, but of being Son of man; and what is the importance of this? “Son of man” is the title of His rejection. “Son of man” is the name that He assumed when the Jews refused Him as the Messiah. You will find a remarkable proof of this in Mat 16:13 and Luk 9:18 (the same fact recorded in the two different Evangelists). He forbids His disciples to say that He was “the Christ.” He leaves aside for a while the glory of His Messiahship: as such He had come and presented Himself to the Jews, but they would not have Him. Now He says, as it were, It is too late: I have given them ample proof – miracle, prophecy, My own ways and words. Everything shows that I am the Messiah, but they will not have Me. It is not that proof is wanting, but their hearts are steeled against all evidences. They are the enemies of God, and proved to be such by refusing what God has fully vouchsafed. Now He takes another character altogether – “Son of man.” And what may well and deeply affect us is this – it is as Son of man that He suffers on the cross. “The Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected by the elders, and chief priests, and scribes, and be slain, and be raised the third day.” “The Christ” was a title in particular connection with Israel after the flesh. He was their Messiah. He belonged to no other nation. He was the promised King of the Jews. But the Jews would not have Him. Well, says the Lord, you cannot deny that I am Son of man. It is a lowly name, but, after all, the Son of man opens the way to His magnificent rights and glory over all mankind. The Son of man comes in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. The Son of man takes the kingdom over all tribes, and nations, and tongues. What leads to it all? His rejection as Messiah. He suffers as Son of man first, because it is determined, according to God’s counsels and grace, to have companions with Him in the very same glory. It is through that very same fact that Christ has suffered as the Son of man, and has surely taken His glory because of it, that we shall be with Him – that all Christians will be without a spot or stain, or any such thing, all through the suffering Son of man. But if I have Him humbled, I have the glorious Son of man.

In the present case, however, the Lord does not go further than “The Son of man is Lord also of the Sabbath.” He accepts His rejection, but He pleads for His disciples before those who boasted and disputed about the Sabbath, while they were dishonouring the Lord of the Sabbath. Could they deny what David had done, and God had scaled, sanctioned, and recorded for Israel’s instruction? That is the first defence. The next is that the Sabbath was made for man, not man for it. The third plea, which is rather a consequence, is that He who was a blessed Man – the Son of man – is Lord of the Sabbath. It is the glory of His person as the rejected, suffering Man: as such, and not only as God, He is above the Sabbath Day – its Lord.tid=31#bkm35-

NOTES ON Mar 2 .

28 Mar 2:4 . – For description of such a house, see A. M. Thomson, “The Land and the Book,” ii., p. 433 f.

29 Mar 2:7 . – Blasphemy is one of the New Testament Greek words which acquired an extension of meaning among the Jews beyond that which they had in the classics. There it meant simply “speaking against” a person, a “blasphemy” thus being the opposite of a “euphemism” (Trench, “Miracles,” p. 219). Cf. its use in Mar 14:64 , and for the thought cf. Phi 2:6 . Bengel has a good note in his “Gnomon” at Mat 9:3 . Another such word is , used in Mar 3:29 , where the “Workers’ New Testament” renders “age-abiding.” Such words illustrate Psa 12:6 : “The words of Jehovah are pure words, silver tried in the furnace of earth, purified seven times.”

30 Mar 2:10 . – Here we meet, for the first time in Mark, with the title Son of man, used characteristically by the Lord of Himself. The lecturer sets forth at the end of this chapter (verse 27 f., cf. the note there) what is undoubtedly its true significance. But the phrase exercises “divines” still, as of old the “scribes” (Joh 12:34 ). H. J. Holtzmann says that the meaning intended is “one of the most intricate questions in New Testament theology” (“Introduction,” i., p. 246); and the art. s. tit. in Hastings (vol. iv.) certainly shows the perplexity prominent contemporary writers feel in dealing with it (p. 586). How could anyone really be satisfied with such enlightenment as this article affords? It is, however, like exposs of “modern thought,” which Mrs. Humphry Ward deems instruments of a “liberal education.” A summary of the points at issue may be useful:

1. Whether “Son of man” does or does not bear a Messianic meaning. Bousset (chapter 10) avers that the majority of scholars regard it as a true Messianic title. Harnack, on the affirmative side, agrees not only with H. J. Holtzmann, but with B. Weiss, whom Stalker (Lect. ii.) and Stevens follow. They are influenced by such passages as Mar 14:61 f., Joh 3:13 , and 1Co 15:45 , 1Co 15:47 – some, accordingly, seeing a reference in it to Christ’s heavenly origin (so also Dalman). The negative side is taken by Westcott (“Commentary on John’s Gospel”) and Wendt (“The Teaching of Jesus”). Neander limited himself to saying, “It is certain that this name was not amongst the more usual or best-known names of Messiah” (p. 98).

2. As to the meaning which “Son of man” bears in the Old Testament. The passages discussed are Job 25:6 , Psa 8:5 and Psa 80:17 , Eze 2:1 , etc., Dan 7:13 .Job 25:6 and Psa 8 , as well as the passages of Ezekiel, are supposed to describe inferiority. A. B. Bruce on Mat 9:6 would connect the parallel passage here with those of the Ezekiel type (“humiliation”). Dan 7:13 , it is generally agreed, stands for superiority. However this may be, H. J. Holtzmann, Dalman, Schmiedel, etc., trace the New Testament use of the title to Daniel; not so Westcott, etc.

3. The relation of the Evangelists’ “Son of man” to that in the apocryphal book of Enoch (“Similitudes,” chapters xxxvii. – lxxi.) is discussed. This book was for long known only in Ethiopic, but for the last twenty years the first thirty chapters of it have been available in Greek. Deane, in his “Epigrapha,” has dealt with so much as concerns the present topic (pp. 49-95; see in particular pp. 62, 89 f.). Amongst others, Rville (i. 192 note) is of opinion that the picture of the “Son of man” in this book “differs entirely from that common to the four Gospels.” Stanton and Drummond agree in considering the book post-Christian.

4. With regard to the meaning being (a) “mankind,” or (b) simply a “human being.” Grotius took it in the first sense; later writers, as Neander (p. 99), Westcott, Stanton (“Jewish and Christian Messiah,” part ii., chapter ii.), and Farrar, understand by it the “Ideal of Humanity,” and practically a new title, although Psa 8:4 and Psa 80:17 might seem, from the parallelism in each, to countenance that sense already in the Old Testament. H. J. Holtzmann (“Introduction,” p. 39 f.; “New Testament Theology,” i., p. 255), Pfleiderer (i. 341, referring to Mat 9:8 ), Wright, Wellhausen (“Jewish and Hebrew History,” p. 346), hold that the use of Bar Enosh in Aramaic determines “human being” as the sense, on the ground that B-E is the only equivalent in that language for “man.” This view naturally suits such as Martineau (“Seat of Authority in Religion,” p. 335 f.). Holtzmann’s view, however, Dalman, the leading expert, describes as “a grievous error,” “a mare’s nest,” because in Biblical Aramaic Enosh alone, not B-E, stands for “man,” and with him Schmiedel and some others agree.

Theology – call it “systematic” or “scientific” – is certainly not at its best in such uninspiring treatment of this title, after which it is refreshing to find Fairbairn writing that “Son of man” is “no man’s son”; that He “has no fellow”; that Christ is “the Son of man”; and, further, “As Son of God, Christ interprets God to man; as Son of man, He interprets man to God” (“Christ in Modern Theology,” p. 364).

Following up the lecturer’s remarks, which introduce the reader to a very different atmosphere from that of conventional scholarship, we may develop these by reference to the “Synopsis of the Books of the Bible,” by Mr. J. N. Darby. The second psalm, he explains, in the light of Act 4:25 ff., as exhibiting to us the Son of God, rejected in His character of Messiah; the eighth as setting Him forth “the Son of man,” with a higher glory (cf. Joh 1:49 ff., Joh 12:23 , Joh 12:34 ). In Mar 9 (see also notes on that chapter) Peter, having confessed Jesus as Messiah, the Lord thereupon drops that title for the time being, to introduce His sufferings as Son of man. In Ezekiel the title “suited the testimony of a God who spoke outside of His people.” “It is Christ’s own title, looked at as rejected and outside of Israel. He would not, thus rejected, allow His disciples to announce Him as the Christ, for the Son of man was to suffer” (ii., p. 370 f.). “He could not be rejected as Christ without His having a more glorious place destined to Him” (ibid., p. 78). On Dan 7 the same writer remarks: “It is not now the Messiah, owned as King in Zion, but ONE in the form of the Son of man, a title of far greater and more wide significance. It is the change from Psa 2 to Psa 8 brought about by the rejection of the Messiah” (p. 437).

In his “Lectures on Matthew” W. Kelly has remarked, with reference to the use of this title in Act 7:52-56 , that when the Lord “was refused as Messiah, Stephen, finding that the testimony was rejected, is led of God to testify of Jesus as the exalted Son of man at God’s right hand” (p. 352).

Attempts are made to divorce the Synoptic from the Johannine treatment of the Lord’s ministry in general; but a comparison of Mar 14:64 with Joh 10:36 would show what a link this title forms between the three first and the fourth Gospels. Cf. Schanz, “A Christian Apology,” ii., p. 521. Thus in Joh 6:27 we are told that in His baptism (Mar 1:10 f. and parr.) the Lord was “sealed” as Son of man. Moreover, not only in John’s, but in all the other narratives the distinction between the titles “Christ” and “Son of man” is maintained. This is especially noticeable in Luk 9:26 (cf. Mat 10:23 ), but we meet with it also in Mar 9:21 f. See also Mar 12:34 , and compare Westcott’s note on p. 34 of his “Commentary on John.”

In all four Gospels the sufferings of the Son of man as well as His exaltation, are spoken of; His being future Judge (Joh 5:22 ) is but one form of the latter.

Outside the Gospels, besides Act 7:52 ff., already mentioned, reference may be made to 1Co 15 , Eph 1 , and Heb 2 , and, of course, to Rev 1:13 and Rev 14:14 . On Mat 9:6 , Bengel connects “on earth” with “Son of man” (as here). Cf. Joh 3:13 . Neander also accepts the idea of the connection with heaven in the title itself. The Lord, he says, indicated thereby “His elevation above all other men, the Son of God in the Son of man” (p. 100).

See, further, notes on verses 27, 28, and 14: 64; also note on 8: 27 ff. as to the claim of JESUS to be Christ, which, as so much else at the present day, has been wantonly questioned.

31 Mar 2:16 . – As to the Pharisees, see Edersheim’s “Life of Jesus the Messiah,” if not Rville i., chapter x., or the American “Jewish Encyclopedia,” vol. ix.

32 Mar 2:18 . – The Pharisees’ idea was that pious people should not, even if they could, be emphatically happy! The remonstrances came both from them (Luk 5:33 ) and from John’s disciples (Mat 9:14 ).

33 Mar 2:22 . – As to the different Greek words for “new,” see Trench, “Synonyms,” lx. The (time) applies to the wine, the (quality) to the skins. A. B. Bruce remarks (on Mat 9:17 ): “That which is new in time does not necessarily deteriorate with age; it may even improve. That which is new in quality always deteriorates with age.”

34 Mar 2:26 . – A difficulty is raised here from the fact that Abiathar was not the official high-priest at the time of this incident (see 1Sa 21:1 ; cf. 1Sa 22:11 ). The confusion of names already arose in the Old Testament text of both Hebrew and Greek; cf. 1Sa 22:20 with 2Sa 8:17 (1Ch 18:16 ). But “the” before “high-priest” is absent from the Greek of Mark – “Abiathar, a high-priest.” Abiathar was doubtless acting for his father at the time, and he was, as Plumptre says (ad loc.) “of David’s party, the chief agent in allowing him to take the shewbread.” Moreover, the preposition may here be taken as “in the presence of” (cf. Greek of 1Ti 6:13 ).

35 Mar 2:27 , Mar 2:28 . – The questions raised in respect of the designation “Son of man” have been already discussed in note 30 (on verse 10), in anticipation of the lecturer’s remarks at this place. Grotius would apply the rules of formal logic to the “man” of the first of these two verses, followed by the “Son of man” of the other (cf. note 29 above); and so H. J. Holtzmann (ad loc.). Bousset likewise finds it “obvious” that Son of man here means “man in general” (p. 185). But much that is “obvious” to any not going beyond the surface of a passage is illusion. The application of logic, which we have to correct in life by our experience, has been baneful in “theology”: see as to this Professor Julius Kaftan’s standard book on “The Truth of the Christian Religion” (1894), or his recent pamphlet “Jesus and Paulus,” especially at pp. 33, 36. All know how forcibly this consideration applies to Calvin’s system of doctrine. It is curious that learned men should be anxious to foist conventional logic into the interpretation of such a homely narrative as Mark’s is throughout. The reader may look for like treatment by “advanced” writers at Mar 10:18 , Mar 12:37 , where see notes.

It may be desirable here to note the characteristics of theology, or reasoned development of Biblical doctrine, which it has been since the time of Origen. One whose writings are not sufficiently known shall speak. “When a man’s mind apprehends the truth, and he seeks to give it a form, he does it according to the capacity of man, which is not its source; the truth as he expresses it, even were it pure, is separated in him from its source and its totality; but, besides this, the shape that a man gives it always bears the stamp of the man’s weakness. He has only apprehended it partially, and he only produces a part of it. Accordingly, it is no longer the truth. Moreover, when he separates it from the whole circle of truth in which God has placed it, he must necessarily clothe it in a new form, in a garment which proceeds from man: at once error mixes with it. Thus it is no longer a vital part of the whole: it is partial, and thereby not the truth; and it is, in fact, mixed with error. That is theology” (J. N. Darby, Synopsis,” vol. v., on 2 Timothy).

Fuente: William Kelly Major Works (New Testament)

Mark

CHRIST’S AUTHORITY TO FORGIVE

Mar 2:1 – Mar 2:12 .

Mark alone gives Capernaum as the scene of this miracle. The excitement which had induced our Lord to leave that place had been allowed ‘some days’ to quiet down, ‘after’ which He ventures to return, but does not seem to have sought publicity, but to have remained in ‘the house’-probably Peter’s. There would be at least one woman’s heart there, which would love to lavish grateful service on Him. But ‘He could not be hid,’ and, however little genuine or deep the eagerness might be, He will not refuse to meet it. Mark paints vividly the crowd flocking to the humble home, overflowing its modest capacity, blocking the doorway, and clustering round it outside as far as they could hear Christ’s voice. ‘He was speaking the word to them,’ proclaiming His mission, as He had done in their synagogue, when He was interrupted by the events which follow, no doubt to the gratification of some of His hearers, who wanted something more exciting than ‘teaching.’

I. We note the eager group of interrupters.

Mark gives one of the minute touches which betray an eye-witness and a close observer when he tells us that the palsied man was carried by four friends-no doubt one at each corner of the bed, which would be some light framework, or even a mere quilt or mattress. The incident is told from the point of view of one sitting beside Jesus; they ‘come to Him,’ but ‘cannot come near.’ The accurate specification of the process of removing the roof, which Matthew omits altogether, and Luke tells much more vaguely, seems also to point to an eye-witness as the source of the narrative, who would, of course, be Peter, who well remembered all the steps of the unceremonious treatment of his property. His house was, probably, one of no great pretensions or size, but like hundreds of poor men’s houses in Palestine still-a one-storied building with a low, flat roof, mostly earthen, and easily reached from the ground by an outside stair. It would be somewhat difficult to get a sick man and his bed up there, however low, and somewhat free-and-easy dealing with another man’s house to burrow through the roof a hole wide enough for the purpose; but there is no impossibility, and the difficulty is part of the lesson of the incident, and is recognised expressly in the narrative by Christ’s notice of their ‘faith.’ We can fancy the blank looks of the four bearers, and the disappointment on the sick man’s thin face and weary eyes, as they got to the edge of the crowd, and saw that there was no hope of forcing a passage. Had they been less certain of a cure, and less eager, they would have shouldered their burden and carried him home again. They could well have pleaded sufficient reason for giving up the attempt. But ‘we cannot’ is the coward’s word. ‘We must’ is the earnest man’s. If we have any real consciousness of our need to get to Christ, and any real wish to do so, it is not a crowd round the door that will keep us back. Difficulties test, and therefore increase, faith. They develop a sanctified ingenuity in getting over them, and bring a rich harvest of satisfaction when at last conquered. These four eager faces looked down through the broken roof, when they had succeeded in dropping the bed right at Christ’s feet, with a far keener pleasure than if they had just carried him in by the door. No doubt their act was inconvenient; for, however light the roofing, some rubbish must have come down on the heads of some of the notabilities below. And, no doubt, it was interfering with property as well as with propriety. But here was a sick man, and there was his Healer; and it was their business to get the two together somehow. It was worth risking a good deal to accomplish. The rabbis sitting there might frown at rude intrusiveness; Peter might object to the damage to his roof; some of the listeners might dislike the interruption to His teaching; but Jesus read the action of the bearers and the consent of the motionless figure on the couch as the indication of ‘their faith,’ and His love and power responded to its call.

II. Note the unexpected gift with which Christ answers this faith.

Neither the bearers nor the paralytic speak a word throughout the whole incident. Their act and his condition spoke loudly enough. Obviously, all five must have had, at all events, so much ‘faith’ as went to the conviction that He could and would heal; and this faith is the occasion of Christ’s gift. The bearers had it, as is shown by their work. It was a visible faith, manifest by conduct. He can see the hidden heart; but here He looks upon conduct, and thence infers disposition. Faith, if worth anything, comes to the surface in act. Was it the faith of the bearers, or of the sick man, which Christ rewarded? Both. As Abraham’s intercession delivered Lot, as Paul in the shipwreck was the occasion of safety to all the crew, so one man’s faith may bring blessings on another. But if the sick man too had not had faith, he would not have let himself be brought at all, and would certainly not have consented to reach Christ’s presence by so strange and, to him, dangerous a way-being painfully hoisted up some narrow stair, and then perilously let down, at the risk of cords snapping, or hands letting go, or bed giving way. His faith, apparently, was deeper than theirs; for Christ’s answer, though it went far beyond his or their expectations, must have been moulded to meet his deepest sense of need. His heart speaks in the tender greeting ‘son,’ or, as the margin has it, ‘child’-possibly pointing to the man’s youth, but more probably an appellation revealing the mingled love and dignity of Jesus, and taking this man into the arms of His sympathy. The palsy may have been the consequence of ‘fast’ living; but, whether it were so or no, Christ saw that, in the dreary hours of solitary inaction to which it had condemned the sufferer, remorse had been busy gnawing at his heart, and that pain had done its best work by leading to penitence. Therefore He spoke to the conscience before He touched the bodily ailment, and met the sufferer’s deepest and most deeply felt disease first. He goes to the bottom of the malady with His cure. These great words are not only closely adapted to the one case before Him, but contain a general truth, worthy to be pondered by all philanthropists. It is of little use to cure symptoms unless you cure diseases. The tap-root of all misery is sin; and, until it is grubbed up, hacking at the branches is sad waste of time. Cure sin, and you make the heart a temple and the world a paradise. We Christians should hail all efforts of every sort for making men nobler, happier, better physically, morally, intellectually; but let us not forget that there is but one effectual cure for the world’s misery, and that it is wrought by Him who has borne the world’s sins.

III. Note the snarl of the scribes.

‘Certain of the scribes,’ says Mark-not being much impressed by their dignity, which, as Luke tells us, was considerable. He says that they were ‘Pharisees and doctors of the law . . . out of every village of Galilee and Judaea and Jerusalem itself, who had come on a formal errand of investigation. Their tempers would not be improved by the tearing up of the roof, nor sweetened by seeing the ‘popularity’ of this doubtful young Teacher, who showed that He had the secret, which they had not, of winning men’s hearts. Nobody came crowding to them, nor hung on their lips. Professional jealousy has often a great deal to do in helping zeal for truth to sniff out heresy. The whispered cavillings are graphically represented. The scribes would not speak out, like men, and call on Jesus to defend His words. If they had been sure of their ground, they should have boldly charged Him with blasphemy; but perhaps they were half suspicious that He could show good cause for His speech. Perhaps they were afraid to oppose the tide of enthusiasm for Him. So they content themselves with comparing notes among themselves, and wait for Him to entangle Himself a little more in their nets. They affect to despise Him, ‘This man’ is spoken in contempt. If He were so poor a creature, why were they there, all the way from Jerusalem, some of them? They overdo their part. The short, snarling sentences of their muttered objections, as given in the Revised Version, may be taken as shared among three speakers, each bringing his quota of bitterness. One says, ‘Why doth He thus speak?’ Another curtly answers, ‘He blasphemeth’; while a third formally states the great truth on which they rest their indictment. Their principle is impregnable. Forgiveness is a divine prerogative, to be shared by none, to be grasped by none, without, in the act, diminishing God’s glory. But it is not enough to have one premise of your syllogism right. Only God forgives sins; and if this man says that He does, He, no doubt, claims to be, in some sense, God. But whether He ‘blasphemeth’ or no depends on what the scribes do not stay to ask; namely, whether He has the right so to claim: and, if He has, it is they, not He, who are the blasphemers. We need not wonder that they recoiled from the right conclusion, which is-the divinity of Jesus. Their fault was not their jealousy for the divine honour, but their inattention to Christ’s evidence in support of His claims, which inattention had its roots in their moral condition, their self-sufficiency and absorption in trivialities of externalism. But we have to thank them for clearly discerning and bluntly stating what was involved in our Lord’s claims, and for thus bringing up the sharp issue-blasphemer, or ‘God manifest in the flesh.’

IV. Note our Lord’s answer to the cavils.

Mark would have us see something supernatural in the swiftness of Christ’s knowledge of the muttered criticisms. He perceived it ‘straightway’ and ‘in His spirit,’ which is tantamount to saying by divine discernment, and not by the medium of sense, as we do. His spirit was a mirror, in which looking He saw externals. In the most literal and deepest sense, He does ‘not judge after the sight of His eyes, neither reprove after the hearing of His ears.’

The absence from our Lord’s answer of any explanation that He was only declaring the divine forgiveness and not Himself exercising a divine prerogative, shuts us up to the conclusion that He desired to be understood as exercising it. Unless His pardon is something quite different from the ministerial announcement of forgiveness, which His servants are empowered to make to penitents, He wilfully led the cavillers into error. His answer starts with a counter-question- another ‘why?’ to meet their’ why?’ It then puts into words what they were thinking; namely, that it was easy to assume a power the reality of which could not be tested. To say, ‘Thy sins be forgiven,’ and to say, ‘Take up thy bed,’ are equally easy. To effect either is equally beyond man’s power; but the one can be verified and the other cannot, and, no doubt, some of the scribes were maliciously saying: ‘It is all very well to pretend to do what cannot be tested. Let Him come out into daylight, and do a miracle which we can see.’ He is quite willing to accept the challenge to test His power in the invisible realm of conscience by His power in the visible region. The remarkable construction of the long sentence in Mar 2:10 – Mar 2:11 , which is almost verbally identical in the three Gospels, parenthesis and all, sets before us the suddenness of the turn from the scribes to the patient with dramatic force. Mark that our Lord claims ‘authority’ to forgive, the same word which had been twice in the people’s mouths in reference to His teaching and to His sway over demons. It implies not only power, but rightful power, and that authority which He wields as ‘Son of Man’ and ‘on earth.’ This is the first use of that title in Mark. It is Christ’s own designation of Himself, never found on other lips except the dying Stephen’s. It implies His Messianic office, and points back to Daniel’s great prophecy; but it also asserts His true manhood and His unique relation to humanity, as being Himself its sum and perfection-not a , but the Son of Man. Now the wonder which He would confirm by His miracle is that such a manhood, walking on earth, has lodged in it the divine prerogative. He who is the Son of Man must be something more than man, even the Son of God. His power to forgive is both derived and inherent, but, in either aspect, is entirely different from the human office of announcing God’s forgiveness.

For once, Christ seems to work a miracle in response to unbelief, rather than to faith. But the real occasion of it was not the cavils of the scribes, but the faith and need of the man and His friends; while the silencing of unbelief, and the enlightenment of honest doubt, were but collateral benefits.

V. Note the cure and its effect.

This is another of the miracles in which no vehicle of the healing power is employed. The word is enough; but here the word is spoken, not as if to the disease, but to the sufferer; and in His obedience he receives strength to obey. Tell a palsied man to rise and walk when his disease is that he cannot! But if he believes that Christ has power to heal, he will try to do as he is bid; and, as he tries, the paralysis steals out of the long-unused limbs. Jesus makes us able to do what He bids us do. The condition of healing is faith, and the test of faith is obedience. We do not get strength till we put ourselves into the attitude of obedience. The cure was immediate; and the cured man, who was ‘borne of four’ into the healing presence, walked away, with his bed under his arm, ‘before them all.’ They were ready enough to make way for him then. And what said the wise doctors to it all? We do not hear that any of them were convinced. And what said the people? They were ‘amazed,’ and they ‘glorified God,’ and recognised that they had seen something quite new. That was all. Their glorifying God cannot have been very deep-seated, or they would have better learned the lesson of the miracle. Amazement was but a poor result. No emotion is more transient or less fruitful than gaping astonishment; and that, with a little varnish of acknowledgment of God’s power, which led to nothing, was all the fruit of Christ’s mighty work. Let us hope that the healed man carried his unseen blessing in a faithful and grateful heart, and consecrated his restored strength to the Lord who healed him!

Fuente: Expositions Of Holy Scripture by Alexander MacLaren

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Mar 2:1-12

1When He had come back to Capernaum several days afterward, it was heard that He was at home. 2And many were gathered together, so that there was no longer room, not even near the door; and He was speaking the word to them. 3And they came, bringing to Him a paralytic, carried by four men. 4Being unable to get to Him because of the crowd, they removed the roof above Him; and when they had dug an opening, they let down the pallet on which the paralytic was lying. 5And Jesus seeing their faith said to the paralytic, “Son, your sins are forgiven.” 6But some of the scribes were sitting there and reasoning in their hearts, 7″Why does this man speak that way? He is blaspheming; who can forgive sins but God alone?” 8Immediately Jesus, aware in His spirit that they were reasoning that way within themselves, said to them, “Why are you reasoning about these things in your hearts? 9Which is easier, to say to the paralytic, ‘Your sins are forgiven’; or to say, ‘Get up, and pick up your pallet and walk’? 10But so that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins”He said to the paralytic, 11″I say to you, get up, pick up your pallet and go home.” 12And he got up and immediately picked up the pallet and went out in the sight of everyone, so that they were all amazed and were glorifying God, saying, “We have never seen anything like this.”

Mar 2:1 “Capernaum” The name means “village of Nahum.” Because of the unbelief of the people in Nazareth, Jesus chose this town in Galilee (cf. Mat 4:13) as His headquarters. It was located on a major caravan route from Damascus to Egypt. For further discussion see Cities of the Biblical World by Moine F. DeVries, pp. 269-275.

“it was heard” Jesus’ reputation caused many people to come and see Him (i.e., the sick, the curious, the true seekers, and the religious leaders). Jesus’ words are often addressed to different groups in the audience, but to which group is not usually recorded.

“He was at home” Whether this was Peter’s or Mary’s house or a rent house is uncertain.

Mar 2:2 “many were gathered” In eastern societies an open door meant “come on in,” and they did.

“there was no longer any room even around the door” There may have been a small courtyard, but even so, this home would not hold a lot of people.

“He was speaking the word to them” This is an Imperfect active indicative, which can be understood as (1) the beginning of an act or (2) the repeating of an act. The “word” refers to Jesus’ recurring message stated in Mar 1:14-15. His signs and actions changed, but the central core of His message remained the same.

Mar 2:3 “a paralytic” This is a compound of “to loose” and “along side.” Possibly this was a stroke victim, paralyzed on one side. Jesus’ actions had a twin purpose: (1) to fulfill the Messianic prophecy of Isa 61:6 and (2) to proclaim His deity and authority by forgiving sin. For those who had spiritual eyes this was a clear, unambiguous sign!

Mar 2:4 “removed the roof” This is literally “they unroofed the roof.” Roofs were accessible from the street and were often the place of social gatherings. They were usually flat and made of mud and branches with grass. Luk 5:19 has “tiles” which might imply a courtyard. Can you imagine Jesus trying to teach while pieces of the roof fell on all of them?

“pallet” This was a small straw mat used for sleeping.

Mar 2:5 “their faith” Jesus saw the faith of the friends as well as the paralytic’s faith and acted on their belief.

“your sins are forgiven” This was probably or possibly an intentional provocation to the religious leaders who were present. Jesus was also encouraging this man’s faith. The Jews believed there was a relationship between illness and sin (cf. Job; Joh 9:2; Jas 5:15-16). This man may have been concerned that his sin was somehow involved in his paralysis.

The UBS4 text has a present passive indicative. Some Greek texts have a perfect passive indicative (cf. P88, , A, C, D, L, W), which is like Luk 5:20. However, Mat 9:2 and MS B have a present passive indicative. It is hard to choose which of these two options is original.

Mar 2:6 “scribes” These were experts on the oral and written Law. They were either (1) an official delegation from Jerusalem sent to keep an eye on Jesus or (2) local interpreters of the Jewish traditions for the townspeople. They must have come early to get into the house or they expected to be allowed to move to the front because of their social status. See SPECIAL TOPIC: SCRIBES at Mar 1:22.

NASB, NKJV”reasoning in their hearts”

NRSV”questioning in their hearts”

TEV, NJB”thought to themselves”

The theological question is did Jesus read their thoughts, thus showing another evidence of His deity (cf. 1Sa 16:7; Psa 7:9; Psa 139:1-4; Pro 16:2; Pro 21:2; Pro 24:12; Jer 11:20; Jer 17:10; Jer 20:12; Luk 16:15; Act 15:8; Heb 4:12), or did He know their traditions and see their facial expressions?

This itself (cf. Mar 2:8) may have been another sign. The rabbis interpreted Isa 11:3 as the Messiah being able to discern people’s thoughts.

SPECIAL TOPIC: THE HEART

Mar 2:7 “He is blaspheming” The penalty for blasphemy was death by stoning (cf. Lev 24:16). Jesus was guilty of this charge unless He was deity. Jesus’ forgiving sin is also a not-so-subtle claim to deity or at least being a representative of divine power and authority.

“who can forgive sins but God alone” Jesus’ message of repentance and faith (cf. Mar 1:14-15) was predicated on the assumption of the sinfulness of all humans (even the OT covenant people, cf. Rom 3:9-18). Sin is serious and has not only a temporal fellowship aspect, but an eternal eschatology aspect. Sin, and its power and consequences, is why Jesus came (cf. Mar 10:45; 2Co 5:21).

Only God can forgive sin because sin is primarily against Him (cf. Gen 20:6; Gen 39:9; 2Sa 12:13; Psa 41:4; Psa 51:4). Since the book of Isaiah is a recurrent reference (or allusion) in Mark’s Gospel here are some verses in Isaiah that deal with the new age and forgiveness: Isa 1:18; Isa 33:24; Isa 38:17; Isa 43:25; Isa 44:22. This is another Messianic sign.

Mar 2:8; Mar 2:12 “Immediately” See note at Mar 1:10.

“Jesus, aware” See note at Mar 2:7.

“in His spirit” The Greek uncial manuscripts of the NT did not have

1. space between the words

2. punctuation marks

3. capitalization (all letters were capitals)

4. verse and chapter divisions

Therefore, only context can determine the need for capitals. Usually capitals are used for

1. names for deity

2. place names

3. personal names

The term “spirit” can refer to:

1. the Holy Spirit (cf. Mar 1:5)

2. the conscious personal aspect of humanity (cf. Mar 8:12; Mar 14:38)

3. some being of the spiritual realm (i.e., unclean spirits, cf. Mar 1:23).

In this context it refers to Jesus as a person.

I personally reject the theological concept of humans having three aspects (body, soul, and spirit based on 1Th 5:23). Usually those who assert this concept turn this theological assumption into a hermeneutical grid by which all biblical texts are interpreted. These categories become airtight compartments by which God relates to humans. Humans are a unity (cf. Gen 2:7). For a good summary of the theories of mankind as trichotomous, dichotomous, or a unity see Frank Stagg’s Polarities of Man’s Existence in a Biblical Perspective and Millard J. Erickson’s Christian Theology (second edition) pp. 538-557.

Mar 2:9; Mar 2:11 “‘Get up, and pick up your pallet and walk'” These are two aorist imperatives followed by a present imperative. This was an instantaneous and lasting cure. It was done for three reasons.

1. because Jesus cared for the needy man and rewarded his and his friends’ faith

2. to continue to teach the disciples the gospel as it relates to His person and mission

3. to continue to confront and dialog with the religious leaders

These religious leaders have only two options: believe in Him or explain away His power and authority.

Mar 2:10 “‘the Son of Man'” This was an adjectival phrase from the OT. It was used in Eze 2:1 and Psa 8:4 in its true etymological meaning of “human being.” However, it was used in Dan 7:13 in a unique context which implied both the humanity and deity of the person addressed by this new eschatological royal title (cf. Mar 8:38; Mar 9:9; Mar 13:26; Mar 14:26). Since this title was not used by rabbinical Judaism and therefore had none of the nationalistic, exclusivistic, militaristic implications, Jesus chose it as the perfect title of both veiling and revealing His dual nature, fully man and fully divine (cf. 1Jn 4:1-3). It was His favorite self-designation. It is used thirteen times in Mark (often in relation to Jesus’ various sufferings, cf. Mar 8:31; Mar 9:12; Mar 9:31; Mar 10:33; Mar 10:45; Mar 14:21; Mar 14:41).

“‘has authority on earth to forgive sins'” Jesus performed this miracle for the purpose of witnessing to these scribes. This issue of authority (i.e., exousia) will become the focal issue. They cannot deny His power, so they will assert that His power and authority is demonic or Satanic in origin (cf. Mat 10:25; Mat 12:24-29; Luk 11:14-22).

Mar 2:12 “they were all amazed” This was not because of the healing; they had seen Him do that earlier, but for the forgiving of sins! They (the scribes and Pharisees) had their sign. Jesus clearly showed His power and authority. I wonder if these leaders were “glorifying God” on this occasion also.

Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley

into. Greek. eis. App-104.

after. Greek. dia. App-104. Mar 2:1,

noised = . reported.

that He was in the house = “He is [gone] into the house [and is there]”.

in. Greek. eis (as above).

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

1.] , after an interval of some days: see reff.

, in doors; as , to the country, ch. Mar 16:12 : = , ,-the practice of omitting the art. after a preposition being universal, and apparently regulated by no assignable rule. See examples in Middleton, ch. vi. 1, which however in later Greek are by no means limited to the class of nouns there mentioned, but are found with nouns of all classes of meaning.

The combines motion with the construction,-that he had gone home, and was there.

Fuente: The Greek Testament

Now,

And again he entered into Capernaum after some days; and it was noised that he was in the house ( Mar 2:1 ).

So, word went around Jesus is in the house over there.

And straightway many were gathered together, insomuch that there was no room to receive them, no, not so much as about the door: and he preached the word unto them ( Mar 2:2 ).

I like that. “He preached the word unto them.” What else is there to preach? Well, all you have to do is listen to television and the radio, and you’ll find there’s a lot of things being preached. Experience often preached, wild experiences. But, oh, how important that we just preach the word.

And they come unto him, bringing one [who was] sick of the palsy, which was borne of four [he was being carried by four men]. And when they could not come nigh unto him for the press [because of the crowd of people], they [climbed up on the roof and] uncovered the roof where he was: and when they had broken it up, they let down the bed wherein the sick of the palsy lay ( Mar 2:3-4 ).

So, Jesus was sitting there in the house. The place was packed outside. You couldn’t even get near the door because of the multitude of people. And here came four fellows carrying a friend who was sick with the palsy. And they were desperate to see Jesus. Not being able to get near the house, they probably went around back, climbed up on the roof, hoisted the guy up and began to tear off the tiles, or whatever it was. And as Jesus is sitting there talking, suddenly here comes this guy on a pallet down in front of Him.

When Jesus saw their faith, he said unto the sick of the palsy, Son, thy sins be forgiven thee ( Mar 2:5 ).

Now, I imagine at this point these four friends were very disappointed. “Lord, we didn’t bring him to get saved. We brought him to get healed.” But Jesus is taking care of the most important thing first. What is really the most important thing? A person’s salvation, or a person’s healing? And in reality, we realize that the most important thing for any man is his salvation. Better to go into heaven maimed than whole into hell. Salvation is by far the greatest need that any of us have. The greatest miracle that God can work in any of our lives is that miracle of freeing us from the power of sin and transforming us into the kingdom of light. God’s great miracle. And so Jesus was doing first things first. But also, I’m certain that He was seeking to make a statement to the people, which the Pharisees immediately caught. For when Jesus said to this man, “Son, thy sins be forgiven thee,”

But there were certain of the scribes [that were] sitting there, and reasoning in their hearts ( Mar 2:6 ),

Immediately it flashed on them. This man is speaking blasphemously, for no one can forgive sins but God

Why doth this man thus speak blasphemies? who can forgive sins but God only? ( Mar 2:7 ).

They are absolutely correct in the second statement, wrong in the first. Jesus wasn’t speaking blasphemy, because Jesus was God. They were correct in the second statement; no one can forgive sins but God.

You remember David in the fifty-first Psalm, as he had been faced by the prophet Nathan with his sin against Bathsheba, cried out, “Have mercy upon me, oh God. According to the multitude of Thy tender mercies, blot out my transgressions. For against Thee and Thee only have I sinned and done this great wickedness.” Only God can forgive a man’s sins. And so, they were correct in that assessment; only God can forgive sins. But they were incorrect in the first assessment that He’s speaking blasphemously. But in reality, He was just showing that He was God.

Just as we dealt the other morning with the rich young ruler who came to Jesus and said, “Good Master, what must I do to have age-abiding life?” And Jesus said, “Why do you call Me good? There’s only one good and that is God.” Jesus wasn’t saying, “I’m not good.” He was saying, “You’ve recognized a truth. You’ve recognized a truth about Me. You’ve recognized that I am God. Why did you call Me good? Because you recognized that I am God.” He’s trying to help the young fellow to really realize what he had subconsciously come to realize, bring it out into the conscious. “Why did you call me good? There’s only one good; that is God. You called Me good because I am God.”

Now, here again is an assertion. He knew, Jesus knew, that only God could forgive sins. And He was acting in His divine nature as He said, “Son, thy sins be forgiven thee.” And Jesus knew that this would rise up in the minds of the Pharisees.

And immediately, when Jesus perceived in his spirit that they so reasoned [these things] within themselves, he said unto them, Why reason ye these things in your hearts? Whether is it easier to say to the sick [man] of the palsy, Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say to him, Arise, and take up thy bed, and walk? ( Mar 2:8-9 )

Now, what’s easier to say? Well, they’re probably both easier, as far as just to say, you know, you can say whatever you want. But to prove that what you said was true, it would be difficult to prove that when you say, “Thy sins be forgiven thee,” that they are really forgiven. There is no visible, outward sign that we can discern that a fellow’s sins have been forgiven him. To say, “Take up thy bed and walk,” that’s putting it on the line. That is difficult to say, because you can prove pretty quick whether or not there’s any power in the words that you spoke. If you say, “Take up your bed and walk,” and the guy still lies there, then you’re exposed in a hurry as a fraud. But if you say, “Take up your bed and walk,” and the guy takes up his bed and begins to walk, then it’s quite obvious that he has great power. So, Jesus said,

But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, [again, showing who He is] (he saith to the sick of the palsy,) I say unto thee, Arise, and take up thy bed, and go thy way into thine house [go home]. And immediately he arose, took up the bed, and went forth before them all; insomuch that they were all amazed, and glorified God, saying, We never saw it on this fashion [anything like this before] ( Mar 2:10-12 ).

It’s glorious. Now, “they were all amazed and they glorified God.” Jesus had said in the Sermon on the Mount, “Let your light so shine before men, that when they see your good works, they glorify your Father which is in heaven” ( Mat 5:16 ). There are two ways to let your light shine. There are two ways by which you can do your works. You can let your light shine in such a way that when men see your good works, they say, “Oh, what a glorious person he is. Isn’t he marvelous? My, he is so great.” Drawing attention and praise to yourself. Or you can let your light so shine that when men see the good works, they say, “Oh, isn’t God great? Isn’t God good?” And so, Jesus was doing the work in such a way that people were glorifying God. That’s the way we should do our works; in such a way that we don’t draw attention to ourselves.

Somehow, within this perverse nature of mine, I desire to draw attention to me. When I was a little tiny kid, I used to get out on the school ground all by myself with a football under my arm and I’d run through all of the team. And everybody was cheering and the announcer was saying, “And Chuck Smith has the ball and he’s running. He’s down to the five, crossing the goal. Oh, touchdown! Hooray! Hooray!” And everybody was cheering and yelling. And I was walking around, you know. And I was four and five years old doing this kind of stuff. Declaring the greatness of this tremendous athlete, wanting the attention, wanting the praise, wanting the cheers of the crowd. And so, it was only natural as I grew older, I continued playing football and all, and living for that cheering of the crowd, living off the cheers of the crowd, fulfilling my early fantasies. Something within man’s nature, something within man’s old nature.

But when we come to Jesus Christ, we must reckon that old man to be dead with Christ, in order that we might be alive unto God and live now not for our glory, not for our recognition, not to receive praise for ourselves, but do our works in such a way that when men see the good work, they glorify our Father which is in heaven. Jesus set the classic example for us, “for they were all amazed and glorified God, saying, ‘We’ve never seen anything like this.'”

And he went forth again by the sea side; and all the multitude resorted unto him, and he taught them. And as he passed by, he saw Levi [or Matthew] the son of Alpheus sitting at the receipt of custom ( Mar 2:13-14 ),

So there in Capernaum, Matthew was a tax collector. It is interesting that so many of the disciples were drawn right from that area of Capernaum. And as they were passing by, there was Matthew sitting at his little tax house, toll booth,

and said unto him, Follow Me. And he arose and followed him. And it came to pass, that, as Jesus sat at meat in his house ( Mar 2:14-15 ),

So Matthew prepared a great meal for Jesus, but he invited a lot of his sinner friends because he wanted to expose them to Jesus. It is interesting that the gospels tell us that Matthew was the one who fixed this dinner for Jesus, where Matthew just tells us about the dinner, but he didn’t tell us that he was the host. But the other gospel writers point out that Matthew was the host of this meal. “It came to pass as Jesus sat at meat in his house, many publicans and sinners,” not Republicans, but there’s not much difference. Someone said, “Never vote for a Democrat, because they’re all crooks.” But then, the Republicans are crooks too, but they do it with more finesse. Never discuss politics with your friends. I’m looking for a new kingdom, wherein dwelleth righteousness. I tell ya, that’s the kingdom.

[And they] sat also together with Jesus and his disciples; for there were many, and they followed him. And when the scribes and the Pharisees saw him eat with the publicans and sinners, they said unto his disciples, How is it that he eateth and drinketh with publicans and sinners? ( Mar 2:15-16 )

Now, you have to understand Jewish culture to understand their chagrin and their shock at this. According to their whole cultural concept, if you would sit down and eat with someone, you were becoming one with that person. Because you see, you had a common sort of a soup and a loaf of bread on the table, and they didn’t have knives and forks and that kind of stuff. You just picked up the bread and you pulled off a hunk, and then you dip it in this common bowl of soup out there and you eat it. So, you’d hold out the bread to me and I’d take and pull off a chunk, and you’d pull off a chunk, and we’d both dip together in the soup out there. And then we would eat the bread. But we are both eating from the same loaf of bread; we are both dipping in the same soup. And we know that as we eat that bread, our body is assimilating it, and it’s becoming a part of my body; it’s becoming a part of me. But that same loaf of bread is becoming a part of your body and becoming a part of you. So, mystically, we are becoming a part of each other. We’re becoming one with each other when we eat with each other. I’m becoming one with you as I eat together with you.

Now, that is why the Jew would never eat with a Gentile. They didn’t want to become one with a Gentile. And so, when Jesus was eating with these publicans and sinners, in their cultural mind He was becoming one with the sinners; identifying and becoming one with the sinners. “But God made Him to be sin for us who knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God through Him” ( 2Co 5:21 ). He identified with us in order that He might redeem us. And so they were amazed, they said, “Hey, how is it He’s eating with publicans and sinners?”

When Jesus heard it, he saith unto them, They that are whole have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance. And the disciples of John and of the Pharisees used to fast: and they come and said unto him, Why do the disciples of John and of the Pharisees fast, but thy disciples fast not? And Jesus said unto them, Can the children of the bridechamber fast, while the bridegroom is with them? as long as they have the bridegroom with them, they cannot fast. But the days will come, when the bridegroom shall be taken away from them, and then shall they fast in those days ( Mar 2:17-20 ).

Now, fasting is a spiritual rite in which there is that denial of the flesh. It is a self-abnegation type of a thing, or a self-mortification. It’s a part of denying self. And while Jesus was with His disciples, He did not command them to fast as a spiritual rite. He said, “The days will come. As long as the bridegroom is here, we’re going to rejoice; we’re going to party. But then I’ll be going, and in those days they’ll fast.”

In the Old Testament we read of Daniel fasting, afflicting himself as he was waiting upon God and praying. Daniel’s fast comprised of not drinking wine, not eating meat or pastries. So, there are many things that you can deny yourself–Swenson’s for a while. There are different types of fasts that you can engage in: total abstinence, drinking just water, keeping the liquid level of your body up, or just denying certain things for a period of time as you denied the flesh to spend time in prayer and to wait upon God. Prayer and the word feed the spirit, just as food feeds the body. We are extremely faithful in feeding the body. We see that it has meals three times a day. But so often, we’re careless about feeding the spirit.

Now, the flesh is warring against the spirit, and the spirit against the flesh. And so often the flesh is overcoming the spirit. Well, that’s quite obvious. Why? Because I am so faithful in feeding the flesh, and so negligent in feeding the spirit. So, fasting and prayer are a reversal of the normal. I begin to neglect the feeding the flesh, and take the time to feed the spirit. And as the result, as my spirit is warring against my flesh, and the flesh against the spirit, my spirit begins to become strong and overcome, and I become victorious. And so that’s really where fasting comes in and the purpose of fasting.

Now they’re talking about the disciples of the Pharisees and so forth. The old religious system with its fast days and all of the rights and so forth, and Jesus said,

No man also seweth a piece of new cloth on an old garment; else the new piece that filled it up taketh away from the old, and the rent [tear] is made worse ( Mar 2:21 ).

Now, Jesus was talking in the days before they had Sanforized clothes. So, you have a robe that you’ve been wearing for a long time; it’s been through many washings. All of the shrinking is out of it because it’s been through so many washings. And you rip that old robe. Now, if you would take a new piece of cloth to sew up the hole that you have in your robe, the first time you washed it, that new cloth that you put in would shrink. And, of course, pull out the old, because the old robe already had the shrinkage out of it, the new cloth shrinking would just rip the thing all the more. So, you don’t use new cloth to patch an old garment. You just make the tear worse.

And no man putteth new wine into old bottles [skins]: else the new wine doth burst the bottles, and the wine is spilled ( Mar 2:22 ),

What is Jesus saying? He’s saying that the religious systems get so set that to revive or to restore them is next to impossible. That when God desires to do a new work, He usually moves outside of the boundaries of the established religious systems because they can’t handle the new wine. They can’t handle that new work of God. And how true this is. And how we have seen the truth of this in personal observation. How God, when He desires to move with a new work of His Spirit in the hearts of people, unfortunately, has to move out beyond the boundaries of the organized religious systems and has to start up something new to contain that new work of His Spirit, that fresh work of God that He is seeking to do in the world.

So God wanted to save a bunch of old hippies. And the old systems couldn’t handle those longhaired barefooted kids, so God raises up a new work, in order that He might reach those that He’s desiring to reach.

Now, this is where my prayer is that, “God, keep us flexible.” I don’t want to get in a rut, a pattern, a routine that we would say, “Well, this is the way we’ve done it. This is the way Chuck did it,” and this kind of stuff. I really don’t want that. I want to ever stay flexible and free to move as God’s Spirit moves. Blessed are the flexible; they shall not be broken. I mean, you get rigid. If God wants to move, “No, that’s not the way we do it.” Well, God is going to move, and you’ll get snapped. But if you just learn to be flexible. If God wants to move, all right. Move with it; be flexible. The interesting thing about God is His refusal to be patterned. “Well, God did it this way.” Well, maybe He did the last time, but He wants to do it a different way this time. God does not confine Himself to patterns, and man always makes the mistake when he tries to pattern God, tries to make the groove for God to flow in. And God is always overflowing our banks, and always coming up with some new way of working in the lives of people. And so, God keep us open and flexible and ready to move as the Spirit of God moves in different ways.

And it came to pass, that he went through the corn fields ( Mar 2:23 )

And that would be wheat fields; they called the little kernel the corn of the wheat.

on the Sabbath day; and his disciples began, as they went [through], to pluck the ears of corn ( Mar 2:23 ).

Now, during the months of May, early June and all, as the wheat is getting ripe, you take and pick off that little top part, the corn of the wheat. And you take and rub it in your hands, and you knock the chaff off of it, the little bran off of it, and then you blow it. And you rub it and blow it, and you get just a handful of wheat. And then you eat it; the kernel is soft enough that you can chew it with your teeth. And as you chew it for a while, it makes sort of a gum, actually. And you can chew it all day if you want. When we were kids, we used to pick the wheat out of the chicken feed. We didn’t have enough money for gum, so we’d go out and get the chicken feed and pick out all the wheat, and we’d chew it until we got our gum. And we’d go chewing the wheat gum all day long. But, of course, it’s extremely helpful. And it was something that the disciples did, going through the wheat field. And they’d just grab some of these little corn of the wheat and begin to rub it in their hands and eat it.

And the Pharisees said unto him, Behold, why do they on the Sabbath day that which is not lawful? And he said unto them, Have ye never read what David did, when he had need, and was ahungered, he, and they that were with him? How he went into the house of God in the days of Abiathar the high priest, and did eat the showbread, which is not lawful to eat but for the priests, and gave also to them which were with him? And he said unto them, The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath: Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the Sabbath ( Mar 2:24-28 ).

Human need takes precedence over the law. They’re hungry; there’s a human need. Now, according to the law, when you went through a man’s cornfield, you could pick the corn and eat it. But you couldn’t carry any out; you weren’t to take a sickle and cut it down and carry out the sheaves of corn. If you were going through an orchard, you could pick the fruit and eat it, but you couldn’t carry any fruit out. Human need, hunger, God made provisions for. “If you’re hungry, go and pick an orange.” You can’t do that here now. I’m not telling you to do that here, because Sunkist Growers will slap you with a $500 fine. But God had made provision for hungry people to go in and to take what they needed to satisfy their hunger. You couldn’t take any out, set up a little stand and sell the produce at the edge of the field, but you could eat to your own need and satisfaction. And so, the disciples were doing that. They were walking through someone’s wheat field, and they just began to pluck the little kernels and eat them. And it was the Sabbath day.

Now, to the Pharisees and the scribes, that constituted a violation of the Sabbath day law; you’re not to do any work. But Jesus said, “They’re hungry. They’re only taking care of their needs; their hungers. David, whom you admire, don’t you remember how he, turning the time when Abiathar was the high priest, went in and he and his men were hungry? They were fleeing from Saul and they went in and David said, ‘Do you have anything?’ He said, ‘No, I don’t have anything, but the showbread here.’ David said, ‘I’ll take that.’ And he took the showbread and he fed his men and all. And that was against the law; only the priests, according to the law, were to eat that showbread.” But again, human need, hunger is a higher law.

And then He announced Himself as the Lord of the Sabbath. Making that statement that we need to remember, “Sabbath was made for man.” It’s for man’s benefit. Really, we would all be wise to observe the Sabbath, to give our bodies a chance to recuperate. If you spent every Saturday in bed, you’d be a healthier person. Just kick back. Spend the day in bed; do nothing. But we are so geared up, that we press and push all the time. But God made it for you, take advantage of it. Kick back. “

Fuente: Through the Bible Commentary

Mar 2:1-2. And again he entered into Capernaum, after some days; and it was noised that he was in the house. And straightway many were gathered together, inasmuch that there was no room to receive them, no, not so much as about the door: and he preached the word unto them.

He could not be hid; the healed leper had made his name so famous that men crowded to see him, and he took advantage of their curiosity, and preached the word unto them.

Mar 2:3-5. And they came unto him, bringing one sick of the palsy, which was borne of four. And when they could not come nigh unto him for the press, they uncovered the roof where he was: and when they had broken it up, they let down the bed wherein the sick of the palsy lay. When Jesus saw their faith, he said unto the sick of the palsy, Son, thy sins be forgiven thee.

Those who brought this man to Jesus believed that he could and would heal him, and Christ delighted to honour their faith, and perhaps also the faith of the man himself.

Mar 2:6-9. But there were certain of the scribes sitting there, and reasoning in their hearts, Why doth this man thus speak blasphemies? who can forgive sins but God only? And immediately when Jesus perceived in his spirit that they so reasoned within themselves, he said unto them, Why reason ye these things in your hearts? Whether is it easier to say to the sick of the palsy, Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Arise, and take up thy bed, and walk?

It was just as easy to say either the one or the other.

Mar 2:10-12. But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (he saith to the sick of the palsy,) I say unto thee, Arise, and take up thy bed, and go thy way into thine house. And immediately he arose, took up the bed, and went forth before them all; insomuch that they were all amazed, and glorified God, saying, We never saw it on this fashion.

This exposition consisted of readings from Mar 1:28-45; Mar 2:1-12,

Fuente: Spurgeon’s Verse Expositions of the Bible

Mar 2:1. , again) Comp. ch. Mar 1:21; Mar 1:29.- ) After some days had intervened. [It is one and the same return into the city of Capernaum, of which Mark makes mention in this place after the healing of the leper; Matthew, after the return from the region of the Gergesenes, in his ch. Mar 9:1 : it is also the same man sick of the palsy, whom Mark and Luke, after Matthew, treat of.-Harm., p. 276].

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

Mar 2:1-12

SECTION THREE

DISCUSSIONS WITH SCRIBES AND PHARISEES

Mar 2:1 to Mar 3:35

1. ABOUT POWER TO FORGIVE SINS

Mar 2:1-12

(Mat 9:1-8; Luk 5:17-26)

1 And when he entered again into Capernaum–Matthew says “his own city.” [After traveling around the cities of Galilee for some time, preaching and healing in their synagogues, Jesus returned to Capernaum–his home. Time is told in very indefinite language in the scriptures, and frequently a few verses include a considerable time. All we can tell is it was yet in the first year of his ministry. We measure the years of his ministry by the Passover feasts at Jerusalem noted only by John. Jesus, after journeying from city to city on foot until worn and wearied with his journey, his labors, the constant crowds that thronged him, would naturally, at his home, seek quiet and rest preparatory to starting again upon his lifework. He returned to Capernaum, as the narrative would indicate, quietly, and entered his home.]

after some days,–How many days elapsed after “Jesus could no more openly enter into a city” (Mar 1:45) is not stated. The fact that he goes again into the city is evidence that a sufficient time had passed, for the cause that hindered his entering into the cities had, in some way, been removed; and therefore, there is no inconsistency between the two statements.

it was noised that he was in the house.–[It was told from one to another, until the news spread through the city that he was in the house.] Jesus had no house of his own (Matt. 8 20);but he dwelt in Capernaum (Mat 4:13) in a house occupied by some friend, probably Peter (Mar 1:29), as at Bethany his home was with Lazarus and his sisters.

2 And many were gathered together,–Eager to hear from the lips of him who had so recently shown the possession of unparalleled power. [So soon as the people heard he was at his home many were gathered together to see him.]

so that there was no longer room for them, no, not even about the door:–[They crowded into the house until there was no room in the house to receive them, and they pressed around the door, so that it became impossible to approach it even.] Jesus was so far from seeking praise and commendation of people that he came into the city without observation, and betook himself to his home there;but the more he sought seclusion, the more he was taken notice of. Honor flees from those that pursue it, and pursues those that run from it. The way to be honored is to be humble. God seldom honors a proud man by making him either eminently serviceable or successful.

and he spake the word unto them.–[The chief mission of Jesus was to preach to the people the word of God. The healing of the sick and the casting out of the devils was a matter of secondary importance, but helpful, to his preaching the word. Jesus moved with kindness to men, would heal their bodily infirmities. But the great thing with him was to teach them the word, and to heal their spiritual afflictions. The healing of the body showed the presence of God with him. They were separated from God, they were as sheep without a shepherd, and he came to call them back to God. The miracles were wrought to prove he was from God, God was with him, and that his words were the words of God. The good that words do depends much on who speaks them and how received. The words spoken by Jesus were comparatively without effect to those who received them as the words of men. They were full of power and grace to those who received them as the words of God. The word preached here was the specific words that the kingdom of heaven was at hand. Luk 4:18-20 is an example of his preaching. He quoted a prophecy foretelling his coming and his mission, and then showed it was fulfilled in his person and work. The word “preach” is not used in the New Testament as we use it. In the scriptures there is a distinction between the preaching and teaching. Preaching is the original proclamation of a message or a truth. The teaching was showing the duties and obligations that belief of the truth required. Here Christ himself proclaimed or first made known his mission in a clear, concise statement of the work he came to do, or the mission he came to fulfill.]

3 And they come, bringing unto him a man sick of the palsy, borne of four.–His case was an extreme one. The bed must have been of a very portable character, from the manner in which it was later handled. Being light, Jesus might with propriety command him to take it up and walk. (Mat 9:6.) As a demonstration of Christ’s divine power, he was pleased to single out the extreme cases, to work a cure upon such as were afflicted.

4 And when they could not come nigh unto him for the crowd, they uncovered the roof where he was:–The regular entrance to the house had been blocked by the multitude, so they could not have access to Jesus. Many of ordinary faith and perseverance would have given up the enterprise for that time. At all events, “they went up to the housetop.” (Luke.) The roof was made of rafters, and over these were laid branches, twigs, matting and earth, and trodden down. The uncovering of such a roof would not be a very dangerous or difficult proceeding.

and when they had broken it up, they let down the bed whereon the sick of the palsy lay.–Luke says he was let down “into the midst before Jesus.” Their part of the work was done. Their faith had been shown, for very doubtful men would never have taken all this trouble. The sufferer was before the healer. It is not difficult to imagine the suppressed excitement which such an occurrence would produce in this crowded audience.

5 And Jesus seeing their faith–[Their faith doubtless included the faith of the paralytic as well as of those who bore him–his friends. Their faith showed itself in their outward action in bringing him to Jesus, and in overcoming the difficulties that lay in the way. It was a faith made perfect by works. God blesses those who believe, but only when the faith expresses itself in outward action. Faith never affects a person’s character until it so controls the heart as to direct the actions. When Jesus was here in person he had no fixed act in which faith was to be expressed. Before he left the earth he ordained a specific act in which man must express his faith, and in expressing it come to Christ. A burial in baptism with Christ into death is the act ordained by Jesus and sealed by his blood in which man must express his faith in Christ. Every man who truly believes in Christ and desires to come to him must do it in the way Jesus directs it to he done. Faith leads the believer to do what Jesus commands to be done, and to come to him in his appointed way. We have no example in the Bible of God blessing a man for his faith before that faith had showed itself in a bodily act. There being no specific act in force during the life of Jesus, these people showed their faith in him by their earnest efforts to reach him.]

saith unto the sick of the palsy, Son, thy sins are forgiven. –Jesus speaks to him; he does not disdain him. He turns from all the great rabbis gathered there, he even interrupts his teaching, that he may speak to him. Such is the condescending love of Jesus. The word “son” among the Jews had a great variety of significations. It means literally a son; then a grandson; a descendant; an adopted son; a disciple, or one who is an object of tender affection–one who is to us as a son. In this place, it denotes affection, or kindness. [The Jews regarded all afflictions as the result of sins. Jesus saw the faith of these men, was willing to forgive his sins, so he kindly said, “Son, thy sins are forgiven.” The paralytic doubtless believed himself, but the faith of those bearing him was taken into account in the healing. Jesus is our model in all things. His tenderness and love for the unfortunate and erring are examples we should follow.] Luke says, “Man, thy sins are forgiven thee”; Matthew (Mat 9:2; Mat 9:6) says: “Son, be of good cheer; thy sins are forgiven.” “But that ye may know that the Son of man bath authority on earth to forgive sins (then saith he to the sick of the palsy), Arise, and take up thy bed, and go unto thy house.” Thus he demonstrates his power to forgive sins. Jesus healed the man by removing the cause that produced the affliction. He had been brought there on his bed, helpless; he returns home carrying his bed in his arms.

6 But there were certain of the scribes–[These scribes were the Pharisees and doctors of the law which Luke 5 : tells came out of every village of Galilee and Judea and Jerusalem. These scribes originally were those who kept the records, copied the law, studied it, became skilled in its explanation, so were called doctors of the law. Smith’s Bible Dictionary says: “The special training for the office of scribe began, probably, about the age of thirteen. The boy who was destined by his parents for the calling of a scribe went to Jerusalem and applied for admission into the school of some learned doctor.” This shows the office had come to embrace doctors of the law, or those who explained its teachings and taught the traditions. Scribes were Levites. The classes here mentioned were the leaders in religious teaching among the Jews, and had come to Capernaum attracted by the reports concerning the works of Jesus to examine into and report on them. They were those naturally most unfavorable to him and his claims, as the religious are more jealous than the common people of new theories and leaders. They were reasoning in their hearts, watching to catch him.]

sitting there, and reasoning in their hearts,–These scribes, acting as spies, were probably occupying prominent seats near Jesus where they could catch every word. Matthew (9:3) adds: “Said within themselves.” They were secretly and deliberately considering and debating in their own hearts how to trap Jesus, unconscious that he perceived their own wicked thoughts and designs.

7 Why doth this man thus speak? he blasphemeth:–A very pertinent question, if he was only a man. [It would have been blasphemy for a mere man to claim to forgive sins. This was claiming a power that belongs only to God. So they, in their minds, decide it is blasphemy in Jesus to claim to forgive sins, and ask, “Who can forgive sins hut one, even God?” This was all done in their minds, no one speaking it openly. Jesus told them what they were thinking of to show his divine power, and thus introduce the more direct evidence to convince them of its truth.]

who can forgive sins but one, even God?—The answer is negative, none. They were correct in holding that it was God’s prerogative to forgive sins; but they failed to see in his teaching and wonderful works the manifestations of divinity in Christ. Their doctrine was true, but their application false. Their denying Christ of this power was blasphemy in them, none in him. They were the guilty parties, he the innocent one. In forgiving sins Jesus drew the issue squarely; he either blasphemed, or he was divine. On this issue Jesus purposed to stand or fall. By forgiving sins, he affirms he is divine. None can forgive sins but God, but he has his appointed means of forgiveness.

8 And straightway Jesus, perceiving in his spirit–By his own omniscient and divine spirit. He perceived it at once. Their hearts lay bare before his spiritual gaze.

that they so reasoned within themselves, saith unto them, Why reason ye these things in your hearts?–That is, in their hearts, but not expressing their thoughts in words. Mat 9:4 says, “Wherefore think ye evil in your hearts?” Their reasoning was evil because there had already been enough done by Jesus, of which they were doubtless cognizant, to show that God was with him and that, consequently, he could not be a sinner. [Jesus had continually shown his power to read the thoughts of men without their expressing them, so he asked them, “Why reason ye these things in your hearts?” Showing he discerned their secret thoughts was a step in proving he had more than human power that enabled him to read the secrets of men’s hearts. This was the evidence he brought to bear on Nathanael and the woman at the well of Samaria.]

Here Jesus gives some insight as to what the heart is and where it is located. Man is of a twofold nature–flesh and spirit–the inward man and the outward man. He is composed of body and spirit and is possessed with two hearts–the fleshly heart and the spiritual heart. The fleshly heart is a fleshly lobe located in the breast. It pumps to all the extremities of the human body the life-giving principle, the blood. This is its function. The spiritual heart is located in the spiritual man, and from it flows the life-giving principles to the inner man, the spirit and principles of Christ. This is the heart that undergoes a change in conversion. The fleshly heart located in the breast undergoes no change in man’s conversion or turning to God. It is the same heart after that it was before conversion. It has undergone no change whatsoever. Not so with the spiritual heart. It has undergone a change. It has been changed from an impure to a pure heart. We may learn what the spiritual heart is from what it does. (1) It understands. “Apply thy heart to understanding.” (Prow. 2:2.) Should “understand with their heart.” (Mat 13:15.) (2) It reasons. “Why reason ye these things in your hearts?” (Mar 2:8.) (3) It thinks. “Wherefore think ye evil in your hearts?” (Mat 9:4.) (4) It desires. “Brethren, my heart’s desire.” (Rom 10:1.) (5) It believes. “With the heart man believeth unto righteousness.” (Rom 10:10.) (6) It purposes. “And he exhorted them all, that with purpose of heart they would cleave unto the Lord.” (Act 11:23.) (7) It condemns. For “if our heart condemn us.” (1Jn 3:20.) (8) It obeys. “Ye became obedient from the heart to that form of teaching.” (Rom 6:17.) It is clear that the physical heart located in the human breast cannot do the things here ascribed to the heart in the Bible, and therefore it is not the heart to be changed in turning to God.

[In opposing one extreme there is always danger of running into the other. The religious people around us hold that the emotions and the fleshly feelings constitute the heart to the exclusion of the mental, moral, and willing powers. In opposing these, many run to the other extreme and claim that the intellect is the heart. This is as erroneous and as hurtful as to make the emotions the heart. The fleshly heart is the center and active force in stirring and using all the faculties of the fleshly body. Without the activity of the heart the eyes could not see, nor the ears hear, nor the brain think. The eye is not the body or the fleshly heart, yet it is a faculty of both; so are all the senses and organs of the body. Within the fleshly body dwells the spiritual body. That body has faculties, members, and organs, just as the fleshly body has; only they are spiritual faculties and organs. The mind, the emotions, the volitions are all members or organs of the spiritual body, but no one of them is the body. The spiritual heart is the center and life of this spiritual body and directs and uses these faculties. The heart is frequently used to represent the whole inner or spiritual man. It thinks through the mind; loves or hates through its emotions; sees, wills, and purposes through the volition; and believes and trusts, decides and acts, through the harmonious action of all its faculties. Common experience ought to show that the mind alone is not the spiritual heart. Many things are memorized and retained in the mind that the heart does not take hold of at all;they do not arouse the emotions or volutions, consequently do not affect the heart. The mind perceives, discriminates, and decides what is true or false; carries this decision to the heart; and the heart believes or disbelieves. The Bible nowhere says the mind believes; the heart believes, and the scriptures require that the gospel shall be believed with the whole heart. This means the intellect approves, the emotions lay hold of the truth, and the volition, or will, acts on it. Needless prejudice has been excited and great harm has been done by saying that to believe with the heart is a mere mental perception or acknowledgment of the truth. The heart, properly speaking, embraces the mind, the emotions, and the will. Sometimes, to make sure the things spoken were understood, or to give emphasis, the heart and the parts of which the heart is composed are all mentioned. We sometimes say: “A man is buried head and ears.” The ears constitute a part of the head. We sometimes say: “The man, soul, mind, and body.” Each of these constitutes a part or member of the body to show the office of each is recognized;but to especially impress that all are spoken of the specific use or office of each part or member is meant, all the parts are mentioned. A man that really thinks the heart, spoken of as affected by our faith and our relations to God, is the lobe of flesh in our body is hardly accountable. “Thy word have I laid up in my heart, that I might not sin against thee” (Psa 119:11) is an allusion of the puzzling declaration in 1Jn 3:9 : “Whosoever is begotten of God doeth no sin, . . . because he is begotten of God.” Connect with this the declaration of the Savior (Luk 8:11): “The seed is the word of God.” This manifests that the word of God is the seed of the kingdom which is implanted in the heart. While that seed is hid, covered up in the heart, the man cannot intentionally engage in sin. The heart means something more than the mind in this connection. The heart in the physical man is the common receptacle of the blood distilled from the food, received by the continual action of all the organs for receiving and assimilating food for invigorating the body. It not only receives this blood from the divers organs, but it is the distributing center by and from which the blood is distributed to the different members of the body, supplying life, warmth and strength to enable each member to perform its proper work. So in the spiritual man, the spiritual heart is that faculty that receives the impression, thoughts, affects, desires of the human soul and molds them into one supreme controlling purpose and end through which it strengthens all the faculties of soul, mind, and spirit to courageous activity in the attainment of that end. The word of God enfolded in this heart, in this receptacle, this distributing center of spiritual life, guides the soul so that it sins not. It cannot sin while the word of God enveloped in this heart is the guiding and controlling principle. Of the same purport, precisely, is the declaration concerning the righteous; “the law of his God is in his heart, none of his steps shall slide.” (Psa 37:31.) When God’s law is in the heart of a man, it makes him wise and though he walk through slippery places, his steps shall not slide. “And Jehovah helpeth them, and rescueth them: he rescueth them from the wicked, and saveth them, because they have taken refuge in him.” (Psa 37:40.)

9 Which is easier, to say to the sick of the palsy, Thy sins are forgiven; or to say, Arise, and take up thy bed, and walk?–[He intimates that one who could heal by his word the sick of the palsy could forgive sins. This is true not because the healing was necessarily equal to forgiving sins. The power to heal by his word showed God was with him. (Joh 3:2.) He was divine, and if he was divine he could not lie about his power to forgive sins. Then he asked, is it easier to say to the sick of the palsy, “Thy sins are forgiven thee,” or to say, “Arise, and take up thy bed, and walk?” The power to do this showed the power to do that. One could be manifested to the eyes of those present, the other could not be.] Here are two perplexing questions which the scribes made no attempt to answer. They could not without condemning themselves, so they preferred to keep silent.

10 But that ye may know–And thus never be excusable again in such accusations, mental or spoken. [He proposed by working a miracle they could all see, and about which there could be no doubt, to show that he possessed divine power. God was with him, and hence he had power to forgive sins.]

that the Son of man hath authority–This is the first mention by Mark of that phrase which Jesus applied to himself as a name oftener than any other. [He called himself the “Son of man” alluding to the fact that he took on himself the nature of a man. He called himself “the Son of man,” owned that he was human, and depended on his works to prove he was divine, the Son of God. “The works that I do in my Father’s name, these bear witness of me.” (Joh 10:25.) “If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not. But if I do them, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father.” (Joh 10:37-38.) The works he did were such as only God could do, so for him to do the works that God only could do showed God was in him.]

on earth to forgive sins (he saith to the sick of the palsy), –He not only has power in heaven to forgive sins, but he had it on earth where sins are committed. Pardon takes place where the pardoning power is. He had this power while on earth, and had the right to exercise it, and did so. He carried this authority and power with him to heaven. All pardoning power is now in heaven. Men pardoned are on earth, but pardon takes place in heaven–in the mind of God.

11 I say unto thee, Arise, take up thy bed, and go unto thy house.–[The command was that he who could not walk, who was so helpless he had to be borne upon the bed by the four persons, should before their eyes arise, take up the bed on which he had been borne, and go his way to his home. To do this would show a wonderful change in his condition, and to do it at the word of Jesus would show he had power to work miracles, which no one save God could do. The works would prove God was in him and he in God.]

12 And he arose, and straightway took up the bed, and went forth before them all;–[In doing what was commanded the power of God helped him. The work he did proved God was with Jesus. All the fullness of the Godhead dwelled bodily in him (Col 2:9)–that is, the fullness of the power and majesty of the Godhead dwelled in Jesus Christ. In his bodily form all of its majesty and power dwelled. Hebrews (Heb 1:3) says of Jesus: “Who being the effulgence of his glory, and the very image of his substance, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had made purification of sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high.” These works of Jesus declared to the world the power he possessed from God. He gave these testimonies that God was in him and he in God to show he had power to forgive sins. Miracles showed God was with and in him.] The last minute for the final test of the claim of Jesus having authority to forgive sins on earth has arrived. Doubtless all eyes were centered on the paralytic. It is not easy to imagine the suspense with which both the enemies and friends of Jesus must have awaited the result. Had the paralytic failed to obey the command, the claims of the new religious teacher were refuted by the test of his own choosing. But “he arose,” not by slow degrees, but “straightway,” without delay, and “took up the bed, and went forth before them all.” Thus a victory for the claims of “the Son of man” was won. Luke (Luk 5:25) tells us that the man went forth, “glorifying God.” It needs this to make the picture complete.

insomuch that they were all amazed,–Matthew and Luke say that they were “afraid.” The presence of a being of such power in their midst filled them with dread. What might he not do next? They probably felt like Peter, when he said “Depart from me; for I am a sinful man, O Lord.”

and glorified God,–Whether the scribes participated is not certain, though the “all” may be literal, and take them in. Matthew specifies “the multitudes,” which may leave them out. At all events, they did not long continue in this frame of mind for they soon gave their voice against Jesus and he was led to the cross and crucified.

saying, We never saw it on this fashion.–[When the people saw how he healed the palsied man and gave him health and strength, they were amazed greatly. It was new and wonderful. They glorified God, gave him the honor and credit of the healing done by saying, “We never saw it on this fashion.” Hence he was not of man. It was above man. Matthew (Mat 9:8) says: “But when the multitudes saw it, they were afraid, and glorified God, who had given such authority unto men.” Luke (Luk 5:26) says: “And amazement took hold on all, and they glorified God; and they were filled with fear, saying, We have seen strange things today.” This shows that people may love to see the works of God, wonder and admire, and yet not be benefited. It proves that great works and wonders before people will not help them unless they wish to serve God. Notwithstanding this fear and amazement and this ascribing glory to Jesus as having God with him, they did not become disciples of Jesus, and all these works and wonders in their presence became the ground of their deeper condemnation.]

The true end of the miracle was reached when God was glorified by the man and the people, and not till then. See that you give God the glory of all work done, all results achieved. They knew not that, in glorifying God, they glorified Jesus.

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary

A great principle of the exercise of power by the Master is revealed in the words, “When He saw their faith.” There can be no doubt that the word “their” includes the whole party, both the man himself and those who brought him.

From the house to the seashore He passed, and the multitudes followed Him. Rapidly and forcefully the story of Levi is told. Called to follow. All abandoned. A feast made, and Jesus the principal Guest, with many of Levi’s friends and associates present. Again the scribes and Pharisees were exercised. “He eateth and drinketh with publicans and sinners.” The Master’s words explain the whole meaning of His sociability. He went to the feast of the publican as a Physician, to heal.

A third question on observance of the Sabbath was raised because the disciples had plucked ears of corn on that day. Our Lord replied:

1. The Sabbath is universal, not Jewish, “the Sabbath was made for man.”

2. Jesus claimed it as His own. “The Son of man is Lord even of the Sabbath.”

3. There are circumstances in which it is permissible to break the letter of the Sabbath law.

“Did ye never read what David did, when he had need, . . . ?”

4. Any application of the Sabbath law which operates to the detriment of man is out of harmony with divine purpose. “The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath.”

Fuente: An Exposition on the Whole Bible

THE CHARGE OF BLASPHEMY

2:1-12. Jesus return to Capernaum. Healing of a paralytic. Jesus announces the cure as a forgiveness of the sins which have produced the disease. The Scribes protest against this blasphemy. Jesus defends his claim to forgive sins, and proves it in this case by the cure.

Immediately after the return of Jesus to Capernaum, the crowd gathers again in such numbers as to prevent access to him. But four men bringing to him a paralytic, not to be turned back, gain access to the roof of the house in which he was, tear up the roof, and let the paralytic down. In healing him Jesus says, Thy sins are forgiven, meaning the sins that have produced the disease. The Scribes, who make their first appearance here, protest against this as blasphemy. Jesus meets their charge by showing that forgiveness is here only another name for cure. But he asserts his right to forgive sins, and proves it by the cure.

1. -And having entered again it was heard.

, instead of , Tisch. Treg. WH. RV. BDgr L 28, 33, 124, mss. of Lat. Vet. Memph. etc. Omit before Tisch. Treg. WH. RV. BL 28, 33, 124, mss. of Lat. Vet. Memph. etc.

-again. See 1:21. It is a peculiarity of Mk. that he notes the recurrence of scenes and places in his narrative. Lk. uses this word only twice, and Mt. uses it almost entirely to denote the different parts of discourse, not the recurrence of the same, or similar occasions. -after (some) days.1 -in the house, or at home.2

, instead of , Tisch. Treg. WH. BDL 33, 67, most mss. of Lat. Vet. Vulg.

2. -and many were gathered together.

Omit Tisch. (Treg.) WH. RV. BL 33, mss. of Lat. Vet. Vulg. Memph. Pesh.

-so that not even the parts towards the door (on the outside) would hold them any longer. Not only was the house too small for the crowd, but not even outside, near the door, was there room for them.1 -and he was speaking. The imperf. denotes what he was doing when the bearers of the paralytic came. AV. preached. RV. spake. -the word. The word of the Gospel, or glad tidings of the kingdom of God, with the accompanying call to repentance. See 1:14, 15.2

3. -a paralytic.3

4. -And as (they saw that) they were unable to bring him to him. shows that their inability is not viewed simply as a fact, but in their view of it, as it influenced their minds.4

, instead of , Tisch. Treg. marg. WH. RV.marg. BL 33, 63, 72 marg. 253, two mss. Lat. Vet. Vulg. Memph. Harcl. etc.

-they unroofed the roof. Uncovered, EV., does not render the paronomasia of the Greek.5 -having dug it out. This describes the process of unroofing. It would imply probably some sort of thatched roof. -they let down the pallet. The noun denotes any slight bed, such as might be used to carry the sick about the streets, a stretcher.6 -where (on).

, instead of Tisch. Treg. WH. BDL two mss. Lat. Vet.

The roofs of Eastern houses were flat. Access to the roof would be easy by an outside stairway or ladder. The description, moreover, implies that this house had only one story, according with what we know of the humble position and means of Jesus and his followers.

5. -their faith. That is, the faith of the paralytic and his friends. That it was their faith, and not simply his faith, would show several things. First, that faith is not the psychological explanation of the cure, through the reaction of the mind on the body, in which case, the faith of the others would have nothing to do with it,-but the spiritual condition of the miracle. This is also shown by the cure of demoniacs. Secondly, that Jesus meant here by the forgiveness of the mans sins only this removal of the physical consequences of some sin affecting the nervous organization. The removal of the spiritual penalty would be conditioned on the faith of the man himself. However, this is simply the reflection of the writer on the facts. And it is in the narration of facts, that the value of contemporaneous witness appears. In the historical judgment of the Gospels, this distinction between facts and reflections has frequently to be remembered. , -Child (EV. Son.), thy sins are forgiven.

, instead of , Tisch. Treg. WH. B 28, mss. of Lat. Vet. Vulg. Pesh. Harcl.

6. -of the Scribes.1 This is the first encounter of Jesus with the formalists and dogmatists of his time. So also in Mt. and Lk. And the matter in controversy, the extraordinary claims of Jesus, was sure to become an issue between them. The opposition to Jesus is easily explained. -debating in their hearts. , in the N.T., does not denote, like our word heart, the seat of the affections, but the inner man generally, and more specifically, the mind. This corresponds to the Homeric use, the common Greek use being like ours.

7. ; .-Why does this one speak thus? he blasphemes.

, instead of , Tisch. Treg. WH. RV. BDL mss. of Lat. Vet. Vulg. Memph.

is used of any speech derogatory to the Divine majesty. The generic sense of the word is injurious speech, among men, slander. In this case, the supposed blasphemy consists in the assumption of the Divine prerogative. ; except one, God? This is a good example of the ill usage that good principles receive at the hands of men who deal only with rules and formulas. As a general proposition, this statement of the Scribes is undeniable. The difficulty is, that they ignored the possibility of a mans speaking for God, and the fact that they had before them one in whom this power was lodged preminently.2

8. -in his spirit. This is contrasted with the knowledge acquired through the senses, e.g. in this case, by hearing what was said. Without their saying anything, he knew inwardly, intuitively, what was going on in their minds. Jesus knew generally their intellectual attitude, and their position towards any attempt to live according to the spirit, instead of the letter of things, and the mere look of their faces would put him on the track of their thoughts. -says to them.

, instead of , Tisch. Treg. WH. RV. BL 33, mss. of Lat. Vet. Vulg.

9. ; Which is easier?1 Jesus does not make the contrast here between healing and forgiving, but between saying be forgiven and be healed. The two things would be themselves coincident, and the difference therefore would be only between two ways of saying the same thing. The disease being a consequence of the mans sin, the cure would be a remission of penalty. -Thy sins are forgiven.

, instead of , Tisch. Treg. WH. B 28, mss. of Lat. Vet. Vulg. Pesh. Harcl. instead of , Tisch. Treg. WH. RV. BEFGHKL, etc. , instead of , Tisch. LWc , and , D 33, mss. of Lat. Vet. A difficult case to decide, as may be taken from Mt. and Lk., and from v. 11.

10. -but that ye may know. Here was an opportunity to put his power to a practical test. As a general thing, the power to forgive sins admits of no such test, but only of those finer inward tests by which a change of spiritual condition and relation becomes known. But here the forgiveness was manifested in an outward change, making itself known in cure, as the sin had discovered itself in disease. -authority, or right. This is the proper meaning, rather than power, and it evidently fits this case.

-the Son of Man. This is a Messianic title, the use of which is to be traced to the Messianic interpretation of Dan 7:13-27. In the post-canonical Jewish literature, it appears several times in the Book of Enoch.2 It is the favorite title applied by Jesus to himself in the Synoptical Gospels, Son of God being used by Jesus himself only in the fourth Gospel.3 In the passage in Dan., the prophet sees in vision a fifth power succeeding the four great world-powers, only this is in his vision like a son of man, while the preceding powers have been represented as beasts. And in the interpretation that follows (see especially v. 18, 22, 27) this power is said to be the kingdom of the saints of the Most High. But later, when the hopes of the people were concentrated finally on a Messianic king, this passage was given Messianic interpretation, and Son of Man came to be a Messianic title, though not so distinctive, not so commonly accepted, as the name Messiah. The choice of it by Jesus was partly for this reason. To have called himself plainly the Messiah would have precipitated a crisis, forcing the people to decide prematurely on his claim. And it is evident from the doubt of the people, not only about what he was, but in regard to this very point, what he himself claimed to be, that the title used by him familiarly was indecisive. However, there can be little doubt, that the reason for the choice of the name Son of Man lay deeper than this, and is to be found in the significance of the name itself, aside from its historic sense. Everywhere, Jesus uses the Messianic phraseology of his time, but rarely limits himself to its current meaning. This name, Son of Man, was to the Jews a Messianic title, only that and nothing more. But Jesus fastens upon it because it identified him with humanity, and owing to the generic use of the word Man in it, with the whole of humanity. His chosen title, as well as his life, showed that his great desire was to impress on us his brotherhood with man.

-upon the earth. Contrasted with the power of God to forgive sins in heaven. Of course, the power to forgive sins, involved in the mere cure of diseases resulting from them, is in itself small. But the significance of these words lies in the unity of our Lords work implied in them. As the redeemer and deliverer of mankind, he is appointed to cope with the whole power of evil among men, to strike at its roots, as well as its twigs and branches, and at its effects, as well as its causes. And the whole is so far the one power trusted to him, that one part becomes the sign of the other.

11. -This is to be connected with , the clause being parenthetical. This is what he says in order to put his power to forgive sins to a test. , -arise, take up.1

Omit before Tisch. Treg. WH. RV. BCDgr L 13, 28, 33, mss. of Lat. Vet. Memph. Pesh.

12. , -And he arose, and immediately having taken went out before.

, instead of , Tisch. Treg. WH. RV. BC*L 33, Memph. , instead of , Tisch. Treg. marg. WH. BL 187 marg.

The , before all, is introduced to show the publicity attending Jesus proof of his power. There was a great crowd of people, Jesus had performed his miracle in distinct answer to a challenge of his authority, and the cure was therefore purposely public. It contrasts therefore with Jesus ordinary reserve in the performance of his miracles, and with his depreciation of their testimony to his mission. And one significance of the event lies in this indication of his varying method, and of his power to include all the facts in the broad range of his action. -were amazed.1 -glorified God.2 -we saw.3

, instead of , Tisch. Treg. WH. CD. The unusual form determines the probability of this reading.

CONSORTING WITH SINNERS

13-17. The call of Levi the tax-gatherer. Jesus answers the charge of consorting with this and other obnoxious classes, many of whom had eaten with him.

This is the second cause of offence. The scene changes from the house to the shore of the lake, where Jesus finds Levi, a tax-gatherer, at the customs station. He calls this representative of a despised class into the inner circle of his disciples, and follows this up by entertaining at his house many of the same, and of the class of open sinners generally. Again it is the scribes who, attack him for this open association with outcasts. Jesus answers that he is a physician, and his business is with the sick.

13. -to the side of the sea. This differs from , which denotes motion by the side of, whereas this is motion to the side of. -again.4 The only previous event at the lakeside had been the call of the four disciples, 1:16 sq. The week following, Jesus had gone on a tour through Galilee; and now, on his return, he resorts to his usual place again. Capernaum and the shore of the lake were the scenes of his ministry. , -resorted to him, and he was teaching them. The impfts. here denote the acts in their progress, the gradual gathering of the crowd, and Jesus discourse as they came and went.5

14. -Levi, the son of Alphus. So Luk 5:27. In Mat 9:9, however, where the same event is told in almost identical language, , Matthew, is substituted for Levi. The two are to be identified, therefore, as different names of the same person.

Alphus is also the name of the father of James the less. But as Matthew and James are not associated in any list of the apostles, there is no sufficient reason for identifying this Alphus with the other.

, not in the toll-house, but near it. See Thay.-Grm. Lex. denotes the place in which the customs were collected. It is a late Greek word.1 -follow me. This is the common language of Jesus in summoning disciples to personal attendance on himself, which is evidently the meaning here. The apparent abruptness of the call, and the immediateness with which it is answered, are relieved of their strangeness by the fact that Jesus had now been teaching long enough to call the attention of men to himself, so that the summons probably brought to a crisis and decision thoughts already in Levis mind.

15. -And it comes to pass that he is reclining (at table).2

instead of , Tisch. Treg. WH. BL 33. Omit before -Tisch. Treg. WH. RV. BL 13, 33, 69, 102, 124, Memph.

-he was reclining at table in his house. Meyer, Holtzmann, and others say that this was the house of Jesus. This is contrary to the statement of Lk., who says expressly that Levi made him a great feast at his house. But the recurrence of the pronoun makes it reasonably certain that they refer to the same person. Mt. does not insert any pronoun after , and that makes his language point in the same direction. And the fact that Mt. and Mk. use different language, which nevertheless points to the same conclusion, makes that conclusion doubly certain. The connection between this event and the call of Levi is thus simply that both show Jesus revolutionary attitude towards the despised classes of his time.

-tax-gatherers. The name publicans, given them in our English Bible, comes from the Latin publicani, but in English it has become practically obsolete in that sense. Moreover, the Latin publicani does not apply to the whole class of tax-gatherers, but only to the Roman knights to whom the taxes were farmed out in the first instance.

-sinners; i.e. here, those guilty of crimes against society and law, the degraded and vicious class.1

-were reclining at table with.2

-disciples. The common word used to describe the followers of Jesus, corresponding to the title applied to him. It is significant, that the names teacher and pupil are chosen by Jesus and the disciples to describe the relations between them. It is probable, according to the best text, that the last two clauses of this verse are to be separated, so that the verse ends with .3 The statement is, that there were many of this class of open sinners. It does not denote the number present, which would be superfluous, but the number of the class. Holtzmann calls attention to the situation of Capernaum on the borders of the territory of Herod as the cause of the number of tax-gatherers, as this made it an important customs station. . .-the Scribes of the Pharisees. The Pharisees were the sect that adhered not only to the Law, but to the rabbinical interpretation of the Law, which gradually formed a traditional code by the side of the written Law. Their scribes, therefore, would be the rabbis of the party that specially believed in the rabbis. Morison is right in calling them the arch-inquisitors, the genus inquisitor being the Pharisees.

In the N.T., the use of is confined to the Gospels and Acts. In the Gospels, it is applied to the twelve, who formed the inner circle of disciples, as well as the larger group outside. In the Acts, it is the general name for Christians, the official title apostles being given to the twelve.

instead of , Tisch. Treg. WH. RV. BL mss. of Lat. Vet. Vulg.

16. () , () , , ; ( )-And there followed him also (the) Scribes of the Pharisees, and having seen that he eats with the sinners and tax-gatherers, they said to his disciples, Why does he eat (and drink) with the tax-gatherers and sinners?

, instead of , , Tisch. L 33. is the reading also of Treg. WH. RV. txt. Insert before also Treg. , instead of , WH. RV. B 33, mss. of Lat. Vet. Pesh. Memph. some edd. Tisch. Treg. DL mss. of Lat. Vet. Memph. edd. Harcl. , instead of the reverse order, Treg. WH. RV. BDL 33, mss. of Lat. Vet. and of Vulg., Memph. edd. Omit before Tisch. Treg. WH. RV. BL 33, 108, 246. * Omit (Treg. marg.) WH. RV.marg. BD mss. of Lat. Vet. etc.

( )-why does he eat (and drink) ?1 This charge of eating with tax-gatherers and sinners was fitted to discredit Jesus claim to be a rabbi, or teacher. For the Scribes and their followers would not even associate with the common people for fear of ceremonial defilement; much less with the vicious class, to eat with whom was an especial abomination. The tax-gatherers were classed with sinners, that is, with the vile and degraded, not only by the Jews, but all over the Roman Empire. The secret of this was, that the taxes were collected, not by the paid agents of the government, but by officers who themselves paid the government for the privilege, and then reimbursed themselves by extortion and fraud. They let it out to others, and these to still a third class, who were selected generally from the inhabitants of the province, because their knowledge of the people would expedite the work. This last is the class called in N.T., and the unpatriotic nature of their employment was added to its extortionate methods, placing them under a double ban.

17. -they that are strong. EV. whole. The contrast expressed figuratively by strong and sick is given literally in the latter part of the verse in the terms righteous and sinners. Jesus justifies his conduct in associating with sinners, from the point of view of the Pharisees themselves. Admitting them to be righteous and the publicans to be sinners, his office of physician put him under obligation to the sick rather than the strong. But he shows elsewhere that he does not admit this distinction. The Pharisees were extortionate as well as the publicans; they devoured widows houses; but they added to their wickedness by assuming a cloak of respectability, and thanking God that they were not as other men. The publicans, on the other hand, had the grace of honesty, and by their acknowledgment of sin, fulfilled the first condition of cure.

-but sinners.

Omit , unto repentance, Tisch. Treg. WH. RV. ABDKL mss. of Lat. Vet. Vulg. Memph. Pesh. Harcl. etc.

This omission leaves to be explained. It means to invite or summon; but to what? The answer is to be found by following out the terms of the figure. As a physician, Jesus summons sick souls to be cured. Or, dropping this figure, as a Saviour, he summons sinners to be saved. Owing to the blindness of men, the ordinary relation between them is reversed. Instead of the sick summoning the physician, it is here the physician who has to call the sick.

NONCONFORMITY IN MATTER OF FASTING

18-22. Jesus answers the complaint of the Pharisees and of the disciples of John that his disciples do not fast.

The third ground of complaint is the failure of the disciples, under the influence of the free spirit of Jesus, to observe the frequent fasts prescribed by the Pharisees as a part of their formalism, and by the disciples of John as a part of their asceticism. Jesus answer is divided into two parts. The first shows the incongruousness of fasting at a time when joy, and not sorrow, was the ruling feeling of the disciples, v. 18-20. The second shows the incongruousness of such observances as fasting with the new dispensation set up by our Lord. It is the incongruity of new and old.

18. -the disciples of John and the Pharisees.

, instead of , Tisch. Treg. WH. RV. ABCD mss. of Lat. Vet. Vulg. Memph. Harcl. txt. etc.

-were fasting.1 Fasting, as a religious observance, was prescribed in the Law only once in the year, on the great day of atonement. But the traditional code of the rabbis had multiplied this indefinitely. Twice in the week was the boast of the Pharisee. And the importance attached to this empty piece of religiosity made it a part of the formal religion of the period. -and they come, viz. the disciples of John and the Pharisees.

Mat 9:14 names only the former. Luk 5:33 makes this a part of the preceding controversy with the Pharisees and Scribes, in which they call attention to the practice of the disciples of John and of the Pharisees.

-the disciples of the Pharisees.

Insert before Tisch. Treg. marg. WH. RV. BC* L 33, mss. of Lat. Vet. Harcl. marg.

The disciples of the Pharisees is a singular expression, much as if one should speak of the disciples of the Platonists. The Pharisees were themselves disciples of the Scribes, or Rabbis. The disciples of John and of the Pharisees were at one in regard to the act of fasting, but not in the spirit of the act. The Pharisees fasted in a formal, self-righteous spirit, and the teaching of John was directed against this spirit. So far as the fasting of his disciples reflected the teaching of John and his spirit, it would be a part of the asceticism, the mortification of the body, characteristic of him.

19. . 1-sons of the bridechamber. A Hebraistic form of expression by which , with the genitive of a thing, denotes a person who stands in intimate relation of some kind to that thing. The sons of the bridechamber were friends of the bridegroom, whose duty it was to provide for the nuptials whatever was necessary. The principle contained in this analogy is that fasting is not a matter of prescription, but of fitness. If you set times for fasting, the circumstances of the set time may be such as to produce joy, instead of sorrow, and so make your fasting out of place. Fasting, i.e., is an expression of feeling, and is out of place unless the feeling is there which it is intended to express. But it is a matter, not only of feeling, but of fitness. If the circumstances of the time are such as to make sorrow the fit feeling, then it is a fit time for fasting also. -they cannot fast. This is said, of course, not of the outward act, which is possible at any time; but of fasting in the only sense in which it becomes a religious act, or the expression of the feeling to which it is appropriated. It is as much as to say, in a time of gladness it is impossible to mourn.

20. -It is evident here that Jesus, still keeping to the figure, points forward to the time when he shall be taken away from the disciples, and then, he declares, will be the time for them to fast. This is the first time that he has prophesied of his taking away, but we can see that even as a premonition it is not premature, because of the revolutionary character of his teaching. He had already brought on himself the charge of blasphemy, consorted with publicans, one of whom he had introduced into the immediate circle of his disciples, and shown his indifference to the strict law of fasting. And he knew that there was much more of the same kind in reserve. -whenever. The expression leaves the time of the taking away indefinite. -in that day. Days and that day in this verse are simply a case of oratio variata, both denoting in a general way a period of time.

instead of the plural, Tisch. Treg. WH. RV. ABCDKL mss. of Lat. Vet. Pesh. Harcl. etc.

21. , -no one sews a patch of undressed cloth on an old garment; otherwise the new filling of the old takes from it.

Omit before Tisch. Treg. WH. RV. ABCKLS D 1. 13, 33, 69, mss. of Lat. Vet. Memph. Vulg. Pesh. Harcl. etc. , instead of dat., Tisch. Treg. WH. RV. BCDL 33. , instead of , Tisch. WH. RV. BL, also A 33.

The RV. translates else that which should fill it up taketh from it, the new from the old. But this seems to require a repetition of the prep. before . is in apposition with , so that it would read literally, the filling takes from it, the new of the old. The substitution of unfulled for new is necessary to make the parable an exact fit. It is the shrinking of the undressed cloth that strains and tears the old cloth to which it is sewed.

22. , , -and no one puts new wine into old skins; else the wine will burst the skins, and the wine is destroyed, and the skins.

instead of , Tisch. Treg. WH. RV. BCDL 33, mss. of Lat. Vet. Vulg. Omit after , Tisch. Treg. WH. RV. BC* DL 13, 69, 242, 258, 301, mss. Lat. Vet. Vulg. Memph. Pesh. etc. , instead of , , after , Tisch. Treg. WH. RV. BL. Memph. Omit the clause Tisch. (Treg. WH.) D mss. of Lat. Vet. Omit only (Treg.) WH. RV. * B. The omission is more in Mk.s manner, and it looks as if the clause was borrowed from Lk., where it is undoubted.

The substitution of skins for bottles, AV., is necessary to make the parable tell its story. The skins rot with age, and the new wine, as it ferments, bursts them.

These analogies, among the homeliest and aptest used by our Lord, are a further answer to the question why his disciples do not fast. For this is evidently the part of the question which it is intended that he should answer, not why the disciples of John do fast.1 Nor is it simply a repetition of the preceding, showing the incongruity of fasting at this time under another figure.2 But it generalizes, showing the incongruity of the class of things with which fasting belongs with the new life of Christianity. The general teaching is that the new teachings and the old forms do not belong together. But this is expressed in the two parables in different ways. In the first, it is the unfitness of piecing out the old religion with the new, like a new patch on an old garment. In the second, it is the unwisdom of putting the new religion into the old forms. The whole is an anticipation of St. Pauls teaching that Christianity is not a mere extension of Judaism, and that Jewish laws are not binding upon Christians. Dr. Morison sees in the figures employed by Jesus only an expression of the incongruity of fasting at a time better adapted to feasting. But this would be simply a repetition of the preceding teaching contained in the figure of the wedding, and not so apt an expression of it either. The principle of this interpretation is a good one, that it is well to seek in each parable the single point of comparison, and there stop. Here the single idea is that of incongruity. But surely the figure of the wedding has brought out not simply the idea of incongruity, but the special unfitness of this particular act. And it is no violation, therefore, of the rule of interpretation to make these other comparisons not merely suggest the general idea of incongruity, but show also the special incongruity involved. In the figure of the wedding, it is the incongruity of fasting and joy that is pointed out; in these figures, it is the incongruity of new and old. The old religion attempted to regulate conduct by rules and forms, the new by principles and motives, and these are foreign, the one to the other. It is not fasting to which objection is taken, but fasting according to rule, instead of its inherent principle. As a piece of legalism, or asceticism, in which fasting per se becomes of moral obligation, it is incongruous with the free spirit of Christianity.

ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE SABBATH

23-28. Jesus defends his disciples for plucking ears of grain on the Sabbath.

The fourth ground of complaint is the violation of the law of the Sabbath. Jesus and his disciples are going through the grain-fields on the Sabbath, and the disciples, careless of the strict Sabbatism of the Pharisees, pluck the ears of grain and eat them. Evidently there was the usual crowd following him, and the Pharisees attack this act as unlawful. In the first part of his reply, Jesus argues from an analogous case the admissibility of infringing the law to satisfy hunger. In the second part, he shows the nature of the law itself, that it is the servant of man, and not man the servant of the law, involving the lordship of the Son of Man over the law.

23. -sown fields. -began, as they went, to pluck, EV. This is the translation naturally suggested by the context, as it prepares the way for Jesus explanation of their conduct by the parallel case of David. But the phrase does not mean to make way in the sense of merely going along or advancing, but to make a road. The middle, however, has the former sense. Moreover, this translation makes the participle, instead of the verb, express the principal thought. On the other hand, the translation, to make a road by plucking the ears, besides making Jesus answer quite unintelligible, presents an absurd way of making a road. You can make a path by plucking the stalks of grain, but you would make little headway, if you picked only the ears or heads of the grain. There are two ways of explaining this. We can take in its proper sense, but make the participle denote merely concomitant action, not the means or method. They began to break a path (by treading down or plucking up the stalks of grain that obstructed their path), meanwhile plucking and eating the ears that grew on them. Or we can minimize the difficulties in the way of the ordinary interpretation, without doing much violence to the laws of speech. Surely, in a language so careless of nice distinctions as the N.T. Greek, it is not difficult to suppose that an active may be substituted for the middle. And there seems to be no doubt that the active is used in this sense in Jdg 17:8. And as for making the principal and subordinate clauses exchange places, in this case the peculiarity is not so great. They began to go along, plucking the ears is not so very different from they began, going along, to pluck.

24. -what is not lawful. The Sabbath law is meant, which forbids work on that day. The casuistry of the rabbinical interpreter found here its most fruitful field in drawing the line between work and not-work, and managed to get in its most ingenious and absurd refinements. But the great difficulty, as with all their work, is that they managed so to miss the very spirit and object of the law, that they made its observance largely a burden, instead of a privilege. Whenever they speak of that which is lawful, or unlawful, their standard is not simply the written law, but this traditional interpretation of it. In the same way, we can conceive of men now accepting the Bible as their standard, and yet admitting to an equal authority an interpretation of it contained in creed or confession, and really referring to this when they use the terms, Biblical or unbiblical.

25. -And he says.

Omit Tisch. Treg. WH. RV. BCL 33, 69, mss. of Lat. Vet. Vulg. Memph. etc. , says, instead of , said, Tisch. Treg. WH. RV. CL 33, 69, mss. of Lat. Vet. Memph. etc.

26. -the house of God is a generic term that would apply either to the tent or tabernacle in which the Jews at first worshipped, or to the later temple. Here, of course, the former. It was called the house of God, because in a sense God dwelt there, manifesting his presence in the inner shrine, the Holy of Holies.

-in the high-priesthood of Abiathar.

Omit before Tisch. Treg. marg. WH. RV. BL etc.

In the account of this in 1Sa 21:1, sqq., Abimelech was high-priest, and Abiathar, his son, does not become high-priest until the reign of David. See ch. 22:21. To be sure, other passages in the O.T. make the same confusion of names, making Abimelech, the son of Abiathar, high-priest in Davids time. But this does not explain our difficulty; it only shows that there is the same difficulty in the O.T. account. Nor does it relieve it to suppose that this means simply that the event took place during the lifetime of Abiathar, not during the high-priesthood. For the transaction took place between David and the high-priest; and the object of introducing the name would be to show in whose high-priesthood it took place, not simply in whose lifetime. The impropriety would be the same as if one were to speak of something that took place between the Bishop of Durham and some other person in the time of Bishop Westcott, when, as a matter of fact, Lightfoot was bishop, and it was only during the lifetime of Bishop Westcott. And the phrase itself means strictly, during the high-priesthood of Abiathar. If such disagreement were uncommon, it would be worth while to try somewhat anxiously to remove this difficulty; but, as a matter of fact, discrepancies of this unimportant kind are not at all uncommon in the Scriptures.

-the bread of setting forth. It is a translation of the Hebrew, bread of the face, or presence, given to twelve loaves of bread set in two rows on the table in the holy place of the tabernacle, or temple, and renewed by the priests every Sabbath. S. Lev 24:5-9. The Greek name, taken from the Sept., denotes the bread set forth before God. The Hebrew name, about which there has been naturally much curious writing, seems to mean that the bread, in some way, symbolized Gods presence. -the priests.

, instead of , Tisch. Treg. marg. WH. BL.

is the subject of . The priests were allowed to eat the bread after it had been replaced by fresh loaves. In this case, there was no other bread, and when David and his hungry men appeared, it became a case of physical need against ritual law. Jesus cites it as a case decided by a competent authority and accepted by the people, showing the superiority of natural law to positive enactment, the same principle involved in the alleged illegal action of his disciples. And he evidently upholds the correctness of the principle, and not simply the authority of this precedent.

27. -the Sabbath was made on account of man, not man on account of the Sabbath. This is introduced to show the supremacy of man over the Sabbath. The statement that the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath follows directly from this. If the law antedates man, having its seat in God, as the moral law does, it becomes a part of the moral constitution of things, resident in God, to which man is subservient. But if it is something devised by God for the uses of man, then the subserviency belongs to the law, and man can adapt it to his uses, and set it aside, or modify it, whenever it interferes with his good. The law of the Sabbath, if not moral, is either natural or positive. Regarded as natural law, the principle involved is that of rest, and this places it in the same category as the law of day and night. As positive, it is a matter simply of enactment, and not of principle. And in both aspects it is liable to exceptions. It is only moral law which is lord of man, and so inviolable.

28. -the noun is emphatic from its position. -also of the Sabbath, as well as of other things belonging to the life of man. This lordship, as we have seen, is true of everything else except moral law. Of that he would be administrator and interpreter, but not Lord. He would be ruler under the supreme law, but without the power to modify or set aside, as in the case of that which is made for man.

Weiss, Life of Jesus, contends that Jesus did not here, nor in fact anywhere, assume an attitude of independence towards the Jewish Law, but only towards the current traditional interpretation of it. But surely, the statement that the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath, puts the Sabbath law in a separate class, and subordinates it to the moral law. Whereas, the O.T. throughout, not only makes the Sabbath a matter of moral obligation, but of the highest moral obligation. Judaism is a system of rules, Christianity of principles. And so far forth as the Sabbath is a rule, that is, so far as it is Jewish, Jesus does abrogate it in these words. Weiss confuses matters by neglecting this distinction.

This early statement of Jesus lordship, and its use of the term Son of Man as his official title, is a good specimen of the way in which he tacitly assumed his Messianic character under this title, while the doubt in which the whole nation stood of his claim shows that he was not understood to make it formally.

THE PERIOD OF CONFLICT CONTINUED

The third chapter continues the account of the Period of Conflict. It contains matter, however, which belongs to the period, but not to the conflict. It shows us Jesus attended by larger crowds than ever, drawn by the report of his deeds from the whole country, as far south as Jerusalem, and as far north as Tyre and Sidon. The growth of hostility against him is thus shown to be accompanied by an access of popularity with the people. The combination of these two features seems to his family to make the situation so dangerous, and his own action so unwise, that they think him distraught and seek to restrain him. In the midst of this is introduced the account of the appointment of the apostles, evidently in the connection, as assistants to him in his increasing work. The occasions of conflict are, first, the healing of a man with a palsied arm on the Sabbath, causing a renewal of the Sabbath controversy, and secondly, the charge of the Scribes that he casts out demons through Beelzebul, and that he himself is possessed by that prince of the demons. He himself brings on the controversy about the Sabbath by his question whether the Sabbath is a day for good or evil deeds, for killing or healing. And the charge of collusion with the devil he meets with the question whether Satan casts out Satan.

Tisch. Tischendorf.

Treg. Tregelles.

WH. Westcott and Hort.

RV. Revised Version.

Codex Sinaiticus.

B Codex Vaticanus.

D Codex Ephraemi.

L Codex Regius.

28 Codex Regius.

33 Codex Regius.

Lat. Vet. Vetus Latina.

Memph. Memphitic.

1 See Win. 47, I. 64, 5.

2 The prep. with the anarthrous noun constitutes a phrase.

Vulg. Vulgate.

Pesh. Peshito.

1 is transitive and has for its subject. On the repetition of the negative, see Win. 55, 9, b. On the construction of with and the inf.-always so in N.T.-see Win. 55, 2, d.

AV. Authorised Version.

2 For other instances of this use of to denote in a general way the subject of Christian teaching, see 4:14-33, Luk 1:2.

3 This word belongs to Biblical Greek. The Greeks said .

4 See Win. 55, 5, g, .

marg. Revided Version marg.

Harcl. Harclean.

5 This is the only case of the use of this verb in the N.T.

6 commonly means to slacken, or relax, and to let down, when this involves slackening. is a late Greek word copied from the Latin grabatus. The Greeks said .

1 See on 1:22.

2 In J. 20:23, Jesus extends this power to his disciples.

1 is a late word, and is used in the N.T. only in this phrase, . The Greek word for which of two is . means strictly what, not which.

E Codex Basiliensis.

F Codex Borelli.

G Codex Wolfi A.

H Codex Wolfi B.

K Codex Cyprius.

Codex Sangallensis

2 For passages, see Thay.-Grm. Lex. For a discussion of the date of the allegories in which the Messianic portion of the book occurs, see Schrer, N.Zg. II. III. 32. 2. Schrer, on the whole, favors the pre-Christian date.

3 Son alone is used by Jesus in Mat 11:27, Mat 21:37, Mat 28:19, referring to the Divine Sonship in the theocratic sense.

1 is transitive, and the active is used here in the sense of the passive or middle. On the meaning of the verb, see on 1:31 footnote. In the passive or middle, in the sense peculiar to the N.T., the meaning is to rise from a reclining position.

C Codex Bezae.

13 Codex Regius.

1 In Greek, means to displace or alter, and sometimes by itself, but generally with , or , to put one beside himself, to derange. In the N.T., it is used always in the sense of amaze, or be amazed, except 3:21, 2Co 5:13, where the stronger meaning, to be distraught, reappears.

2 means properly to think, to have an opinion. To praise, or glorify, is the only N.T. use.

3 is sec. aor., with the vowel of the first aor.

4 See note on Mk.s use of , v. 1

5 Note the difference from the aor. which denotes the momentary past act.

Thay.-Grm. Thayers Grimm.

1 The repetition of the somewhat peculiar in Mt. and Lk. is a strong sign of the interdependence of the Synoptics.

2 , it comes to pass, that, is a periphrase not unknown to the Greek, but its frequent recurrence in the Synoptics is probably due to Hebrew usage.

69 Codex Leicestrensis.

102 Codex Bibliothecae Mediceae.

1 The word is rare in Greek writers.

2 The double compound is found, outside of Biblical Greek, only in Byzantine and ecclesiastical writers. itself belongs to later Greek, the earlier writers using and . See Thay.-Grm. Lex.

3 The insertion of before in v. 16 makes it necessary to connect with , instead of with .

1 is here the indirect interrogative, taking the place of the direct, a usage unknown to earlier Greek, but occurring a few times in the Sept. and N.T.

A Codex Alexandrinus.

1 with the part is a stronger form of expressing the idea of the impf. than the tense. It is characteristic of Mk., and belongs to the picturesqueness of his style.

1 is a Biblical word.

S Codex Vaticanus.

1 .Codex Basiliensis

1 So Weiss.

2 So Morison.

Codex Tischendorfianus

Fuente: International Critical Commentary New Testament

the Friend of Sinners

Mar 1:40-45; Mar 2:1-22

The leper, Mar 1:40-45. The news of Christ spread fast and far until it reached the outcasts from Jewish society, the very dregs of humanity. As the story of the wonderful miracles wrought by our Lord was pondered deeply by this man, He concluded that the only question which remained was that of Christs willingness to hear. As to His power there could be no doubt. But no one of all the religious world of that time had ever thought of extending a helping hand to such as he. Note the instantaneousness of our Lords response to this appeal. His love and power are commensurate; when you gauge the one, you have measured the other.

The paralytic, Mar 2:1-12. The disease had resulted from sin. It was necessary to deal with the soul before the body could be emancipated. As soon as we sin, Gods pardon awaits our asking for it, and of this fact our Lord gave the paralytic man definite assurance. Jesus right to speak was evidenced by His power to heal. If the latter was effectual, so was the former.

The sinners friend, Mar 2:13-22. They thought to coin a term of reproach, but they added a crown of glory. In eternity the Friend of sinners will surround His table with saved sinners who have become His guests.

Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary

Chapter Two The Work Of The Divine Servant Part One

Submitted by H A Ironside on Tue, 03/11/2008 – 05:00

Healing of the Palsied Man (Mar 2:1-12)

The Lords early Galilean ministry was still in progress, the events of Mark 2 following closely upon those of Mark 1. Capernaum was the center from which Jesus worked out to other parts of Galilee in the early summer or late spring of a.d. 28.

The presence of Jesus in any particular place soon became known, as on this occasion when the word went out that the great healer was again in the city that He had chosen for His home. Crowds filled the house where He was staying and pressed about the door as He proclaimed the message He had come from Heaven to deliver, the word of the kingdom. This was His chief mission during His three and a half years of ministry. Healing sick bodies was secondary, though to the people it doubtless seemed to be the most important. But sickness of the soul is far more serious than physical ill-health, and to bring to men the message of life is far more important than delivering them from bodily ailments.

One sick of the palsy, which was borne of four. Without help, this poor helpless paralytic could not make his way to Jesus, but he had four friends who were apparently firmly convinced that the Lord would give strength to the palsied limbs of the sick man. These energetic friends were determined not to fail in their endeavor to bring the afflicted sufferer directly to the wonderworking, compassionate Savior. Since they found all ordinary access to Jesus blocked by the crowd surging about the door, they carried him up onto the flat roof, generally reached by an outside stairway. There they lifted off the tiles and thatching and made a space so large that by passing cords under the pallet on which the paralytic lay, they could let the sick one down to where Jesus was teaching. One can imagine the stir and excitement of the people as the reclining man was carefully lowered to the very feet of Jesus. To Him it was no rude or unwarranted intrusion or interruption, but mute evidence of the faith of the five, who counted on Him to exercise His power on their behalf.

When Jesus saw their faith. Faith is evidenced by works. The four friends of the helpless man showed their faith by their works. Their persistence and energy demonstrated the reality of their faith in Jesus readiness to meet the need. Assured that their sick friend needed Jesus, they were determined that nothing would prevent his coming into the Saviors presence. Are we as much concerned about bringing our unconverted friends to Jesus as they were? It was a joy to Christ when He saw the faith of these men, for faith always glorifies God. He recognizes its presence in every honest, seeking soul and is ever quick to respond to the desire of the believing heart. He recognized the faith of the friends, and seeing that the paralytic needed something far greater than healing of the body-namely, the forgiveness of his sins-He said unto the sick of the palsy, Son, thy sins be forgiven thee. It was a dramatic moment, and His words must have amazed the listeners, for never had they known man to speak like this.

Certain of the scribesreasoning in their hearts. These were legalists who knew nothing of grace and who denied the claims of Jesus to be the Son of the Father. They did not go to the Scriptures for light, but they debated among themselves what it could all mean. Filled with prejudice and determined not to believe in Jesus, they at once took issue with Him. To them it was the rankest kind of blasphemy for anyone to pretend to have authority to forgive sins. This prerogative belonged to God alone. They did not know that God revealed in flesh stood in their midst!

Jesus perceived in his spirit that they so reasoned within themselves. They did not speak aloud, thus audibly expressing their indignation and objection to His words, but Jesus knew their thoughts (Psa 94:11) and He answered them accordingly. Why reason yein your hearts? To be able thus to read the inmost secrets of their thought-life was another evidence of deity, for only God knows our thoughts afar off (Psa 139:2).

Whether is it easier? So far as they were concerned, they could no more heal the sick than forgive the sinner. Jesus could do both. He chose to do the more important first.

That ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins. He would perform a miracle to reveal His authority to deliver from both sin and its effects. He therefore turned to the still helpless paralytic and commanded him to rise up and carry his bed- a pallet easily rolled together-and return healed to his home. There was power in His word. As He spoke, strength came to those limbs and the man arose, to the astonishment of all who were looking on.

The palsied man had been literally without strength (Rom 5:6). In his weakness he pictures all men in their sins. The word of Christ spoke strength into his paralyzed limbs, just as that same word gives new life to the one who receives it in faith.

As the people saw the paralytic rise to his feet and go away carrying his bed at the command of Jesus, they realized that divine power was active in their midst, and they gave God the glory for working so wondrously through His servant Jesus. Doubtless many wondered if He were not indeed the promised Messiah as they exclaimed, We never saw it on this fashion. It was a new and striking exhibition of the grace and power of God.

Calling of Matthew (Mar 2:13-17)

Leaving the house where He had healed the palsied man, Jesus went forth again by the sea side, and there taught the multitude who followed Him. He revealed to them the great truths connected with the forthcoming kingdom of God, for which Israel had waited so long.

He saw Levi the son of Alphaeus sitting at the receipt of custom. Levi, otherwise called Matthew (Mat 9:9-13), the author of the first Gospel, was a member of the despised publican class. He was one of the tax-gatherers in the service of Rome. They were hated because they farmed the taxes, grinding down their Jewish brothers to enrich themselves. At Capernaum there was a Roman customhouse, where all the fishermen had to bring their catches and pay a certain percent as tax. Levi was perhaps connected with this office. Evidently he had heard Jesus before and was convinced in his heart that He was the Messiah; so when the call came, he responded immediately. There was instant surrender to the claims of Christ. We see in the ready obedience of Levi, an example of what should be characteristic of all whose hearts have been won by Christ.

Christ is not only our Savior. He is also our Lord. Redemption involves much more than salvation from the guilt of and the judgment due to sin. Redemption includes our deliverance from the power and authority of Satan, the god of this world, and our glad subjection to the One who has purchased us with His own precious blood. We read, Ye are not your own ye are bought with a price (1Co 6:19-20). Because of this, we are to acknowledge the Lord Jesus as the supreme Master of our lives. Gratitude to Him for all His grace has done would in itself demand our wholehearted recognition of His dominion over us. We are not saved by following Jesus, but because we are saved we are exhorted to follow Him.

Loyalty to Christ demands that we surrender our wills to His and seek to glorify Him in all our ways. We often hear it said that our wills must be broken, but that is poor psychology and worse theology. A broken-willed man is no longer capable of making definite decisions. Tennyson wrote, Our wills are ours, / To make them Thine. And this is what Scripture emphasizes. We are voluntarily to yield our wills to Him who has given Himself for us, that our service may be the glad, happy obedience of those who delight in the will of God above all else. We need to beware of calling Jesus Lord if we are slighting His commands. It is by obedience that we prove our love for Him (Joh 14:15), as did Levi.

As he began his new career, Levi made a feast to which he invited many of his former friends and Jesus and His disciples. It was his way of testifying to the new allegiance, and this testimony must have made a great impression on his old associates.

The scribes and Pharisees saw him [Jesus] eat with publicans and sinners. In the eyes of these religious formalists this was a very serious offense. But it showed how little they understood the nature of the mission of Jesus. As a physician ministers to the sick rather than to the well, so Christ came to bring the message of grace to needy sinners rather than to seek out those who fancied they were already good enough for God. Actually, there is none righteous (Rom 3:10), but there are many who pride themselves on a righteousness they do not really possess. For such there is no blessing. It is the confessed sinner who finds mercy.

Defending His Disciples (Mar 2:18-22)

A question arose concerning fasting. Jesus took occasion to open up important truth in this connection. It was the disciples of John and those of the Pharisees, the orthodox party in Judaism, who raised the question as to why the disciples of Jesus did not follow their example in regard to fasting. Both groups evidently thought of refraining from food at certain times as meritorious, or at least advantageous in producing holiness of heart and life. It seemed therefore to them that Christs disciples, in this respect at least, moved on a lower plane than they. Jesus answered them by putting a question: Can the children of the bridechamber fast, while the bridegroom is with them? as long as they have the bridegroom with them, they cannot fast. Jesus was saying that there was no occasion for His followers to mourn before God and to afflict their souls while He Himself, the source of all blessing, was with them. But Jesus foretold the time when He, the bridegroom, would be taken away from them, and then they would fast in a very real sense. Their fasting would be characterized by abstinence from the follies of the world-that world which was to be arrayed against them in bitter opposition to the teachings of their Master.

Moreover, those who raised the question about fasting did not realize that Jesus had come to introduce an altogether new order. We are told elsewhere that the law was given by Moses-and there was much in the law that had to do with fasting-but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. It was not in accordance with His program to call men and women to subject themselves to legal principles. To do so would be but to attempt to sew a piece of new cloth on an old garment, which would only result in making the tear worse. Or it would be like putting new wine into old skin bottles; when the wine began to ferment, the bottles would burst and the wine would be lost. It is not possible to put the new wine of grace into the forms and enactments of the law; the one necessarily nullifies the other. As we read in Rom 11:6, And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work. By His answer our Lord clearly distinguished between the legality of the past and the grace He had come to reveal. This was in measure illustrated in the incident related next.

Answering Questions on Sabbath Day Observance (Mar 2:23-28)

As the disciples walked through a grainfield on the sabbath day they began to pluck some of the heads of grain, rub them in their hands, and eat the grains. This was in full accord with the provision made in the law, for God had said through Moses, When thou comest into the standing corn of thy neighbour, then thou mayest pluck the ears with thine hand; but thou shalt not move a sickle unto thy neighbours standing corn (Deu 23:25). But the Pharisees immediately found fault because the disciples were plucking the grain on the sabbath day, and so those legalists immediately objected.

There was nothing in the law that declared this act contrary to anything that God had commanded, but the Pharisees had added so many traditions to the law that the disciples seemed to be violating a divine precept. In reply Jesus referred to what David did when he and his men were hungry and came to the tabernacle in the days of the high priest Abiathar. David asked for food for himself and his retainers. The priest Ahimelech, the father of Abiathar, replied that they had no bread at hand except the shewbread that had been taken from the holy table and was the food of the priests (Lev 24:9; 1Sa 21:6). At Davids request, however, the shewbread was given to the hungry men, and no judgment followed. When Gods anointed was rejected, it was far more important to minister to him and to the needs of his followers than to preserve punctiliously the order of the tabernacle, for after all, men are more important to God than ordinances.

After referring to David Jesus declared, The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath: Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath. With these words He was announcing His own deity, for again and again the sabbath is called the sabbath of Jehovah. When Jesus declared Himself to be Lord of that day of rest, He definitely confessed Himself to be the God of Israel, revealed in flesh. If the Pharisees had ears to hear, they would have understood.

I do not here go into the critical question as to the expression, in the days of Abiathar. This has been discussed by many, and perhaps it will never be fully explained until we know even as we are known. We should remember that it would be a simple matter for some copyist to substitute by mistake Abiathar for Ahimelech. On the other hand, there may be some divine reason for setting the father to one side and recognizing the son as the rightful high priest at that time.

Conclusion

We have noticed already that our Lord performed miracles in order to relieve human misery and to authenticate His messiahship. We would also emphasize the precious truth that these miracles were intended to reveal to men: the grace and tender compassion of God. Through Christ God demonstrated His deep concern for those who had brought such dire trouble and affliction on themselves by turning away from Him. The entire human race was suffering because of sin. Israel in particular had been promised immunity from disease if obedient to the law of God (Exo 23:25). Every blind, deaf, crippled, or diseased person among them was a witness to Israels failure in this respect (Deu 28:15ff.). In healing the sick, Jesus was undoing the work of the devil (Act 10:38) and fulfilling what had been predicted concerning the Servant of Jehovah, Israels promised Messiah-King (Isa 35:4-6). When Jesus was on earth proclaiming the gospel of the kingdom, it was specially fitting that the blessings of the coming age should be revealed. Through Christs ministry the people were given a sample of what Israel and the whole world will enjoy in its fullness when Gods King reigns on mount Zion and blessing goes out to all the earth.

Physical healing and forgiveness of sins were intimately connected in the Old Testament (Psa 103:3; 67:2; Isa 58:8). This connection between healing and forgiveness was equally true in our Lords earthly ministry, as Mar 2:1-12 makes clear. John prayed for Gaius that physical health and prosperity of soul might go hand in hand (3Jn 1:2). And there is a sense in which the connection is still true, even though our blessings now are spiritual (Eph 1:3) rather than temporal. Where physical health does not accompany spiritual health, we may be assured it is because God our Father is working out some hidden purpose of blessing. But we are always free to pray for one another that we may be healed (Jam 5:16).

Every form of disease healed by our Lord Jesus seems to picture some aspect of sin, which is like a fever burning in the soul, a leprosy polluting the whole being, a palsy making one utterly unable to take a step toward God, and a withered hand incapable of true service. Whatever form sin may take, Jesus can give complete deliverance from it.

All healing is divine, whether it be by miraculous power, by means of properly controlled physical habits, diet, and exercise, or by direct medical treatment. It is God alone who can give renewed health and strength. He whose power brought us into being and gave us these marvelous bodies with all their wonderful functions, is the only One who can keep us well or restore us from illness.

Fuente: Commentaries on the New Testament and Prophets

Mar 2:1-12

Note here:-

I. The helplessness of some men. All helplessness traceable to sin.

II. The social usefulness of some other men. We can all carry sufferers to Christ, even when we cannot heal them ourselves. To point a sinner to Christ is a good work; to carry a little child to the Saviour is to execute a most blessed mission.

III. The possibilities of earnestness. These men uncovered the roof in their determination to approach the Healer.

IV. The vigilance of Jesus Christ over human action. He knew the meaning of the extraordinary movement that was taking place, and the reward which He gave to the earnest men was great.

V. The censorious spirits of technical observers.

Parker, City Temple, 1871, p. 45.

References: Mar 2:1-12.-J. S. Exell, Christian World Pulpit, vol. ix., p. 229. Mar 2:3, Mar 2:4.-Homiletic Quarterly, vol. iv., p. 542. Mar 2:3, Mar 2:12.-Ibid., vol. vi., p. 9. Mar 2:4.-Spurgeon, Morning by Morning, p. 251; Parker, Christian Commonwealth, vol. vii., p. 407. Mar 2:5.-W. F. Hook, Sermons on the Miracles, vol. i., p. 104; Homiletic Quarterly, vol. ii., p. 409.

Mar 2:8

The text shows-

I. An important aspect of human power. Secrecy; having two lives. These considerations make us mysteries to one another.

II. A startling instance of Divine insight.

III. A splendid manifestation of Christ’s fearlessness.

IV. A solemn example of the confusion which will fall upon all Christ’s objectors.

Parker, City Temple, vol. i., p. 303.

References: Mar 2:8.-Homiletic Quarterly, vol. ii., p. 561. Mar 2:9.-Preacher’s Monthly, vol. iv., p. 112. Mar 2:10.-Ibid., vol. iii., p. 50; R. E. Wallis, Expositor, 2nd series, vol. iii., p. 106. Mar 2:12.-Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxi., No. 1269. Mar 2:13.-Homiletic Quarterly, vol. ii., p. 253. Mar 2:13-15.-Ibid., vol. vi., p. 11. Mar 2:13-17.-H. W. Beecher, Christian World Pulpit, vol. x., p. 267; H. M. Luckock, Footprints of the Son of Man, p. 43. Mar 2:14.-J. S. Exell, Christian World Pulpit, vol. ix., p. 181. Mar 2:14, Mar 2:15.-Preacher’s Monthly, vol. ii., p. 462. Mar 2:15-17.-Ibid., p. 108; A. B. Bruce, The Training of the Twelve, p. 20. Mar 2:15-22.-W. Hanna, Our Lord’s Life on Earth, p. 154.

Mar 2:16

I. The question which was asked by the scribes and Pharisees is very instructive, for the answer to it illustrates the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ in His work and person. Why was He at all at the feast of Matthew? Because He was and is the Friend of sinners. Here we have one of the most glorious titles of our Lord and Saviour; not merely because, being such as we are, we naturally fix our eyes upon those qualities in Him which meet most directly and consolingly the case of our fallen and wounded nature; not chiefly because, in ancient language, our wants are the real measure of our enthusiasms; but because God’s condescensions reveal His glory even more completely than it is revealed by His magnificence. The magnificence of God is altogether beyond us. By His condescension He places Himself within our powers of, in some degree, understanding Him. His condescension is the visible measure of His love. And thus the glory of His work depends upon and illustrates another glory-the glory of His character. He could-He can-afford to be the Friend of sinners. Purity is fearless where mere respectability is timid; where it is frightened at the whisperings of evil tongues; where it is frightened at the consciousness of inward weakness, if indeed it be only weakness. It was the glory of Christ, as the sinless Friend of sinners, which made Him eat and drink as He did, to the scandal of the Pharisees, in the house of Levi.

II. And the answer to the question of the scribes and Pharisees is a comment on the action and history of the Church of Christ. Of her, too, the complaint has been made, age after age, by contemporary Pharisees, sometimes in ignorance, sometimes in malice-“How is it that she eateth and drinketh with publicans and sinners.” Like her Lord, the Church has entered into the life of sinful humanity. The idea of a hermit Church-of a Church made up of recluses, such as Donatists-such as some Puritans have imagined, involves nothing less than a sacrifice of the whole plan of Jesus Christ for the regeneration of the world. Still must the Church do what she may for the blessing and improvement of all departments of activity and life. Duty is not less duty because it is dangerous. Precautions and safeguards are near at hand, but she may not cease to eat and drink with publicans and sinners.

III. These words are not without suggestiveness as to the duty and conduct of private Christians. On what terms ought a Christian to consort with those who openly deny the truth of religion, or who live in flagrant violation of its precepts? Here there are two dangers to guard against. (1) On the one hand, we must beware of Pharisaism; that rank weed which so soon springs up in the souls of those who are trying to serve God. (2) On the other hand, we must guard against an appearance or affectation of indifference to the known will of God, whether in matters of faith or conduct.

H. P. Liddon, Penny Pulpit, No. 898.

References: Mar 2:16, Mar 2:17.-Homiletic Quarterly, vol. vi., p. 12. Mar 2:17.-Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxiii., No. 1345; D. Fraser, Metaphors of the Gospels, p. 106.

Mar 2:18-20

A Word from Jesus on Fasting.

Fasting, in its essence, is the restraint of self in respect of lower appetite, with special reference to abstinence from that which nourishes the body. Its advantages Jesus Christ never denied; indeed He availed Himself of them for forty days in the wilderness. Even the Pagans understood something of them. For example, the third day in the festival of the Eleusinian mysteries was a fast-day, and every supplicant at the oracle of Trophonius fasted twenty-four hours before he was prepared to receive the answer. During our Lord’s days fasts were numerous, every Monday and Thursday being observed by the Essenes and the stricter Pharisees. He did not approve them, nor disapprove them, by any distinct declaration, but He very decidedly protested against the enforcement of them by any extraneous authority. He ordained, in short, that none were to regulate the piety of others by the rules which they might fairly make for themselves. It is to be feared that in this respect His law has often been violated. Coming now to a more close exposition of the text, we discern in it the four following truths:-

I. Hypocrisy is here condemned. We do not mean that John’s disciples were guilty of this sin. Our Lord did not, for a moment, imply that they were hypocrites; but He did imply that His own disciples would be if they joined outwardly in a fast which was untrue to their own feeling. Hopeful and jubilant in the presence of their Lord, they could not fast, for the Bridegroom was with them.

II. Ritualism is here rebuked. By ritualism we mean putting external religious ceremonies in the place of spiritual acts of worship. During our Lord’s ministry ritualism was rife. Customary observances had gradually usurped the place of vital religion with multitudes. Sacrifices were offered with no sense of guilt; washings were frequent even to absurdity, but they did not express conscious uncleanness of soul; alms were profusely given, yet without any stirring of generosity or pity; and fasts were observed without any humiliation of soul before God. It is in accordance with the whole doctrine of Christ that He declares here that fasting is not a rite of any value in itself.

III. Freedom is here proclaimed. The law you have no right to impose on others; you may be called upon to make a rule for yourself.

IV. Joyousness is here inculcated as the prevailing characteristic of the Christian life. It is not a joy which arises from the pleasant circumstances of life, or from a happy and equable disposition, but from the assurance that Christ as your Saviour died for you.

A. Rowland, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xx., p. 121.

References: Mar 2:18.-G. E. L. Cotton, Sermons and Addresses in Marlborough College, p. 57. Mar 2:18-20.-J. S. Exell, Christian World Pulpit, vol. ix., p. 207; Homiletic Quarterly, vol. vi., p. 13.

Mar 2:18-22

I. There should be differences between Jesus Christ’s disciples and the disciples of all other men. It is noticeable how soon these differences were detected by the critics of the day. The differences should be as broadly marked now as they were in the days of Jesus Christ’s visible ministry.

II. These differences should find their explanation in Jesus Christ, not in the expression of the disciples themselves. Jesus Christ takes upon Himself the responsibility of determining the public attitude of His disciples.

III. The illustration about pieces of cloth and the different wines shows the perfect uniqueness of Christianity. There is to be no patching, there is to be no compromising; Christianity is to have a distinctiveness and speciality of its own.

Parker, City Temple, 1871, p. 59.

References: Mar 2:18-22.-A. B. Bruce, Parabolic Teaching of Christ, p. 295; Ibid., The Training of the Twelve, p. 69; H. M. Luckock, Footprints of the Son of Man, p. 47.

Mar 2:19

The Secret of Gladness.

There are three subjects for consideration arising from the words of my text: The Bridegroom; the Presence of the Bridegroom; the Joy of the Bridegroom’s Presence.

I. With regard to the first a few words will suffice. The first thing that strikes me is the singular appropriateness and the delicate pathetic beauty in the employment of this name by Christ in the existing circumstances. Who was it that had first said, “He that hath the bride is the bridegroom,” etc.? Why, it was the master of these very men who were asking the question. John’s disciples came and said, “Why do not your disciples fast?” And our Lord reminded them of their own teacher’s words, when He said, “The friend of the bridegroom can only be glad.” And so He would say to them, “In your master’s own conception of what I am, and of the joy that comes from My presence, he might have taught you who I am, and why it is that the men who stand around Me are glad.”

II. A word as to the Presence of the Bridegroom. It might seem as if this text condemned us who love an unseen and absent Lord to exclusion from the joy which is made to depend on His presence. Are we in the dreary period when the bridegroom is taken away, and fasting appropriate? Surely not. The time of mourning for an absent Christ was only three days; the law for the years of the Church’s history between the moment when the uplifted eyes of the gazers lost Him in the symbolic cloud and the moment when He shall come again is, “Lo, I am with you always.” The absent Christ is the present Christ. The presence which survives, which is true for us here today, may be a far better and more blessed and real thing than the presence of the mere bodily form in which He once dwelt.

III. The Joy of the Bridegroom’s Presence. What was it that made these rude lives so glad when Christ was with them, filling them with strange new sweetness and power? The charm of personal character; the charm of contact with one whose lips were bringing to them fresh revelations of truth, fresh visions of God; whose whole life was the exhibition of a nature, beautiful, and noble, and pure, and tender, and sweet, and loving, beyond anything that they had ever seen before.

A. Maclaren, A Year’s Ministry, 1st series, p. 137.

References: Mar 2:21.-J. S. Exell, Christian World Pulpit, vol. ix., p. 318. Mar 2:21, Mar 2:22.-D. Fraser, Metaphors of the Gospels, p. 106.

Mar 2:23

I. All positive laws must yield to man’s necessities. The law as a formal common element may be broken, yet its spirit may be honoured.

II. There is a relation of life to positive laws; there is a relation to moral law, which is higher and more exacting.

III. Christ shows that in all ages circumstances have arisen which have necessitated a violation of literal sabbatism. David ate the shew-bread, and the priests profaned the temple, and yet were guiltless.

Parker, Contemporary Pulpit, vol. viii., p. 120.

References: Mar 2:23.-G. S. Coster, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxiv., p. 134. Mar 2:21, Mar 2:22.-D. Fraser, Metaphors in the Gospels, p. 106.

Mar 2:23-28

I. The Pharisees were a Class. They were not only Pharisees by name, but they were Pharisees by nature; that is, they were typical men; they were representative of a large fraction of the human race. One of the chief pharisaical characteristics was a love of form, of rule, of law, of custom; a love of the formalistic and the technical, as opposed to the spiritual and the natural. A Pharisee was a man and is a man who exaggerates the value of an ordinance, of a ceremony, of a ritualistic observance. A Pharisee was a man who loved and worshipped institutions as institutions, while he was thoughtless, perhaps, of the real spirit which they embodied. All men that exaggerate form, ceremony, ritualism; all men that live in the letter of the law while they ignore its spirit; all men that make the form of government, and that which is outward in institution, more valuable than the object of government, and that which vitalizes institutions, are Pharisees in blood and bone, by the ordainment of their nature. Such men are naturally tyrannical. Such men are naturally persecutors. Such men hinder beyond expression the true growth of the world.

II. Now Jesus, when He came to face these men, saw that He must teach them, and through them the world, a lesson. And the lesson which He taught them and the world was this: That man, in his rights, in his privileges, that are inalienable, is greater than any institution, nobler than any form of government, and more holy than any observance. There is no law that man cannot annul if it oppresses him; no government that he has not the Divine right to rebel against if it oppresses him; no custom or habit that he cannot tear in fragments and throw to the four winds, if it injuriously cramps his liberty, hinders his growth, or prevents his happiness. Christ declared that as a man He had rights which no ecclesiasticism could take from Him; had a liberty which no priestly council could rob Him of. He declared that the Sabbath was a day to be used; used, not according to the dictation of self-constituted guardians, but according to individual necessities, individual opportunities, and individual profit. In short, He placed the sovereignty of judgment in respect to it as an institution, and as an observance, in the hands of each individual man, saying, “Therefore the Son of Man is Lord also of the Sabbath.”

W. H. Murray, The Fruits of the Spirit, p. 430.

I. In this interview it is made clear: (1) That all critical inquiries are not to be condemned; (2) the question on the part of the Pharisees was not at all unnatural.

II. The perfect and inalienable supremacy of Jesus Christ is asserted in the last verse; He proclaims Himself Lord over time, over institutions, and over human affairs.

Parker, City Temple, 1871, p. 60.

References: Mar 2:23-28.-Homiletic Quarterly, vol. vi., p. 14; A. B. Bruce, The Training of the Twelve, p. 88; H. M. Luckock, Footprints of the Son of Man, p. 51.

Mar 2:27-28

During His public ministry our Lord was repeatedly accused of breaking the Sabbath; and on such occasions He vindicated Himself in one or other of two ways.

I. Sometimes He stood upon His rights as a Divine Being to work at any time for the welfare of men. That was the course which He adopted when, in answer to those who sought to slay Him because He had healed the impotent man on the Sabbath day, He said, “My Father worketh hitherto, and I work.” A reply which not only made Himself equal with God, but cast a new light upon the meaning of the creation week. For it could have no pertinence to the case in dispute, unless its significance be something like this, “We are living now in the seventh day of the creation week. This is the time of Jehovah’s rest.” We have now no work of creation going on; no special additions have been made to the various orders of animals on the surface of the earth since man appeared; and in that sense God has been resting. But though He has not called anything new into existence, He has been continually at work in upholding all that He has made, and He has put forth special remedial efforts for the restoration of man to the state in which he was formed at first, but from which he fell by his own sin. If therefore, during the Sabbath of creation’s week, and while God is resting, He can yet put forth special exertions for the redemption and education of man, I am only following on the same line when, on the Sabbath of an ordinary week, I put forth my energy in the restoration of the impotent man to health.

II. At other times the defence of the Lord was based on the nature of the works which He had performed. He held and taught that it was lawful to do good on the Sabbath day. Nay, He went further, and declared that there is a class of duties which we not only may, but must, perform on that day. It was ordained at first for the benefit of man, and therefore it was never intended that it should operate to his detriment; whenever, therefore, an injury would be inflicted on a fellowman by our refusing to labour for his assistance on the Sabbath, we are bound to exert ourselves, even on that day, for his relief. So by His sharp incisive logic our Lord cut away all the traditional ivy-growth which had so largely covered the primal ordinance of the Sabbath, and restored to it its own primal beauty and benevolence.

W. M. Taylor, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xi., p. 103.

References: Mar 2:27.-C. Girdlestone, Twenty Parochial Sermons, p. 245; H. W. Beecher, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xix., p. 228; vol. xxi., p. 92; G. Brooks, Five Hundred Outlines, p. 257; M. R. Vincent, Three Hundred Outlines on the New Testament, p. 32; see also American Pulpit of the Day, vol. i., p. 258. Mar 2:27, Mar 2:28.-A. Barry, Cheltenham College Sermons, p. 46; Christian World Pulpit, vol. xi., p. 103; Homiletic Magazine, vol. xi., p. 95; G. E. L. Cotton, Sermons and Addresses in Mar thorough College, p. 296.

Mar 2:28

(1) It was instituted by Him. (2) It is kept on a day which was fixed by His authority. (3) It is intended to commemorate His resurrection. (4) It ought to be observed with a special regard to His will, and word, and work.

G. Brooks, Five Hundred Outlines of Sermons, p. 257.

Fuente: The Sermon Bible

Chapter 2

1. The Servant again in Capernaum. The healing of the Paralytic. (Mar 2:1-12. Mat 9:1-8; Luk 5:17-26.)

2. Levi called. With the Publicans and Sinners. (Mar 2:13-17. Mat 9:9-13; Luk 5:27-32.)

3. The Question concerning Fasting. (Mar 2:18-22. Mat 9:14-15; Luk 5:33-39.)

4. The Question concerning the Sabbath. (Mar 2:23-28. Mat 12:1-8; Luk 6:1-5.)

1. The Servant again in Capernaum. The healing of the Paralytic. Mar 2:1-12.

His second visit to Capernaum brought out a large multitude. We see Him occupied with preaching the Word. He always preached the Word first, to make known the Truth; for this He had come (Mar 1:38). Then in the next place He confirmed His Word by His mighty works. The Paralytic tells of mans impotence; leprosy is the type of Sin as a defiling, incurable disease, paralysis shows mans helpless condition. The paralytic is likewise the picture of Israel. The helpless paralytic is brought into the presence of the Lord. Mark alone tells us that four carried him and describes fully the obstacles in the way. They had faith in His love and in His power. How it must have refreshed His heart! As His servants we can still bring sinners into His presence and honor Him by our confidence. Son, thy sins be forgiven thee. With this blessed Word He touches the root of all evil. To deal with it He had come. The proof that He is Jehovah and has power to forgive sins is the healing of the paralytic. Love and Power are here blessedly manifested. Love in forgiveness, power in healing and restoration. It is ever repeated in the case of every believing sinner. The two great elements of the Gospel are here. In some future day converted Israel will know this (Psa 103:1-3).

2. Levi called. With the Publicans and Sinners. Mar 2:13-17.

Levi, the son of Alphaeus, is Matthew, the writer of the first Gospel. He was a tax gatherer. As such he was despised by the nation Israel. Not alone were they considered thieves, but they were the miserable hirelings of the Romans and as such hated as Apostates. What Grace to call such an one to the office of an Apostle! And the feast which followed reveals both the loving condescension of the Servant-Son and His Grace to seek that which is lost. The Servant had taken a low place by associating with the tax-gatherers. In the eyes of the self-righteous Pharisees it was an abomination. God in the person of His Son had come in Love and Grace seeking man.

3. The Question concerning Fasting. Mar 2:18-22.

The disciples of John approach Him next with a question. The Servants ear was always ready to listen to the perplexities, difficulties and sorrows of others. He was always approachable. Under the Law they fasted. The Grace of God had now appeared and Grace was soon to take the place of the Law. He Himself is the Bridegroom. No need of fasting and mourning while He was with them. His rejection would come and with it their fasting. A significant parable follows. The old garment and the old wineskins are symbolic of Judaism with its laws and ceremonies. The new piece and the new wine stand for the Gospel. Law and Grace must not be mixed. If the Gospel of Grace, the new wine, is put into the old wineskins, Judaism with its laws, the wineskins go to pieces and the new wine is spilled. Much in Christendom today is neither Law nor Grace. The Servant announced a change of dispensations.

4. The Question concerning the Sabbath. Mar 2:23-28.

The question concerning the Sabbath is closely connected with the preceding parable. The Sabbath, not a seventh day, but the seventh day, was the day on which God rested in Creation. It was also the sign of His covenant with His people Israel. Plucking ears of corn on the Sabbath to eat them is nowhere forbidden in the Law. It was one of the hard and burdensome man-made traditional injunctions. The Lord cites Davids case. Mark adds that David was not alone hungry, but he had need. David, though anointed King, was despised and in need. His greater Son and His disciples were in the same condition. What is greater with God, the maintenance of an ordinance or the need of Man? Surely the latter. He, the humble Servant, was none other than the Lord of the Sabbath. He had rested in His Creation work and instituted the Sabbath for His people. He had become the Son of Man for the need of Man. As the Lord of the Sabbath He speaks, The Sabbath was made for man and not man for the Sabbath. On the ground of Grace the Sabbath no longer exists. We have the Lords day, the first day of the week to enjoy communion with our risen and glorified Lord, resting from our daily occupation. Blessed privilege to adore Him on that day and to follow His own example of doing good.

Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)

CHAPTER 7

Four of the Most Important Men in the Bible

And again he entered into Capernaum after some days; and it was noised that he was in the house. And straightway many were gathered together, insomuch that there was no room to receive them, no, not so much as about the door: and he preached the word unto them. And they come unto him, bringing one sick of the palsy, which was borne of four. And when they could not come nigh unto him for the press, they uncovered the roof where he was: and when they had broken it up, they let down the bed wherein the sick of the palsy lay. When Jesus saw their faith, he said unto the sick of the palsy, Son, thy sins be forgiven thee. But there were certain of the scribes sitting there, and reasoning in their hearts, Why doth this man thus speak blasphemies? who can forgive sins but God only? And immediately when Jesus perceived in his spirit that they so reasoned within themselves, he said unto them, Why reason ye these things in your hearts? Whether is it easier to say to the sick of the palsy, Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Arise, and take up thy bed, and walk? But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (he saith to the sick of the palsy,) I say unto thee, Arise, and take up thy bed, and go thy way into thine house. And immediately he arose, took up the bed, and went forth before them all; insomuch that they were all amazed, and glorified God, saying, We never saw it on this fashion.

Mar 2:1-12

May God the Holy Spirit, whose words these are, be our Teacher as we study this passage. May he be pleased to take the things of Christ revealed here and show them to us, effectually applying them to our hearts, that we may be instructed in the gospel of his grace.

Gospel Hardened

The first obvious lesson to be learned from these verses is that those who live under but do not believe the gospel are the greatest and most blameworthy of all sinners in the world. This is a truth that is strikingly illustrated by the history of Capernaum. No other place in Palestine enjoyed so many displays of our Lords miraculous power, so much of his presence, or so many words of instruction from his lips as the city of Capernaum. After he left Nazareth, our Master dwelt at Capernaum (Mat 4:13). Capernaum was the headquarters of his ministry. His sermons were often heard there. His miracles were performed there. He was both well known and very popular there. The people of Capernaum gathered in great crowds to see him and to hear him. They were astonished at his power, dazzled by his words, and awed by his Person.

“And again he entered into Capernaum after some days; and it was noised that he was in the house. And straightway many were gathered together, insomuch that there was no room to receive them, no, not so much as about the door: and he preached the word unto them” (Mar 2:1-2).

The opening words of this chapter would be very delightful to read were it not for one sad, sad fact: Nothing that our Master said or did seems to have had any lasting, spiritual effect upon the hearts of the people at Capernaum.

Isnt that amazing? The men and women of Capernaum lived under the bright, dazzling, noonday brilliance of the Sun of Righteousness. Yet, they were unconverted. Rather than being melted to repentance, they were hardened against Christ by their spiritually barren familiarity with him. It was against this city that our Lord Jesus pronounced his heaviest curse and condemnation (Mat 11:23-24).

Capernaum stands before our eyes as a beacon of warning. Never was there a people so highly favored as the men and women of Capernaum. Never was there a people more hardened against the gospel. Never was there a people more severely condemned by our God. Let us beware of walking in their steps!

The same gospel, which is a savor of life unto life to those who believe it, is a savor of death unto death to those who believe it not. The same fire that melts the wax hardens the clay. None are so hardened as those who are gospel hardened. From such hardness may God be pleased to keep us by his grace.

Blessings in Disguise

The paralyzed man in our text shows us a second very important lesson. Great afflictions, trials, and sorrows are often the forerunners of great blessings.

“And they come unto him, bringing one sick of the palsy, which was borne of four. And when they could not come nigh unto him for the press, they uncovered the roof where he was: and when they had broken it up, they let down the bed wherein the sick of the palsy lay. When Jesus saw their faith, he said unto the sick of the palsy, Son, thy sins be forgiven thee” (Mar 2:3-5).

I suspect this poor, impotent man spent many hours every day of his miserable life asking, Why did God do this to me? If there is a God in heaven, if he is good and wise and gracious, why did he give me these bum legs and mangled feet? And I do not doubt for a moment that, from this day forward, he never ceased to thank God for that lifelong trouble which at last brought him to Christ and brought the forgiveness of sin to his soul! He would never have been brought by his friends to the Master had he not been in such a miserably helpless condition.

God moves in a mysterious way

His wonders to perform.

He plants His footsteps in the sea

And rides upon the storm.

Deep in unfathomable mines

Of never failing skill,

He treasures up His bright designs,

And works His sovereign will.

Ye fearful saints, fresh courage take;

The clouds ye so much dread,

Are big with mercy, and shall break

In blessings on your head.

Judge not the Lord by feeble sense;

But trust Him for His grace.

Behind the frowning providence,

He hides a smiling face.

His purposes will ripen fast,

Unfolding every hour.

The bud may have a bitter taste;

But sweet will be the flower.

Blind unbelief is sure to err,

And scan His work in vain.

God is His on interpreter

And He will make it plain.

William Cowper

Let every child of God understand that the paths of our lives are well ordered; for they are ordered by our heavenly Father, who is too wise to err, too strong to fail, and too good to do wrong.

Use of Means

Third, we learn from the behavior of this mans friends that faith in a mighty God and Savior produces diligence in the use of means. Read verses three, four, and five again.

“And they come unto him, bringing one sick of the palsy, which was borne of four. And when they could not come nigh unto him for the press, they uncovered the roof where he was: and when they had broken it up, they let down the bed wherein the sick of the palsy lay. When Jesus saw their faith, he said unto the sick of the palsy, Son, thy sins be forgiven thee.”

The Holy Spirit does not tell us who these men were, where they lived, or what their occupations were. We know absolutely nothing about them except these five things:

1.They had a friend who was in need of mercy.

2.They believed that the Lord Jesus Christ could heal their friend of his terrible paralysis.

3.They brought their needy friend to the place where Christ was working miracles of mercy.

4.They were not deterred by obstacles, hindered by difficulties, or put off by problems.

5.They saw their friend saved by the Son of God.

These four men, Bros. Faithful Fred, Witnessing Willie, Praying Perry, and Diligent Dan, got what they wanted. Their friend was cured, both physically and spiritually. God honored their labors of love, which were the fruit of their faith. “When Jesus saw their faith, he said unto the sick of the palsy, Son, thy sins be forgiven thee.”

As far as we know, not one of these men was a preacher. None of them wrote a word of inspiration. These four men were not prophets or apostles. They appear to have been insignificant, if not totally unknown among their peers. The names, ages, and birth places of these four men are not mentioned anywhere in the Word of God. Yet, these four men rank among the most important men in the Bible.

These four, unknown nobodies were instruments by which God brought one of his elect sheep to Christ. These four men had a friend who was paralyzed, both physically and spiritually; and they brought their friend to Christ, and Christ both healed their friend and forgave his sin. The story of their remarkable faith and zeal is recorded in Matthew, Mark, and Luke. Never in all the world did any mortal perform a more important work than these four men. Because of their labors a sinner was saved and God was glorified.

Try to picture the scene. It is a truly remarkable story. These four men knew who Christ is; and they knew the power of his grace. They knew a man who needed Christ. They knew where the Lord was. They resolved together to bring their friend to the Savior. And, by thoughtful pain, labor, and perseverance, they succeeded in getting their friend to the Lord Jesus.

The work required much pain, trouble, time, and diligence. But they were in dead earnest. They knew that Christ had the power to save their friend; and they knew that their friend needed his grace. They were determined to let nothing stand in their way. They were determined to get their friend to Christ. They could not heal his disease. They could not save his soul. They could not forgive his sin. And they did not know whether or not the Lord would do these things for him. But they could get their friend to Christ. And what they could do they were determined to do. And, as a direct result of their diligent labors, a sinner was saved and God was glorified. Nothing in all the world could be more important. When the Lord Jesus saw their faith, he forgave that mans sin.

These four men are held before us as examples for us to follow. They show us the importance and the necessity of those who know the Savior bringing needy souls to him. I know that salvation is of the Lord. No man can save himself; and we cannot save other men. It is not possible for us to create a new heart in another person. We cannot give them repentance and faith in Christ. We cannot reveal Christ to a mans heart. But there are some things that we can do; and what we can do, we must do. These five facts are plainly revealed in the Word of God.

1.All men by nature are totally depraved, helplessly lost, and spiritually dead. No man will ever, of his own accord, by his own, imaginary, free-will, seek the Lord and come to Christ (Rom 3:10-12). Sinners cannot save themselves, make any contribution to their salvation, or even make themselves more likely to be saved.

2.God has an elect people in this world whom he has chosen for himself in eternal love and determined to save; and they must and shall be saved (Rom 8:29-30).

3.The Lord Jesus Christ has redeemed Gods elect by his own precious blood; and all for whom he shed his blood he shall bring into the bliss and glory of eternal life in heaven (Isa 53:9-11).

4.God the Holy Spirit shall effectually quicken, regenerate, and preserve all of those who were chosen by God the Father and redeemed by God the Son, calling them to faith in Christ by irresistible grace (Psa 65:4; Psa 110:3).

5.And God always uses men to reach the hearts of men with the gospel (1Co 1:18-29; Rom 10:14-17; 1Pe 1:23-25).

If these facts, plainly revealed in Holy Scripture, mar our theological system, our theological system needs to be marred. It is Gods good pleasure to use sinful men to proclaim the gospel to sinful men. He could use angels. He could speak to men directly. He could even preach the gospel to dead sinners by the mouths of asses, were that his pleasure. But he has chosen to speak to men through men. This is no limitation to Gods sovereignty. It is the marvel of his sovereign grace that he is pleased to use the men he uses to communicate the message of life to dead sinners (1 Corinthian Mar 1:26-29).

Only One

The fourth lesson taught in this passage is the fact that there is one man, only one man in all the universe who has power on the earth to forgive sins and speak peace to the hearts of men; but, blessed be his name, there is one man who can forgive sin, the God-man, Christ Jesus.

“But there were certain of the scribes sitting there, and reasoning in their hearts, Why doth this man thus speak blasphemies? who can forgive sins but God only? And immediately when Jesus perceived in his spirit that they so reasoned within themselves, he said unto them, Why reason ye these things in your hearts? Whether is it easier to say to the sick of the palsy, Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Arise, and take up thy bed, and walk? But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (he saith to the sick of the palsy,) I say unto thee, Arise, and take up thy bed, and go thy way into thine house. And immediately he arose, took up the bed, and went forth before them all; insomuch that they were all amazed, and glorified God, saying, We never saw it on this fashion” (Mar 2:6-12).

The Son of Man, our Lord Jesus Christ, has power on earth to forgive sins, because he who is the Son of man is also God the Son. No mere man can absolve the guilty. No Church or denomination can pardon the guilty. Not even God himself can forgive sins apart from Christ. Only the God-man could obtain the forgiveness of sins for us and grant forgiveness to us.

The reasoning of the Scribes and Pharisees was but the venting of their malice toward Christ and their enmity against God; yet, it was precisely the doctrine of Holy Scripture. None but God can forgive sins. When the man Christ Jesus publicly exercised this divine prerogative, he publicly asserted that he is himself God; and, as if to confirm that claim, he healed the sick mans body, visibly demonstrating his sovereign power over all things.

Christ is the Fountain opened for cleansing from sin. We point sinners to the Fountain; but we cannot forgive sin or even pronounce forgiveness. Only Christ can do that. We must go to Christ, go directly to Christ, and go to Christ alone for absolution. He is our only Priest, our only Mediator, our only Advocate, our only Way to the Father. Gods justice demands satisfaction. Only Christ could give it. Gods holiness demands perfect righteousness. Only Christ could give it. Our guilty consciences demand the same, both righteousness and satisfaction. Only Christ can quieten the guilty conscience.

Spiritual Palsy

The palsy with which this mans body was afflicted is a vivid picture of the palsy of every mans soul by nature. What a crippled, helpless creature we are since the fall of our father Adam! This poor, needy creature had no ability to come to Christ. So it is with all the fallen children of Adam (Joh 6:44). But his friends brought him to the Savior with earnestness. They refused to allow the crowd, or the obstructions before them to stop them. If the only way they could accomplish their desire was to tear up the house-top, they did not hesitate to tear it apart.

Oh! that the Lords people, who know, in their own cases, the blessedness of Jesus grace, would feel somewhat of the same earnestness for the salvation of others. Methinks I would bring to ordinances, and also in private approaches, to the mercy seat, the whole of my carnal, graceless relations; and do as they did by this man, lay them down before the presence of Jesus. More than this I am not able to do; but thus far I am encouraged to do. And that compassionate Lord, who hath healed my crippled soul, can cure theirs. (Robert Hawker)

As is ever the case, the Lord Jesus did indescribably more than they desired. They brought their friend to be healed of his physical palsy; but the Son of God, in his great mercy, healed both the palsy of his body and of his soul. He said, Son, thy sins are forgiven thee.

He identified this man as one of the many children the Father gave to him before the world was made, one of those of whom he spoke as a covenant Surety in eternity (Isa 8:18), and of whom he will say at the last day, when presenting his church faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy (Jud 1:24), Behold I and the children which God hath given me (Heb 2:13).

Until the Lord Jesus spoke this word of grace to this poor soul, he was completely unaware of his eternal adoption and the covenant relationship which he had with Christ from eternity. So it is with all Gods elect, until called by the omnipotent grace and power of God the Holy Spirit. Though they are Christs people, the people he came to save, children of God by eternal adoption, and given to Christ in covenant grace, they are, in their own minds, children of wrath even as other (Eph 2:3).

Fuente: Discovering Christ In Selected Books of the Bible

again: Mar 1:45, Mat 9:1, Luk 5:18

and it: Mar 7:24, Luk 18:35-38, Joh 4:47, Act 2:6

Reciprocal: Mat 8:5 – entered Mat 9:2 – they brought Mat 14:35 – General Mar 1:21 – they went Mar 6:55 – General Luk 5:15 – great Luk 18:37 – they

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

CHRIST IN US

It was noised that He was in the house.

Mar 2:1

We are all houses, whether we will or no. The only question is, Who shall inhabit us? It is a blessed thought that Christ died not only to redeem us, but to dwell in us. I want to point out some marks, suggested by the narrative in this chapter, by which we may know whether Christ is dwelling in us or not.

I. If Christ is in the house, other people will find it out.We are told it was noised that He was in the house. It got about. It was in the air, as we say. Our Lord did not parade His presence. No one sounded a trumpet to herald His approach; it was not advertised; but for all that, His presence betrayed itself. Our influence with our fellow-men in public will always be in exact proportion to the depth of our hidden life with God in secret. It is not what we say, not what we do; it is what we are that tells, or rather what Christ is in us.

II. If Christ is in the house, He will make it attractive.If our lives have no magnetic force; if we are not winning souls to Christ; if we are not attracting others to follow Christ by our life and our example; if we are conscious that, instead of attracting, we have often repelled others by the gloom and dullness of our Christian profession, it is an evidence that Christ is not in the house, or at least that He is not in full possession of the house.

III. When Christ is in the house, He will open to us the Scriptures.We read at Mar 2:2 that He preached the word unto them. When Christ is dwelling in our hearts, the Bible will be a new book. That is the testimony of hundreds who have received Christ as their sanctification. They tell you that the Bible is illuminated from cover to cover. If you want to understand a book, the best plan is to make the acquaintance of the author; he can interpret it as no one else can.

IV. If Christ is in the house, our diseases will be healed.This man, sick of the palsy, was healed. There are a good many paralysed Christiansmany weak and miserable in their own Christian experience. They have not power to walk. Is there any remedy or deliverance from this life of ups and downs, of constant defeat, this spiritual lameness from which they are suffering? When Christ comes to dwell in you, you have a power never known before. You feel more the meaning of St. Paul when he said, I can do all things through Christ that strengthened me.

V. If Christ is in the house, some people are sure to object.You find that the Pharisees did so here. Shall we lose a blessing because some people do not understand it? God forbid! Though some one will object, what does it matter, if God be glorified?

Rev. E. W. Moore.

Illustration

The holiness of the common Christian, says William Law, is not an occasional thing, that begins and ends, or is only for such a time, or place, or action, but is the holiness of that which is always alive and stirring in us, namely, of our thoughts, wills, desires, and affections. If, therefore, these are always alive in us, always driving or governing our lives; if we can have no holiness or goodness but as this life of thought, will, and affection works in us; if we are all called to this inward holiness and goodness, then a perpetual, always existing operation of the Spirit of God within us is absolutely necessary. For we cannot be inwardly led and governed by a spirit of goodness, but by being governed by the Spirit of God Himself. If our thoughts, wills, and affections need only be now and then holy and good, then, indeed, the moving and breathing Spirit of God need only now and then govern us. But if our thoughts and affections are to be always holy and good, then the holy and good Spirit of God is to be always operating as a principle of life within us.

Fuente: Church Pulpit Commentary

THIS CHAPTER OPENS with another work of power that took place in a private house, when after some time He was again in Capernaum. This time faith of a very robust type comes into view, and that, remarkably enough, on the part of friends and not on the part of the sufferer. The Lord was again preaching the Word. That was His main service; the healing work was incidental.

The four friends had faith of the sort that laughs at impossibilities, and says, It shall be done, and Jesus saw it. He dealt instantly with the spiritual side of things, granting forgiveness of sins to the paralysed man.

This was but blasphemy to the reasoning scribes who were present. They were right enough in their thought that no one but God can forgive sins, but they were wholly wrong in not discerning that God was present amongst them and speaking in the Son of Man. The Son of Man was on earth, and on earth He has authority to forgive sins.

The forgiveness of sins however is not something which is visible to the eyes of men; it must be accepted by faith in the Word of God. The instantaneous healing of a bad case of bodily infirmity is visible to the eyes of men, and the Lord proceeded to perform this miracle. They could no more release the man from the grip of his disease than they could forgive his sins. Jesus could do both with equal ease. He did both, appealing to the miracle in the body as proof of the miracle as to the soul. Thus He puts things in their right order. The spiritual miracle was primary, the bodily was only secondary.

Here again the miracle was instantaneous and complete. The man who had been utterly helpless suddenly arose, picked up his bed and walked forth before them all in a fashion that elicited glory to God from all lips. The Lord commanded and the man had but to obey, for the enabling went with the command.

This incident which emphasises the spiritual object of our Lords service is followed by the call of Levi, afterwards known to us as Matthew the publican. The call of this man to follow the Master exemplifies the mighty attraction of His word. It was one thing to call lowly fishermen from their nets and toil: it was another to call a man of means from the congenial task of scooping in the cash. But He did it with two words. Follow Me, fell upon Levis ears with such power that he arose and followed Him. God grant that we may feel the power of those two words in our hearts!

What a wonderful glimpse we have been granted of the Servant of the Lord, His promptitude, His authority, His power, His dependence, His devotedness, His compassion, His refusal of the popular and superficial in favour of the spiritual and the abiding; and lastly, His mighty attractiveness.

Having risen up to follow the Lord, Levi soon declared his discipleship in a practical fashion. He entertained his new-found Master in his house together with a large number of publicans and sinners, displaying thus something of the Masters spirit. He exchanged his sitting at the receipt of custom, for the dispensing of bounty, so that others might sit at his board. He began to fulfil the word, He hath dispersed, he hath given to the poor, (Psa 112:9), and that evidently without having been told to do so. He began showing hospitality to his own set in order that they too might meet the One who had won his heart.

In this he is an excellent pattern for ourselves. He began to expend himself for others. He did the thing which most readily came to his hand. He gathered to meet the Lord those who were needy, and who knew it, rather than those who were religiously self-satisfied. He had discovered that Jesus was a Giver, who was seeking for such as should be receivers.

All this was observed by the self-satisfied Scribes and Pharisees, who voiced their objection in the form of a question to His disciples. Why did He consort with such low-down and degraded folk? The disciples had no need to answer, for He took up the challenge Himself. His answer was complete and satisfying and has become almost a proverbial saying. The sick need the doctor, and sinners need the Saviour. Not the righteous but the sinners He came to call.

The Scribes and Pharisees may have been well versed in the law but they had no understanding of grace. Now He was the Servant of the grace of God, and Levi had caught a glimpse of this. Have we? Far more than Levi we ought to have done so, inasmuch as we live in the moment when the day of grace has reached its noontide. Yet it is possible for us to feel a bit hurt with God because He is so good to folk that we would like to denounce, as Jonah did in the case of the Ninevites, and as the Pharisees did with the sinners. The great Servant of the grace of God is at the disposal of all that need Him.

The next incident-verses Mar 2:18-22-discloses the objectors again at work. Then they complained of the Master to the disciples: now it is of the disciples to the Master. They evidently lacked courage to come face to face. This oblique method of fault-finding is very common: let us forsake it. In neither case did the disciples have to answer. When the Pharisees maintained the exclusiveness of law, He met them by asserting the expansiveness of grace, and He silenced them. Now they wish to put upon the disciples the bondage of law, and He most effectively asserts the liberty of grace.

The parable or figure that He used plainly inferred that He Himself was the Bridegroom-the central Person of importance. His presence governed everything, and ensured a wonderful fulness of supply. Presently He would be absent and then fasting would be appropriate enough. Let us take note of this, for we live in the day when fasting is a fitting thing. The Bridegroom has long been absent, and we are waiting for Him. At the moment when the Lord spoke the disciples were in the position of a godly remnant in Israel receiving the Messiah when He came. After Pentecost they were baptised into one body, and were built into the foundations of that city which is called the Bride, the Lambs wife (Rev 21:9). Then they had the place of the Bride rather than that of the children of the bridechamber; and that position is ours today. This only makes it yet more clear that not feasting but fasting is fitting for us. Fasting is abstaining from lawful things in order to be more wholly for God, and not merely abstinence from food for a certain fume.

The Pharisees were all for maintaining the law intact. The danger for the disciples, as after events proved, was not so much that as attempting a mixture of Judaism with the grace which the Lord Jesus brought. The law system was like a worn-out garment, or an old wine skin. He was bringing in that which was like a strong piece of new cloth, or new wine with its powers of expansion. In the Acts we can see how the old outward forms of the law gave way before the expansive power of the Gospel.

Indeed we see it in the very next incident with which chapter 2 closes. Again the Pharisees come, complaining of the disciples to the Master. The offence now was that they did not exactly fit their activities into the old bottle of certain regulations concerning the sabbath. The Pharisees pushed their sabbath-keeping so far that they condemned even rubbing ears of corn in the hand, as though it were working a mill. They contended for a very rigid interpretation of the law in these minor matters. They were the people who kept the law with meticulous care, whilst they considered the disciples to be slack.

The Lord met their complaint and defended His disciples by reminding them of two things. First, they should have known the Scriptures, which recorded the way in which David had once fed himself and his followers in an emergency. That which ordinarily was not lawful was permitted in a day when things were out of course in Israel because of the rejection of the rightful king. 1Sa 21:1-15 tells us about it. Once again things were out of course and the rightful King about to be refused. In both cases needs connected with the Lords Anointed must be held to override details connected with the ceremonial demands of the law.

Second, the sabbath was instituted for mans benefit, and not the reverse. Hence man takes precedence of the sabbath; and the Son of man, who holds dominion over all men, according to Psa 8:1-9, must be Lord of the sabbath, and hence competent to dispose of it according to His will. Who were the Pharisees to challenge His right to do this?-even though He had come amongst men in the form of a Servant.

The Lord of the sabbath was amongst men and He was being refused. Under these circumstances the solicitude of these sticklers for the ceremonial law was out of place. Their bottles were worn out, and unable to contain the expansive grace and authority of the Lord. The sabbath bottle breaks before their very eyes.

Fuente: F. B. Hole’s Old and New Testaments Commentary

Chapter 12.

The Healing of the Paralytic-I.

“And again He entered into Capernaum after some days; and it was noised that He was in the house. And straightway many were gathered together, insomuch that there was no room to receive them, no, not so much as about the door: and He preached the word unto them. And they come unto Him, bringing one sick of the palsy, which was borne of four. And when they could not come nigh unto Him for the press, they uncovered the roof where He was: and when they had broken it up, they let down the bed wherein the sick of the palsy lay. When Jesus saw their faith, He said unto the sick of the palsy, Son, thy sins be forgiven thee.”-Mar 2:1-5.

The Four Friends.

It is a striking thing that in this story of the healing of the paralytic the sufferer himself plays a very small part It would, perhaps, scarcely be true to say he was entirely passive; for Christ could not have spoken to him as He did had there not been some kind of faith and wistful longing in his soul. At the same time, it is quite obvious that the main interest of the story gathers, not around the paralytic, but around his four friends and our blessed Lord. The story is so replete with points that claim our notice, that, we had better, in this chapter, confine ourselves to a study of the four friends and their action.

Their Character.

1. What true and genuine friends these men were! Theirs was no fair-weather friendship. They stood by their friend in his hour of need and deep distress. That is the badge and sign of a true friendship-it bears the strain of misfortune and reverse. “I call you not servants… but… friends,” said Jesus to His disciples (Joh 15:15). And in another verse we find the reason why our Lord bestowed this honourable title upon them. “Ye are they,” He said, “which have continued with Me in My temptations” (Luk 22:28).

At the commencement of His career Christ had multitudes of admirers and followers. But as trials came thronging in, and as opposition deepened, these people turned their backs upon Him and deserted Him in shoals. But amid the wholesale desertion of the crowds the apostles remained staunch and true; and their loyalty to their Master in His day of trouble proved the genuineness of their friendship. For it was just on the eve of the Cross and Passion that Christ gave them that honourable name. “Ye are they which have continued with Me in My temptations. No longer do I call you servants, but I have called you friends.” And these four men had the same claim to that honourable title. They continued with their friend in the time of his trouble and distress.

Their Action.

Notice, too, how they fulfilled the highest office of friendship. They had heard of Christ’s power, and they determined they would carry their friend to Him. They were ready to do anything to bring back health and vigour to his wasted and stricken frame. And that is again a mark of a genuine friendship-it always seeks the good of the loved one. It is always plotting and scheming for the well-being of the friend. That was how John Robinson, the beloved pastor of the Pilgrim Fathers, was described by one of his flock. “He ever sought our good, both body and soul.” That was a true friendship.

And as man’s good, both body and soul, is best secured by union with Christ, this follows, that the highest office of friendship is to do what these four men did, bring the friend to Jesus. When Andrew found Messiah, he hurried off to seek his brother Simon. “He brought him unto Jesus.” What a friend he was to his brother that day! “Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, we have found Him” (Joh 1:45, R. V.). What a friend Philip was to Nathanael that day! Are we friends of that type?

Their Faith Undaunted by Difficulties.

2. What magnificent faith these friends had! It was faith that was not daunted by difficulties. It was not an easy task to bring their friend to Jesus, but they persevered, in spite of all obstacles, and their faith won the blessing. “Jesus seeing their faith saith unto the sick of the palsy, Son, thy sins are forgiven.” (ii. 5, R.V.). There are difficulties still in the way of bringing friends to Christ. The crowd of engagements and cares and pleasures, and the opposition of so-called society, they are all hindrances in the way-but a true faith perseveres. Monica wept and entreated and prayed for years, but at last she saw Augustine her son at the Saviour’s feet. “In due season we shall reap, if we faint not” (Gal 6:9.)

-Exerted for Another.

Theirs was a vicarious faith. “Jesus seeing their faith saith unto the sick of the palsy, Thy sins are forgiven.” He blessed the sick man for the faith of the four devoted friends. We often talk of vicarious sacrifice. But here is vicarious faith! That people receive large and rich blessing on account of the faith of others, is not theory, but fact. The Bible is full of it. For the sake of ten righteous men God would have spared Sodom. The Lord blessed the house of Potiphar for Joseph’s sake. God saved the whole ship-load of people because His servant Paul was on board. And so still, God blesses the world for the sake of His faithful servants who are in it. He blesses the house for the sake of a saintly mother. He blesses this man and that for the sake of a godly friend, just as He forgives and saves the world for the sake of a Holy Christ.

Here is encouragement to make our faith a real help to others. Are we doing this?

Fuente: The Gospel According to St. Mark: A Devotional Commentary

The Healing of the Sick of the Palsy

Mar 2:1-17

INTRODUCTORY WORDS

1. How Christ’s meetings were advertised. Our Lord’s Word and His work was sufficient to assure Him a multitude, whithersoever He went. He moved among the people in a quiet and even in an humble mien. When He spoke He was accustomed to sit down. When He healed the sick or raised the dead, He did not sound a trumpet before Him, yet all the people sought Him.

We are coming more and more to the conviction that after all it is a plain, positive, and Holy Ghost indued message that people want to hear in our day. The world is getting weary of the flash of Broadway and of the glare of its white lights. Depression and distress, poverty and almost famine, sorrow and sighing fill the hearts of an ever-increasing mass of men.

What the people need is a messenger sent from Heaven with a power which is of God.

2. What Christ preached. The last statement of the 2d verse carries a wealth of meaning. It reads thus, “and He preached the Word unto them.”

The Lord Jesus could have found many other things to preach had He sought for them. There were many thing’s which He might have preached, however, “He preached the Word.”

Did not Paul say to Timothy, “Preach the Word, be instant in season, out of season”? Did not the Apostle Paul write of himself, “Paul * * an Apostle, separated unto the Gospel of God, * * concerning His Son”? On another occasion did he not say, “We preach Christ”?

It is the Word of God which is sharper than any two-edged sword.

It is the Word of God which is like the rain and the snow coming down from Heaven, and causing the earth to bring forth and bud.

It is the Word of God that is the fire and the hammer that breaketh the rock in pieces.

The unsaved are born again by the grafted Word. The saved are built up by the Word. The path of the just is lighted by the Word. Can we not therefore, as believers, appreciate the statement concerning Christ,

“He preached the Word unto them”?

I. ONE SICK OF THE PALSY (Mar 2:3-4)

1. The sick of the palsy was borne of four. Perhaps that day in the crowd that filled the house and pressed the doors, the Lord observed the absence of the four followers. Where were they? Would they not have enjoyed His testimony? They would. Would they not have delighted in His presence? There is no doubt of it. However, they had gone to seek another and to bring him to Christ.

It took four to bring the one, but it was not a waste of time or of energy. Would that we had more people ready to go out into the highways and hedges and constrain the people to come in. Would that we had more men who had a heart for those who wander, for the absentees and non-attendants at the House of God.

2. A hindering crowd. As the four brought the sick of the palsy to the meeting, they found that they could not come nigh unto Christ for the press. Everybody seemed more anxious to see themselves, than to let some one else see. They were peering over each others’ heads. They were pressing through, the best they could to get a sight of the. Master. They had no thought and no care, however, for one who needed the Lord more than they.

We have seen the time, as an invitation was being given in some church service, when, pinned in the middle of a seat, there was a man who sought the Saviour. Tears were in his eyes. A sob was in his heart. On either side of him and between him and both aisles were saints filling his only path of egress. They stood with their hymnbooks raised, singing with their might. They knew it not, but they were hindering one who wanted to get out that he might come to the altar for prayer.

Let us be helpers and not hinderers. Let us seek for the lost and not crowd them out from God.

3. An undaunted purpose. The four men had started with the sick of the palsy determined to lay him at the feet of Jesus. The press of the people at the doors could not deter them. Upon the roof they climbed, carrying the bed on which the sick man lay. The tile they removed, then carefully they let down the bed whereupon the sick man lay.

4. The responsive Christ. When Jesus saw their faith, the faith of the four, and the faith of the sick of the palsy, he said, “Son, thy sins be forgiven thee.”

The four had faith or else they had never gone to bring the sick of the palsy. The sick of the palsy had faith or else he never would have suffered himself to be brought. Our Lord said, “According to your faith be it unto you.”

So when He saw their faith, there was nothing to do save to heal the sick. When faith grasps the hand of God, it grasps the power that rules the rod.

II. THE FAULTFINDING SCRIBES (Mar 2:6-7)

1. The ever-present critic. We wonder if a sermon has ever been preached when there were not some people present who were chronic faultfinders, some sitting there who had not come to worship but to criticize. It was so with our Lord. How wonderful was He! How matchless were His Words! How unspeakable were His miracles! In such a one there could be found no fault. He knew no sin, and He did no sin. He was ever thoughtful and filled with compassion.

However, all of this did not stay the hand of the scribes, nor did it quiet their reasoning against Him. They had made up their minds before they came that they would not accept the Lord Jesus. Their purpose was not to be taught but to contend.

We remember how the Apostle Paul wrote, “All they which are in Asia be turned away from me.” He said, that Alexander the coppersmith did him much harm. He said, “Demas hath forsaken me, having loved this present world.”

He also said, “At my first answer no man stood with me, but all men forsook me.”

Hard it is to understand, and yet it is true that even the Lord was despised. Some rebuked Him because He sat with sinners and ate with them. Some said that He had a demon, others cried that He was a glutton and a winebibber. Against all of these Jesus did not contend. Such reproofs as He uttered were reproofs of love and of pity. Let those of us who seek to serve the Lord expect to be maligned, misrepresented and misunderstood.

2. The cause of their criticism. The Lord Jesus had said unto the sick of the palsy, “Son, thy sins be forgiven thee.”

The critics said, “Why doth this man thus speak blasphemies? who can forgive sins but God only?”

Thus we behold that their antagonism began with their negation of Christ’s Deity. Had they known that He was God, they would have known that He could forgive sins.

We are led therefore to grant that sometimes the bickering and the strife of people against their pastor or against some other leader in the Word and Work of God is brought about by misconceptions and misunderstandings.

We are sure that the scribes should have known better. We are sure also that the modernists, whom we call destructive critics, should also know better. They speak against One whom they know not. They criticize One who is entirely foreign to their faith.

Christ came unto them from the Father but they knew Him not. He came with the Words of Life but they received Him not. He extended unto them His hands of love but they came not unto Him.

They cried out, “Why doth this man thus speak blasphemies?” and yet they themselves were blaspheming the Christ, the Son of God. They cried, “Who can forgive sins but God only?” and yet, they themselves could never be forgiven of their sins apart from the God-Man whom they were criticizing.

III. THE OMNISCIENT CHRIST (Mar 2:8)

Our key verse says, “And immediately when Jesus perceived in His spirit that they so reasoned within themselves, He said unto them, Why reason ye these things in your hearts?”

1. The Lord knew what was in man. He knew it from the throne in Heaven; He knew it when He walked among men; He knows it now. Who is there who can fly from His Spirit, and hide away from His face? Our Lord has beset us behind and before.

The omniscient Christ! Such knowledge is too wonderful for us. It is high. We cannot attain unto it.

The omniscient Christ! Whither shall I go from Thy spirit? or whither shall I flee from Thy presence? Is there anywhere that we can go that He will not find us? If we ascend up into Heaven, He is there. If we take the wings of the morning and hie us away to the uttermost parts of the sea, He is there.

The omniscient Christ! If I say, “Surely the darkness shall cover me,” even the night shall be light about me. When we think of Christ, we must remember that our substance was not hid from Him. From our mother’s womb, He was there. He knows our downsittings and our uprisings and understandeth our thoughts afar off. Thus it was that immediately Jesus perceived in His spirit that they reasoned against Him.

2. The Lord questioned man. To His critics Christ said, “Why reason ye these things in your hearts?” We would like to ask every critic of our Saviour the same word, “Why?” Has the Lord Jesus done anything worthy of death? Have those who criticize Him any real reason for their condemnation? Shall the unclean deride the clean? Shall the impure defame the holy? Shall the unforgiving ostracize the merciful, the tender, the kindhearted?

In other words, how can people cry out, “Away with Him,” “Let Him be crucified”? How can they thrust the sword into His side and drive the nails through His hands and His feet? How can they press His brow with thorns?

IV. A QUESTION OF AUTHORITY (Mar 2:9-10)

To the reasoning and questioning of the critics, Christ responded by asking them a question. They said, “Who can forgive sins but God only?” He replied, “Whether is it easier to say to the sick of the palsy, Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Arise, and take up thy bed, and walk?”

1. The secret back of Christ’s question. In the Gospel of John, we have, in chapter 2, the working of Christ’s first miracle in Cana of Galilee. The water having been turned to wine, we read, “This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and manifested forth His glory.”

In the 5th chapter of John, Christ said, “The same works that I do, bear witness of Me, that the Father hath sent Me.”

Now, to the statement of the scribes that God alone could forgive sin, Christ responded that it is as easy to forgive sins as it is to say to the sick of the palsy, “Take up thy beef, and walk.” Then He added, “But that ye may know that the Son of Man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (He saith to the sick of the palsy,) I say unto thee, Arise, and take up thy bed.”

Our Lord Jesus wrought where no one had ever wrought. His miracles were miracles such as no human, unless panoplied with power Divine, could work. Christ cured the sick of the palsy, the leper, the woman bent double by Satan’s power, the demoniac of Gadara. Christ raised the dead, the daughter of Jairus, the son of the widow of Nain, and Lazarus. Christ walked upon the sea, and with His lips spoke the word that caused the startled elements immediately to be quiet.

Surely such an One could forgive sins because such an One was very God of very God.

Let those who deny the efficacy of Jesus Christ, His power to save and to forgive sins, explain how this Man spake as never man spake; how He lived as none other ever lived; how He wrought as none other ever wrought.

Let those who deny the power of Christ to forgive sins explain His resurrection from the dead, His ascent to the Father’s right hand, with the descent of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost.

2. The assurance of the forgiveness of sins. Thank God that the sinner borne down under the burden of his sins needs not to despair. There is One who suffered and died, the Just for the unjust. By virtue of His atoning work, He can and does proffer a full and free pardon.

Not only does He forgive sins, but He takes them away. He justifies the sinner, and makes him to stand before God clothed in Divine righteousness.

No man, be he priest or potentate, can forgive sins but God. Christ has that power because Christ is God.

V. GLORIFYING THE ALL GLORIOUS CHRIST (Mar 2:11-12)

1. The immediacy of Christ’s twofold work. That the Lord did do two things for the sick of the palsy, we know. (1) He forgave him his sins. This was done immediately and upon the spot. It may be that his palsy had been a Divine chastisement, placed upon him because of some physical sin, which he had committed. The Holy Spirit, through James, instructed the sick saying among other things, “Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed.”

We are assured that in many cases personal sins, are closely related to personal sicknesses. In Corinthians we read of the failure of certain saints to discern the Lord’s body. Then the Holy Spirit adds, “For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.”

(2) He healed him of his palsy. This also was done immediately. The sin was gone; the sickness was also gone. When the latter is the result of the former, the confession of the latter, with forgiveness, will naturally be followed by the removal of that which caused the disease.

2. The people glorifying God. When the populace saw what was done they were all amazed and glorified God saying, “We never saw it on this fashion.”

The greatest testimony to the power of God is the redemption of the sinner. In a revival meeting, when the unsaved are loosed from the chains that bind them, and when they experience the marvelous regenerating grace of God, there is joy not only in the presence of the angels above, but also among the saints and populace below.

“The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth His handywork.” How much more then do reborn men and women declare His glory! This glory will be accorded now to Christ. It will also be given in “the air,” and throughout the eternal ages. We love the reading in Revelation which runs this way, “And they sung a new song, saying Thou art worthy * *: for Thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by Thy Blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation.”

Thus, in Heaven itself, the redeemed glorify God.

VI. HEALING FOLLOWED BY TEACHING, TEACHING FOLLOWED BY A CALLING TO SERVICE (Mar 2:13-14)

After the healing of the man sick of the palsy, the Lord Jesus went forth by the seaside. Once again the multitude resorted unto Him and He taught them.

1. Teaching should follow healing. We may behold the mighty works of God without knowing the wonders of the Miracle Worker. He who has felt the power of God in his body in healing, or the power of God in his heart in the forgiveness of sins and in redemption, needs to be taught concerning the Lord Jesus.

It was Mary who chose that better part to sit at the feet of her Master and to hear His words. How wonderful, and how gracious, as well as how illuminating were the words which fell from the lips of the Saviour.

In imagination we can see Him, even now, as He sat on the mountain and spoke forth the magic message of the Sermon on the Mount. Thank God, even unto this hour it is possible for any of us to sit at the feet of Jesus and hear His words.

Have you just been saved? Remember how the man of Gadara being delivered sat clothed and in his right mind, at the feet of the Master, as He opened up unto him the Scriptures?

2. Serving should follow teaching. After He had taught the disciples, as He passed by He saw Levi the son of Alphaeus sitting in the receipt of custom, and He said unto him, “Follow Me.” We think that our conclusion is correct. The Apostle Paul being saved immediately proclaimed that Jesus was the Christ and yet before he was sent on his three great missionary tours, he must needs go into Arabia to be taught of God.

The head must be taught before the lips can successfully proclaim the story of God.

3. Levi, commonly known as Matthew, left the seat of the custom to follow Jesus. Beloved, are we willing to follow Him and to go forth to serve Him? We may have much to leave but we will have much more to obtain. If we turn from this or from that, we will find ourselves not in straitened but enlarged quarters.

Even Moses, who left the riches and pleasures of Egypt and the glories of the Egyptian court, left nothing comparable to the glory which he obtained as the leader of the Children of Israel.

As Moses stood on the Mount of Transfiguration, think you that he regretted his abandonment of Pharaoh and Pharaoh’s God?

VII. THE EVER PRESENT CRITIC (Mar 2:15-17)

There were critics in the home in Capernaum where Jesus taught. There were critics ready to complain and find fault as Jesus sat at meat in the house of Levi.

1. Jesus sat at meat with publicans and sinners. First of all, we ask you to observe that Christ had a body similar to our bodies. A body that needed substance for He ate and He drank as do we. Again, we would have you to observe that Christ delighted in companionship. He entered the house of Levi and sat together with him at meat. If Christ delights in our fellowship, how much more should we delight in His! Christ did not enter a cloister where He might be separate and segregated from men. He sat rather in the house of Levi, where many publicans and sinners sat with Him. Let us not refuse contact with the lost.

The Lord came into the world to seek and to save that which was lost. He was the Bread which was to be shared with the hungry and the Water of Life which was to be a fount from which the thirsty might drink.

God is still saying to the wicked, “Come now, and let us reason together.”

2. The criticism of the critics. When the scribes and Pharisees saw Jesus eating with the publicans and sinners, they said, “He eateth and drinketh with publicans and sinners.” When Jesus heard it He said unto them, “They that are whole have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.”

Christ did not mingle with sinners with the intent of entering with them into their shame and folly. He mingled with them in order to save them. In Luk 15:1-32, we read of how the Lord again sat with publicans and sinners; but, as He sat He gave that marvelous threefold parable of the lost sheep, the lost coin, and the lost son.

We must not enter into the ways of sinners. We must not walk with their conceptions of things. We may go only where they are, mix with them and mingle with them in order that we may win them and point them to the Saviour of man.

AN ILLUSTRATION

“For your lives!” cried the Portuguese captain of an African slave ship to a band of naked negroes, as he pointed to an English ship which had been in hot chase of him for hours. “Fight for your lives!” he cried out, as he gave each man a weapon. And the deluded and terrified negroes did as they were told, and in doing so they wounded and killed their best friends, who had come to deliver them. So Jesus came to set the captives of sin free, but the Pharisees rose against Jesus; and the very men He loved and came to free they hied on to kill Him.-Rev. B. Waugh.

Fuente: Neighbour’s Wells of Living Water

1

Jesus did not remain in the desert indefinitely, but returned to Capernaum which was his last residence. Of course he would not escape the knoweldge of the crowd for the word passed around that he was in a certain house.

Verse 2. The crowd filled the house to capacity and then kept coming until they could not all get in hearing distance of the door. But to all who were within that limit Jesus did his preaching.

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

THIS passage shows our Lord once more at Capernaum. Once more we find Him doing His accustomed work, preaching the word, and healing those that were sick.

We see, in these verses, what great spiritual privileges some persons enjoy, and yet make no use of them.

This is a truth which is strikingly illustrated by the history of Capernaum. No city in Palestine appears to have enjoyed so much of our Lord’s presence, during His earthly ministry, as did this city. It was the place where He dwelt, after He left Nazareth. (Mat 4:13.) It was the place where many of His miracles were worked, and many of His sermons delivered. But nothing that Jesus said or did seems to have had any effect on the hearts of the inhabitants. They crowded to hear Him, as we read in this passage, “till there was no room about the door.” They were amazed. They were astonished. They were filled with wonder at His mighty works. But they were not converted. They lived in the full noon-tide blaze of the Sun of Righteousness, and yet their hearts remained hard. And they drew from our Lord the heaviest condemnation that He ever pronounced against any place, except Jerusalem: “Thou, Capernaum, which art exalted unto heaven, shalt be brought down to hell; for if the mighty works, which have been done in thee, had been done in Sodom, it would have remained until this day. But I say unto you, That it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment, than for thee.” (Mat 11:23-24.)

It is good for us all to mark well this case of Capernaum. We are all too apt to suppose that it needs nothing but the powerful preaching of the Gospel to convert people’s souls, and that if the Gospel is only brought into a place everybody must believe. We forget the amazing power of unbelief, and the depth of man’s enmity against God. We forget that the Capernaites heard the most faultless preaching, and saw it confirmed by the most surprising miracles, and yet remained dead in trespasses and sins. We need reminding that the same Gospel which is the savor of life to some, is the savor of death to others, and that the same fire which softens the wax will also harden the clay. Nothing, in fact, seems to harden man’s heart so much, as to hear the Gospel regularly, and yet deliberately prefer the service of sin and the world. Never was there a people so highly favored as the people of Capernaum, and never was there a people who appear to have become so hard. Let us beware of walking in their steps. We ought often to use the prayer of the Litany, “From hardness of heart, Good Lord, deliver us.”

We see, in the second place, from these verses, how great a blessing affliction may prove to a man’s soul.

We are told that one sick of the palsy was brought to our Lord, at Capernaum, in order to be healed. Helpless and impotent, he was carried in his bed by four kind friends, and let down into the midst of the place where Jesus was preaching. At once the object of the man’s desire was gained. The great Physician of soul and body saw him, and gave him speedy relief. He restored him to health and strength. He granted him the far greater blessing of forgiveness of sins. In short, the man who had been carried from his house that morning weak, dependent, and bowed down both in body and soul, returned to his own house rejoicing.

Who can doubt that to the end of his days this man would thank God for his palsy? Without it he might probably have lived and died in ignorance, and never seen Christ at all. Without it, he might have kept his sheep on the green hills of Galilee all his life long, and never been brought to Christ, and never heard these blessed words, “thy sins be forgiven thee.” That palsy was indeed a blessing. Who can tell but it was the beginning of eternal life to his soul?

How many in every age can testify that this palsied man’s experience has been their own! They have learned wisdom by affliction. Bereavements have proved mercies. Losses have proved real gains. Sicknesses have led them to the great Physician of souls, sent them to the Bible, shut out the world, shown them their own foolishness, taught them to pray. Thousands can say like David, “It is good for me that I was afflicted, that I might learn thy statutes.” (Psa 119:71.)

Let us beware of murmuring under affliction. We may be sure there is a needs-be for every cross, and a wise reason for every trial. Every sickness and sorrow is a gracious message from God, and is meant to call us nearer to Him. Let us pray that we may learn the lesson that each affliction is appointed to convey. Let us see that we “refuse not Him that speaketh.”

We see, in the last place, in these verses, the priestly power of forgiving sins, which is possessed by our Lord Jesus Christ.

We read that our Lord said to the sick of the palsy, “Son, thy sins be forgiven thee.” He said these words with a meaning. He knew the hearts of the Scribes by whom He was surrounded. He intended to show them that He laid claim to be the true High Priest, and to have the power of absolving sinners, though at present the claim was seldom put forward. But that He had the power He told them expressly. He says, “the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins.” In saying, “thy sins be forgiven thee,” He had only exercised His rightful office.

Let us consider how great must be the authority of Him, who has the power to forgive sins! This is the thing that none can do but God. No angel in heaven, no man upon earth, no church in council, no minister of any denomination, can take away from the sinner’s conscience the load of guilt, and give him peace with God. They may point to the fountain open for all sin. They may declare with authority whose sins God is willing to forgive. But they cannot absolve by their own authority. They cannot put away transgressions. This is the peculiar prerogative of God, and a prerogative which He has put in the hands of His Son Jesus Christ.

Let us think for a moment how great a blessing it is, that Jesus is our great High Priest, and that we know where to go for absolution! We must have a Priest and a sacrifice between ourselves and God. Conscience demands an atonement for our many sins. God’s holiness makes it absolutely needful. Without an atoning Priest there can be no peace of soul. Jesus Christ is the very Priest that we need, mighty to forgive and pardon, tender-hearted and willing to save.

And now let us ask ourselves whether we have yet known the Lord Jesus as our High Priest? Have we applied to Him? Have we sought absolution? If not, we are yet in our sins. May we never rest till the Spirit witnesses with our spirit that we have sat at the feet of Jesus and heard his voice, saying, “Son, thy sins be forgiven thee.”

Fuente: Ryle’s Expository Thoughts on the Gospels

Mar 2:1. Capernaum. His own city. Mat 9:1.

After some days. More than one day, but how many does not appear. Still even this indefinite mark of time favors the view, that the order of this Evangelist is exact.

Noised. This suggests a private entrance into the city, and then a general report that He was there.

In the house. The article is wanting in the original; the phrase is equivalent to at home; but with the additional idea of having come there. It is therefore probable that the house was His usual residence in Capernaum, but this is not definitely expressed.

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

In the last verse of the foregoing chapter we find how industriously our blessed Saviour withdrew himself from the concourse and throng of people which flocked after him from every quarter; and to show how little he affected the applause and commendation of the multitude, he left the cities and was without in desert places. Hereby giving his ministers an instructive example to decline vain-glory, and to shun popular applause. But now the words before us show that our Saviour having entered (privately, as is probable) into the city of Capernaum, it is presently, noised and reported that he was in the house, and a mighty concourse and throng of people are after him; insomuch that neither the house, nor hardly the streets, could contain them.

Thence learn, That such as least seek after honour and applause from men, are oft-times most famous and renowned. Our Saviour was so far from seeking the people’s praise and commendation, that he came into Capernaum without observation, and betook himself to his dwelling-house there; but the more he sought to lie hid, the more he was taken notice of.

Honour flies from them that pursue it, and pursues those that fly from it. The way to be honoured, is to be humble. God seldom honours a proud man, by making him either eminently serviceable or successful.

Observe farther, The people being come together, our Saviour takes the opportunity to preach; And he preached the word unto them. Teaching his ministers by his example, to embrace all opportunities, in season and out of season, on the Lord’s day and on the week day, to edify our people by our ministry, by our public exhortations, by our private instructions, prudent admonitions, and holy examples.

Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament

Mar 2:1-2. And again After having been in desert places for same time, he returned privately to Capernaum. It was noised that he was in the house The rumour immediately spread, that he was come to the city, and was in Peters house. And straightway many were gathered together His arrival was no sooner known than such a multitude was gathered together that the house could not contain them; nor even the court before the door. Hitherto the general impression on their hearts continued. Hitherto, even at Capernaum, most of those who heard, received the word with joy. And he preached the word unto them He preached to as many as could hear him; and among the rest, as we learn, Luk 5:17, to many Pharisees and teachers of the law, who on the report of his miracles were come from all quarters to see his works, and judge of his pretensions.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

XXXV.

JESUS HEALS A PARALYTIC AT CAPERNAUM.

aMATT. IX. 2-8; bMARK II. 1-12; cLUKE V. 17-26.

c17 And it came to pass on one of those days, bwhen he entered again into Capernaum after some days, cthat he was teaching; bit was noised that he was in the house. [Luke uses the general expression [181] “those days,” referring to the early portion of our Lord’s ministry in Galilee. Mark says, “some days,” which implies the lapse of a considerable interval. The healing of the leper created such excitement that for some time, several weeks, Jesus kept out of the cities. He now, after the excitement has subsided, quietly enters Capernaum, and probably goes to the house of Simon Peter, now looked upon as his head quarters in Capernaum ( Mar 1:29). His entrance into Capernaum marks the end of his first missionary tour through Galilee.] 2 And many were gathered together, so that there was no longer room for them, no, not even about the door: and he spake the word unto them. [Oriental houses are one or two storied structures, built in the form of a square, or rectangle, with an open space in the center called the court. They have one door which opens from the street into an open space called the porch, and this porch in turn opens upon the court. In this porch there is usually a stairway leading to the roof. The roofs are invariably flat, and are surrounded by a breastwork or parapet to keep those on them from falling off. Roofs or housetops are used as we use yards, only they are somewhat private. Some think that this house was a two-storied structure, and that Jesus was teaching in the upper room or second story. If this were so, there would have been little profit to the people who clung about the street door, for they could neither see nor hear. Besides, a two-storied house would probably have been beyond the means of Simon Peter. It is more likely that Jesus was in the room opposite the porch across the court. If so, the crowd at the door might catch an occasional word, or by tiptoing obtain a momentary glance; and thus fan the hope of some ultimate satisfaction. The gospel is here called “the word,” for it is the Word among words, as the Bible is the Book among books.] cand there were Pharisees and doctors of the law sitting by [the fact that they were sitting, shows that they were honored above the rest: Jesus did not increase their ill-will by any needless disrespect], who were come out of every village of Galilee and Judaea and [182] Jerusalem [It is not likely that such a gathering came together by accident. Capernaum was known to be the headquarters of Jesus, and these leaders of the people had doubtless gathered there to wait for some opportunity to see or hear Jesus. They recognized the necessity of coming to some definite judgment regarding him. We shall see in this scene the beginning of their hostility to Jesus, which developed into four objections: 1. Alleged blasphemy; 2. Intercourse with publicans and sinners; 3. Supposed neglect of ascetic duties, such as washings, fastings, etc.; 4. Alleged violation of the sabbath]: and the power of the Lord was with him to heal. [That is to say, the power of God the Father was then working in Jesus to perform miracles ( Joh 14:10). Some take this as implying that other miracles had been wrought that day, before the arrival of the paralytic. But the words are more likely a preface for what follows; in which case the meaning is that the cold disbelief of the Pharisees did not prevent Jesus from working miracles, as disbelief usually did– Mat 13:58, Mat 16:1-4.] 18 And behold, men bring {athey brought bthey come, bringing} unto him a man sick of the palsy, {cthat was palsied:} alying on a bed: bborne of four [Palsy is an abbreviation of the word “paralysis.” It is caused by a cessation of the nervous activities. See Act 8:22). So far as the church forgives sins ( Joh 20:23), it does it merely as the organ of God, and must do so according to the methods and ordinances laid down by God. Those who profess to forgive sin by word of mouth, should be able to make good their claim to this boasted power by healing diseases or otherwise removing the consequences of sin. Failing to do this, they must forever rest under justified suspicion that they are, wittingly or unwittingly, guilty of blasphemy.] b6 But there were certain of the scribes cand the Pharisees bsitting there, a3 And behold, [they] cbegan to reason, band reasoning in their hearts, asaid within themselves, csaying, aThis man blasphemeth. b7 Why doth this that man thus speak? [A scornful expression, shown by the repetition, houtos houtoo, which means, literally, “this one these things.”] cWho is this that speaketh blasphemies? Who can forgive sins, bbut one, even God? calone? [In classic Greek to blaspheme means to speak evil or, or to slander a person, and it is used in this sense in the New Testament ( Tit 3:2, 2Pe 2:2, Jud 1:8). Its ordinary New Testament use, however, is quite different, since it is employed to designate something which reflects evil on the character and nature of God. This use is peculiar to monotheistic writers, and was unknown to the Greeks. Such blasphemies may be divided into three general heads, thus: 1. To attribute the unworthy to God. 2. To deny the worthy to God. 3. To arrogate or claim any attribute, power, authority, etc., which belongs to exclusively to God. It was under this third head that Jesus seemed to lay himself open to accusation–an accusation entirely just if he had not been the [185] Son of God. The Pharisees were not faulty in their logic, but were mistaken in their premises; hence Jesus does not deny their doctrine; he merely corrects their mistaken application of it to himself. As to this pronounced forgiveness of Jesus, two questions arise: 1. Why did he forgive the man’s sins? The haste with which the man was brought to Jesus suggests that his condition was critical; in which case the torment of sin would be the greater. As a searcher of hearts, Jesus saw the unuttered desire of the sick man, and at once responded to it. If his words meant nothing to the conscience of the man, they were wasted; but Jesus knew what was in man. 2. Why did he pronounce the forgiveness so publicly? As the terms of pardon prescribed in the law were yet in full force, this open speech of Jesus was a surprising assertion of authority. In fact, such assertions were exceptional in his ministry; for only on three recorded occasions did he thus forgive sins ( Luk 7:48, Luk 23:43). Being the exceptional and not the established method of pardon, and being thus employed in the presence of so representative an audience, it was evidently used for a special purpose; and that purpose was to show that Jesus had such power, that men seeing this power might believe him to be the Son of God. He was vindicating an eternal law of the universe, in which all human beings throughout all generations would be interested; viz.: that humanity has a Ruler who can present it spotless before the throne of God ( Jud 1:24). Jesus propounded his law in the presence of those most interested in exposing it if false, and most able to explode it had it not been true. Whether his words were truth or blasphemy, was the controversy between Christ and the rulers from that day to the end of his ministry– Mat 26:65.] b8 And straightway Jesus, perceiving in his spirit that they so reasoned {ctheir reasonings,} bwithin themselves, a4 And Jesus knowing their thoughts [Jesus read their thoughts by his divine insight, and not because of any recognized habit or tendency on their part to criticise him, for this is the first recorded indication of hostility on the part of the Pharisees, [186] though it is hinted at, at Joh 4:1. Such discernment of the thought was to be a characteristic mark of the expected Messiah ( Isa 11:2, Isa 11:3), and Jesus had it ( Joh 2:25). It also is an attribute peculiar to God– 1Ch 28:9, Jer 17:10, Rom 8:27, Rev 2:23] canswered and said {bsaith} unto them, aWherefore think ye evil in your hearts? [Jesus could see invisible sin, and could forgive it or condemn it, as the conditions moved him. The powers of discernment, forgiveness and condemnation make him the perfect Judge.] bWhy reason ye in your hearts? a5 For which is easier, bto say to the sick of the palsy, cThy sins are forgiven thee; bor to say, Arise, and take up thy bed, and walk? [To understand this sentence we should place the emphasis upon the word “say,” because the question at issue was the power or effect of his speech. The rabbis, after their first shock of surprise, thought that Jesus feared to attempt the fraud of a so-called miracle in the presence of learned men, lest he should be detected and exposed; and hence looked upon his present action as an attempt to bear himself safely off before the public, and to maintain his standing by the use of high-sounding words. They felt that he used words of unseen effect, because he dared not use those of seen effect. This was precisely the view that Jesus knew they would take, and that he wished them to take; for by showing his ability to work in the realms of sight that which is impossible; viz.: the healing of the sick man, he could place before them proof suited to their own reasoning that he had a like ability to work the impossible in the realms of the unseen; viz.: the forgiveness of the man’s sins. By thus demonstrating his authority in the eternal and physical world, Jesus assures us of his dominion over the internal and spiritual.] 10 But that ye may know that the Son of man [Daniel’s name for the Messiah– Dan 7:10-13] hath authority on earth to forgive sins [The words “on earth” are taken by some to indicate the then existing contrast between Christ’s present humiliation or ministry on earth, and his future glorification or enthronement in heaven; in which case they would [187] mean that Jesus could grant now that which some might think could only be exercised hereafter. Others take them to mean the same as if Jesus had said, “You think that forgiveness can only be granted by the Father in heaven, but it can also be granted by the Son upon earth. That which you have heretofore sought from the Father you may now seek from me.” The latter is probably the correct view. As to the test of power or authority, the miracle of Jesus was very convincing; for in the popular opinion sin was a cause of which disease was the effect. We are told, on the authority of later rabbis, that it was a maxim among the Jews that no diseased person could be healed till his sins were blotted out. We also recognize a correlation between sins and diseases, which the Saviour’s use of this miracle justifies. A mere miracle, such as swallowing fire or causing iron to float, would not prove his ability to forgive sins. The proof consisted in the relation which disease bears to sin, and the consequent relation which healing bears to forgiveness. The connection between disease and sin is a real and necessary one. The Jews were right in seeing this connection, but they erred in thinking that they were warranted in personally criminating every one whom they found afflicted, and in judging that the weight of the affliction indicated the quantity of the sin. The Book of Job should have corrected this error. Such unrighteous judgments are condemned by Christ ( Joh 9:3, Luk 13:2-5). Paralysis is, however, to-day looked upon as ordinarily the punishment of some personal sin, usually that of intemperance or sensuality], a(then saith he to the sick of the palsy), {c(he said unto him that was palsied),} I say unto thee, Arise, and take up thy couch, {bbed,} cand go up unto thy house. [What command could be more pleasant than that which bade this sick man go home forgiven and healed?] 25 And immediately he rose up {aarose,} cbefore them, band straightway took up the bed, cthat whereon he lay [“A sweet saying! The bed had borne the man; now the man bore the bed”–Bengel], band went forth before them all aand departed to his house. [188] cglorifying God. binsomuch that they were all amazed, 8 But when the multitudes saw it, they were afraid, c26 And amazement took hold on all, and they glorified God [The “all” of this passage hardly includes the scribes and Pharisees, or, if it does, their admiration of Jesus was but a momentary enthusiasm, which quickly passed away]; awho had given such authority unto men. [Some take the word “men” as the plural of category, and apply it to Christ. Others think that they regarded Jesus as a mere man among other men, and that they therefore looked upon his power as a gift given to men generally, and not as something peculiar to himself. If this latter view is correct, it is likely that they took the words “Son of man” as referring to men generally, and not as a reference to the Messiah, such as Jesus meant it to be.] bsaying, We never saw it on this fashion, cand they were filled with fear, saying, We have seen strange things to-day. [Literally, seen paradoxes: things contrary to common thought and ordinary experience. They had seen a threefold miracle: sins forgiven, thoughts read and palsy healed.]

[FFG 181-189]

Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)

Mark Chapter 2

Afterwards (chap. 2) He goes again into the city, and immediately the multitude gather together. What a living picture of the Lord’s life of service! He preaches to them. This was His object and His service (see Mar 1:38). But again, in devoting Himself to the humble accomplishment of it as committed to Him, His service itself, His love-for who serves like God when He deigns to do it?-bring out His divine rights. He knew the real source of all these evils, and He could bring in its remedy. “Thy sins,” said He to the poor paralytic man, who was brought to Him with a faith that overcame difficulties, persevering in spite of them-that perseverance of faith which is fed by the sense of want, and certainty that power is to be found in Him who is sought-“thy sins are forgiven thee.” To the reasoning of the scribes He gives an answer that silenced every gainsayer. He exercises the power that authorised Him to pronounce the pardon of the poor sufferer. [3]

The murmuring of the scribes brought out doctrinally who was there; as the verdict of the priests, who pronounce the leper clean, put the seal of their authority upon the truth that Jehovah, the healer of Israel, was there. That which Jesus carries on is His work, His testimony. The effect is to make it manifest that Jehovah is there, and has visited His people. It is Psa 103:1-22 which is fulfilled, with respect to the rights and the revelation of the Person of Him who wrought.

Jesus leaves the city; the people flock around Him; and again He teaches them. The call of Levi gives occasion for a new development of His ministry. He was come to call sinners, and not the righteous. After this He tells them that He could not put the new divine energy, unfolded in Himself, into the old forms of Pharisaism. And there was another reason for it -the presence of the Bridegroom. How could the children of the bridechamber fast while the Bridegroom was with them? He should be taken from them, and then would be the time to fast. He proceeds to insist on the incompatibility between the old Jewish vessels and the power of the gospel. The latter would but subvert Judaism, to which they sought to attach it. That which took place when the disciples went through the cornfields confirms this doctrine.

Ordinances lost their authority in the presence of the King ordained of God, rejected and a pilgrim on the earth. Moreover the sabbath-a sign of the covenant between God and the Jews-was made for man, and not man for the sabbath; therefore He, the Son of man, was Lord of the sabbath. As Son of David rejected, the ordinances lost their force, and were subordinate to Him. As Son of man possessor (in the sight of God) of all the rights which God had bestowed on man, He was Lord of the sabbath, which was made for man. In principle the old things were passed away. But this was not all. It was in fact the new things of grace and power, which did not admit of the old order of things. But the question was, whether God could act in grace, and bestow blessing, in sovereignty, on His people-whether He must submit to the authority of men availing themselves of His ordinances against His goodness, or do good according to His own power and love as being above all. Was man to limit the operation of God’s goodness? And this, in truth, was the new wine which the Lord brought to man.

Footnotes on Mark Chapter 2

3: We must distinguish between governmental forgiveness, and absolute pardon of sins. Only, such as man is, there could not have been the former without the latter. But till Christ was rejected and had died this was not fully brought out.

Fuente: John Darby’s Synopsis of the New Testament

HE HEALS A PARALYTIC

Mat 9:2-8; Mar 2:1-12; & Luk 5:17-26. Mark: And again He came into Capernaum during those days, and it was heard that He is at home. And immediately the multitudes came together, so that there was no room, not even at the door; and He continued to speak the word to them. Luke says: The Pharisees and teachers of the law, who had come out of every village of Galilee and Judea and Jerusalem, were sitting around. In that day they had no newspapers, steam-engines, telegraphs, nor telephones, the news only going on the back of a camel, a fleet horse, or a swift pedestrian; yet, to our inextricable puzzle, the tidings flew everywhere with astounding velocity, notifying the people, as here Luke says, not only in the cities, but all the villages, that Jesus has come back from His retirement Into Capernaum, His headquarters, and is again preaching to the multitudes, healing the sick and casting out demons.

They come to Him, carrying a paralyzed man, borne by four. Not being able to reach Him, on account of the crowd, they took up the roof where He was, and lifting it out, let down the bed on which the paralyzed man was lying down. Luke says: Mounting up on top of the house, they let him down through the tiles, along with the bed, in the midst, in the presence of Jesus. The houses in that country have flat roofs, covered with stone, with stairways ascending up, and tiling arranged for removal at their option, when they wish to go out on the roof. The first time I ever entered Jerusalem, my guide escorted me through a lofty mansion by internal stairways, leading up through the roof, giving me a grand view of the city, which was impossible from the streets. As there is no doubt but this was Peter’s house in Capernaum, and the home of Jesus, the presumption is, it was not very high, the multitude being outside. These importunate friends of the paralytic, pressing their way through the crowd, use a ladder to climb the house from the outside, reaching the solid stone roof, cemented together so that it looked like a single great limestone rock covering the house, as I have so often seen and walked over them; coming to this movable door, take up the tiles, and let the man down, lying on his bed, lowering him to the very presence of Jesus, in the midst of His sermon.

And Jesus, seeing their faith, says to the paralytic, Child, thy sins are forgiven. Here we have a wonderful demonstration of prevailing faith.

There is no doubt but the paralytic had faith in Jesus to heal him, as these four friends, all round him during the long journey while carrying him on his bed, heaving like volcanoes, had inundated him with an atmosphere red- hot and electrified with indefatigable faith, so that, if he didn’t have it before, he certainly had imbibed it from his company by the time he reached the feet of Jesus; yet we have no allusion whatever to the faith of the patient, but it is unequivocally certified that the healing resulted from the faith of his four friends, who certainly abundantly proved their faith by their works in thus bringing him to the presence of Jesus, despite every conceivable difficulty. O that the perishing myriads all round us could only have friends enough to carry them to Jesus on the pinions of a faith that will take no denial! What a transcendent inspiration to all Christian workers, this notable case, where Jesus healed the man responsive to the faith of his friends!

Luk 5:21. And the scribes and Pharisees began to reason, saying, Who is this One who speaketh blasphemies? Who is able to forgive sins except God alone? And Jesus, knowing their thoughts, responding, said to them, Why do you reason in your hearts? Why is it easier to say, Thy sins are forgiven, than to say, Arise and walk? But in order that you may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, He said to the paralyzed man, I say unto thee, Arise, and taking up thy bed, go to thy home. And immediately arising in presence of them, taking up that on which he was lying down, he departed to his own home, glorifying God. And ecstasy seized all, and they continued to glorify God; and they were filled with fear, saying, That we have seen paradoxical things this day. While the Jewish Church was awfully unspiritual, and the preachers, as a rule, without an experimental knowledge of God, they held pertinaciously to the cardinal truths of the Bible, one of which here very lucidly crops out; i.e., that none but God can forgive sins. Many modern Churches, who are depending on priestly absolution, water baptism, sacraments, and good works, to take away their sins, would do well to heed this fundamental truth, here enunciated by the fallen clergy of apostate Judaism; i.e., that none but God alone can forgive sins. Therefore we must all pass by our own works, Church rites, water baptism, clerical intercession, and everything else, and go to God alone, on our knees, and stay till He, for Christ’s sake, forgives all our sins, and witnesses to the same by His blessed Holy Spirit. In this case, Jesus avails Himself of the smaller work i.e., bodily healing which was visible to mortal eyes, and incontestably demonstrated by the uprising of the patient, and the carrying of his bed away to his home, in order to illustrate the greater work i.e., the forgiving of his sins which either directly or indirectly had brought on him the paralysis, which is not hereditary, like leprosy, which typifies inbred sin; and consequently, as it originates from violation of the hygienical laws, represents actual sins, which must be removed by pardon, while original sin can only be expurgated by the cleansing blood of Jesus and the refining fire of the Holy Ghost. It is highly probable that this paralytic was a very bad case, of long standing, and extensively known by those people. Hence, his sudden and perfect healing, so clearly demonstrated, produced an intense excitement, not only filling the people with delight to see the mighty work, but Overawing them with profoundest reverence in the realization of the Divine presence.

Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament

Mar 2:4. They uncovered the roof. Houses in the east have mostly flat roofs on which they walk for the benefit of the air. They have but a narrow door, and seldom a window to the street. All their lower windows are toward the gardens.

Mar 2:7. Who can forgive sins but God only. When Nathan came to David he said, The Lord hath put away thy sin, thou shalt not die. The pharisees on hearing Christ, being learned in the law, said, this man blasphemeth. What would they have said to modern priests enthroned in the temples or confessionals, and blotting out the peoples sins as a cloud, among which are thousands of private murders in Ireland! None but God can judge of the preparation of heart for remission, none besides has authority to remit the penalty of his law: against thee, and thee only have I sinned, said David. Then God alone can forgive.

Mar 2:8. When Jesus perceived in his spirit that they so reasoned within themselves. Not his human soul, in which he sighed deeply when the jews demanded a sign from him, Mar 8:12; nor yet the Holy Spirit by which the prophets were inspired; but spiritus person ejus (Dei Creatoris) Christus Dominus. The Spirit of his Person, the Christ, the Lord. By consequence, Spirit in this place is equivalent to the Word of God. See in Pooles Synopsis of the critics, many testimonies from the fathers, that, to use St. Pauls word, Heb 1:3, the hypostasis or person of the Son is the same with the hypostasis or person of the Father. What other spirit could know the evil reasoning of these doctors? What other proof could the apostles ask of the omniscience of their Lord and master? He knew all men, and needed not that any should testify of man, for he knew what was in man. Joh 2:23-24.

Of the method of pardoning sins in Ireland, an interesting memoir has just appeared by Thomas sergeant in the forty third regiment. Having served at Copenhagen, and nearly in all the campaigns of Spain and Portugal, on returning home he was advised to go to the priest. He had misgivings as to the value of those services, but the importunity of his friends prevailed.

On arriving at the chapel, he says, which was a barn, I found a crowd of persons, all waiting to be relieved of their moral burdens. His reverence at length appeared: a haughtier figure I do not remember to have seen. On commencing the service, the latin was to me an intolerable jargon. A fierce rush was made by those without for admission. The reason for this haste did not consist in any special desire first to catch the benedictions, but because we had been told, it was a deadly sin to eat before confession. After a tremendous row, which had nearly ended in a fight, I was ushered into the presence of the priest. Tell out your sins, said he; a terrific commencement, but there was no retreat. I related the particulars of my life, not forgetting occurrences in the campaigns abroad. He then prescribed me a course of penance, promising me the eucharist on a future occasion.

I was then advised to apply to father K at the parish chapel, a deep old file. On approaching, he sung out for money due to the church. After such an opening I felt no desire either for his advice or pardon. In a few weeks I was induced to apply again; but in this instance I fared, if possible, still worse. He had taken his station at an alehouse. Some of the auditory were augmenting existing sins by excessive drinking; others were confessing, and a few receiving pardons. I left the scene with unmingled disgust: p. 204. Published by J. Mason, 66, Paternoster Row. This occurred in a rude part of the country; no doubt greater decency is observed in the large towns.

Mar 2:14. He saw Levi sitting at the receipt of custom, and taking toll of passengers and traders as they passed the bridge over the Jordan, a little below the sea of Galilee. Dr. Lightfoot quotes a law of the pharisees to expel from their communion any man who entered on the profession of a publican, because they regarded them as robbers. The poor complain of all taxes as oppressive, because they neither see nor feel the wants and dangers of the state; but a nation without defence becomes a prey to every invading foe.

Mar 2:17. I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance, such as the publicans just named. There is a sentence in the prayer of Manasseh which seems to apply here. Oh Lord, that art the God of the just; thou hast not appointed repentance to the just, as to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, which have not sinned against thee; but thou hast appointed repentance unto me, who am a sinner; for I have sinned above the number of the sands of the sea. Then it follows that Christ came not to call the righteous to repentance, such as Nathaniel, but to gather them by faith into the fold of the sheep. Others turn the text to the self righteous, who were called indeed, but they would not come.

Mar 2:18. Thy disciples fast not. They were full of labour from morning till night, and could not fast. They were rejoicing in the presence and glory of the Bridegroom; but the days would soon come when the Bridegroom should be taken away, and then they should fast and weep in many afflictions. A mild reply to a question asked with no very gracious designs. Heathens as well as jews had days and times of fasting, though unbounded in festivity, as far as money would go. Mat 6:16. Zec 7:3.

Mar 2:26. Abiathar the highpriest. 1Sa 21:1; 1Sa 21:6. Ahimelech was the highpriest, and Abiathar his son the sagon cohen, the second priest. The jews always had the sagon in readiness, lest accidents should happen to the chief priest. Some think that Mark uses here the antonomasia, which puts the office for a dignity, as when we say, the orator, for Demosthenes. It is more probable that Mark calls Abiathar by that dignity, because from the moment his father was slain, he lawfully succeeded to that office.

Mar 2:28. The Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath. The sabbath was made for man, the BEN ADAM, as in Psalms 8., or the Son of man. He therefore can dispense with the sabbath in cases of need, as in the great question in chap. Mar 3:4. Is it lawful to do good on the sabbath day, or to do evil? The enemies were silent. The grand criterion is, whether the thing done be Gods work or our own. If it be the work of God, he who causes the winds to blow, by consequence commands the seaman to steer his ship. How wide then of those gracious laws are the pursuits of trade and labour, and licentious pleasures, fraught with contempt for the worship of God.

REFLECTIONS.

The case of the man afflicted with the palsy is highly instructive. His friends as well as himself believed that Christ was the best physician; they therefore surmounted all difficulties in gaining access to the Saviour. They hoisted him over the battlements, and let him down through the door of the roof. Admirable faith is admirable in its exertions to see Jesus. It will climb a tree like Zaccheus, and take no denial like the woman of Canaan.

Jesus perceiving their faith, and perceiving that the paralytic was more solicitous of salvation than of health, comforted him first with a declaration of pardon. Son, be of good cheer, thy sins be forgiven thee. Christ often speaks more comfortably to the seeking soul than is expected, and bestows favours which often confound and revolt the self-righteous. Who is this that forgiveth sins also; said those who were not worthy of a pardon. Undismayed in the exercise of grace by self-righteous clamour, our Lord healed this mans body as a proof that he had granted remission to his soul. He said, Arise, take up thy bed and go to thy house. Let me here add, that sanctifying grace must always follow justification. Christ must still work a double cure; for the healing of our pride, our concupiscence, and self-love, are the only sure proofs that our sins are forgiven. He whom the Lord forgives receives strength to take up his cross and follow him, as this man did when he took up his bed and walked.

We are transported with admiration of the blessed Saviour. Whether with the pharisees or with the sadducees, whether disputing with daring individuals, or addressing the multitude, he was always king in Jeshurun. His words disclosed the perfection of wisdom, and his conduct was covered with glory and grace. But he most of all confounded his foes by disclosing their thoughts. They were arrested by a presence more than human, and retired in confusion and shame.

To this gracious miracle we must add another glance, on the condescending love of the Saviour. He went to dine with publicans: what a guest. What a friend was he to publicans and sinners! Nay, oh sinners, he knocks at the door of your hearts, and asks to sup with you, that you may sup with him. What do you say? Can you still keep the door shut? Must the fell murderer for ever keep possession of the Lords castle? For once be men; rise, like Samson, in the strength of grace, and once for all act the part of men.

Fuente: Sutcliffe’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Mar 2:1-12. The Healing of the Paralytic.Loisy (pp. 8688) regards the discussion of the right to forgive sins as artificially interwoven by Mk. into a simpler story of healing. He says it is not like Jesus to prove a spiritual claim by the argument of a miracle. Jesus refused to work signs. The power to forgive is also asserted by Jesus personally as a Messianic endowment. This conflicts with the attitude towards the Messianic secret (p. 670) preserved elsewhere in the gospel. But forgiveness is undoubtedly one of the blessings of the kingdom (cf. Mar 4:12). It is the offer of forgiveness which is challenged by the Pharisees when they ask why Jesus eats with sinners, and why His disciples do not fast. There is an inward connexion between the three incidents in Mark 2. The work of evangelization requires Jesus to forgive sins as well as to drive out demons and heal diseases. These are so many inseparable features of the gospel (cf. Luk 4:18 f. and Mat 11:5*, where the miracles must not be allegorized, as Sohmiedel suggests). Bodily healing and forgiveness go together. Because of their union the visible influence of Jesus over disease confirms His power to forgive, which cannot be tested by sight. It is as herald of the kingdom rather than as Messiah that Jesus claims this authority. Mat 9:8 suggests either that the term Son of Man is not Messianic in Mar 2:10 or that the term is due to the evangelist. But Mat 9:8 means, not that men as men have this power, but that a fresh gift of God has come to mankind in and through the announcement of the nearness of the kingdom. A new ministry of reconciliation is entrusted to men.

Mar 2:1. Follow mg.

Mar 2:4. Wellhausen suggests that they uncovered the roof is a misunderstanding of an Aram. phrase which means they brought him up on to the roof. This is probably correct, and in that case the picturesque detail about breaking up the roof may be an addition inspired by the false rendering of an Aram. original.

Mar 2:5. Teknon, an affectionate form of address. Cf. Luk 15:31, and Csars last words, Kai su, Teknon, not Et tu, Brute.

Mar 2:6. It should be noted, Jesus is accused of blasphemy, not of laxity as to conditions of forgiveness (see Montefiore, i. 78).

Mar 2:8. Mk. attributes supernatural knowledge to Jesus. Joh 2:25 does not lack a Synoptic root.

Mar 2:9; Mar 2:11 f. Arise, take up thy bed and walk. The threefold repetition reflects popular oral tradition. The proof of the complete cure by carrying ones bed is also a feature in popular tales of healing. Cf. Lucan, Philopatris, xi., Midas picked up the bed on which he had been lying and went off to the country. The word for bed in Mk. is a vulgar one, and implies the small mattress of a poor man.

Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible

One paralyzed man who was dependent on the help of four men was now brought to Him. If leprosy is the type of sin’s corruption, paralysis teaches us the helplessness occasioned by sin. Yet all five men realized there was help in one person. Nothing would hinder their getting the man into the presence of the Lord Jesus. Today too, though many surround the Lord Jesus, some genuine, others merely professors without reality, where pretense may be a hindrance to many, faith will overcome whatever obstacle that one in need may be brought to the Lord Jesus. Tearing up the tile roof was a drastic measure, but it accomplished the result. Peter would be faced with no small repair bill, yet likely he would feel this worthwhile when he saw the man healed.

The Lord’s first words, however, did not address the question of the man’s paralysis, but that of his sins, a matter far more important. He saw their faith, no doubt that of all five, and assured the man that his sins were forgiven. Scribes sitting there became most critical of this inwardly, though they did not have the boldness to speak out. Their reasoning ignored the fact of who Christ actually is, for it is true enough that only God can forgive sins.

Then they are given a sticking proof that He is God: He read their thoughts, which only God can do, and questioned them as to why they so reasoned in their hearts. Then He added another question as to which was easier to say, “Thy sins be forgiven” or “Arise, take up thy bed and walk.” Of course, as to simply saying the words, there is no difference; yet neither could become effective by the word of a mere man. But the proof of the effectiveness of His first words is most evident when He tells the man, “Arise, and take up thy bed, and go thy way into thine house.” For the man immediately responded, his helplessness being transformed into strength and capability. If the latter words were so manifestly effective, then certainly His first words were effective. Yet, He has told the scribes that it is as Son of Man He has authority on earth to forgive sins. He fully claims the title “Son of Man,” but with it the evidence is clear that He is more than man: He is God. But their minds were blinded to the vital fact of His Manhood and Deity in one person. Still, His spoken word had produced marvellous results, and all the witnesses were amazed and glorified God.

Leaving the house He went to the seaside, with crowds coming to hear the teaching of the Word. This is only mentioned, then His observing Levi (Matthew) at his tax collecting desk, as He passed by. He spoke to him only two words, “Follow Me.” His response was immediate. The voice of the Son of God had such effect on him that he unhesitatingly left his lucrative employment and followed the Lord.

Matthew himself then reports only that Jesus sat at meat in the house. Mark tells us that it was his (Matthew’s) house, while Luke says that “Levi made Him a great feast in his own house,” where he invited many tax gatherers and sinners to hear the Word of God. God considered it a great feast, though Matthew himself did not think of it in this way. The scribes and Pharisees give no credit to Matthew whatever for this unusual kindness, but are ready to strongly criticize the Lord of glory Himself for eating with tax gatherers (whom they considered unfaithful to their own nation because they collected taxes for the Romans) and others who were manifestly sinners. The self-righteous pride of scribes and Pharisees was certainly most serious sin, but religious zealots are commonly blind to their own sinful condition.

The answer of the Lord is clear and to the point: it is those who are sick who need a physician. Christ had come with the answer to the misery and sin of mankind, not calling the righteous, but sinners to repentance. Only the great grace and power of God can work this precious result. Scribes and Pharisees needed Him as much as any others, but their pretended righteousness kept them from Him. They had no heart whatever for repentance, just as some people, infected by cancer, strongly insist there is nothing wrong with them.

In verse 18 the Lord Jesus is now questioned by some of the people as to why the disciples of John the Baptist and of the Pharisees practiced fasting while His disciples did not do so. This illustrates the fact that people may have diverse reasons for fasting The disciples of John no doubt did so out of motives of self-judgment, for they were taught to judge the sin of the flesh. The motives of the disciples of the Pharisees were likely those of self-righteousness, a matter for boasting, as in Luk 18:11-12. This kind of thing was only an offense to God, while the former was honest and honorable.

Still, even this does not approach the preciousness of fasting simply for Christ’s sake, as He intimates in His answer. While He, the Bridegroom, was present, His disciples, the children of the bride chamber, had cause for rejoicing, not fasting; but He would be taken away from them, as of course He has been now for nearly two thousand years. Believers therefore have very real reason to fast, out of motives of true affection for Christ. While He is rejected, self indulgence is unbecoming to His disciples. Their fasting too involves more than literally abstaining from food at certain times, but self-denial in many other ways. But the motive should always be that of love for the Lord, with no drawing attention to ourselves.

For Christianity is not a patching up of the old garment of law-keeping, but a totally new revelation from God that draws out the heart itself to the person of Christ. Therefore it was not correct to compare the disciples of John and of the Pharisees to those of the Lord Jesus. This was a matter of contrast, not comparison. Pharisees cling to their old garment. John the Baptist showed the old garment to be full of holes. But the Lord Jesus provided an entirely new garment. There was to be no mixture of the new with the old.

The garment illustrates what is external. The new wine speaks of the internal power of the ministry of Christ: it must be put into new vessels (wineskins), for old vessels could not be trusted to contain it. The new vessels are the true disciples of the Lord Jesus, those who have been born anew. Man in the flesh, though a zealous law-keeper, could not contain or value properly the preciousness of the ministry of Christ.

As He and His disciples pass through the grain fields, the disciples, in accordance with permission granted in Deu 23:25, began to pick the ears of grain, evidently eating them. This awakened the opposition of the Pharisees against Him, for they claimed that this was unlawful on the sabbath day. How ignorant they were of what is true service to God! Does God force His servants to fast on the sabbath day? The law had actually not forbidden this, but the traditions of the Pharisees.

However, the Lord’s answer is remarkable. He refers them to David when he and his men were hungry, and were given the showbread by the high priest, though it was lawful only for priests to eat it. This was of course a ritualistic law and was in this exceptional case set aside because of human need. Of course it is evident that man cannot flagrantly set aside the moral principles of truth and righteousness in order to satisfy his temporal needs, but ritualistic laws were a different matter. In David’s case, he was God’s anointed king, but not being recognized by Israel, he was suffering rejection, and God cared for him. Now Christ, the Son of God had come, but was rejected as David had been, along with His disciples. Therefore even the ritualistic demands of law must give place to their needs. If so, how much more must the mere traditions of Pharisees be set aside!

He sums this up by announcing principles of vita! significance in verses 27 and 28. The sabbath was made for man, not man for the sabbath. It was in man’s best interests to have a day during the week when he might rest, yet often he will not do this unless he is virtually forced to. God was seeking the blessing of man in providing him with one day of rest during the week. Now Pharisees were turning it into a virtual curse for man by their rigid traditions. More than this, the Son of Man is Lord of the sabbath: His authority is far higher than that of the sabbath, and certainly infinitely higher than the assumed authority of Pharisees, little as the Pharisees were willing to recognize it.

Fuente: Grant’s Commentary on the Bible

Verse 1

After some days; during which there was time for the excitement to subside.

Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament

(Mark 2) THE MINISTRY OF THE LORD

In the previous portion of the Gospel we have seen the perfect Servant; in this fresh division there passes before us the perfection of His service, the faith that profits by it, and the opposition that it raises. We are privileged to see that the Lord’s ministry is marked by righteousness and grace – righteousness, that raises the question of sins (1-12), and grace that blesses sinners (13-17). Such a ministry at once arouses the opposition of men, for righteousness that raises the question of sins disturbs the conscience, and grace that blesses the sinner is offensive to religious pride.

(Vv. 1, 2). Already we have seen the Lord and His disciples at Capernaum. Now again he enters this favoured town and crowds assemble to whom the Lord preached the word. It looked, indeed, as if souls were eager to hear the truth, but, alas! a little later the Lord has to say, “Thou Capernaum which art exalted unto heaven, shall be brought down to hell, for if the mighty works which have been done in thee, had been done in Sodom it would have remained until this day. But, I say unto you it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment than for thee.” It was at Capernaum the man was delivered from the unclean spirit; there Simon’s wife’s mother was healed; there it was that all the diseased were brought to Him in crowds, and were healed, and there the sick of the palsy received the forgiveness of his sins. Capernaum was, indeed, brought near to heaven, and the power and grace of heaven, but all in vain, as far as the mass were concerned. As in that day, so in this, mere crowds do not mean that souls are exercised or consciences are awakened. The advent of the Lord in their midst was but a nine days wonder in their eyes; but, before God, the lack of repentance in the presence of such a ministry left them in a more terrible plight.

(Vv. 3, 4). Nevertheless, where there was faith in Christ there the blessing was received. God’s work is not done by mass movements, but by individual work in souls, and where there is faith there will be difficulties to overcome. The palsied man was in himself helpless, so was “borne of four”; but, even so “they could not come nigh unto Him for the press.” But faith overcomes every obstacle.

(V. 5). The Lord recognises their faith, and, as ever in His dealings with us, looks beyond the mere outward need that may bring us to Himself and deals first with the root of the trouble. Beyond the disease of the palsied man, as of all disease, there is the question of sin that has brought disease and death into the world. It may be that the man, and those who brought him, were little exercised as to the sins, nevertheless they had faith in the Lord and at once the Lord responds to this faith and can begin to unfold the blessings of those that believe; thus, He can say “Thy sins be forgiven thee.”

(Vv. 6, 7). The moment the Lord uses His power to forgive sins the opposition commences. Men did not object to demons being cast out and diseases being healed, and lepers being cleansed, for these things relieved man of bodily trials without necessarily disturbing his conscience. Directly He speaks of sins, the conscience is touched, and men begin to oppose. They say, “Who can forgive sins but God only?” Their argument was true in principle, for God alone can forgive sins: it was wrong in application, for they failed to see the glory of the Person who was present – God manifest in flesh.

(V. 8). The reasoners are left without excuse for the Lord proceeds to give evidence of the glory of His Person. He shows that they are in the presence of One from Whom no thoughts are hidden. They may have uttered no word, but all was known to the Searcher of hearts, Who can say, “Why reason ye these things in your hearts?” Is not the answer to their reasonings, as to all human reasonings, that where there is no sense of need there is no realization of the glory of the Person of Christ?

(Vv. 9-12). In grace the Lord speaks another word which manifests His divine power in a way that even nature can appreciate. Whether is it easier to say “Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Arise, and take up thy bed, and walk?” It has been truly said, “They were equally easy to God, alike impossible to man.” In order that men “may know” that the Lord had power to forgive, He also said to the palsied man “Arise, and take up thy bed, and go thy way into thine house.” This outward sign of power guaranteed the inward gift of grace. The people at once say, “We never saw it on this fashion.”

(Vv. 13-15). The proclamation of the forgiveness of sins has aroused the resentment of the Jewish leaders. This opposition is the first sign of the total rejection of Christ which involved the setting aside of the Jews. Hence it becomes the occasion of bringing to light, in the call of Levi, an intimation of the new dispensation about to be introduced by the Lord. Thus we read, “He went forth by the sea side.” The sea in Scripture is often used to set forth nations, and therefore is suggestive of the great truth that the Lord was about to become the gathering centre of Christianity for believers from Jews and Gentiles. The word to Levi was, “Follow Me.” Moreover, the fact that Levi was a publican, or taxgatherer, sets forth the great characteristic of Christianity in contrast to the law. No occupation was more degraded and scandalous in the eyes of a Jew, than that of a man who made his living by the extortion of tribute for the hated Roman. That the Lord should call such was great grace that lifts a man from the lowest place of degradation as a sinner into the highest place in the service of the Lord as an apostle. At once Levi responds to the call, and makes a feast in his house to which he invites many publicans and sinners to meet the Saviour of sinners.

(V. 16). Such a display of grace stirs up the opposition of those marked by the pride of intellect and the pride of religion. They were deeply offended by the grace that, passing them by, takes a sinner, far beneath them in moral degradation, and lifts him into a place far above them in blessing and power. These opposers do not approach Christ, as an exercised soul would have done, but they turn to the disciples, and, as the Serpent tried to shake the woman’s confidence in God by asking what appeared to be a very simple question, so these men attempt to shake the confidence of the disciples in the Lord by asking what might appear to them a very reasonable question, “How is it that He eateth and drinketh with publicans and sinners?”

(V. 17). The Lord disposes of this question with a simple illustration, ‘They that are whole have no need of the physician, but they that are sick.” He then applies the illustration, by saying, “I came not to call the righteous, but sinners.” They insinuated that the Lord was associating with sinners; His reply is that He was “calling” sinners out of their things to follow Him. Grace to the sinner does not mean indifference to his sins.

(V. 18). But the Pharisees grow more bold. They had sought to undermine confidence in the Lord by going to the disciples with questions about the Lord; now they will seek to find fault with the disciples by raising questions with the Lord about the disciples. “Why do the disciples of John and of the Pharisees fast, but thy disciples fast not?”

(Vv. 19, 22). Again the Lord uses an illustration to expose their folly. Would it be seemly to fast in the presence of the Bridegroom? In like manner would it be appropriate to fast in the presence of the One Who was dispensing blessing on every hand? The days were coming when Christ would be no longer present. Solemn consideration for these opposers of grace; then, indeed, fasting would be appropriate; not simply fasting from food, but from the pleasures of a world that has rejected Christ. As ever, the Lord does more than answer their question. He proves that their question exposes their utter incapacity to enter into the new ways of God in grace. The new character of grace displayed in life and walk and ways, could not be attached to the older order any more than a piece of new cloth could be attached to an old garment. Nor can the inner life, and power of this new life, be contained in the old vessels. New wine demands new vessels. The power and energy of the Holy Spirit cannot have anything to say to the flesh. The Lord was introducing that which was entirely new, set forth in figure by the “new cloth,” the “new wine,” and the “new bottles.” When the new is brought in we cannot go back to the old. Alas! Christendom has attempted to do so by attaching the forms of Judaism to Christianity. The doctrines of grace have been acknowledged, while in practice the forms of the law have been adopted.

(Vv. 23-29). In the incident that took place on the Sabbath, we see a further intimation that the whole system, represented by the Sabbath, was about to be set aside. In raising the question of the Sabbath, the Pharisees profess great zeal for the outward observance of a day, while wholly indifferent to the fact that the Lord of the Sabbath, and His disciples were left to hunger. They assumed to be glorifying God at the very moment when they were rejecting His witness. The Lord exposes their unreality by recalling the history of David and his companions, who in the day of their rejection were left to hunger. In these circumstances, when God’s anointed was rejected, and hunted, and hungered, the shewbread ceases to have its value in His sight, and therefore no sin was committed though David and his companions acted contrary to the letter of the law in eating of the shewbread. So with the Sabbath: it was for the blessing of men, and not for increasing the sufferings of hungry men. Moreover, “The Son of Man is Lord also of the sabbath,” and therefore above the Sabbath that He instituted.

Thus in the course of the chapter we are permitted to see the righteousness that raises the question of sins; the grace that forgives sins and calls sinners, and the faith that obtains the blessing. Then we see the opposition that the natural heart, if left to itself, will ever raise against a ministry of righteousness and grace. Lastly, this position becomes the occasion of showing the change in the dispensation about to take place.

Fuente: Smith’s Writings on 24 Books of the Bible

CHAPTER 2

1 Christ healeth one sick of the palsy, 14 calleth Matthew from the receipt of custom, 15 eateth with publicans and sinners, 18 excuseth his disciples for not fasting, 23 and for plucking the ears of corn on the Sabbath-day.

Ver. 1. And again He entered into Capernaum after some days. A few MSS. read, after eight days.

Ver. 2. And many came together, so that there was no room, &c. See what is said in the Introduction to this Gospel.

Ver. 5. Son, thy sins are forgiven thee. Hear Bede, “When He is about to heal, He first forgives the man his sins, to show that he was suffering for his faults.” For men are afflicted with bodily ills, either for the increase of merit, as Job and the martyrs; or for the preservation of humility, as Paul; or for the correction of sin, as the sister of Moses, and this paralytic; or for the glory of God, as the man who was born blind; or for a beginning of damnation, as Herod.

Bede adds that this paralytic was carried by four bearers, to signify that a man in the faith of his soul is lifted up by four virtues to deserve soundness, namely, by prudence, fortitude, justice, and temperance.

Ver. 14. He saw Levi (the son) of Alphus, i.e., He saw Matthew, who by another name is called Levi before he was called by Christ, for after his vocation he is always called Matthew. 0f Alphus, i.e., the son, as the Syriac expresses it. This Alphus is a different person from the Alphus who was the husband of Mary of Cleopas, who was the father of James the Less and Jude (Mat 10:3). Luke and Mark call Matthew Levi, out of regard for his good name, because this name of Levi was known but to few. But he calls himself Matthew, to humiliate himself, and to profess openly that he was a sinner and a publican.

And rising up, &c., i.e., leaving everything. Wherefore Bede saith, “He left his own possessions who was wont to seize those of others. He left also the accounts of his taxes imperfect, and not cast up, because the Lord had so inflamed him that he straightway followed Him who called him.”

Ver. 26. Under Abiathar. You will say that it is said in Isa 21:6 that this was done under Ahimelech, the father of Abiathar. I answer, first, that Abiathar was even then the pontiff together with his father, because when his father was absent, or sick, or otherwise engaged, he discharged the High Priest’s office; and he was shortly to succeed his father, at his death, in the pontificate. Listen to Bede: That the Lord calls Abiathar the High Priest instead of Ahimelech involves no discrepancy, for both were on the spot when David came and asked for and received the loaves. And when Ahimelech was slain by Saul, Abiathar fled to David, and was his companion through the whole of his exile. Afterwards, when David was king, he received the rank of the high-priesthood; and continuing in the pontificate during the whole of David’s reign, he became much more celebrated than his father, and so was more worthy to be called High Priest by the Lord, even during his father’s lifetime.

Second, and better, It is clear from Scripture that both father and son bore both names, and were called sometimes Abiathar, sometimes Ahimelech. This appears from 2Sa 8:17, 1Ch 18:16 and 1Ch 24:6. So Jansen, Toletus, &c.

The Sabbath was made (Syr. created) for man, &c. That is, the Sabbath was instituted for the benefit of man, that man, by the rest of the Sabbath, should refresh and restore his body, fatigued by the continuous labour of six days of the week; and that he should apply his mind to the things which concern his eternal salvation, such as hearing and meditating upon the law of God. The force of the argument is this: Since the Sabbath was instituted for the sake of man, and not man for the sake of the Sabbath, therefore, if the Sabbatical rest be hurtful to man, it must be abandoned, and the labour undertaken that man may be benefited. Therefore rightly do I permit My disciples to engage in the moderate labour of plucking the ears of corn on the Sabbath, to satisfy their hunger. For it is better that the rest of the Sabbath should be broken than that men should perish.

Therefore the Son of Man, &c. Some understand the therefore in this place as properly inferential from what has gone before, thus: Since the Sabbath was made for man, and the Son of Man, that is, Christ, is Lord of all men, and of all things which pertain to man’s health, therefore He is Lord also of the Sabbath, so as to be able to dispense from it. But it is better and simpler to take the therefore not as inferential, but as complementary for lastly, in short. Wherefore the Arabic so translates, and makes the passage of the following effect: “Lastly, the Son of Man, that is, I, Christ, because I am the Messias and God, am Lord of the Sabbath, I who instituted it at the beginning for man’s benefit, and therefore am able for the benefit of man to order, to relax, or to abolish it. This is the fresh and final reason by which Christ proves to the Scribes that it was lawful to pluck the ears of corn on the Sabbath to satisfy hunger.”

Mystically: Says Theophylact, Christ healing on the Sabbath signifies that those who have rest in their passions are able to heal sinners agitated by their passions, and lead them to virtue. More fully Bede. The disciples, he says, are teachers. The corn means those planted in the faith, whom the teachers visit, and hungering for their salvation, pluck away from earthly things. And by their hands, i.e., by their examples, they bring them away from the lust of the flesh, as it were out of husks. They eat them, that is, they incorporate them as members into the Church. And they do it upon the Sabbath, because this is for the hope of future rest. Return to top

Fuente: Cornelius Lapide Commentary