Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Mark 2:8
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?
8. in his spirit ] His soul was human, but His “Spirit” was divine, and by this divine faculty He penetrated and then revealed to them the “thoughts and counsels of their hearts,” comp. Heb 4:12. On this peculiarly Divine faculty see 1Sa 16:7; 1Ch 28:9 ; 2Ch 6:30.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
8. Why reason ye these things inyour heartsor, as in Matthew, (Mt9:4) “Wherefore think ye evil in your hearts?”
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And immediately, when Jesus perceived in his Spirit,…. “His own Spirit”, as the Vulgate Latin, Syriac, Arabic, and Ethiopic versions read; not his human soul, nor the holy Spirit of God, though both may be said to be his Spirit; but his divine nature, in and by which he knew all things, even the most sacred thoughts of men’s hearts: and as soon as ever the above thoughts were conceived in the minds of the Scribes and Pharisees, they were perceived by him, and told to them,
that they so reasoned within themselves; he said unto them, why reason ye these things in your hearts? thereby reproving them, not for reasoning and concluding in their own minds, that none but God can forgive sins; but for imputing blasphemy to him, for pronouncing this man’s sins pardoned; he being God, as well as man, of which his knowing the thoughts and reasonings of their minds might have been a convincing proof.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Perceived [] . The preposition ejpi gives the force of fully. He was not only immediately aware of their thought, but clearly and fully aware.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “And immediately when Jesus perceived in His spirit,” (kai euthus epignous ho lesous to pneumati autou) “And immediately, Jesus continually knowing in His spirit,” as He always knows the thoughts of men, 1Ch 29:17; 1Sa 16:7; Mat 9:4; Joh 2:25.
2) “That they so reasoned within themselves,” (hoti houtos dialogizontai en heautois) “That they thus (like this) reasoned among themselves,” though they had said nothing; He still, by His spirit, distinct from hearing by His ear, He knew what their thoughts were, for He “knoweth all things,” 1Jn 3:20.
3) “He said unto them,” (legei autois) “He said directly to them,” directly addressed, challenged them, who were questioning, Mar 1:27.
4) “Why reason ye these things in your hearts?” (ti tauta dialogizesthe en tais kardiais humon) “Why are you all questioning these things in your hearts?” as in Mat 9:11. Why are you so skeptical, in and from your hearts? The answer is that they believed not, Mat 5:20; Joh 8:24.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
(8) When Jesus perceived in his spirit.The special mention of the spirit as the region of our Lords consciousness is, as part of this narrative, peculiar to St. Mark, and is not without importance in its bearing on the reality and completeness of our Lords human nature.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
8. Perceived in his spirit Not by the Divine Spirit, but by his own spirit in a supernatural clearness.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘And immediately Jesus, perceiving in His spirit that they so reasoned within themselves, says to them, “Why do you reason these things in your hearts? Which is easier? To say to the paralytic, ‘Your sins are forgiven’, or to say, ‘Arise take up your bed and walk’?’
Jesus gathered what they were thinking and whispering (for Jesus’ ability to discern thoughts compare Mar 12:15; Joh 2:24). What a contrast there was between the thoughts of the paralysed man and these scribes. Jesus had known what the paralysed man had been thinking, his faith, and his uncertainty about his worthiness. Now He knew what these men were thinking, their lack of faith, and their total confidence in their own worthiness. And so He challenged them. They had been following Him around, they had seen some of His miracles. Well, which was easiest, to declare a man’s sins forgiven or to heal him and make him walk? Let them think about that. Why was it that they had not seen the truth about Him by what He was doing?
They were caught in the net of their own teaching. They believed that illness and disease was the consequence of sin. So for someone to be healed meant that their sin had been dealt with. The healing demonstrated forgiveness. Thus the fact that He healed should have suggested to them that He had the power to determine whether God had forgiven a man.
Besides, did they not recognise that this was to be the proof positive that the Kingship of God had come? Isa 53:5-6 made clear that One was coming on Whom all their iniquities would be laid, because He bore them on their behalf. Did that not mean that He would bring forgiveness? Indeed forgiveness was the basis of the salvation that Isaiah saw God as bringing (Isa 43:25; Isa 44:22; Isa 54:8). Jer 31:34 made clear that when the Kingship of God came men’s sins would be freely forgiven. And Micah declared that in those days God would turn and have compassion on them, pardoning sin and passing by transgression, delighting in mercy (Mar 7:18-19). For then would be opened to the house of David a fountain for sin and uncleanness (Zec 13:1).
So if the Kingly Rule of God was drawing near they should have recognised from the Scriptures that the One Who brought it would also bring forgiveness. And as well as forgiveness He would bring healing. The eyes of the blind would be opened, the ears of the deaf unstopped and the lame would leap like a hart (Isa 29:18; Isa 35:4-6; Isa 61:1-2). Thus when the Coming One came forgiveness and healing would go together. They had already seen the latter constantly in His ministry. Did they not see then that that meant that the Kingly Rule of God with its consequences of forgiveness had come? That the acceptable year of the Lord was now here. Yet the fact was that they would not concede the point because they were not willing to face the consequences. They did not want the hearers in the crowd to think that it meant that this man Jesus had been justified in declaring the man’s sins forgiven. So they sat there silent, but unforgiving.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
DISCOURSE: 1418
THE PARALYTIC HEALED
Mar 2:8-12. 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.
WE cannot wonder that such multitudes attended the ministry of our Lord, or that his occasional retirements from labour were so often interrupted. But it is indeed astonishing that so many should continue hostile to so benevolent a person; and that he should persist in doing good, when his words and actions were so constantly perverted, and made grounds of accusation against him. Having retired to a house in Capernaum, he was soon encompassed with a crowd: amongst them were many Scribes and Pharisees who came only to cavil [Note: Luk 5:17.]. Our Lord, however, neither intimidated nor incensed, proceeded in his work; and took occasion even from their cavils to display more eminently his power and glory. Being accused of blasphemy, he confirmed his word by his works, and multiplied his mercies to some as the means of convincing others.
The particular circumstances referred to in the text lead us to consider,
I.
The authority he exercised
Whatever miracles our Lord performed, he wrought them by his own power. A man was brought to him to be healed of the palsy
[So afflicted was the man, that he was deprived of all use of his limbs. His friends, who bore him on a bed, or couch, could not get access to Jesus [Note: ver. 3, 4.]. They would not however relax their endeavours to obtain a cure. They went by another way to the top of the house, and broke open the lattice, and then let the man down into the midst of the room where Jesus was [Note: Their houses were scarcely ever above one or two stories high. Their roofs were flat, and guarded on every side with a battlement or balustrade, Deu 22:8; thither the inhabitants used to retire for exercise, 2Sa 11:2; for conversation, Mat 10:27; for meditation and prayer, Act 10:9. There were two ways of access to the top; one from the inside, by a lattice or trap-door, 2Ki 1:2. the other by steps on the outside, Mar 13:15. Having easily ascended to the top, they forced open (, ver. 4.) the lattice which was fastened within, and let down the man through the tiling (Luk 5:19.) with which the roof was paved on all sides of the lattice. Some explain the matter somewhat differently. See Doddridge, sect. 45. note (e.)]. Nor did Jesus take offence at his intrusion, as though he were an unwelcome guest. He, on the contrary, beheld their solicitude with approbation, and richly recompensed their faith, which had urged them to such benevolent exertions. We read not indeed of any particular request made by the man or his friends; but the very sight of such misery was sufficient to call forth our Lords compassion.]
Jesus healed not his disorder, but authoritatively forgave his sin
[All that the man thought of was, a restoration to bodily health; but the divine Physician in an instant healed his soul. The disorder had probably been sent by God as a punishment for sin; and Jesus removed his sin as incomparably the greater evil. Yea, he spoke to the man in the most affectionate and condescending terms, and gave him a comfortable assurance that his iniquities were forgiven. How must the helpless dying man rejoice in such tidings! Surely, after this, he would scarcely wish to have his life prolonged; at least, he would desire it only that he might glorify his Lord and Saviour.]
But this exercise of divine authority excited the indignation of the Pharisees
[It is possible that they might manifest in their countenances the reasonings of their hearts: but Jesus needed not any external proof of their thoughts. He knew in his spirit every thing that passed within their minds. They inwardly condemned him as guilty of blasphemy. Nor was their reasoning defective, if the application of it had been just. Certainly none but God has any authority to forgive sin; and any mere creature that should assume it, would be a blasphemer. But their objection, in this instance, was altogether unfounded.]
Jesus, having claimed the power of forgiving sin, immediately stated,
II.
His vindication of it
Our Lord was ever willing to satisfy those who desired information; and, by multiplied proofs, to leave determined infidels without excuse:
He now stated a criterion whereby they might judge of the validity of his claim
[When Jehovahs deity was questioned, his servant Elijah proposed a mean of determining the controversy between him and Baal [Note: 1Ki 18:21-24.]. Thus our Lord condescended to submit his pretensions to a trial. He appealed to all whether the healing of the paralytic would not be an evidence of divine power? and whether he, who by his own authority could restore man to health, were not equally able to forgive his sin? This was as just a criterion as could possibly be proposed. If Jesus were not God, he could never by his own power heal the man. Nor, if he were a blasphemer, would God work such a stupendous miracle to confirm his blasphemies. Thus his claims to divine authority were brought to the test; and every person present was made a competent judge of their truth or falsehood.]
According to that criterion, he immediately vindicated his divine authority
[He commanded the man to arise, and take up his couch, and go home. Instantly he, who before could not help himself, was restored to health; and, in the presence of all, went forth with his couch upon his shoulders. Thus were the enemies of Jesus effectually put to silence; yet none understood the full extent of the conclusion to be drawn from the miracle. They still viewed Christ only as a man acting by a delegated authority [Note: Mat 9:8.]; whereas they should have acknowledged him to have been truly God. They all however glorified God for the marvellous displays of his power; and confessed that they had never before seen such stupendous works.]
Learn from hence,
1.
The power and grace of Christ
[When Jesus sojourned on earth as a poor man, he had power to forgive sin, and often exercised that power unsolicited, uncontrolled. He even subjected himself to the charge of blasphemy rather than he would conceal his right. Has he then less power or compassion now that he is enthroned in glory? or, now that he is exalted on purpose to exercise that power [Note: Act 5:31.], will he neglect to exert it? Will he who bestowed mercy unasked, cast out our petitions? Let us then present ourselves before him with all our miseries and wants. Let us try, by all possible means, to get access to him. Let us break through every obstacle that would defeat our endeavours; and let us approach him with an assurance of his power and willingness to save. Sooner shall heaven and earth fail, than he reject one such a believing suppliant [Note: Mat 21:22.].]
2.
The benefit of affliction
[If the paralytic had never been disordered, he had never been brought to Jesus. Had he never come to Jesus, his sins had never been forgiven. Would he not then rejoice, yea, does he not rejoice even to this very hour, that God ever sent him that affliction? Would he not number that amongst his richest mercies? Thus many of us would never have thought of Jesus if we had not known trouble; but through temporal afflictions we were brought to the enjoyment of spiritual blessings. Let those then, who have experienced this, give thanks to God [Note: Psa 119:71; Psa 119:75.]; and let those, that are now in trouble, seek chiefly the remission of their sins [Note: Psa 25:16-18.].]
3.
The efficacy of intercession
[Many of us, alas! have friends whose souls are dead in trespasses and sins: their faculties are altogether destitute of spiritual motion or sensation; hut we may bring them by faith into the presence of the compassionate Jesus. He will be pleased, rather than offended, with our officious intrusion; nor shall our labours of love be without many good effects. Little do we think how many thousands have been converted in answer to the entreaties of Gods praying people; and who can tell but that God may fulfil to us that promise [Note: Jam 5:15.]? Who can tell but that, as an answer to our faith, we may see our friends healed of their sins, and triumphing in their blessed Saviour? We are sure, at least, that our prayers shall return into our own bosom. Let us then improve our knowledge of the Redeemers grace, and exert ourselves, that all around us may participate his saving benefits.]
Fuente: Charles Simeon’s Horae Homileticae (Old and New Testaments)
Unspoken Objections to Christ
Mar 2:8
Then there is an unspoken life. Then silence may be eloquence. This is mysterious, and this is alarming. Here are words found for our silence. We thought our silence was sacred; we said, Our words being spoken belong to us exclusively no more, they are common property, but our silence is our own; that never can become public property; we can have a heart-life quite solitary, and of that life we may be absolute monopolists. All this is broken in upon suddenly and ruthlessly by this new voice. There is now no secrecy; privacy is a term of very limited application. The new voice is very explicit; it says, Whatsoever is spoken in secret shall be proclaimed from the housetop. That which was supposed to have been done under the cover of darkness shall stand forth in the blaze of noonday. It will be well to take this fact into consideration in studying man’s history and action. By neglecting this fact, who can tell how much we lose of intellectual reality and spiritual beneficence? By omitting this fact as an element of reality in the government of mind we may soon come to live a fool’s poor life. We should be greater men, built on another scale, sustaining new and higher relations, if we realised the fact that there is nothing in our minds or hearts that is not perfectly and absolutely known. It will be difficult for some men to believe this; but it is difficult for some men to believe anything. The difficulty may arise from want of mental capacity and spiritual sensitiveness, or that general faculty which lays hold of things subtle and impalpable. Did you hear the tinkling of that bell? No. I did; that is the difference between you and me. Did you hear that footstep? I did not, but you did; I should have said there was no footstep, but you heard it. Ignorance must not stand in the way of wisdom; speculation about probability and improbability must not stand in the way of realised fact. Here is a piece of soft pensive music; listen: did you ever hear anything quite so exquisite? You say you cannot heal; why can you not hear? Because of the infirmity of deafness. Then is your deafness to be the measure of other people’s sensitiveness of hearing, or is the sensitiveness of other people only to show you more clearly the reality and the pitiableness of your infirmity? Christian believers say and you must ruin their character before you can destroy their evidence that they see the unseen, endure as seeing the invisible, fasten their eyes upon things not seen and eternal, realise the nearness of spiritual intelligences and ministries; and you want us in an age of advanced learning and culture to set up ignorance against wisdom, and to oppose insensateness to that sensitivity which hears the footfall of God in the wind. That cannot be done. We are anxious to accommodate every capacity and degree, but we cannot allow boundless ignorance to urge its immensity as an argument for its acceptance.
Every man, then, is really two men. He is, first, viewing him from an external point, a speaker; then he is a thinker. As a man thinketh in his heart so is he. Not a word you have said is worthy of a moment’s attention if it has not expressed the reality of your heart. The smile upon your face is a lie if it express not a finer smile on the heart. Here we are a perplexity and a mystery to ourselves. Sometimes we hardly know whether we are on the one side or on the other; so subtle is the whole action of life that there are points in consciousness when it is almost impossible to say whether we are leaning towards the reality or the semblance. There are other times when we want to speak out everything that is in the heart and mind. We are checked by fear. We are disabled for want of language; a hundred considerations instantaneously flash themselves upon the judgment, and want to be umpire over the conflicting processes of our own mind. We carry things in the soul by majority. One man is not one vote in any case of real intellectual and spiritual excitement; nor is one mind one decision regarding many practical outgoings, reasons, and responsibilities of life. In your own soul, the silent parliament of the spirit, you carry things by majorities. You say, On the whole this is better than that; taking a large view of the case, there are seven reasons why I should do it, and I can only discover four why I should not do it; I will obey the indication of the larger number. But whilst we are willing to grant that there are spheres and sections of life in which it is almost impossible to tell whether it is the thinker or the speaker that is about to act; yet there is difference enough amongst the sections of life to excite our spiritual jealousy, lest we should be telling lies to ourselves in the very act of speaking them so loudly as to delude the conscience into a belief in our sincerity. We have employed emphasis to cheat the conscience. Here is the mystery of man: what he thinks is one thing, what he says is another. Christ wants to bring these two hemispheres of mental action into unity, harmony, and identical expressiveness. He would make us so clean of heart that we cannot be foul of lip; he would so exalt the soul in love of truth that it could not speak a lie. Any religion that proposes to work this miracle is a true religion, wherever its Author came from; and its Author has a right to be heard by the moral grandeur of his purpose.
What is Christ’s relation to this mysterious dual relation of man? It is a relation of perfect knowledge. The scribes and others round about him were reasoning, saying, “Why doth this man thus speak blasphemies? who can forgive sins but God only, and immediately when Jesus perceived in his spirit….” “He needed not that any should testify of man, for he knew what was in man.” How could he do otherwise? He made man, he redeemed man; he sends forth the Paraclete to sanctify man. He knows us therefore creatively, experimentally, sympathetically, and by every process that can possibly be applied to the knowledge of human nature. He hears our heart beat; he knows how the pulse stands; he writes down in his book the history of the day not the history of the deceptive, often self-deceiving, hand, but the history of the heart, the soul, the mind, the spirit, which is the real man. The hand is but the glove of the soul. We must penetrate to inward realities before we can know how much Christ knows. He searches us through and through. This is the prerogative of God: he searches the heart and he tries the reins of the children of men. He knows our thought afar off. We speak of plasm, of things remote, small, microscopical, growing, accumulating upon themselves, ever rising in capacity and expressiveness of life; in talking so we talk according to fact. It is said therefore of God that he knows our thought before it is a thought; he knows the plasm of it, he knows it in its first, its earliest, its invisible conception. Before we know it he knows; before we dare find words for our thought he has written that thought fully down in heaven. Unless we stand in this consciousness let me recur to an early point we shall live a fool’s life, quite lineal, superficial, without cubic measurement, depth, value, worth. And are we to live such a life when we can escape it? Are we to live externally when we can live metaphysically, internally, spiritually? Are we to be content with things on the surface when we may penetrate and bring up things from the very depths of the wisdom and grace of God? To this higher life we are called, and God the Holy Ghost is pledged to accomplish our education in this development if we will yield ourselves to his gracious ministry.
Christ sustains a position of fearlessness in regard to the whole internal economy of the human mind and human life generally and particularly. He need not have challenged these men. A false teacher would not have challenged them; he would have said, If they raise no objection I shall suggest none; they look very troubled and doubtful, but I shall not trouble them to express their trouble or their doubt; it is not for me to encourage men to express scepticism or unbelief; I will therefore close this subject, and swiftly turn to another. That is not Christ. Christ said, “Why? ” let us have nothing hidden about these mysteries; speak out your objection, give it word that we may consider it openly, and for the advantage of yourselves and others. This fearlessness of the Son of God is no small consideration in estimating the quality of his character. He will have nothing hidden away in the heart that can be brought out of it, and used helpfully in the Christian education of the soul. Preachers are sometimes blamed for raising doubts; whereas in reality they are only answering them. Let us beware of a self-considering and cowardly ministry that says in effect, If the people do not know these things I shall not tell them; if they do not express the doubts I will not answer them; in fact, I may flatter myself with the observation that perhaps I may raise more doubts than I can settle. I may suggest more questions than I can answer; I think, therefore, I will live on the sunny side of my work, and do as little as possible towards encountering the unspoken tumult and conflict of the human soul. It is perfectly true that we may raise more doubts than we can settle, we may ask more questions than we can answer; at the same time every ministry ought to address itself to the realest part of the life. Do not address mere fancy or taste or sentiment, but get at the unspoken heart-thought. The people are quite content in numberless cases that we should address their fancy: How lovely, how bird-like some of the notes of the voice; how fascinating and enchanting altogether in manner! Some are perfectly content that we should address their taste; they say, How polished, how quiet, how very beautiful, how classic; how vividly the speaker recalled the best of days of Attic eloquence! Away with this intolerable and indescribable rubbish! We meet in the house of God to talk reality, to get at life in its inmost thought, to address not the decoration of the face, but the disease of the heart. The Lord send us, if need be, rough prophets, Elijahs and John the Baptists, who will speak out thunderously and boldly, and sweep away from the debased pulpit all attempts to please mere sentiment, and gratify pedantic and therefore perverted taste. When we are revealed to ourselves it may be found that we are altogether inverted, and that we have been making a false impression upon society, if not actually upon ourselves. The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked, and therefore it is perfectly possible for a man to be imposed upon by himself, to be, in other words, his own impostor. He wants to look well in his own eyes, and he is willing to overlook a little here and overlook a little there, and may promise himself concessions of divers kinds; upon the whole he will recommend himself to himself. Let us not fear the scathing, searching process, the cruel analysis of Christ. Then the matter may stand thus: For such and such reasons I proceeded in this course. Then the Lord will say, You call them reasons; now let me show you that they are all excuses. You defrauded your own soul by talking euphemistically, by speaking of reasons as if they were points wrought out by logic and fact and a right connection of events properly interpreted; whereas in reality they are all excuses, vain pleas, selfish arguments; you wanted to reach such and such a conclusion, and you laid the stepping-stones accordingly.
There is all the difference in the world between light and darkness, between reasons and excuses. We have degraded our life by processes of self-excusing. We would not go out because then we told a lie in measured language to ourselves. We would have gone out ten times that night if we could have made a thousand pounds; and we know it, and we shall have to face that challenge some day. We were afraid; whereas the fear was a selfish fear and a miserable cravenness, and ought to have been eradicated and blown away as if by contemptuous winds. And thus would the process go on: namely, I endeavoured to be amiable and gentle, and to put a good appearance upon things. And the Lord will say, Amiability is your word insincerity is mine; it was not light that was on your face, but sheen, glamour, a calculated and manufactured thing. Amiability you call it hypocrisy I name it; you ought not to have been amiable; you ought to have been stern, resolute, unbending, judicial; you ought to have insisted on right being acknowledged, even if right was not done. And thus will the process advance, namely: I was tolerant of men’s weaknesses, I was charitable in relation to their prejudices and their actions; I endeavoured to take a large and tolerant view. Christ will say, Thou wicked servant! it was not toleration, it was self-defence; you allowed a man to do something wrong that you might do something still more deeply evil; you tolerated vice in others that you might practise it yourself; you call that toleration it was not toleration, it was false judgment, bad character, rottenness of heart and soul. Why did you not speak to yourselves words of fire? Why did you not criticise yourselves with the judgment of God? If you had then spoken out boldly, fearlessly, the very action of so speaking might have lifted you into a higher spiritual manhood, and then you would have displayed a true courage. Do not talk of reasons when they are excuses; do not speak of amiability when it is insincerity; do not set up toleration as a plea for self-indulgence: be true in your hearts that you may be true in your speech.
We are entitled to believe that there is no objection which Christ cannot answer. Personally, I never heard a single objection against Christ that could not be completely answered and satisfied. Let us beware lest we call objections what ought to be called quibbles. The quibbler will do nothing for you in the extremity of your life. He is a very clever wordmonger; he has a great skill in verbal legerdemain; he can twist the words wondrously, he can play with them like so many balls thrown up in the air, and kept there in rhythmic movement; but if he be only a quibbler he will do nothing for you when the rain falls and the wind blows and the earth shakes under your feet. Quibbling cannot cover all the need of life. Let it have its half-day’s sunshine and holiday; let it practise its little gambols on some little greensward, but let it know that beyond that it cannot go. When night darkens and the storm roars and the foundations of things are out of course, and death pale, grim, cruel death comes for his dole and tax, the quibbler will not be within earshot in that dark time. If you have objections to Christ, state them, state them in the plainest, simplest, directest terms; and distinguish between an objection and a quibble, and especially distinguish between a reason and an excuse, and still further distinguish between a solid objection to Christianity and a secret love of sin that would get rid of the Cross, that it might get rid of self-accusation. Thus, thou Son of God, thou dost call us to reality, faithfulness, candour. A voice so calling is like a great and mighty wind from heaven. It is not earth-wind, full of dust; it is heaven’s gentle tempest, charged with love.
Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker
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?
Ver. 8. Perceived in his spirit ] That is, by his Deity, as 1Ti 3:16 ; Heb 9:14 . Or by his own spirit, as 1Pe 3:18 , not by inspiration, as2Pe 1:212Pe 1:21 .
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
8. ] The knowledge was immediate and supernatural , as is most carefully and precisely here signified.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Mar 2:8 . : Jesus read their thoughts at once , and through and through ( ). , by His spirit , as distinct from the ear, they having said nothing.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
immediately. A keyword of this Gospel, to mark the activities of Jehovah’s Servant. Soo note on Mar 1:12.
perceived. Greek. epiginosko. App-132.
in His spirit = in Himself. Greek. pneuma. See App-101.
within = or among. Greek. en. App-104.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
8.] The knowledge was immediate and supernatural, as is most carefully and precisely here signified.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Mar 2:8. , in His Spirit) The prophets became cognisant of things through the Spirit of God, but not with their own spirit: Christ, with His own Spirit, which is omniscient and Divine; comp ch. Mar 8:12. Moreover, the Holy Spirit is not called the Spirit of Christ before that great Pentecost recorded in Acts 2 The conclusion therefore remains, that we are to understand the Spirit of Jesus as applying to His Divine nature, which had its dwelling in His human nature.-, why) An allusion to their Why? in Mar 2:7.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
when: 1Ch 29:17, Mat 9:4, Luk 5:22, Luk 6:8, Luk 7:39, Luk 7:40, Joh 2:24, Joh 2:25, Joh 6:64, Joh 21:17, Heb 4:13, Rev 2:23
Why: Mar 7:21, Psa 139:2, Pro 15:26, Pro 24:9, Isa 55:7, Eze 38:10, Luk 24:38, Act 5:3, Act 8:22
Reciprocal: Gen 18:15 – Nay Psa 35:25 – say Eze 11:5 – for Mat 12:25 – Jesus Mat 22:18 – perceived Mar 8:17 – knew Mar 9:33 – What
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
8
Jesus let them know that he knew what they were thinking about.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Mar 2:8. In his spirit. An immediate and supernatural knowledge is thus indicated: itself no slight evidence of His power to forgive sins.
Why reason ye? Comp, on Mat 9:4, where their thoughts are called evil.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Mar 2:8 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? Mar 2:9 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? Mar 2:10 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,) Mar 2:11 I say unto thee, Arise, and take up thy bed, and go thy way into thine house. Mar 2:12 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.
The phrase “when Jesus perceived in his spirit that they so reasoned within themselves” is of interest. The term translated “perceived” is the Greek word that is normally translated “know.” It is in the active voice which would suggest that it was something known from within, not from without, as in the Holy Spirit giving this knowledge.
Matthew uses another term which means “know” but it is translated “Jesus knowing their thoughts” while Luke uses the same term as Mark. Again it is translated “perceiving.” Mark and Luke’s term has the thought of knowing well.
Now, I do not know, because we are not told, but I suspect this “knowing” was related to something many of us have experienced. Sometimes when you are in a situation you just know what people are thinking. We are thinking beings and we can put two and two together. Here is Christ presenting a kingdom, He is healing people, He is forgiving people and He sees the “religious leadership” in the group. Offhand it is not rocket science to determine that Christ knew a little about the situation. Add to that the body language and facial expressions that would have been obvious to the Lord and it was probably obvious to Him what they were thinking.
Years ago we visited the niece of someone that we had met on deputation. She was in the Juvenile lock up. She was a typical know it all teenager that could do no wrong and did not understand why she was there. One Sunday she came out and flopped herself down in a slump in the chair totally disgusted. She began ragging on the staff for getting on her case about body language – well duuuuuh, I can certainly see why. After relating what we were observing she began to realize the correctness of the staff.
When you are in meetings with people, just be observant of body language and facial expressions – you will know much about what is going on in people’s minds. It can be of great benefit. As Christ used His knowledge of their thinking to form questions, you can do the same to further God’s work. Often you can head off traps by sharing information before someone in the group tries to lower the boom on your head.
Christ then confronts them with their thoughts. SHOCK time! “How in the world did He knowwhat we were thinking?” might have been on their minds now. Matthew reads “Wherefore think ye evil in your hearts.” That just had to be a shock to their intellectual highbrow systems! This guy heals, He reads minds and now He calls our thoughts about Him evil! What is that about?
Now, imagine you are in a business meeting and you know someone is laying for you and you can tell by their body language that they are about to spring and you open their minds up to the rest of the folks gathered. I am not suggesting you use this ability to know people to “get” them but to allow you to run meetings to the Lord’s best advantage and to avoid meetings that degenerate into problems. Use your God given abilities and senses to His advantage.
Christ asked them if it is easier to forgive or heal. Both take acts of God if you want to know the truth. They must have known this in their minds.
Christ presents the leaders with this question, then turns to the ailing man and says that to give the man knowledge that the Son of Man has power to forgive, he then healed the man. It is not clear, but it would seem that the ailment was due to sin, since forgiveness of sin was the basis of the healing.
Luke relates that the people were fearful due to what they had witnessed. Now it is not clear what caused them fear. Was it the ability of the Lord to forgive sin, was it His ability to heal, or was it the ability to seemingly read minds. Then again it might have related to the Jewish leaders being confronted in such a manner. Imagine the leaders being embarrassed in front of you and knowing you have to go to services with them on the Sabbath. All might be related to the fear that the people felt. (Some translations show Matthew using fear as well but the King James translates it “amazed.”)
At any rate the folks were in a mental dither over what they had witnessed. They ended in glorifying God which is always good and the end result of man no matter what our condition of mind – we are to glorify Him with our lives and minds.
The man who was healed, just took the situation in stride and did not get overly excited it would seem. Just did what he was told – picked up his bed and left – which might indicate it was light enough for one person to carry thus probably a mattress instead of a four poster.
The man is pictured in Luke as glorifying God but all three accounts treat it rather matter of factly – picked it up and left. All three accounts speak of the forgiveness of sin which might indicate that sin was a part of the ailment. This is not always true in sickness, but often is. Be sure to take some time to consider your life when sickness comes along. The Spirit is usually quite able to show you if sin is related.
Mark mentions “We never saw it on this fashion.” and Luke says “We have seen strange things to-day.” while Matthew mentions “glorified God, which had given such power unto men.” It would seem that Matthew fills in the what of Mark and Luke’s observation of the activities of the day. God had given great power – power that they had never seen, power that was strange to their normal life. In short this rocked their world. They were taken aback by their observationsof this man with the new teaching.
I’d guess these folks went home considering just what was going on. Wondering what their response should be to such activities and teaching.
Fuente: Mr. D’s Notes on Selected New Testament Books by Stanley Derickson
Only God can heal and forgive sins. These actions are equally impossible to men. However a person cannot verify his claim to forgive sins, but his claim to be able to heal paralysis is verifiable. The scribes therefore assumed that the claim to heal paralysis was the greater one. Jesus frequently used the rabbinic device of asking counter questions, especially when dealing with opponents (cf. Mar 3:4; Mar 11:30; Mar 12:37).