CHAPTER 3
Another time Jesus went into the synagogue, and a man with a shriveled hand was there. Some of them were looking for a reason to accuse Jesus, so they watched him closely to see if he would heal him on the Sabbath. Mark 3:1-2
It was Jesus’ custom to worship in the synagogue, as we have seen, and once again he is doing so. We can assume that it was still the synagogue near his home at Capernaum. When Jesus entered the synagogue he saw there a man with a withered hand. 1 In Luke’s account (6:6) he informs us that it was his right hand that was withered. This would obviously have had a big effect on how the man could work and earn his living.
This time, there was an opposition group waiting in the synagogue to see if Jesus would heal again on the Sabbath. They were ready to bring accusations against him if he did so. As we can see, the Pharisees, scribes and others were increasing their surveillance of Jesus and no doubt were in close contact with their headquarters in Jerusalem. Opposition was building rapidly and headed for a climax.
We can say that from almost the outset of Jesus’ ministry the shadow of the cross was falling upon him.2 His enemies were now to the point of setting a trap for him and it is obvious from this chapter that their plans were focused on bringing about his death. One great theme of Mark is that Jesus came to fulfill the role of the Suffering Servant, as seen in the Servant Songs of Isaiah chapters 41-53. From the outset he was fully prepared to give his life for his sheep. It was actually the reason that he came to earth (Jn. 10:11; 12:27).
“Jesus said to the man with the shriveled hand, ‘Stand up in front of everyone.’ Then Jesus asked them, ‘Which is lawful on the Sabbath: to do good or to do evil, to save life or to kill?’ But they remained silent” (3:3-4). Jesus was not the least bit timid, nor was he fearful of confrontation. In fact, it seems here that Jesus was even pressing for a confrontation as he singled out the man and asked him to stand before them all.
For us to understand the tension here we must also understand how the Jewish people of old looked at the Sabbath. The Sabbath from ancient times had become very central in Jewish teaching. No doubt, one reason for this was that the Sabbath returned every week and was always on their minds. The Jews came to see the Sabbath in a very rigid way. They were determined to guard it so they began to build so-called “fences” around the law of the Sabbath lest they should break it. As we have seen, a person could only walk a certain distance on the Sabbath. Even today small synagogues in Israel are often located so that devout Jewish people can walk to them, since they may not ride in automobiles on the holy day. There were literally hundreds of things that could not be done on the day. “No medicines or special foods could be taken on the Sabbath, nor could a hand or foot out of joint be immersed in hot water.” 3
The Jewish people did have a teaching that eventually became known as pikuakh nefesh (Heb. saving a life). It was thought in biblical times that only life-threatening issues should be dealt with on the Sabbath. A broken bone for instance or a withered hand was not such an issue. Jesus thought otherwise. We have already learned that Jesus claimed the title “Lord of the Sabbath” (cf. Mk. 2:28). We know from scripture that Jesus was in fact the agent of the creation. He made all things (including the Sabbath) by his powerful word and he sustains all things by the same word (Jn. 1:1; Heb. 1:3). Jesus, as Lord of the Sabbath, was indeed the final authority on what could and could not be done on the sacred day.
Jesus clearly felt that it was permitted to do good on the Sabbath rather than to do evil. Healing of all sorts was therefore permitted so far as Jesus was concerned. We see here the great irony presented in Mark. Jesus was intent on doing good and saving life, while the Pharisees sitting in the audience were actually contemplating murder.4 We can understand why they had nothing to say to Jesus and were rather dumbfounded. John Chrysostom, that early church father and preacher (c. 347–407), quipped about the contest of the poor man and the Pharisees saying: “If he was withered in hand, the ones who stood by were withered in their minds.” 5
In Matthew and Luke’s versions of this same story we have some important additional information given that probably helped silence Jesus’ enemies. In Matthew 12:11-12, we hear Jesus say to them: “…If any of you has a sheep and it falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will you not take hold of it and lift it out? How much more valuable is a man than a sheep! Therefore it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath” (cf. Lk. 14:5). Cotton Mather (1663-1728) that early American father and writer once said: “The ability to do good imposes an obligation to do it.” 6 We see a similar thing in Matthew 25:45, where the wicked are condemned precisely because of what they did not do.
“He looked around at them in anger and, deeply distressed at their stubborn hearts, said to the man, ‘Stretch out your hand.’ He stretched it out, and his hand was completely restored. Then the Pharisees went out and began to plot with the Herodians how they might kill Jesus” (3:5-6). Edwards remarks here: “He uses three strong Greek words that appear nowhere else in the gospel. Having surveyed the crowd Jesus is ‘angry’ (orges) and is ‘deeply distressed’ (syllypoumenos) at their ‘stubborn’ (porosei) hearts.” 7 Their hearts were actually “calcified” according to the Greek.8
The Pharisees immediately went out. They had not the slightest praise for the miracle they had just seen. Rather, the only thing on their minds was how to kill Jesus, since they now deemed him worthy of death. They immediately began to consult with the Herodian party who were normally their natural enemies. Herod Antipas was in power over the Galilee and his consent would be necessary for obtaining the death sentence. So far as we know, the Herodians were not a party like the Pharisees or Sadducees, but were sympathizers and supporters of the Herodian dynasty. 9
JESUS MINISTERS OUTSIDE THE SYNAGOGUE
Jesus withdrew with his disciples to the lake, and a large crowd from Galilee followed. When they heard all he was doing, many people came to him from Judea, Jerusalem, Idumea, and the regions across the Jordan and around Tyre and Sidon. Mark 3:7-8
We can readily see from the previous incident, that the synagogue doors were closing on Jesus. He chose to do what some great preachers have done since. He simply went to the open-air meetings. Some of the great pioneers of the Evangelical movement were known for such meetings. We think of the eighteenth century ministers, George Whitefield and John Wesley. They were not always welcome in the Anglican Church, so they conducted vast meetings in the open-air, often with crowds numbering in the many thousands. When we look at scripture we see that even the Apostle Paul sometimes conducted such meetings (Acts 16:13). In these verses we cannot help but be amazed that Jesus was beginning to draw crowds from great distances. It seems that many were from Jerusalem, which was about one-hundred miles away (160 km.). Some had come from Idumea, far in the south country, perhaps as much as 200 miles (321 km.). Others had come from across the Jordan and from the areas of ancient Phoenicia.
“Because of the crowd he told his disciples to have a small boat ready for him, to keep the people from crowding him. For he had healed many, so that those with diseases were pushing forward to touch him” (3:9-10). It seemed that Jesus was under pressure everywhere he went. He had been under great pressure from the religious authorities in the synagogue and now the crowds were pressing upon him. Edwards remarks how the: “Pastoral and folksy stereotypes of Jesus surrounded by lambs and children are skewed caricatures of Mark’s description of Jesus’ early ministry in Galilee.” 10 To avoid the near mob scene and the very real possibility of getting crushed in the press, Jesus instructed his disciples to provide him with a small boat. He put it out to sea and used it as his open-air pulpit.
This open-air meeting must have been quite a scene with sick people crowding in just to touch Jesus. He always had mercy and healed them all. Coffman remarks: “The number of the cures wrought by Jesus was astronomical; all of the gospels together give only a fraction of the great things he did.” 11
Also as a part of this scene Mark says: “Whenever the evil spirits saw him, they fell down before him and cried out, ‘You are the Son of God.’ But he gave them strict orders not to tell others about him” (3:11-12). As we have said previously, Jesus would not receive testimony from evil, lying spirits. It is rather amazing that devils knew he was the Son of God but the people, the Pharisees and even his own disciples did not understand this important fact. We see in James 2:19 that the devils believed and trembled. However, it was not possible for demonic powers to repent or truly have faith.
THE TWELVE APOSTLES
Jesus went up on a mountainside and called to him those he wanted, and they came to him. Mark 3:13
We have the mention of a mountain here which was no doubt well known to the disciples but is not known to us. Since the Sea of Galilee was surrounded by mountains there are many possibilities. On the west side of the lake, Mount Arbel is a very prominent and outstanding peak. On the eastern side of the lake we have the impressive hills of what we now call the Golan Heights. Since Jesus’ ministry was focused on the northwestern side of the lake we can probably eliminate the eastern mountains. Nothing at all is said about Arbel in the New Testament so we can probably eliminate that too. We might note that the traditional Mount of Beatitudes is the most prominent hill on the north side near the lake.
Wiersbe says that according to the harmony of the gospels, the Sermon on the Mount must have taken place between Mark 3:19 and 20. Mark does not record this because his emphasis was not so much upon what Jesus said as upon what he did. 12 It could be that Jesus appointed his disciples on this now famous hill (cf. Matt. 28:16), and soon after preached his sermon there. There is a spot near the top of the hill and around that natural depression there is excellent acoustics, as many pilgrims who have tried it out can attest.
“He appointed twelve that they might be with him and that he might send them out to preach and to have authority to drive out demons” (3:14-15). In the gospels it is clear that the crowds following Jesus were fickle. Also, even large numbers of those who initially walked after Jesus turned back in time (cf. Jn. 6:66). Jesus needed some men who would never turn back. Through these men he would lay the foundations of the kingdom of God and the nucleus of the new “spiritual nation” he was about to bring forth (cf. Matt. 21:43). 13 It was probably for this reason that Jesus chose twelve, just as there are twelve tribes in Israel. Edwards remarks, “The Greek says, ‘he made Twelve.’ To appoint is to select from an existing lot and raise to a new status, but to make means to bring into existence. Mark’s verb (Gk. epoiesen) is the same as that of Gen 1:1 (LXX)…The Twelve are a new creation.” 14 Coffman says, “These men, in one sense, are the most important men who ever lived…. they are fully worthy of the honor God has reserved for them in the inscription of their names upon the foundations of the Eternal City (Revelation 21:14).” 15
Lists of the twelve are found in the synoptic gospels plus an additional listing in Acts (Mk. 3:13-19; Matt. 10:2-4; Lk. 6:14-16; Acts 1:13). Other people could not be added to this select group. After Judas betrayed Jesus, caused his crucifixion and then himself committed suicide, Peter saw that it was necessary to select someone to take his place. He noted that it would have to be someone who was with Jesus throughout his whole ministry from the time of John’s baptism to the resurrection (Acts 1:21-26). Two names were proposed and Matthias was chosen to replace Judas. These disciples were named as apostles (ones sent out) and were all given special authority to preach and to expel demons (cf. Lk. 9:1-2). In later church history there were other apostles such as Paul, Barnabas, Andronicus and Junias, but they were never classed with the original group and were obviously apostles of a different order.
“These are the twelve he appointed: Simon (to whom he gave the name Peter); James son of Zebedee and his brother John (to them he gave the name Boanerges, which means Sons of Thunder); Andrew, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Thomas, James son of Alphaeus, Thaddaeus, Simon the Zealot and Judas Iscariot, who betrayed him” (3:16-19).
We note that in every listing Simon, who was renamed Peter, is always in first place and Judas is always listed last. Of course, this is not the case in Acts since Judas was already dead. Simon also had the name of Cephas (kepha) meaning a rock (Jn. 1:42). This name when translated into Greek became Petros, also meaning a small rock.16 At some point Jesus gave nicknames to James and John. Perhaps it was after the episode when they wanted to call fire down on the cities of Samaria that had rejected Jesus (Lk. 9:52-55). He began to call them Boanerges (Sons of Thunder). No doubt Mark gives this Aramaic translation for the sake of his Roman readers.17 We know from many scriptures that Peter, James and John made up the important inner-circle of Jesus’ disciples. Andrew, Peter’s brother, is also listed with the first group of four.
Mark lists Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew and Thomas next. In the listings of disciples they would form the second group of four. Philip is always listed first in this group. These first two groups of four remain stable in all the listings. It is only in the last grouping that there are some seeming differences. James the Son of Alphaeus always leads the last grouping of four. Thaddeus who appears in Mark’s listing here does not appear in Luke’s listing or that in that of Acts. Instead we have Judas son of James mentioned. It is thought that the two were one and the same. 18 Simon the Cananean (his name meaning “zealous”) mentioned here and in Matthew shows up as Simon the Zealot in Luke and Acts (cf. Lk. 6:15).
There are a number of interesting things about the disciples or apostles. Simon the Cananean or Simon the Zealot was probably a former member of the Zealot group. The center for this movement, which advocated violent opposition to Rome, was at Gamla, a city just up the Golan Heights a short distance from Bethsaida. Later this city was totally destroyed in the Roman war. Judas Iscariot (man of Kerioth) may have been from this city in southern Judea. If so, he would have been the only one of the disciples who was not a Galilean. 19 Thomas apparently had the Hebrew name of Didymus or “twin” (cf. John 11:16). It is interesting that Mark, who earlier describes the call of Levi, gives him the name of Matthew here. 20
TWO GREAT CHALLENGES
Then Jesus entered a house, and again a crowd gathered, so that he and his disciples were not even able to eat. When his family heard about this, they went to take charge of him, for they said, “He is out of his mind.” Mark 3:20-21
Through the window of these verses we get a picture of how weary, stressed and emotionally ragged the disciples must have been at this point. There was no rest and no chance even to have their necessary meals. The crowds were always pressing in and even invading the privacy of home. This setting no doubt takes place back at Capernaum, which was the only home Jesus ever knew in his ministry years.
We read here that Jesus’ family heard of the situation and came over, no doubt from Nazareth (about 20 miles away or 32 km.), to take charge of him. The Greek text reads “those of him (hoi par autou)” and this could be broader than just his family. 21 It probably includes his associates, his kin, his followers or even friends of the family. Their idea was not just to “take charge” but to actually seize him. The Greek here is kratein, and is used elsewhere regularly in Mark with the attempt to bind or deprive someone of freedom. Edwards goes on to state that these relatives and friends may even have had the idea of “deprograming” him (cf. Zech. 13:3). 22
Father Bargil Pixner is a Catholic scholar who spent many years living, studying and doing archaeological work around the Sea of Galilee. Pixner feels that the small town of Nazareth was inhabited in about 100 BC with a Natzorean clan of Davidic lineage. This clan had apparently returned from their Babylonian exile.
Pixner also points out how we now know from archaeological evidence that Nazareth is spelled with the Hebrew “tz” instead of with the “z.” In fact, in modern Hebrew the city has the name of Natzeret. Netzer in Hebrew means “branch” so we can see, at long last, that the town does actually connect up with the strange scripture in Matthew 2:23. This passage says of Jesus that, “…He would be called a Nazarene.” 23 Of course, there is no prophet in the Bible who says such a thing and scholars have pondered over this problem for centuries. Now we know for certain that Nazareth connects up with the prophecy in Isaiah 11:1, which includes the Hebrew word “netzer” or branch, and applies it to Jesus.
If it is true that Davidic clans resettled the little town of Nazareth we can understand how they might have had very strong feelings about who the Messiah would be and how he should conduct his ministry. 24 In this passage, citizens of the town who were friends and family members show some embarrassment and consternation at Jesus and they seem determined to take him back home. No doubt their idea was to help him get his ministry restarted as they thought he should conduct it. This was obviously a serious crisis for Jesus and his disciples.
Later on, Jesus would say in Matthew 10:36: “a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household.” Guzik cites Cole, who thinks that he might have been saying this from his own bitter experience. 25 Apparently, even these close family members thought Jesus had lost his mind. History has proven many times that God’s servants are often misjudged by their contemporaries and even their close family members. It was the great evangelist D. L. Moody who was labeled as “Crazy Moody” by many in Chicago. 26
We see here that the family problem was not the only crisis. We read of another and perhaps a more serious one that was brewing.
JESUS COMPARED WITH BEELZEBUB
And the teachers of the law who came down from Jerusalem said, “He is possessed by Beelzebub! By the prince of demons he is driving out demons.” Mark 3:22
In this passage we have clear evidence that the Jerusalem leaders were stalking Jesus. Now they bring their charge against him and it is a very serious one indeed. They charge him of being possessed by Beelzebub and by doing his miracles through demonic power (cf. Jn. 10:20; Lk. 11:15). We should note here that Mark has an interesting literary technique, in that he is prone to “sandwich” one story right in the middle of another.27 He does so here, and we will see him return to the troublesome family situation later in
verse 31.
The serious charge of Jesus being possessed by Beelzebub needs some attention. The “Beel” in the name reflects the Semitic word “Baal.” This word means “lord,” “owner,” master,” or even “husband.” Baal was known as the fertility god or storm-god of Canaan. The last part of the name, “zebul” can refer to “heights” or “prince,” but it can also refer to “dung.” Jewish people would sometimes change the letters of pagan gods to form a derogatory pun. 28 Here we can imagine them referring to this pagan god as “dung god” or “garbage god.” Wiersbe adds, “Beelzebub: (or Beelzebul) is a name for the devil, and it means ‘master of the house.’ Jesus picked up on this meaning and gave a parable about a strong man guarding his house.” 29
“So Jesus called them over to him and began to speak to them in parables: ‘How can Satan drive out Satan?’” (3:23). We saw in the last verse that the teachers of the law had come down from Jerusalem and how they had made a serious charge against Jesus. These teachers were known as scribes (grammateus). The scribes had their origin after the Babylonian captivity and they were the official teachers and interpreters of the law. Their understandings of the law tended more and more toward legalism.
It is interesting that Jesus here began to speak in parables (Gk. parabolais). This is the first time in Mark that this word is used but we will see a great operation of parabolic teaching beginning with the next chapter and continuing on. Parables were proverbs, riddles or word pictures and Jesus used them both to reveal and conceal his message. 30.
The scribes were claiming that Jesus was not only possessed by Beelzebub, but that he was casting out demons by Beelzebub. The argument of the scribes was not theologically sound and neither was it logically sound. However, since they were likely an official delegation from Jerusalem their opinion carried much weight with the masses. 31
Jesus said to them: “If a kingdom is divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. If a house is divided against itself, that house cannot stand. And if Satan opposes himself and is divided, he cannot stand; his end has come” (3:24-26). Although there is no honor among thieves there nevertheless can be order. That order in this case is instilled by the great fear and terror of Satan.
We know from scripture that Satan was a powerful angel, originally created good and beautiful by God, but that he fell because of his great pride. As a created being Satan does not have omnipotence, omniscience or omnipresence. It is clear from scripture that Satan must work through legions of fallen, evil beings to accomplish his will. He is their ruthless leader and some have described him as a spiritual godfather and his hierarchy as a sort of spiritual Mafia. As the prince of devils he must keep the underworld in line at all times. Because of the great pervasiveness of evil in the world we would have to think he is doing a pretty thorough job of it. We can understand that if Satan’s kingdom was divided in any way it would simply fall apart.
“In fact, no one can enter a strong man’s house without first tying him up. Then he can plunder the strong man’s house” (3:27). This may well be a reference to Isaiah 49:24-25, or even to Isaiah 53:12, where it is said, “Therefore I will give him a portion among the great, and he will divide the spoils with the strong, because he poured out his life unto death, and was numbered with the transgressors. For he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.” We know that later when Jesus arose from the grave he defeated the strong man completely and “…When he ascended on high, he took many captives and gave gifts to his people” (Eph. 4:8).
In Matthew’s version of this struggle with the scribes Jesus also says: “But if it is by the Spirit of God that I drive out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you” (12:28). Mark relates how Jesus announced the kingdom of God in 1:15. He will pick up on the idea in the next chapter and continue with it throughout the book. Wiersbe says that “kingdom” becomes the key word in this whole section. 32
Jesus then warns, “Truly I tell you, people can be forgiven all their sins and every slander they utter, but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven; they are guilty of an eternal sin. He said this because they were saying, ‘He has an impure spirit’” (3:28-30). We immediately see that all sins and blasphemies can be forgiven – all except one, and that is the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. Jesus had been healing the sick, casting out demons, and doing many mighty works in the Galilee. However the scribes were declaring that these mighty works came from Beelzebul or the devil.
The idea of an eternal or unpardonable sin has caused a lot of heartache and concern among Christians. Edwards says of it, “The sin against the Holy Spirit is one of the most disturbing statements of Jesus in the gospels.” 33 Methodist scholar J. Newton Davies adds, “The saying of Jesus with regard to ‘the unpardonable sin’ has occasioned perplexity to scholars and anxiety and unnecessary pain to many devout believers.” 34
Why is blasphemy against the Spirit such a horrible and dangerous sin? To answer this we need to pause and think about what the Holy Spirit does. He bears witness to Jesus (Jn. 15:26). He convicts the world of sin (Jn. 16:8). He takes God’s things and makes them known to us (Jn. 16:14). He is actually the agent and means of our new birth (Jn. 3:5). When we blaspheme against the Spirit we cut ourselves off from our only hope of salvation. In a sense we throw away the one and only lifeline that can rescue us and take us to heaven. That is why this sin is eternal.
Now, can a sincere Christian commit this sin? Is this something about which we should worry ourselves? Coffman answers, “We can say with absolute confidence to anyone who is overwhelmed by the fear that he has committed this sin, that the fact that he is so troubled is itself sure proof that he has not committed it.” 35 Edwards adds his reassurance, “Anyone who is worried about having committed the sin against the Holy Spirit has not yet committed it, for anxiety of having done so is evidence of the potential for repentance. There is no record in Scripture of anyone asking forgiveness of God and being denied it!” 36
FAMILY PROBLEMS
Then Jesus’ mother and brothers arrived. Standing outside, they sent someone in to call him. A crowd was sitting around him, and they told him, “Your mother and brothers are outside looking for you.” Mark 3:31-32
Now Mark returns to the other side of the “sandwich” he had left and begins once more to speak of the brewing family problems Jesus was experiencing. It seems apparent here that this is a continuation of verses 3:20-21, where some close friends and relatives from his hometown had come to seize him and take him away. Some thought he had lost his mind.
Here we see that his immediate family was probably also involved in this plot. Even his dear mother and brothers apparently thought he was somehow on the wrong track. Mary was no doubt a very good Jewish momma and probably had heard reports that her son was not being properly nourished. We note here and in many other places that Jesus’ father is never present. That is proof enough for many scholars that Joseph was now deceased.
We no doubt remember from John 7:5 that even Jesus’ his own brothers did not believe in him. His dear mother, who had no doubt pondered many wonderful things about him in her heart, now seems to have some reservations herself.
Perhaps they, like many, were thinking in terms of some earthly messianic kingdom. Jesus, being the firstborn of Joseph would have been in a direct line to David’s throne. 37 He surely had a divine right, as Matthew 2:2 says, to be called “King of the Jews.” Obviously, with many of his statements and actions he was not in the least seeking an earthly kingdom. There is also a very good chance that his family and friends had heard the death threats against Jesus made by the scribes, Pharisees and other Jewish leaders.
Guelich points out here that lines are gradually being drawn between “insiders” and “outsiders.” He notes that the coming parable in chapter four will make the lines even more distinct. 38 For the time being at least, Jesus’ own family is placing itself in the category of “outsiders.”
Some may think that Jesus is not giving due honor to his mother. This is not the case (cf. Jn. 19:27). Here his ministry and calling are being threatened. Jesus was here having to make the same difficult decision that he would later advise his own disciples to make. In Matthew 10:37-38 he says, “Anyone who loves their father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves their son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. Whoever does not take up their cross and follow me is not worthy of me.” He had to make a choice for the kingdom of God even if it meant turning away temporarily from his own family, even from his dear mother. However, “She had not been replaced in his affections, only in his mission.” 39
Here we get an understanding of who the family of God really is. “‘Who are my mother and my brothers?’ he asked. Then he looked at those seated in a circle around him and said, ‘Here are my mother and my brothers! Whoever does God’s will is my brother and sister and mother’” (3:33-35). Jesus was not only bringing forth a new spiritual kingdom and a new spiritual nation, but he was bringing forth a new spiritual family. Those who were following Jesus sincerely would become that true family. The spiritual ties would actually become much more real and binding than any blood ties. Back in 1970 William Gaither wrote this gospel song expressing these new spiritual ties:
I’m so glad I’m a part of the family of God
I’ve been washed in the fountain
And cleansed by His blood
Joint heirs with Jesus as we travel this sod
I’m so glad I’m part of the family of God