Mark 3:1-6 NASB: I cannot imagine the frustration that Jesus was facing at this point. He showed up in the synagogue as was expected. Upon entering he was aware that the religious leaders had set up a situation of entrapment. They planted a man with a withered hand to see if Jesus would heal on the Sabbath!
Jesus was very angry and disappointed in the religious leaders because of their callous hearts (Mk 3:5 NASB). What did he do? He commanded the man to come forward. This became the focus of the ministry for the day. Jesus had him stretch out his hand and it was instantly restored.
No physical work took place in this healing. Jesus healed through the power of God. Notice also that this man did not have any faith to be healed. He was a decoy, an imposter who stood in place to trap Jesus. The people who brought him knew that He could heal but sought to destroy Him through the healing. Their faith was misplaced.
Jesus taught them from Torah. When a person is in distress, it is ok to relieve their distress on the Sabbath. This is one of the basic truth’s found in Torah. It applies down to the simple animals. If a donkey falls in a ditch, it is ok to get it out on the Sabbath.
The end result of the healing went exactly as the religious leaders had planned. They had their healing on the Sabbath and set out to destroy Jesus.
Mark 3:7-12 NASB Mark gives us the scene of what happens next. The other two accounts from Matthew and Luke do not include this testimony. Jesus demonstrated that healing was certainly acceptable on the Sabbath.
Yet, I wonder if it was on the Sabbath. We have an account of many people traveling from many different parts of the region to meet with Jesus (Mark 3:7-8 NASB) In order for this group of people to come together would mean for many people to be traveling a long distance on the Sabbath. This would have gone against the belief of the Jewish people. So, I would argue that this took place shortly after the Sabbath due to the travel involved.
On the other hand, let’s argue that it did take place on the Sabbath. Now what? Jesus would have held a massive healing service that resulted in many people being healed of many diseases. People crowded against Him just to touch Him in order to be healed. This demonstrated the desperation of the people to receive healing. Imagine being sick and not having any possibility of being cured by doctors. Jesus was a doctor who healed on the spot. Think about it. These people were like animals trapped in the hopelessness of sickness. When Jesus healed them, they were delivered from distress (Mark 3:4 (NASB).
Those who were demon possessed were delivered instantly. The demons were shouting “You are the Son of God!” (Mark 3:11 NASB). Jesus was warning them not to declare this. The implication was that the people present were not to repeat what the demons were saying when they told of the account.
The unclean spirits recognized Jesus as “the Son of God”. The people recognized Jesus as good, the demons recognized Jesus as God, and the religious saw Him as a threat. What did Jesus do? He healed those who were sick and delivered people from their distress.
Often we forget who Jesus was. His Hebrew name was Yeshua. The word Yeshua in the Hebrew meant “Salvation”. He came to deliver people from their distress. This was His name and His nature. What would Jesus do? He came to set people free. He came to set them free from sickness, disease, and demon possession in this passage. He came to set people free from bondage. This was His nature and still is. I cannot stress enough that the nature of Jesus is to deliver people from bondage and set them free.
A little preaching: With that said. Imagine a church where no one makes a decision to follow Jesus as their Messiah. No one steps forward to make a decision to follow Jesus by publicly announcing that they are accepting the freedom found in Jesus. No one steps forward to commit their lives to the Messiah. I will show you a church that either leaches off other churches for members or is steeped in bondage similar to the bondage the religious leaders had set during the New Testament times. Jesus came to set people free. He came to give life and give it abundantly. That is what He did in this passage.
It distresses me greatly when I observe a church that never has an altar call. When a church never makes an attempt to draw people to make a decision to follow Jesus as their Lord and Savior. I have been involved in churches like this. It is very distressing because the very purpose of Jesus setting people free is ignored. Why? The excuses are as many as there are people. Some feel that you would not be in the church if you were not following Jesus. This is not true since many people will be involved in a social club just for the status of belonging. Others feel that making a decision or pressing for a decision is too restrictive on the people. It violates their right to make their own decision. This is also hogwash since those in bondage need to have the chains cut. To cut these chains off means a person has to be willing to make a stand and be delivered. As many as there are excuses, we need to stand up and declare that they are not good enough. Jesus came to set people free.
I just returned from a mission where many people came to make a decision to follow Jesus as Lord of their lives. Seventy-eight percent of the people presented with the Good news of freedom in Jesus accepted this and committed their lives to Him. After that took place everyone present received medical care, and twenty-nine percent of the people showed up for voluntary prayer and spiritual healing. God miraculously healed roughly thirty percent of those who asked for prayer. Remember though, only about thirty percent of the prayer request had to do with sickness or disease. God came to set people free.
Why don’t we see this in our churches? If we as Christians claim to really do as Jesus did, then our churches should be hospitals for the spiritually sick. We should be in the market of setting people free. Our nature should be focused upon bringing people to know their Messiah so that they can be set free. It’s worth thinking about.
Back to the study.
Mark gave us a little different view of the selection of the disciples than the other Gospels give. Remember, Peter is thought to have dictated or relayed the story to Mark. Peter was the leader of the disciples. He gives the disciples with insight into the nicknames that were given them. Peter is introducing intimate friends to us. He starts with his own name. Simon was called Peter (stone), while James and John were nicknamed “sons of thunder.” Perhaps this is from the time where they asked if they could call fire down from heaven (Luke 9:54 NASB). These brothers were constantly getting in hot water as they bartered for positions of authority in the coming Kingdom (Mark 10:35-39 NASB). The point of this bartering is that according to the Jewish thinking of the time, the Messiah would set up a military power in order to overthrow the Roman government. This has a lot to do with the behavior of the disciples on different occasions. They believed that they were a part of a revolution that would set the world free during their lifetime. By the way, James in all three places is mistranslated due to King James wanting his name in the Bible. His name should have been translated as Jacob.
Simon the Zealot is another interesting translation. The Greek word for Zealot is Cananaean, which means “from Canaan” (2 places, Mat 10:4; Mk 3:18 NASB95). How did it get translated as Zealot? The dictionaries still hold the translation as Zealot even though they give alternative translations as Cananaean. This most likely comes from translators who are trying to correct an error. Luke refers to him as one who is “called the Zealot”, Greek “Zelotes” (Luke 6:15 NASB; Acts 1:13 NASB). Matthew and Mark refer to Simon making a distinction between him and Simon Peter by using his hometown as a defining agent. Luke refers to him by his character. Translators need to translate, not to interpret. The distinction was necessary because Jesus renamed Simon as Peter. Perhaps when Peter was relaying this to Mark, he gave his original name. Peter may have been humbled by the denial, and later occurrences that Paul chastises him for. Perhaps he did not feel he lived up to his new name. Just a thought.
Mark does the same thing when distinguishing between Thaddaeus (Matt 10:3; Mk 3:18 NASB) who is also called Judas son of James(Lk 6:16; Acts 1:13 NASB) and Judas Iscariot. Thaddaeus is thought to be the surname of Judas son of James. Judas Iscariot is a distinctive name meaning he was from Kerioth. The names Peter gave were probably the ones that were used with the disciples which were used to specify which Judas they were talking about and which Simon they were talking about. The names that he lists are the intimate names that were used daily.
The note on Judas Iscariot is especially compelling. Why did God pick one that He knew would deny Him? This strikes an interesting point in the “once saved, always saved” group. Were the disciples saved while they were serving and following Jesus? It is obvious that these men left everything to devote their lives to the Messiah. Yet, Judas was the exception to the rule. Judas was involved in every ministry with the other disciples, he worked feeding the five thousand, healing the sick, as well as carrying the money bag for the group. We may argue that since Jesus had not died on the cross yet, Judas was not redeemed by His blood. I wonder though, how could you be face to face with God and then deny Him? Some think that Judas denied Jesus just to force His hand so that he would stop delaying and usher the kingdom of God in earlier. Judas was a strategist who made a tragic mistake. Yet, I am certain that Judas knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that Yeshua was the Messiah and was wholeheartedly devoted to Him. It will be interesting to see if we meet him in heaven.
Before we are hard on the disciples for their behavior regarding the denial of Jesus and bartering for positions of authority, perhaps it is time to think of the way that we treat Jesus. The disciples were trying ot fit Jesus into their “box” expecting Him to fit their understanding of the Messiah. Today we try to fit Jesus into our “box” by defining God, and end times according to our understanding of the scriptures. Sometimes we fit God into our “box” that is shaped out of psychology or current trends in our humanistic society. The God of the Bible has been defanged, tamed and turned into a servant of man rather than a God to be served. Often, God is treated as a concept that is reserved for Sunday mornings (if it doesn’t interfere with the ball game). Sometimes, our denominations teach about a different Jesus than we see in the Bible. Some denominations make Jesus to be nothing more than a prophet, while others make Him a slave of Mary, and sadly, some denominations entertain Jesus as a good man that is to be used for an example to follow. Jesus did not fit into the understanding of the disciples, neither will He fit our box, our job is to follow Him. The only way to get to know Him is to clear the slate. We need to return to the basics. Jesus is Yeshua the Messiah, King of kings and Lord of lords. Then let the scriptures define who Jesus is and stay away from the stinking thinking of the denominations.
Mark 3:20-21 NASB
Crowd control was becoming a problem. Mark gives us a word picture by describing the situation. It was so busy that Jesus was unable to enter a house and have a meal in peace. The word of healing had gotten out and He was overwhelmed with the response. This caused concern from two groups of people.
First, His immediate family was concerned and sought to remove Him from the situation (Mark 3:21, 31-32 NASB). The Greek word for brother is “adelphos”. This word is translated in two ways, the son of a mother or as a fellow Christian believer. The fellow Christian believer is always the son of God. My Catholic friends try to say that this word can be translated as “cousin” thereby trying to say that Mary stayed a virgin through her life. The Greek simply does not allow for this translation. Jesus had physical blood brothers. Albeit, these were half brothers since Joseph was not the father of Jesus.
In the context of Mark’s Gospel, Jesus has just started his earthly ministry. He just chose the twelve and is getting started with teaching, healing, and casting out demons. Jesus went from an unknown person to a radical miracle working preacher in a matter of a relatively short time. His family was astonished at his preaching and sought to take custody of him. The implication is properly translated as “He has lost His senses”. One of the interesting things about Jesus’ life is that his immediate family did not believe in Him until after the crucifixion. After that James came on board as a strong leader in the early church. I believe that Mary knew all along because of the information that we have in Luke. But then, she was one of them that came to take custody of Jesus (Mark 3:32 NASB). Perhaps she was having her doubts. It may be that Jesus had such a radical change in His earthly life when his ministry began that all of them were astonished and felt the need to take custody. Mark 3:22-30 NASB: Secondly, the religious leaders became concerned. They recognized that He had spiritual power beyond their understanding. Therefore, since they were self-proclaimed experts on Torah, the Scribes claimed that Yeshua was possessed by a demon.
Take a close look at the parable because I have seen many of these verses pulled out of context to be used for a massive amount of applications. Jesus makes a logical argument that if Satan is divided against himself, he is finished. Then he develops the argument further by saying that in order for Satan to plunder the strong man’s house, he first has to bind the strong man, (God). Or it could mean the opposite, if Jesus plunders Satan’s house, then he first bound the strong man (Satan). Either way the effect is still the same. I believe that the best interpretation of this is that Satan is the strong man, look at what Wiersbe said on this:
“The analogy in Mark 3:27 refuted their first accusation (v. 22) showing in fact (lit., “on the contrary”) that the opposite was true. Satan is the strong man. His house is the realm of sin, sickness, demon possession, and death. His possessions are people who are enslaved by one or more of these things, and demons are his agents who carry out his diabolical activity. No one can enter his realm to carry off (diarpasai, “plunder”) his possessions unless he first binds the strong man (shows he is more powerful). Then he can rob (diarpasei, “plunder”) the realm, releasing the enslaved victims. At His temptation (cf. Mk 1:12-13) and through His exorcisms Jesus demonstrated that He is the Stronger One, empowered by the Holy Spirit (cf. Mk 3:29). His mission is to confront and overpower (not cooperate with) Satan and to deliver those enslaved by him.”[2]
Now let’s look at the argument for the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. There has been a lot of controversy on these verses. Many Christians argue over what exactly is the blasphemy. I won’t make an absolute statement on this but would rather point out the meaning in context. Wiersbe holds that this is a rejection of the saving power of Jesus or a open hostility toward God. In such a way that the people defiantly choose not to believe in God even though the evidence points to God. That is consistent with this passage.
It may also be noted that the Scribes and Pharisees were attributing the work of Jesus with the work of Satan. Notice that the Holy Spirit is not mentioned by anybody but Jesus in this passage. When Jesus was rejected, He noted that it was not His work that was rejected but rather that of the Holy Spirit. In effect, Jesus was working through the humanly body in cooperation with the Holy Spirit to cast out demons, effect miracles, and teach. God is one God. When Jesus was working on earth, He was not working in isolation from the Father and the Holy Spirit. They were all working together. Therefore, the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is rejection of God’s work in its entirety.
Putting it together, Satan was bound by the work of the Godhead. His kingdom on earth was rapidly coming to a close because God bound him. When Jesus died on the cross, that was the final step in redeeming the world, thus ending the reign of Satan over the sons of Adam. Now, the Holy Spirit is working to convert followers of Satan to be followers of God. Jesus was saying that attributing His work to Satan was blasphemy of the Holy Spirit (Mark 3:30 NASB). In my understanding, this would be a rejection of the work of God until death. This is based on the thief on the cross.
Matthew 27:42-44; Mark 15:32; Luke 23:39-43 NASB
Matthew and Mark tell us that the robbers on the cross were all insulting Jesus saying that He was not the true King of the Jews. In other words; Jesus was not who He claimed to be. This qualifies as blasphemy. Luke develops the story of the thief further by demonstrating that even though the thief did not believe in Jesus, he came to a simple belief while he hung there. Jesus assured the thief that he would be with Him in Paradise. The ultimate blasphemy was a total rejection of the work of God through Jesus. When the thief repented, he was saved. By the way, the first man to enter heaven outside of Jesus was a thief worthy of death on a cross!
1 Corinthians 3:16-17; Ephesians 2:21-22; 2 Corinthians 5:17 NASB
Back to Mark: In the book by Philip Yancey and Dr. Paul Brand called In the Likeness of God. Yancey discusses DNA for a bit in the book. When a cell in the body is closely examined, each cell carries the DNA of the human body. That chain of information carries the exact blueprint that a human body requires in every aspect to be uniquely human. No two people have the same DNA. Think about this, when we enter God’s kingdom, we become a new creation and are incorporated into the body of Christ as members of His body. Our spiritual DNA has changed, we have the blueprint of God stamped on each cell in our body as we become the temple of the Holy Spirit. Think about it. At conversion we become endeared to Christ as members of His body, completely changed forever.
Returning to the passage:
Then the clincher, v. 28. Jesus wants to impress on them the gravity of what they are accusing Him of. Grieving of the Holy Spirit, the only unforgivable sin. The work of the Holy Spirit is to bring men to Jesus, to bring them to repentance and to grow them up in Christ. If a person rejects the Holy Spirits leading in their lives for their entire life until they die. In other words, they die before they are saved, or redeemed, or have salvation, however you want to say it, they aren’t making it to heaven. They have committed the unforgivable sin. This is because they ignored the working of the Holy Spirit in their lives for their entire life. Notice that the reason Jesus mentioned this was because of v. 30, “because they were saying, “He has an unclean spirit.”” Jesus being a righteous God, was giving a warning.
Judaism and Christianity are in agreement. We have a mutually exclusive belief in God. Simply put, the only way to salvation is through one God. All other gods are false and lead to destruction. Biblically speaking, there is only one path to heaven. When God’s leading is rejected to death, there is no other form of salvation. The rejection of the Holy Spirit till death, is an eternal sin that will not be forgiven.
Mark 3:31-35 NASB
Terms of endearment. What a powerful statement, when we accept Jesus and make Him Lord of our lives. We will do the will of God, and we will demonstrate that we have eternal life. We have moved from physical brotherhood of family to the brotherhood of believers. Yeshua was simply saying that once a person enters God’s Kingdom, we all share an intimate kinship (Jn 1:12-13 NASB).
[2]John F. Walvoord, Roy B. Zuck and Dallas Theological Seminary, The Bible Knowledge Commentary : An Exposition of the Scriptures (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1983-c1985), 2:117.
