COMMENTARY ON MARK
LESSON NUMBER 20
“ Mark 2:6But there were certain of the scribes sitting there, and reasoning in their hearts, 7Why doth this man thus speak blasphemies? who can forgive sins but God only? 8And 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? 9Whether 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?” (Mark 2:6-9)
THE MAN WITH PALSY, #2
INTRODUCTION
While he was teaching in a house, presumably that of Simon, a palsied, or paralytic, man has been lowered through the ceiling right before Him. Perceiving the faith of the four men who lowered him, Jesus has spoken directly to the infirm man, announcing that his sins were forgiven: “Son, be of good cheer: thy sins be forgiven thee” (Matt 9:2). Among other things, this incident will clarify the basic reason for Christ coming into the world. While He did heal many of the sick, drive demons from people, and feed the multitudes, these things were not His primary mission. Yet, those deeds of mercy were in harmony with that purpose, and would provide a context in which His mission could be more thoroughly and profitably comprehended. The good things the Lord did for people was driven by His great compassion and tender mercy – both of which are unwavering Divine qualities. Unlike men, however, Jesus would not be turned from the mission on which His Father sent Him by even kind and considerate deeds. These undeniably confirmed that the Kingdom of God was “at hand” (Mk 1:14-15). God was intervening in the affairs of men, disrupting the powers of darkness, and causing men to become aware of both the greatness of God and His “eternal purpose” that was being worked out in their very midst.
THE REASONING OF CERTAIN SCHOLARS
“ 2:6 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?” Luke informs us that, at this time, “there were Pharisees and doctors of the Law sitting by, which were come out of every town in Galilee, and Judea, and Jerusalem” (Lk 5:17). He also relates that “the power of the Lord was present to heal them.” Although scholars, and much learned in matters of erudition, we will see that this “power” was not evident to many who were present. It appears that the “four” who carried the palsied man to Jesus had some sense of the presence of Divine power, but there were also those who were ignorant of it.
CERTAIN SCRIBES. I understand these to be the “doctors of the law” to which Luke refers. Luke also says “the scribes and Pharisees began to reason” (Lk 5:21). Matthew says, “certain of the scribes said within themselves” (Matt 9:3). Originally, scribes were copyists of Scripture, who hand-wrote, or copied, the Law. By virtue of their familiarity with the text of Scripture, they eventually became teachers of the Law. Their teaching, however, was totally unimpressive when compared to that of Jesus. The people noted this difference when they observed Jesus “taught them as one that had authority, and not as the scribes” (Mk 1:22).
Notable scribes include Ezra (Ezra 7:11,21; Neh 8:1), and Baruch (who wrote Jeremiah’s sayings, Jer 36:32). There was also a scribe who asked Jesus concerning “the first commandment of all.” Upon hearing Jesus’ answer, the scribe replied, “Well, Master, Thou hast said the truth.” Jesus responded by saying, “Thou art not far from the kingdom of God” (Mk 12:28-34). Not all scribes, therefore, were of a debased spiritual nature. That is why our text singles out “certain scribes,” therefore allowing for exceptions among the whole of them. As a body of scholars, “scribes” were corrupt (Matt 23:13-34), and stood in the way of the door of entrance into the kingdom (Matt 23:13). The remarkable thing about this is that they were experts in the text of Scripture, yet, as a rule, fell miserably short in their apprehension of that text. Among other things, this confirms that mere exposure to the text of Scripture is not sufficient to produce an understanding of it. The Word must be “mixed with faith” if it is to be comprehended and men profit from it (Heb 4:2).
REASONING IN THEIR HEARTS. This was not a verbal discussion among themselves – a sort of scribal caucus. When they heard what Jesus said, they began thinking about it – “thinking to themselves,” NIV and “questioning in their hearts.” NRSV Throughout human history, there have been relatively few men who have provoked extended thought among their listeners – whether profitable or unprofitable. John the Baptist, who prepared the way for Christ, also provoked profound thoughts: “and all men mused in their hearts of John, whether he were the Christ, or not” (Lk 3:15).
One of the contemptible conditions of our time is that much of the preaching and teaching provokes little or no sober thought. The messages and lessons of the day are too easily forgotten, even though they are often draped with attempted eloquence and buttressed with quotations from peers.
SCHOLASTIC QUESTIONS. These men – parading themselves as scholars – thought that Jesus spoke “blasphemies.” Matthew identified their thoughts in an even more strong manner: “This man blasphemeth” (Matt 9:3). Luke points out that they inquired into who this was that so spoke: “Who is this which speaketh blasphemies?” (Lk 5:21). They had apparently never heard a man speak such things.
To blaspheme is to slander, speak against, and reproach the holy name of the Lord. The idea here is that they saw Jesus was taking upon Himself a Divine attribute. In their minds, it was a reproach to God for Jesus of Nazareth to so speak. They saw no similarities between this Man and the God of heaven. How little they knew, for this was “God with us” (Matt 1:23), “God manifest in the flesh” (1 Tim 3:16), and “the fulness of the Godhead bodily” (Col 2:9). They had no idea that the one who had seen Jesus had also “seen the Father” (John 14:9). Thus we see that their Bible reading had actually blinded their minds, just as Isaiah prophesied (Isa 29:10-11).
These scribes theoretically knew about the forgiveness of sins, but they could not associate it with the Prophet from Nazareth. Thinking within themselves, they reasoned, “Who can forgive sins but God alone?” It is therefore evident that they made no association between Jesus and God – even though Jesus said “the Father is in Me” (John 10:38). He later told His disciples, the Father “dwelleth in Me” (John 14:10). And again, “I am in the Father, and the Father in Me” (John 14:11). This, however, was by no means apparent to the flesh – even educated flesh – even flesh that was expert in the Scriptural text. We learn from this that the human mind and heart are impotent apart from faith.
THE PERCEPTIVE LORD
“ 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?”
There is a certain dulness of both heart and mind that has resulted from sin – particularly regarding unseen things. There have been, and continue to be, those who are “slow of heart to believe” (Lk 24:25). The phrase “dull of hearing” (“slow to learn” NIV) denotes the same delayed response (Matt 13:15; Heb 5:11). This condition has provoked the worldly saying, “repetition is the mother of all learning”– which saying is not at all applicable to “the hearing of faith” (Gal 3:2,5). Jesus was not content with this human trait, even though He confronted it in His own disciples. Therefore He responded to that condition by saying, “How long shall I be with you?” (Matt 17:17), and “Have I been so long time with you, and yet Thou hast not known Me” (John 14:9). Paul also expressed a certain intolerance of the slowness to apprehend: “For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat” (Heb 5:12). You will find no such response in the Lord Jesus! He sets before us the standard of God’s Kingdom.
IMMEDIATELY. No sooner had these scribes began reasoning in their hearts than Jesus was aware of their thoughts. Instantly Jesus responds to the situation. That is how He responded to Peter when He was sinking beneath the stormy wave (Matt 14:31). His response to the woman who touched the hem of His garment was immediate (Mk 5:30). When He came to the disciples walking on the water, He “immediately” responded to their fear (Mk 6:50). While Jesus Himself spoke of the Father bearing long with “His elect” (Lk 18:7), that does not suggest that He “seeth not” (Ezek 9:9). This often moves men to conduct their lives foolishly “because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily” (Eccl 8:11). However, there are also immediate responses – like the sentence against Nebuchadnezzar “the same hour” (Dan 4:33), the judgment of Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1-10, and the immediate judgment of Herod (Acts 12:23). The saints must not be ignorant of this fact.
PERCEIVED IN HIS SPIRIT. Matthew says of this occasion, “And Jesus knowing their thoughts” (Matt 9:4). Luke says, “when Jesus perceived their thoughts” (Lk 5:22). Our Lord was not only aware of their reasonings, or thoughts, but had an understanding of them – of their nature and direction.
The Lord’s Spirit had access to the spirits of others – it probed and searched out what was “within man.” Thus it is written that Jesus “needed not that any should testify of man: for He knew what was in man” (John 2:25). Although it was applied to another matter, the statement concerning the searching nature of the Holy Spirit applies to this text: “the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God” (1 Cor 2:10). This is one of the aspects of the convicting ministry of the Holy Spirit. He could not convince men of sin, righteousness, and judgment, if He did not know their thoughts as well as those of the Lord (John 16:8-11).
Everything was “naked and opened” unto Jesus (Heb 4:13). This was largely owing to Him having the fulness of the Spirit, “for God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto Him” (John 3:34). Even when He was in the flesh, “straightened” by a body (Luke 12:50), and in a humbled state (Phil 2:8), He “knew their thoughts” (Matt 12:25; Lk 6:8).
Jesus was the supreme example of not living according to the flesh. Of old time David spoke of true introspection: “I commune with mine own heart: and my spirit made diligent search” (Psa 77:6). This experience was brought to its apex in Christ Jesus. He did not live close to the surface of life, but was constrained from deep within – in His essential person, and not according to fleshly appetites. On one occasion, when the Pharisees were seeking “a sign from heaven” from Him, He “sighed deeply in His spirit” (Mk 8:12).
WHY REASON YE? Reasoning speaks of considering, the process of thinking, deliberating, contemplating, and pondering. In this case, it included the idea of inward debating – comparing what they heard Jesus say with what they thought Scripture said. To them, there was a conflict between Jesus and God – between what He said and Scripture.
This kind of reasoning is at the root of all division among professing Christians. It is a form of thought that proceeds from a failure to apprehend the truth, which is never at a variance with itself. This way of thinking is still very prominent in the Christian community – thinking that sees Divine statements to be at a variance with one another.
The details of this are most arresting to ponder. When we consider that the Lord knows our words, it often brings a deep conviction. However, here He is shown to be keenly aware of our reasoning, or thought processes – of the way we think, the subjects concerning which we choose to think, and of the inferences and conclusions that we draw.
A PROBING AND REVEALING QUESTION
“ 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?”
In this saying, Jesus is exposing the foolishness of worldly wisdom. He is showing that the mind of the flesh cannot take the truth as a whole into the thought processes, and reason upon it. It must rather deal with bits and pieces, ascribing to each piece independence from the rest of the Revelation. When approaching Divine utterances in this way, priority is given to a saying that best suits the overall view of the individual. If, for example, a person conceives of salvation as being the result of what men do, all references to the election of men, drawing men, being justified by grace, etc. are taken to be wholly dependent on what man, in his own strength, chooses. Others, taking an opposite view, consider that all human response is nothing more than a robotic reaction to the overpowering will of the Lord. In both cases, truth in its entirety was not considered.
Now Jesus will cast the whole matter into the lap of His hearers. As it is written, “The lot is cast into the lap; but the whole disposing thereof is of the LORD” (Prov 16:33). Since they are so willing to reason, He will force them to reason within certain boundaries. It is not God’s manner to let reasoning go on endlessly in the wrong direction. In due time, He will ask some questions of wayward thinkers. That is His manner. Thus the Lord said to Job, “Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou Me” (Job 38:3). To wayward Israel He asked, “What could have been done more to My vineyard, that I have not done in it? wherefore, when I looked that it should bring forth grapes, brought it forth wild grapes?” (Isa 5:4). To those who object to God’s dealings with men the question is asked, “Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?” (Rom 9:20).
WHETHER IS IT EASIER TO SAY? This is a rhetorical question. Actually, a profound God does not say anything that is “easy.” Men who theorize about what the Lord is and is not able to do or say are treading on thin ice, and their souls are at stake. If they insist upon wandering like lost people in the field of thought, God will soon face them with certain sobering facts, and demand some answers of them.
By asking “Whether is it easier to say?” Jesus is asking, “Which takes the most power?” “Which saying is empty, or without any apparent effectiveness.” “Which saying requires the least effort, or can be said without any attending proof?”
TO SAY, “THY SINS BE FORGIVEN THEE.” This is what Jesus has already said – not to the people, but to the palsied man. Notwithstanding, He said it so that all could hear, for “this thing was not done in a corner” (Acts 26:26). To men, it looks as though saying “Thy sins be forgiven thee” cannot be proved. But they have overlooked one key factor – the man to whom the words were spoken. Great works are not always intended to be confirmed outwardly. For example, the woman who was healed of a twelve-year issue of blood, did not necessarily show outward signs of the healing. Yet it is written, “she felt in her body that she was healed of that plague” (Mk 5:29). Do not doubt that the paralytic man had a consciousness of the reality of being forgiven. Jesus’ word was, after all, “with power” (Lk 4:32).
TO SAY, “ARISE, AND TAKE UP THY BED, AND WALK.” At once the skeptic will say that it is easier to say “Thy sins be forgiven thee.” With the exception of the forgiven man, that statement, they thought, could not be supported. First, these men should not have reasoned so foolishly. Already, Jesus had dismissed a fever with His word – a rebuke (Lk 4:39). He had cleansed a leper with His word (Mk 1:41-42). He had dismissed demons “with His word” (Matt 8:16). For those with honest and good hearts, there had been a perfect and consistent correlation between what Jesus said and what He did.
Actually, both the forgiveness of sins and the command for a paralytic to take up his bed and walk, demand omnipotence. Neither can be accomplished by a mere man. This is the point of the twenty-ninth Psalm, which is an ode to “the voice of the Lord.” Breaking cedars, dividing the flames, shaking the wilderness, and making the hinds to calve, are the accomplishments of Divine utterance – and salvation is even more detailed than that.
Right here, a word ought to be said about the current phenomenon of being “angry with God,” or “mad at” Him. Those who respond in this manner to the hardships of life have seen, what they believe to be, a contradiction of what God does and who He is and what He says. But they are as foolish as the scribes of our text, even if they only entertain such thoughts without speaking them. To such we might very well say, “Which is it easier to say, ‘Have no trouble,’ or “Stand in the midst of trouble?’” I will leave the answer to your own conscience, but it certainly ought to be apparent that neither one is really “easier.”