COMMENTARY ON MARK
LESSON NUMBER 89
“ Mark 8:22 And He cometh to Bethsaida; and they bring a blind man unto Him, and besought Him to touch him. 23 And He took the blind man by the hand, and led him out of the town; and when He had spit on his eyes, and put His hands upon him, He asked him if he saw ought. 24 And he looked up, and said, I see men as trees, walking. 25 After that He put His hands again upon his eyes, and made him look up: and He was restored, and saw every man clearly. 26 And He sent him away to his house, saying, Neither go into the town, nor tell it to any in the town.” (Mark 8:22-26)
GETTING AWAY FROM UNBELIEF
INTRODUCTION
Jesus has returned to the other side of Galilee from “the parts of Dalmanutha.” Perhaps you have picked up on this throughout the Gospel of Mark: it is all about Jesus – where He went, and what He was doing. The only time we are told about what the disciples did is when Jesus sent them out (Mk 6:12; Lk 9:2), or commanded them to distribute the food He supplied the multitudes (Mk 8:6-7). The only discussions of the disciples that are recorded are those that required some response from Jesus. The only time anything is said about their homes or their relatives is when they were being called by, Jesus, or were with Him (Mk 1:19-20; Mk 1:30). The only reference to their occupation is related to their call from it (Mk 1:16,19–20; 2:12; Lk 5:10). Throughout the Gospels, and with no exception, the disciples are pictured as being with Jesus. Jesus is not presented as being with them. Even when Jesus promises to be with His disciples following His return to heaven, it is only as they are engaged in His work (Matt 28:20). The promise of the Lord being with His people is now contingent upon their separation from this world – being “without covetousness,” and “content” with the things they have (Heb 13:5). It is a dangerous thing when the emphasis of Christianity is shifted from Jesus to the individual. Such an accent is in sharp conflict with the Gospel of Christ, and the doctrine of the apostles as well. Spiritual life is not about the Lord being with men in all of the details of their lives, but with them devoting themselves wholly to the Lord and His purpose. The well known aphorism “the will of God for my life” is skewed in the wrong direction. If you remove the will and purpose of God from all consideration, there is not so much as a syllable of Scripture that affirms His interest in or concern for the lives of people. Even if we consider the need of food, drink, and clothing, it is within the context of seeking first the Kingdom of God and His righteousness (Matt 6:31-33). I take care to say I am speaking of an emphasis, lest any unwarranted conclusions be reached.
REMOVING THE MAN FROM AN UNACCEPTABLE AREA
“ Mk 8:22 And He cometh to Bethsaida; and they bring a blind man unto Him, and besought Him to touch him. 23a And He took the blind man by the hand, and led him out of the town . . . ”
COMING TO BETHSAIDA. This was a town on the Western side of the Sea of Galilee, and belonged to the region of Galilee, being called “Bethsaida of Galilee” (John 12:21). Philip, Peter, and Andrew were from this city (John 1:44). It was also in the vicinity of Capernaum and Chorazin. This triad of cities is described as a place “wherein most of His mighty works were done” – and yet it is said of them, “they repented not” (Matt 11:20). Jesus pronounced a “Woe” upon both Chorazin and Bethsaida, declaring that it would be “more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon in the day of judgment” than for them (Matt 11:21-22). He told Capernaum, where He Himself resided (Matt 4:13), that they had been “exalted into heaven” by virtue of His presence, yet would be “cast down into hell.” He told them it would be “more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment” than for them (Matt 11:23-24).
There are places and people who are exposed to Jesus primarily to fulfill the Scriptures. This was true of the region of these cities of Galilee. It is written that Jesus moved to and ministered there “That is might be fulfilled which was spoken of Isaiah the prophet The land of Zabulon, and the land of Nephthalim, by the way of the sea, beyond Jordan, Galilee of the Gentiles; the people which sat in darkness saw great light; and to them which sat in the region and shadow of death light is sprung up” (Mat 4:14-16). As a whole, the people were not responsive to Jesus, as confirmed in the woes He pronounced again them.
Jesus told His disciples there would be times when the Gospel would actually be a testimony “against” those who heard it (Mk 13:9-10). On one occasion, Paul and Barnabas told some unbelieving Jews, “It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles” (Acts 13:46). Referring to the preaching of the Gospel, Paul affirmed, “For we are unto God a sweet savor of Christ, in them that are saved, and in them that perish: to the one we are the savor of death unto death; and to the other the savor of life unto life. And who is sufficient for these things?” (2 Cor 2:15-16).
All of this emphasizes that Christ’s ministry was primarily motivated by His desire to “please” the Father (John 8:29). Jesus confessed that His “meat,” or the things that nourished and strengthened Him, was to “do the will of Him that sent Me, and to finish His work” (John 4:34). There is no other way to account for Jesus doing “most of His mighty works” in this region.
I say these things knowing that it is possible to draw incorrect conclusions about Christ’s attitude toward the people. It is necessary, however, to learn to think in terms of the priority of God’s will. So far as we are concerned, that is often the only explanation available to us.
THEY BRING A BLIND MAN TO HIM. Although Jesus is entering into the last part of His ministry (Mk 8:31), the people have not become so used to Him that they can ignore His presence. Even in this area, noted for its rejection of the Christ, the people associated Him, with great things. They were not bringing their disputes to Him, like the people did to Moses, when they brought to Him their “hard causes”(Ex 18:13,18,26). Solomon exercised the same kind of judgment, judging when there were disputes (1 Kgs 3:16-28).
The discernment of the people can be seen in the greatness of the causes they bring to Jesus. Where nothing more than social issues are brought to the Lord, with no quest for His power, there is some question about whether or not Jesus has been seen properly.
In this case, it seems clear that those who brought the blind man to Jesus did not represent the populous as a whole. They were more like Peter, Andrew, and Philip, who were also from that area. You might say they were an example of a remnant.
HE LED HIM OUT OF THE TOWN. Once Jesus had led a deaf man with an impediment of speech away from the multitude to heal him(Mk 7:33). Now Jesus “took the blind man by the hand, and led him out of the town.” In the first case, even though certain had brought the deaf and dumb man to Jesus, the multitude were a distraction because they lacked depth and true interest. Now Jesus takes the blind man by the hand and leads him out of the town of Bethsaida – away from this citadel of unbelief, for no place upon which Jesus pronounces a “Woe” is in any sense conducive to “the mighty acts of the Lord” (Psa 145:4).
There are environs that must be left before the wonderful works of God can be realized. The progress of many in the faith is as much owing to where they left as to where they have come. There are places and people who “are not worthy” of Christ (Matt 10:37-38). There are communications that “corrupt good manners” (1 Cor 15:33). There are people from whom we must “turn away” (2 Tim 3:5), and some individuals from whom a godly man must “purge himself” (2 Tim 2:21). There is a religious society concerning which the Spirit says, “come out from among them” (2 Cor 6:17), and “come out of her My people” (Rev 18:4).
THE LINGERING EFFECTS OF UNBELIEF
“ 23a . . . and when He had spit on his eyes, and put His hands upon him, He asked him if he saw ought. 24 And he looked up, and said, I see men as trees, walking.”
Some people had brought this blind man to Jesus, “and begged Him to touch him.” NKJV But Jesus did not do so – at least not in the manner they specified. Instead, Jesus took the man by the hand and led him out of the town. In the eyes of men, that certainly should have qualified as a “touch” – but it was not a touch of power, and therefore no change was wrought by it. It is, therefore, possible to have some immediate contact with Jesus, and yet not be changed by it. Here is an example of one with a bodily infirmity. Judas is an example of a man with a corrupt heart. Judas was a man whose feet Jesus washed on the night of His betrayal (John 13:5,27-30). Yet, Judas only became worse that night, though touched by Jesus, for that night Satan “entered . . . into Judas” (Lk 22:3), and he went out and “communed with the chief priests and captains, how he might betray Him unto them” (Luke 22:4).
It appears to me that some people view Jesus more as a glorified magician than as the Savior of the world, who is bringing many sons to glory (Heb 2:10). They see Him as able to correct their personal dilemm(as as they have assessed them), and are disappointed when He does not do so. We do well to develop a view of Jesus that is in strict accord with the Father’s representation of Him – the “record” He has given of His Son. Lest we be confused on the matter, John carefully summarizes that record. “And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the world” (1 John 4:14). “God sent His only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through Him” (1 John 4:9). “For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that He might destroy the works of the devil” (1 John 3:8).
HE SPIT ON HIS EYES. This is the only time of record that Jesus used such a means to heal the blind. One time Jesus healed a blind man with a word (Lk 18:12). Another time He anointed the eyes of a blind man with clay made from His own spittle, and told him to wash in a specific pool (John 9:6-7). Our text presents a third method.
Here is a classic example of the revealed Divine manner: “But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; and base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are” (1 Cor 1:28). No one but a fool would attempt to duplicate this miracle by this means. On the other hand, if the Lord had pronounced some formulae by which the man’s sight was restored, I have no doubt that men would have sought to do the same – like the seven sons of Sceva (Acts 19:14-16).
It is the lack of awareness of this Divine manner that moves religious men to promote empty routines – like twelve disciplined steps, forty days of purpose, daily regimens, and the likes. They seek to correct human behavior, or make spiritual advance by stereotyped means.
HE PUT HIS HANDS ON HIM. The laying on of hands is not common in our society, but during the time of our text, people associated this with blessing – particularly when it involved Jesus. Once the people brought little children to Jesus, “that He should put His hands on then, and pray” (Matt 19:13). In His “own country,” He “laid His hands upon a few sick folk, and healed them” (Mk 6:5). When faced with a multitude of infirm people in Capernaum, “He laid His hands on every one of them and healed them” (Lk 4:40). When confronting a woman bowed together with the spirit of infirmity, Jesus “laid His hands on her: and immediately she was made straight” (Lk 13:13). He healed Peter’s mother-in-law by touching her hand (Matt 8:15). When Peter cut off Malchus’ ear, Jesus “touched his ear and healed him” (Lk 22:51). Once He “touched” a leper, said “be thou clean,” and the leper was healed (Mk 1:41-42). When Jesus touched the open coffin of a dead man, the man “sat up and began to speak” (Lk 7:14). It seems to me that the point is this: when Jesus clearly identifies Himself with any difficulty, it will soon be addressed and resolved.
HE ASKED HIM. Jesus asked the man, “Do you see anything?” NIV Eyes that are opened must be used. What did the man see? How clearly did he see the things around him? This is equivalent to telling a man with a withered hand stretch it out (Mk 3:5), or a lame man on a bed to pick it up and walk (Mk 2:11). When Jesus heals our infirmities, He will no doubt call upon us to employ them.
MEN AS TREES WALKING. This is the only time in all of Scripture when a healing appeared to not be complete. The man made an effort; He “looked up,” but confessed people looked to him “like trees walking around.” NIV What he saw was confusing. It was not clear. It appears as though his vision was also blurred, so that men appeared larger than they really were. Some assume that this was a special working of the Lord that was intended to show how understanding is gradually given to believers. It seems to me that the text justifies seeing this as a demonstration of the remarkably hindering influences of an unbelieving environment.
RESTORED AND ADMONISHED
“ 25 After that He put His hands again upon his eyes, and made him look up: and he was restored, and saw every man clearly. 26 And He sent him away to his house, saying, Neither go into the town, nor tell it to any in the town.”
HE PUT HIS HANDS ON HIS EYES AGAIN. Some have conjectured that Christ could have healed this man instantly, had He desired to do so. Philosophically, this may appear to be very true. However, we have this word about Jesus’ ability within the context of great unbelief – and it was in the same geographical area: “And He could there do no mighty work, save that He laid His hands upon a few sick folk, and healed them” (Mark 6:5). This inability was not owing to any lack of power on Jesus part, but was rather related to His nature, which recoils and withdraws from unbelief. Matthew confirms this when he writes, “And He did not many mighty works there because of their unbelief” (Mat 13:58).
It is possible for the attitudes and expressions of men to limit what God can do for them. As it is written, “Yea, they turned back and tempted God, and limited the Holy One of Israel” (Psa 78:41). Some versions, instead of using the word “limited,” neutralize this text by using the word “pained,” NASB “vexed,” NIV or “provoked.” NRSV Thus they rob men of the perspective that when God is vexed or provoked He will not bless those who cause that response! In this case “cannot” refers to the violation of Divine character, not the lack of ability. He “cannot deny Himself” (2 Tim 2:13), which He would surely do if He lavished blessings on those who provoke Him to anger.
Properly seen, this second touch is an exhibition of Divine mercy triumphing over judgment, and not a second attempt in which even more power was used. In these surroundings it took more mercy, more compassion, and more pity than it took more power.
HE MADE HIM LOOK UP. We are not sure how Jesus “made” the man look up, but in some way he moved him to peer into the same area he had previously looked. He had to look at the same thing again. It is as though the unbelief of that region had caused a spiritual mist to descend upon the area. As a result, everything looked distorted and lacked clarity. Now, however, for this man, that circumstance would be changed.
I have observed that there are areas in which spiritual understanding is nearly impossible. There is a blanket of blindness cast over the people, so that the things of God can be scarcely understood. In such environs it is easier to leave one’s “first love” (Rev 2:4). There, it is easier to allow the propagation of wicked teaching (Rev 2:20). Spiritual deadness therefore flourishes, while the shell of religion is meticulously maintained (Rev 3:1).
Those extracted from such places require an extraordinary amount of grace to fully recover. Many of us can testify that the lingering effects of distorted religion are often as challenging to “unlearn” as it is for the truth to be perceived. That is why we are admonished to turn away from corrupt and debilitating religion (2 Tim 3:5).
HE WAS RESTORED. Now, the man “saw everyone clearly.” NKJV Notice, the man’s vision was not said to be “restored” until he saw everything clearly. This puts the lie to the notion that one can be healed, yet retain the symptoms of the malady from which he was healed. Spiritually speaking, those who “cannot see afar off” are said to be “blind” (2 Pet 1:9).
The Lord is never said to have partially healed someone. That is a charge leveled at the false prophets, who are said to have “healed also the hurt of the daughter of My people slightly,” or “superficially” NASB (Jer 6:14; 8:11). Such a condition is like a “carnal christian” – only a figment of the imagination.
DO NOT GO BACK TO THE TOWN. Jesus sent the man to his own house. He gave the same instructions to others (Matt 9:6; Mk 2:11; Lk 5:24). This indicates that the blind man had been brought into the town of Bethsaida from another place. There were times when Jesus told people not to tell what He had done for them (Mk 5:43; 7:36; Matt 8:4; 9:30; 12:16). But that is not the instruction that is given here. “Neither go into the town, nor tell it to any in the town.” Other versions read, “Do not even enter the village,” NASB “Don't go back into the village on your way home,” NLT and “Do not [even] enter the village or tell anyone there.” AMPLIFIED
This village was doubtless Bethsaida, the town into which this man had been brought. Now Jesus forbids the man to return to that town, or to tell anyone from it what had happened. This was a city that had heard Jesus speak and saw Him work, and yet it is written that “they repented not.” Like the people of Jeremiah’s day, showers of blessing were “withholden” from them because they “refused to be ashamed” (Jer 3:3). It could well be said of them, “your sins hath withholden good things from you” (Jer 5:25).
It is a serious condition when anyone at variance with the Lord is exposed to the truth and fails to repent, abandoning their former way of life and cleaving to the Lord “with purpose of heart” (Acts 11:23). Men may grow patient with such conditions and continue to labor endlessly where there is no favorable response. Our text, however, does not reflect that mind-set. Keep in mind that this area had been exposed to the Lord’s Christ for about two years.