In the house – Possibly the house of Peter, with whom Christ lodged when at
Mar 2:2 And immediately many were gathered, so that none any longer had room, even to the door. And He proclaimed the Word to them.
not so much as about the door; or the places before the door, the porch, the court, or courtyard. The crowd was so great, that neither the house, nor the out places before, could hold them, nor could they come even near the door;
Mar 2:3 Then they came to Him, bringing one who was paralyzed, who was carried by four.
Borne of four - Carried upon a couch Four men, one at each corner of the sofa or couch on which he lay: this sick man appears to have been too feeble to come himself, and too weak to be carried in any other way. Matthew 9:2 And behold, they brought to Him a paralytic, lying on a bed. And Jesus, seeing their faith, said to the paralytic, Child, be of good cheer. Your sins are forgiven you.
Mar 2:4 When they could not come near to Him because of the crowd, they unroofed the roof where He was. And digging through, they let down the cot on which the paralytic was lying.
They uncovered the roof where he was – Lit., scooped it out. They would have uncovered the dirt and thatch over the beams of wood that comprised the roof of typical homes of that time and place. . A composition of mortar, tar, ashes, and sand is spread upon the roofs, and rolled hard, and grass grows in the crevices. On the houses of the poor in the country the grass grows more freely, and goats may be seen on the roofs cropping it. In some cases, as in this, stone slabs are laid across the joists. Luke 5:19 And not finding a way by which they might bring him in through the crowd, going up on the housetop, they let him down through the tiles with his cot into the midst, before Jesus where it is said they let him down through the tiles; so that they would be obliged, not only to dig through the grass and earth, but also to pry up the tiles.
The bed - A rude pallet, merely a thickly padded quilt or mat, held at the corners.
Mar 2:5 And seeing their faith, Jesus said to the paralytic, Child, your sins are forgiven to you.
Son - Literally, “child.” The Hebrews used the words “son” and “child” with a great latitude of signification. They were applied to children, to grandchildren, to adopted children, to any descendants, to disciples, followers, young people, and to dependents. In this place it denotes affection or kindness. It was a word of consolation - an endearing appellation, applied by the Savior to the sick man to show his “compassion,” to inspire confidence, and to assure him that he would heal him.
thy sins be forgiven thee; pointing and striking at the root of his disorder, his sins. The blessing Christ conferred on this poor man is of the greatest consequence and importance, forgiveness of sin: it is what springs from the grace and mercy of God; it is provided in a promise in the covenant of grace; Christ was sent to shed his blood to procure it, in a way consistent with the holiness and justice of God; and this being done, it is published in the Gospel, and is a most considerable article in it, and than which, nothing can be more desirable to a sensible sinner: and blessed are they that are partakers of it, their sins will never be imputed to them; they will never be remembered more; they are blotted out of God's book of debts; they are covered out of his sight, and are removed as far as the east is from the west, even all their sins, original and actual, secret or open, of omission, or commission.
thy sins be forgiven thee - The Jews believed that not only death but all disease was the consequence of sin. “There is no death without sin, nor any chastisement without iniquity;” and that “no diseased person could be healed of his disease till his sins were blotted out.” Our Lord, therefore, as usual, appeals to their received opinions, and asserts his high dignity, by first forgiving the sins, and then healing the body of the paralytic.
Mar 2:6 But some of the scribes were sitting there, and reasoning in their hearts,
Reasoning - The word dialogue is derived from this, and the meaning literally is, that they held a dialogue with themselves
Mar 2:7 Why does this one speak such blasphemies? Who can forgive sins except God only?
Why doth this man thus speak blasphemies? - They took Christ to be a mere man, and reasoned with themselves, that he must be a blasphemer, in assuming that to himself, which was peculiar to God: they seem astonished at his words, and wonder at his arrogance, and to be filled with indignation and resentment at him.
He blasphemeth - This is the unspoken charge in their hearts which Jesus read like an open book. They justify the charge with the conviction that God alone has the power to forgive sins. It was, they held, blasphemy for Jesus to assume this divine prerogative. Their logic was correct. The only flaw in it was the possibility that Jesus held a peculiar relation to God which justified his claim. In Jewish teaching, not even the Messiah could forgive sins, only the Lord can. Jesus here asserts His divinity in forgiving sins. So the two forces clash here as now on the deity of Christ Jesus. Knowing full well that he had exercised the prerogative of God in forgiving the man’s sins he proceeds to justify his claim by healing the man.
Mar 2:8 And instantly knowing in His spirit that they reasoned so within themselves, He said to them, Why do you reason these things in your heart?
And immediately, when Jesus perceived in his Spirit - by his divine nature, in 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.
Mar 2:9 Which is easier, to say to the paralytic, Your sins are forgiven you; or to say, Arise, and take up your cot and walk?
Mar 2:10 But so that you may know that the Son of Man has authority upon earth to forgive sins, He said to the paralytic,
Power - authority. The word means it is permitted or lawful. It combines the ideas of right and might. Authority or right is the dominant meaning in the New Testament.
Mar 2:11 I say to you, Arise, and take up your cot, and go to your house.
Mar
We never saw it on this fashion - Jesus had acted with the power of God and claimed equality with God and had made good his claim.
Mar 2:13 And He went out again by the seaside. And all the crowd came to Him, and He taught them.
By the sea-side - That is, by the
Mar 2:14 And as He passed on, He saw Levi the son of
Levi, the son of
sitting at the tax-office - sitting at the receipt of custom; the toll booth, or custom house, where he sat to take toll of passengers that came, or went in ships or boats,
Mar
Sinners - the Gentiles or heathens are generally to be understood in the Gospels, for this was a term the Jews never applied to any of themselves.
And when the Scribes and Pharisees saw him eat - They were offended at his eating and drinking, though it was in moderation; because he did not fast as they, and their disciples did; and especially, that he eat with publicans and sinners; men of very infamous characters, and bad lives, with whom the Pharisees disdained to keep company:
It was an offence for a Jew to eat with Gentiles as even many of the early Jewish Christians felt Acts 11: 2-3 And when Peter had come up to Jerusalem, those of the circumcision contended with him, saying, You went in to uncircumcised men and ate with them. and publicans and sinners were regarded like Gentiles. 1Corinthians 5:11 But now I have written to you not to associate intimately, if any man called a brother and is either a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such a one not to eat.
Mar 2:17 When Jesus heard, He said to them, They who are strong have no need of a physician, but the ones who have illness. I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.
they that are whole, have no need of the physician, which seems to be a proverbial expression, signifying that he was a physician; that these publicans and sinners were sick persons, and needed his company and assistance; but that they, the Scribes and Pharisees, were whole, and in good health, in their own esteem, and so wanted no relief; and therefore ought not to take it amiss, that he attended the one, and not the other. These words give a general view of mankind, in their different sentiments of themselves and of Christ; and of the usefulness of Christ to one sort, and not another.
I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance. Jesus for the sake of argument accepts the claim of the Pharisees to be righteous, though, as a matter of fact, they fell very far short of it. It appears from hence, that by "the whole" are meant, "righteous" persons; not such who are made righteous, by the righteousness of Christ imputed to them, but such who were outwardly righteous before men, who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, depended on their own righteousness, and fancied themselves, with respect to the righteousness of the law, blameless; and so, in their own apprehensions, stood in no need of Christ and his righteousness: yea, even needed not repentance, according to their own thoughts of things, and therefore were not called to it, but were left to their own stupidity and blindness; these were the Scribes and Pharisees
I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance – In this statement, Jesus also shows that to have that share in salvation, there must be a recognition of need (repentance). Self righteous people do not recognize that need. They do not seek the physician and His salvation.
Mar 2:18 The disciples of John and those of the Pharisees were fasting. And they came and said to Him, Why do John's disciples and those of the Pharisees fast, but your disciples do not fast?
Mar 2:19 And Jesus said to them, Can the sons of the bridechamber fast while the bridegroom is with them? As long as they have the bridegroom with them they cannot fast.
can the children of the bride chamber fast, while the bridegroom is with them? Suggesting that he was the bridegroom, as John their master had called him, John 3:29 He who has the bride is the bridegroom, but the friend of the bridegroom who stands and hears him rejoices greatly because of the bridegroom's voice. Then my joy is fulfilled, and that his disciples were the children of the bride chamber; and that it was very unsuitable for them, and very unreasonable to desire them to fast at such a time, and under such a character:
the bridegroom - Jesus identifies himself with the bridegroom of the O.T. Hosea 2:20- 21 I will even betroth you to Me in faithfulness. And you shall know the LORD. And it will be, in that day I will answer, says the LORD. I will answer the heavens, and they shall answer the earth, God in his covenant relation with
Mar
Mar 2:21 And no one sews a patch of new cloth on an old garment, else it takes away from its fullness, the new from the old, and a worse tear occurs.
On an old garment; the moral and ceremonial righteousness of the Jews, in obedience to the law of God; signifying, that the former were not to be joined with these, to make up a justifying righteousness before God; which were not sufficient for such a purpose, either singly, or both together: The traditions of the elders are meant, particularly concerning eating and drinking, and fasting, things before spoken of; and which occasioned this parable, and which were new things in comparison of the commands of God: some of them were of very short standing, devised in, that age; and most, if not all of them, were since the times of Ezra.
else the new piece that filled it up, taketh away from the old, and the rent is made worse; for by attendance to the traditions of the elders, the Jews were taken off from, and neglected the commandments of God; oftentimes the commands of God were made void by these traditions, so that the old garment of their own righteousness, which was very ragged and imperfect of itself, instead of being purer and more perfect, became much the worse, even for the purpose for which it was intended;
Mar 2:22 No one puts new wine into old wineskins, else the new wine bursts the wineskins, and the wine spills, and the wineskins will be ruined. The new wine must be put into new wineskins.
No one puts new wine into old wineskins - but new wine must be put into new bottles; into the hearts of sinners, who are called to repentance, and are renewed in the Spirit of their minds; are newborn babes, that desire the sincere milk of the word, and wine of the Gospel; in these the love of God is exceeding abundant, and it comes in with full flows into their souls; all grace is made to abound towards them, and the word of Christ richly dwells in them; in whom these things remain and abide, and they themselves are saved with an everlasting salvation.
Mar
The cornfields - The fields sown with wheat or barley. The word “corn,” in the Bible, refers only to grain of that kind, and never to “maize” or “Indian corn.”
To pluck the ears of corn - They were hungry. They therefore gathered the wheat or barley as they walked and rubbed it in their hands to shell it, and thus to satisfy their appetite. Though our Lord was with them, and though he had all things at his control, yet he suffered them to resort to this method of supplying their wants. When Jesus, thus “with” his disciples, suffered them to be “poor,” we may learn that poverty is not disgraceful; that God often suffers it for the good of his people; and that he will take care, in some way, that their wants shall be supplied. It was “lawful” for them thus to supply their needs. Though the property belonged to another, yet the law of Moses allowed the poor to satisfy their desires when hungry. Deuteronomy 23:25 When you come into the standing grain of your neighbor, then you may pluck the heads with your hand, but you shall not move a sickle into your neighbor's standing grain.
That which is not lawful - That is, that which they esteemed to be unlawful on the “Sabbath day.” It was made lawful by Moses, without any distinction of days, but “they” had denied its lawfulness on the Sabbath. Christ shows them from their own law that it was “not” unlawful. Reaping is not permitted on the Sabbath.
Mar 2:25 And He said to them, Have you never read what David did, when he had need and was hungry, he, and those with him?
Mar 2:26 How he went into the house of God in the days of Abiathar the high priest and ate the showbread, which it is not lawful to eat, except for the priests, and also gave to those with him?
Abiathar the priest - It appears from 1Samuel 21:1 And David came to Nob, to Ahimelech the priest. And Ahimelech was afraid at the meeting of David, and said to him, Why are you alone, and no man with you? which is the place referred to here, that Ahimelech was then high priest at Nob: and from 1Samuel 22:20 And one of the sons of Ahimelech the son of Ahitub, named Abiathar, escaped and fled after David. 1Samuel 23:6 And it happened when Abiathar the son of Ahimelech fled to David to Keilah, he came down with an ephod in his hand 1Chronicles 18:16 And Zadok the son of Ahitub, and Abimelech the son of Abiathar were the priests. And Shavsha was scribe it appears that Abiathar was the son of Ahimelech. Some difficulty has been felt in reconciling these accounts. The probable reason as to why Mark says it was in the days of “Abiathar” is that Abiathar was better known than Ahimelech. The son of the high priest was regarded as his successor, and was often associated with him in the duties of his office. It was not improper, therefore, to designate him as high priest even during the life of his father, especially as that was the name by which he was afterward known. “Abiathar,” moreover, in the calamitous times when David came to the throne, left the interest of Saul and fled to David, bringing with him the ephod, one of the special garments of the high priest. For a long time, during David’s reign, he was high priest, and it became natural, therefore, to associate “his” name with that of David; to speak of David as king, and Abiathar the high priest of his time. This will account for the fact that he was spoken of rather than his father. Others have suggested that the two shared the same names and were often called by one or the other name.
ate the showbread – From 1 Samuel 21:1-6 that David had servants in company with him when he fled, though they did not attend him when he went to the high priest; and that he asked bread, and it was given him, not only for himself, but for the young men that he had appointed to be at such a place: and therefore, if this was allowed to David and his men, when hungry, it ought not to be charged as an evil upon the disciples, for plucking and rubbing a few ears of corn to satisfy their hunger, though on a sabbath day; and especially when he, who was Lord of the sabbath, was present, and admitted of it;
The shewbread - Lit., the loaves of proposition, i.e., the loaves which were set forth before the Lord. The Jews called them the loaves of the face, i.e., of the presence of God. The bread was made of the finest wheaten flour that had been passed through eleven sieves. There were twelve loaves, or cakes, according to the number of tribes, ranged in two piles of six each. Each cake was made of about five pints of wheat. They were anointed in the middle with oil, in the form of a cross. According to tradition, each cake was five hand-breadths broad and ten long, but turned up at either end, two hand-breadths on each side, to resemble in outline the ark of the covenant. The shewbread was prepared on Friday, unless that day happened to be a feast-day that required sabbatical rest; in which case it was prepared on Thursday afternoon. The renewal of the shewbread was the first of the priestly functions on the commencement of the Sabbath. The bread which was taken off was deposited on the golden table in the porch of the sanctuary, and distributed among the outgoing and incoming courses of priests (compare save for the priests). It was eaten during the Sabbath, and in the temple itself, but only by such priests as were Levitically pure. This old bread, removed on the Sabbath morning, was that which David ate.
Mar 2:27 And He said to them, The sabbath came into being for man's sake, and not man for the sabbath's sake.
The sabbath was made for man - For his rest from toil, his rest from the cares and anxieties of the world, to give him an opportunity to call off his attention from earthly concerns and to direct it to the affairs of eternity. It was a kind provision for man that he might refresh his body by relaxing his labors; that he might have undisturbed time to seek the consolations of religion to cheer him in the anxieties and sorrows of a troubled world; and that he might render to God that homage which is most justly due to him as the Creator, Preserver, Benefactor, and Redeemer of the world.
Not man for the sabbath - Man was made “first,” and then the Sabbath was appointed for his welfare, Gen_2:1-3. The Sabbath was not “first” made or contemplated, and then the man made with reference to that. Since, therefore, the Sabbath was intended for man’s “good,” the law respecting it must not be interpreted so as to oppose his real welfare. It must be explained in consistency with a proper attention to the duties of mercy to the poor and the sick, and to those in peril. It must be, however, in accordance with man’s “real good on the whole,” and with the law of God. The law of God contemplates man’s “real good on the whole;” and we have no right, under the plea that the Sabbath was made for man, to do anything contrary to what the law of God admits. It would not be for our “real good,” but for our real and eternal injury, to devote the Sabbath to vice, to labor, or to amusement. By "man", is not meant all mankind; for the sabbath was never appointed for all mankind, nor binding upon all; only the Jews, who are emphatically called "man", or "men".
Mar 2:28 Therefore the Son of Man is also Lord of the sabbath.
