· Correction Discussion: 30AD vs 33AD
· Overview: Last week we discussed (or didn’t) Jesus authority
o Anointing by the Dove and the Father
o By John the Baptist
o By his authority to call (or invite) men
o By his teaching (he taught as one who had authority
o By his power over demonic spirits
o By his power over disease and sickness (Peter's mother in law and all those who sought him)
· Mark ends the last section with a key miracle : healing of the man with leprosy
o There were three messianic miracles
· Healing a Jewish Leper (none recorded since Miriam; Commander Elijah healed was Jewish)
· Healing a man who had been born blind (Pharisees rejected that miracle because it was done on the Sabbath and therefore in disobedience to the law)
· Casting out a dumb demon (actually Jesus casts a demon out of a dumb and blind man). Pharisees could cast out demons but only if the demon spoke his name
o Pharisees were required to perform a two-stage investigation
· First stage was observation. A delegation is sent to observe what was taking place and report back to Jerusalem. It would determine if the event was significant or insignificant
· Second stage was interrogation. A delegation was sent to confront the messianic person through questions and accusations. The delegation would report back to Jerusalem where the claims would be rejected or accepted
o Jesus tells the leper what?
· To tell no one but the Priest. That would be the key person to start the chain of events
· Also, this next section records 5 cases of opposition to Jesus' ministry. This would be a case where the Jewish practice of ordering by theme takes precedence over chronology, although in my look, the 5 cases of opposition appear to be in the right chronological order
#1 Conflict
Mark 2:1-12 (NIV)
A few days later, when Jesus again entered Capernaum, the people heard that he had come home. 2 So many gathered that there was no room left, not even outside the door, and he preached the word to them. 3 Some men came, bringing to him a paralytic, carried by four of them. 4 Since they could not get him to Jesus because of the crowd, they made an opening in the roof above Jesus and, after digging through it, lowered the mat the paralyzed man was lying on. 5 When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, "Son, your sins are forgiven."
6 Now some teachers of the law were sitting there, thinking to themselves, 7 "Why does this fellow talk like that? He's blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?"
8 Immediately Jesus knew in his spirit that this was what they were thinking in their hearts, and he said to them, "Why are you thinking these things? 9 Which is easier: to say to the paralytic, 'Your sins are forgiven,' or to say, 'Get up, take your mat and walk'? 10 But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins . . . ." He said to the paralytic, 11 "I tell you, get up, take your mat and go home." 12 He got up, took his mat and walked out in full view of them all. This amazed everyone and they praised God, saying, "We have never seen anything like this!"
· How does the delegation from Jerusalem (Luke 5:17) to the event?
· This is an interesting conundrum for the Pharisees. Jesus makes claims that only God can make or do. Yet Jesus is standing before them as a man. If he is a man, then God cannot be working through him since he is blaspheming. But since he has the power to hear, where is it coming from? Ultimately, in Matthew 12 they will make the decision that Satan himself is empowering Jesus. I wonder if the ever considered the other possibility or just refused to accept it
#2 Conflict
Mark 2:15-17 (NIV)
15 While Jesus was having dinner at Levi's house, many tax collectors and "sinners" were eating with him and his disciples, for there were many who followed him. 16 When the teachers of the law who were Pharisees saw him eating with the "sinners" and tax collectors, they asked his disciples: "Why does he eat with tax collectors and 'sinners'?"
17 On hearing this, Jesus said to them, "It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners."
· I'm not exactly sure when we shift from observation to interrogation. In this section, they question his disciples, in the next they question Jesus directly
· Who is Levi? His nickname is Matthew
· What do we know about tax collectors? He worked for the governing authorities, indirectly for the Romans and more directly for Herod Antipas (not a very nice guy himself)
· Who are the sinners? There are various opinions
o One, it seems unusual for Jews to label other Jews as sinners, so some think they are Gentiles. In the story of Peter in Acts, it was against Jewish law to eat with a Gentile or even go into their home. This doesn't seem to be the problem. Plus, Jesus made it pretty clear that his ministry was first to the Jew
o Second, it could be essentially anyone who lived outside of the Law. The tax collectors were social outcasts and they probably hung around with others who were rejected by the religious leaders. Why do you not eat with them? Because you risked ceremonial defilement
· There is something new here in Jesus teaching, what do you think it might be?
o It is not the doctrine that God saves sinners
o It is that God loves and saves them as sinners (Constable, 2008)
· APPLICATION: One other thought. Sometimes church and religion can do more harm than good. The religious didn't see their need for Jesus because they didn't consider themselves sinners. Those who are not religious are more likely to recognize a need, provided that heart has not been hardened to their sin. There are two ways to harden a heart, to believe you are good enough (religious), or to believe there is not such thing as good or bad or sin or God. But both end up with the same result, not seeing your need for a savior
#3 Conflict (skip if not enough time and do one or both Sabbath issues)
Mark 2:18-22 (NIV)
18 Now John's disciples and the Pharisees were fasting. Some people came and asked Jesus, "How is it that John's disciples and the disciples of the Pharisees are fasting, but yours are not?"
19 Jesus answered, "How can the guests of the bridegroom fast while he is with them? They cannot, so long as they have him with them. 20 But the time will come when the bridegroom will be taken from them, and on that day they will fast.
21 "No one sews a patch of unshrunk cloth on an old garment. If he does, the new piece will pull away from the old, making the tear worse. 22 And no one pours new wine into old wineskins. If he does, the wine will burst the skins, and both the wine and the wineskins will be ruined. No, he pours new wine into new wineskins."
· It's not clear why John's disciples were fasting. It could be because of John's imprisonment. The Pharisees fasted twice a week (Mondays and Thursdays) and it is possible that Matthew's banquet for Jesus fell on one of these days
· Jewish custom exempted friends of the bridegroom from certain religious obligations (including weekly fasts)
· In this wedding we have certain actors --
o Groom: Jesus
o Guests of the bridegroom: disciples
o Bride? Israel
· What does Jesus mean by "he will be taken away?"
o This is Jesus first hint (in Mark's Gospel) on his coming death
· APPLICATION: The new covenant is now about rules, rituals, and regulations. It is a heart response to God founded in a relationship with the savior. When rules rule our life, we lose connection with the more important, a relationship with God
o The two parables further highlights this point. The old garment is our sinful condition in OT terms. The new patch doesn't work in the old setting. Judaism is the old wineskin. It is rigid and inflexible, and something new is needed to contain the new wine
#4 Conflict (also John 5:1-47 occurred prior)
Mark 2:23-28 (NIV)
23 One Sabbath Jesus was going through the grainfields, and as his disciples walked along, they began to pick some heads of grain. 24 The Pharisees said to him, "Look, why are they doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath?"
25 He answered, "Have you never read what David did when he and his companions were hungry and in need? 26 In the days of Abiathar the high priest, he entered the house of God and ate the consecrated bread, which is lawful only for priests to eat. And he also gave some to his companions."
27 Then he said to them, "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. 28 So the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath."
· There are three major Sabbath conflicts recorded in scripture. John 5:1-47 records the other one
· So what is the issue?
o It is okay to pluck the ears of wheat or barley (even if you did not own the field)
o Doing it on the Sabbath violated the traditional Pharisaic interpretation of the law. That was considered reaping, threshing, or winnowing, and the law did forbid work
· What was Jesus counter argument?
o He shares an example where David eats the consecrated bread (as he is fleeing from Saul)
· Also, David lied to priest about his mission (note: David did have some men with him since Jesus says he gave some to his men; although most of his men joined him later in the wilderness)
· Jesus argues that David's offense (which was a violation of ritual law, and not moral; and of the letter of the law) was okay because human need is a higher law than religious ritual
· What is Jesus' argument about the Sabbath?
o The Pharisees had made the Sabbath into a straight jacket
o Jesus argues that the Sabbath was a good gift from God
· It freed his people from ceaseless labor
· It gave his people rest
· This is the only one of the ten commandments that is not repeated in the NT
o The New Covenant reinterprets the Sabbath
o Furthermore, the Sabbath has always been Saturday and nothing in the New Covenant changed that
o The New Covenant adds a day by tradition, and not command, called the Lord's day or the first day of the week. It is celebrated because of Jesus resurrection
o The Sabbath was a day of rest and not of religious observance in the old covenant. The use of Synagogues grew out of the exile in Babylon. The requirement to visit the Temple was only a three times a year obligation
o Finally, we are not under the law. The OT commands are no longer binding on us. This is one very good example. Although, this is also pre-law, and the principle behind rest once a week still stands as a very good idea, and an important aspect for remaining healthy
· Also, another claim to divinity is seen in Jesus calling himself Lord of the Sabbath
#5 Conflict
Mark 3:1-6 (NIV)
Another time he went into the synagogue, and a man with a shriveled hand was there. 2 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. 3 Jesus said to the man with the shriveled hand, "Stand up in front of everyone."
4 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.
5 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. 6 Then the Pharisees went out and began to plot with the Herodians how they might kill Jesus.
· This is the final Sabbath conflict. The invalid from birth has already occurred, the one Jesus told to carry his mat. He was confronted by the Pharisees for carrying his mat like Jesus told him
· Why were they looking, on the Sabbath for a reason to accuse Jesus?
o It was a capital offense to violate the Sabbath
o Ex 31:14-17 (NIV) 14 "'Observe the Sabbath, because it is holy to you. Anyone who desecrates it must be put to death; whoever does any work on that day must be cut off from his people. 15 For six days, work is to be done, but the seventh day is a Sabbath of rest, holy to the Lord. Whoever does any work on the Sabbath day must be put to death. 16 The Israelites are to observe the Sabbath, celebrating it for the generations to come as a lasting covenant. 17 It will be a sign between me and the Israelites forever, for in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, and on the seventh day he abstained from work and rested.'"
· What does Jesus do that one might have done differently?
o He doesn't avoid the conflict
o He actually provokes it
· What is Jesus asking?
o What is more important, the legal (letter of the law), or the moral (spirit of the law)?
· This is the only place in the NT where the writer explicitly states that Jesus was angry. We can infer it from the money changers in the temple, but this is the only place where it is stated. Since Jesus is angry, what do we know about his anger?
o It is righteous indignation in the presence of unrepentant evil
· We end the passage with the first explicit reference to his death
· APPLICATION: What stands out to me is threefold:
o God is more interested in the heart than my actions
o People are more important than rules, no matter what the rule. That is why Rahab could lie and still find her name in the hall of fame of faith
o My faith needs to built upon my relationship, and not knowledge or activities
No comments:
Post a Comment