Marcos 2
A.T. Robertson · Citado em PreceptAustin
Marcos 2
Robertson comments that "These scribes and Pharisees were there to cause trouble, to pick flaws in the teaching and conduct of Jesus. His popularity and power had aroused their jealousy. There is no evidence that they spoke aloud the murmur in their hearts, “within themselves” (Matt. 9:3). It was not necessary, for their looks gave them away and Jesus knew their thoughts (Matt. 9:4) and perceived their reasoning (Luke 5:22). Instantly Jesus recognized it in his own spirit (Mark 2:8 "Immediately Jesus, aware in His spirit"). The Master at once recognizes the hostile atmosphere in the house. The debate (dialogizomenoi) in their hearts was written on their faces. No sound had come, but feeling did." (Word Pictures) Scribes (1122)(grammateus from grapho = to write) was one skilled in Jewish law and theology scribe, expert, scholar (Mt 2.4). Grammateus also referred to a chief executive officer of a governmental entity such as a town official secretary, town clerk (Acts 19.35). Jesus gives a long rebuke including 8 WOES primarily to the Scribes and Pharisees which should be read to help understand how this group of Jewish religious men functioned (See Mt 23:1-39, 13, 14, 15, 16, etc). Most sources consider the lawyers (nomikos - meaning one skilled in the Mosaic law) to be scribes specialized in the jurisprudence of the Law of Moses. Finally the scribes in Lk 5:17 (nomdidaskalos) were teachers of the Jewish law who were equal to the lawyers and scribes. In the Septuagint grammateus frequently used for a political officer who assisted kings or magistrates by keeping written accounts of public acts and occurrences or royal revenues (2 Ki 12:10) (See Brown-Driver-Briggs definition of saphar). And reasoning in their hearts - ESV has "questioning." They should have been praising God in their hearts! While they did not verbalize their critical, judgmental thoughts, those thoughts were important, because the heart is the essence of who we are of what kind of person we are. As Pr 23:7KJV says "as he thinketh in his heart, so is he." Given the importance of the heart Pr 4:23 commands us "Watch over your heart with all diligence, For from it flow the springs of life." Sadly, these men had failed to watch over their hearts and out of them flowed in effect springs of death in their legalistic, works righteousness teachings that would keep men from the Kingdom of God. Indeed, the hearts of the scribes (and Pharisees in Lk 5:21+) were hardened to spiritual truth a state which even angered Jesus, Mark 3:5 recording "After looking around at them with anger, grieved at their hardness of heart, He *said to the man, “Stretch out your hand.” And he stretched it out, and his hand was restored." See several heart issues in Mark Mk 6:52; Mk 8:17; Mk 11:23; Mk 12:30, 33; Eph. 1:18; Eph 3:17; Phil. 1:7; 1 Tim1:5) Reasoning (Thought, speculation, disputing, doubts) (1260)(dialogizomai cf dialogismos from dia = intensifies meaning + logizomai - to reason, reckon, consider. English "dialogue" conversation between two or more) means to consider, reason or reckon thoroughly, to think through, to deliberate by reflection. "To bring together different reasons." Hearts (2588)(kardia) does not refer to the physical organ (over 800 mentions and none refer to the physical organ!) but is always used figuratively in Scripture to refer to the seat and center of human life. The heart is the center of the personality, and it controls the intellect, emotions, and will. No outward obedience is of the slightest value unless the heart turns to God. Heart in effect describes our "control center" (to make a play on the "air traffic control center" at the airport which carefully guards and guides what flies in and what flies out. How applicable to our "hearts" which are so prone to wander!). Kardia refers to the the affective center of our being wherein lies the capacity of moral preference and volitional desire. The kardia generates thoughts that make the decisions which the mind works out. In other words, our logic flows out of our heart-decisions and not vice versa. Gleason Archer called the kardia, the "desire-producer that makes us tick" for it is the place where our "desire-decisions" occur, and which establish who we really are. THOUGHT - WHO ARE YOU? HAVE YOU HAD A HEART CHECK UP RECENTLY? We are assiduous to do this medically, but woefully lax in doing it spiritually (beloved, I speak from experience!). At regeneration God reverses the spiritual atherosclerosis of our old sinful heart by giving us a total heart transplant! Daily confession and repentance are thereafter necessary to avoid "spiritual atherosclerosis" and gradual, subtle hardening (and becoming cold to the things of God) of our heart! (Practice daily "preventative maintenance" = 1 Jn 1:9+, Pr 28:13+). Related Resources: Torrey's Topic - Scribes Bridgeway Bible Dictionary Scribes Charles Buck Dictionary Scribe Easton's Bible Dictionary Scribes Fausset Bible Dictionary Scribes Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible Scribe Scribes Hastings' Dictionary of the NT Scribe Scribes Smith Bible Dictionary Scribes 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica Scribes International Standard Bible Encyclopedia Scribes Kitto Biblical Cyclopedia Scribes McClintock and Strong's Bible Encyclopedia Scribe Mark 2:7 "Why does this man speak that way? He is blaspheming; who can forgive sins but God alone? NET Mark 2:7 "Why does this man speak this way? He is blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?" GNT Mark 2:7 Τί οὗτος οὕτως λαλεῖ; βλασφημεῖ· τίς δύναται ἀφιέναι ἁμαρτίας εἰ μὴ εἷς ὁ θεός; NLT Mark 2:7 "What is he saying? This is blasphemy! Only God can forgive sins!" KJV Mark 2:7 Why doth this man thus speak blasphemies? who can forgive sins but God only? ESV Mark 2:7 "Why does this man speak like that? He is blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?" NIV Mark 2:7 "Why does this fellow talk like that? He's blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?" ASV Mark 2:7 Why doth this man thus speak? he blasphemeth: who can forgive sins but one, even God? CSB Mark 2:7 "Why does He speak like this? He's blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?" speak: Mk 14:64 Mt 9:3 26:65 Joh 10:33,36 who: Job 14:4 Ps 130:4 Isa 43:25 Da 9:9 Mic 7:18 Lu 5:21 7:49 Joh 20:20-23 Related Passages: Mt. 9:3+ And some of the scribes said to themselves, “This fellow blasphemes.” Lk 5:21+ The scribes and the Pharisees began to reason, saying, “Who is this man who speaks blasphemies? Who can forgive sins, but God alone?” Why does this man speak that way? - Instead of joy there was judgment in the hearts of these legalistic leaders. Notice their somewhat derogatory reference to Jesus as this man. and in Matthew 9:3+ they used a similar derogatory term "this fellow." Mk 2:7NIV renders it "this fellow" which helps bring out their contemptuous tone. He is blaspheming - This is what they were reasoning in their hearts. They did not speak these words out loud. Their assessment would have been correct if He were not God incarnate. The importance of this fact is that they knew that blasphemy was punishable by death (Lev. 24:10-23+; Nu 15:30–31) Their "logic" was was that Jesus had assumed a prerogative given only to God Himself and thus committed the highest level of blasphemy (see MacArthur below)! Blasphemy was a frequent charge leveled against Jesus (Mk 14:64; Jn 5:18; Jn 10:33, 36) and would eventually become the basis of Jesus’ conviction and crucifixion. The religious leaders thought they had him trapped in a crime that carried the death penalty! Jesus would repeat this “crime” of declaring "Your sins are forgiven" in Luke 7:48–49+ (as He was dining with one of the Pharisees). This Man blasphemes! This would be a true judgment about anyone but God incarnate, for only the One who has been sinned against has the prerogative to forgive. Jesus’ words to the man were therefore an unequivocal claim of divine authority. John
Marcos 2
Robertson says this is "A pretty picture of Jesus walking by the sea and a walk that Jesus loved." (Mark 1:16+). And notice again that Jesus' walk was filled with purpose for this is where "He saw two brothers, Simon who was called Peter, and Andrew his brother, casting a net into the sea; for they were fishermen." (Mt. 4:18+, cf Mark 1:16+) Went by is in the present tense which pictures Jesus, a Spirit filled Man, "passing by" but always on the lookout for opportunities to do good and to redeem the time. THOUGHT - O, to have this Spirit enabled mindset to see people and places and circumstances as opportunities rather than as hindrances, nuisances or irritations (which is my usual response!). It is worth noting the interesting derivation of the English word opportunity from the Latin "ob portu." In ancient times before modern harbors, ships had to wait for the timing of the tide before they could make it safely to port. Thus "OB PORTU," described the ship waiting "FOR PORT," ready to seize the crucial moment when it could ride the tide into safe harbor. The captain knew that if he missed the passing tide, the ship would have to wait for another tide to come in. I am firmly convinced that God gives each believer many "ob portu's", but we must be spiritually wise and Spirit filled in order to see and seize them as did our Lord Jesus. As Charles Swindoll said "We are all faced with a series of great opportunities (ob portu's) brilliantly disguised as impossible situations." Shakespeare's famous line from Julius Caesar conveys the same thought: "There is a tide in the affairs of men (an "ob portu"), Which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune; Omitted, all the voyage of their life Is bound in shallows and in miseries. On such a full sea are we now afloat; And we must take the current when it serves, Or lose our ventures." And all the people were coming to Him - Coming is the picturesque imperfect tense which depict a stream of souls coming to Jesus, one after another they come! This gives us a graphic picture of the crowd swelling in size. Jesus' reputation had spread and He was the main attraction for all the people (all is probably a hyperbole - but certainly a great number). Would it be true today in cities and towns all across America (and the world) that Jesus would be the main attraction and all the people would be coming to Him! Let it be Lord. Amen! And He was teaching them - Jesus always had time for the common people and almost always made use of the time in some eternally profitable way, in this case by teaching. Teaching (didasko) is also in the imperfect tense, picturing Jesus teaching them one thing after another. Again Jesus is showing us that in our short time on earth we must be diligent about redeeming the precious moments we have left! Jesus openness to the common people was in marked contrast to the judgmental, exclusivistic attitudes of the prideful Jewish religious leaders. John
Marcos 2
Robertson says refers to as the aoristic present which is used of an action or event coincident in time with the act of speaking, and conceived of as a simple event. Most frequently the action denoted by the verb is identical with the act of speaking itself, or takes place in that act. Chamblin adds that are forgiven is in the "present indicative in the passive voice, signaling that the sins are forgiven as the words are uttered (a so-called ‘instantaneous present’), and that God is the one who forgives (a divine passive)." (Mentor Commentary-Matthew) Stated another way the present tense here indicates that his sins were forgiven then and there, at that very moment! The passive voice (in all three synoptic accounts) indicates the power to forgive the sins of the paralytic came from without, ultimately from God (divine passive). The very One pronouncing this forgiveness, would a few years later become the very One who would assure forever forgiveness by becoming the Lamb of God Who takes away (present tense) the sin of the world (Jn 1:29+). Note that in Lk 5:20+ forgiven is in the perfect tense which supports the truth of eternal security (see Eternal security). Once you are truly saved, you cannot lose your salvation! The present tense in Mark 2:5 and Matthew 9:2+ is good, but the perfect tense in Lk 5:20+ gives an added degree of certainty to the popular phrase "Once Saved, Always Saved." (which of course assumes that the person making this declaration is genuinely saved and not simply relying on a verbal profession they made many years earlier but instead have experienced a true possession of Christ (Col 1:27b+) and His Spirit (Ro 8:9+)! Evans comments - The Servant of Isaiah 52:13–53:12+, Who in the Aramaic version (i.e., the Targum) is understood to be the Messiah, “shall beseech concerning their (the people’s) sins … he will beseech concerning the sins of man, and to the rebels it shall be forgiven for him” (Tg. Isa. 53:11–12). (Ibid) (See also the note below) The boldface text is the translation of the Jewish Publications Society and the normal text is the Targum translated by Driver en Neubauer. JPS - Isaiah 53:11 Of the travail of his soul he shall see to the full, even My servant, who by his knowledge did justify the Righteous One to the many, and their iniquities he did bear. Targum - Isaiah 53:11. From the subjection of the nations he will deliver their souls, they shall look upon the punishment of those that hate them, and be satisfied with the spoil of their kings; by his wisdom he will hold the guiltless free from guilt, in order to bring many into subjection to the law; and for their sins he will intercede. JPS - Isaiah 53:12 Therefore will I divide him a portion among the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the mighty; because he bared his soul unto death, and was numbered with the transgressors; yet he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors. Targum - Isaiah 53:12. Then will I divide for him the spoil of many peoples, and the possessions of strong cities shall he divide as prey, because he delivered up his soul to death, and made the rebellious subject to the Law: he shall intercede for many sins, and the rebellious for his sake shall be forgiven The man had need for physical healing but Jesus saw his greater need for spiritual healing, the need of all men whether physically fit or lame! Jesus' statement was considered blasphemy, since it was clearly understood to be a claim of being equal with God. The application of this story for us today is clear - To help our friends find forgiveness, we must bring them to Jesus who has authority to forgive sins. Forgiven means once and for all time - see Ps 103:12; Isa 1:18; 55:6, 7; Jer 31:34; Mic 7:19; Jn 1:29. In the OT Nathan the prophet said to David "The LORD also has taken away your sin; you shall not die." (2 Sa 12:13). Notice that in contrast to Nathan who said Jehovah forgave his sins, Jesus personally forgives their sins! He is clearly saying indirectly that He in fact is Jehovah and that He was exerting divine authority! Jesus' statement could signify that this man's paralysis was a result of sin, but one cannot be dogmatic. Sin induced disease was a common thought among the Jews but John 9:1–3 shows in that case Jesus rejected this line of reasoning regarding every illness. John 9:1-3 As He passed by, He saw a man blind from birth. And His disciples asked Him, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he would be born blind?” Jesus answered, “It was neither that this man sinned, nor his parents; but it was so that the works of God might be displayed in him. Ryrie adds in his note on Php 2:30 - Epaphroditus was dangerously ill from overwork. Sickness may also be due to specific sin (1 Cor 11:30) or to prevent sin (2 Cor 12:7) or to test (Job. 2:7) or to display the glory of God (John 9:2), and because of demons (Acts 5:16). Of course, sickness, for whatever reason, ultimately is related to our fallen humanity. To be sure all sickness and paralysis (whether spiritual or physical) is ultimately the result of Adam's fall and the entrance of the corrupting influence of sin into the world (Ge 2:17). Sins (266)(hamartia) literally conveys the idea of missing the mark as when hunting with a bow and arrow (in Homer some hundred times of a warrior hurling his spear but missing his foe). Later hamartia came to mean missing or falling short of any goal, standard, or purpose. Hamartia in the Bible signifies a departure from God's holy, perfect standard of what is right in word or deed (righteous). It pictures the idea of missing His appointed goal (His will) which results in a deviation from what is pleasing to Him. In short, sin is conceived as a missing the true end and scope of our lives, which is the Triune God Himself. As Martin Luther put it "Sin is essentially a departure from God." Are forgiven (863)(aphiemi from apo = prefix implies separation + from apo = prefix implies separation + hiemi = send; cf aphesis) conveys the basic idea of an action which causes separation (e.g. Mk 1:18+ = "left their nets"; Mk 1:20+ = "they left their father Zebedee"; Mt 1:34+ = "the fever left her") and means depart or to send from one's self, to hurl away, to put away (sadly used of a man hurling away his wife, so to speak - Mk 10:2, 4+). Aphiemi conveys the basic idea of bringing about total detachment from a previous condition, a wonderful picture when we think of God forgiving our sins! God does not simply overlook our sins, but He actually wipes out the sins themselves (cf Ps 32:1 Ps 103:12 Isa 38:17 Isa 43:25, Isa 44:22 Mic 7:18,19 Acts 3:19,20)! In one secular writing we read "let the pot drop" (aphiemi) which gives us a vivid picture of what we are to do when we forgive others! Don't bury the pot with the handle showing! From this early literal use the word came to mean leave or let go. Here the Son of Man, God incarnate, sends away the sins of the paralytic healing him spiritually. Don't bury the pot with the handle showing! The Gospel of Mark frequently uses aphiemi - Mk. 1:18; Mk. 1:20; Mk. 1:31; Mk. 1:34; Mk. 2:5; Mk. 2:7; Mk. 2:9; Mk. 2:10; Mk. 3:28; Mk. 4:12; Mk. 4:36; Mk. 5:19; Mk. 5:37; Mk. 7:8; Mk. 7:12; Mk. 7:27; Mk. 8:13; Mk. 10:14; Mk. 10:28; Mk. 10:29; Mk. 11:6; Mk. 11:16; Mk. 11:25; Mk. 11:26; Mk. 12:12; Mk. 12:19; Mk. 12:20; Mk. 12:22; Mk. 13:2; Mk. 13:34; Mk. 14:6; Mk. 14:50; Mk. 15:36; Mk. 15:37 COMMENT - When you compare Lk 5:20+ where Jesus declared "Friend, your sins are forgiven you," the same verb aphiemi is used as in Mark 2:5+ and Matthew 9:2, but there is a difference in tense which is worth noting. In Luke 5:20+ forgiven (aphiemi) is in the perfect tense which indicates the abiding state of the forgiveness, in essence the permanence of divine forgiveness! Once Jesus forgives a person of their sins, He does not take that declaration back and "un-forgive" a forgiven person. Once forgiven by Jesus, forever forgiven! As an aside forgiven in the perfect tense supports the truth of eternal security (see discussion of Eternal security), the assurance of your salvation. Once you are truly saved, you cannot lose salvation (a truth seen even with the verb tense in Lk 5:20!) The present tense in Mark 2:5 and Matthew 9:2 is good, but the perfect tense in Lk 5:20+ gives an added degree of certainty to the popular phrase "Once Saved, Always Saved." (which of course assumes that the person making this declaration is genuinely saved and not simply relying on a verbal profession they made many years earlier but instead have experienced a true possession of Christ (Col 1:27b+) and His Spirit (Ro 8:9+)!
Marcos 2
Robertson adds an interesting thought on why John's disciples were colluding with those of the Pharisees - "John was languishing in prison and they perhaps were blaming Jesus for doing nothing about it. At any rate John would not have gone to Levi’s feast on one of the Jewish fast-days. “The strict asceticism of the Baptist (Mt 11:18) and of the Pharisaic rabbis (Luke 18:12) was imitated by their disciples” (McNeile)." (Word Pictures) NET Note on the practice of fasting in Jesus' day - John's disciples and the Pharisees followed typical practices with regard to fasting and prayer. Fast (3522)(nesteuo from ne- = not + esthío = to eat) means to abstain from food (and sometimes drink) for a certain length of time and in the NT most often done for religious reasons. One idea is that fasting was done to express dependence on God and submission to His will. Others say fasting was done as a mark of religious commitment and devotion or as an expression of repentance for sins. Fasting was also connected with mourning or grieving (Septuagint of 2 Sa 12:16). Some see fasting as a "weakening" of the body in order to "strengthen" the spirit, which sounds good but can easily evolve into a fleshly, self-centered "work" (see Mt 6:18+) rather than an act of genuine self-less devotion. Clearly, we can strengthen our spirit in other ways, most importantly by regular, daily intake of God Word of truth (Mt 4:4, cf Heb 13:9)! In Jesus' day zealous Jews fasted twice a week on Monday and Thursday (cf Lk 18:12+). Jesus discussed fasting in Mt 6:16-18+ but He did not command fasting. Jews sometimes fasted as a result of personal loss, sometimes as an expression of repentance, sometimes as preparation for prayer, and sometimes merely as a meritorious act. The only biblically prescribed fast was on the Day of Atonement (Lev 16:29, 31, cf Lev 23:26–32; Nu 29:7–11), although other fasts grew up late in the OT period (Zech 7:5; Zech 8:19). So important was fasting for ancient Jews that an entire tractate of the Mishna, Taanith, was devoted to it. Today fasting is a matter of Christian freedom, not obligation. Therefore Didache 8.1 (early second century) is wrong in insisting that Christians fast on Wednesdays and Fridays instead of Mondays and Thursdays (like the Jews). Related Resources: Baker Evangelical Dictionary Fast, Fasting - recommended article by Eugene Merrill Torrey Topical Textbook Fasting Christian fasting - what does the Bible say? | GotQuestions.org McClintock and Strong's Bible Encyclopedia Fast American Tract Society Fasting Bridgeway Bible Dictionary Fasting Easton's Bible Dictionary Fast Fausset Bible Dictionary Fasting Holman Bible Dictionary Fasting Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible Fasting Hastings' Dictionary of the NT Fasting (2) Fasting Hawker's Poor Man's Dictionary Fasting Fast Smith Bible Dictionary Fasts Vines' Expository Dictionary Fast, Fasting Fast Wilson's Bible Types Fast Webster Dictionary Fasting Watson's Theological Dictionary Fasting Fasting - Article by Archibald Alexander 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica Fasting International Standard Bible Encyclopedia Fasts and Feasts Fast; Fasting Feasts, and Fasts Kitto Biblical Cyclopedia Fasts The Jewish Encyclopedia Fasting and Fast-Days How to fast—what does the Bible say? | GotQuestions.org Why don't Christians fast the same as Muslims? | GotQuestions.org Why did Jesus fast? | GotQuestions.org What are the different types of fasting? | GotQuestions.org What is Ramadan? | GotQuestions.org What is Tisha B'Av? Warren Wiersbe sees four pictures of Jesus' ministry described in all three synoptic Gospels - (1) As the Physician, He came to bring spiritual health to sick sinners. (Mt 9:12-13+, Mk 2:17+, Lk 5:31-32+) (2) As the Bridegroom, He came to give spiritual joy. The Christian life is a feast, not a funeral.(Mt 9:14-16+, Mk 2:18-20+, Lk 5:33-35+) (3) The illustration of the cloth reminds us that He came to bring spiritual wholeness; He did not come to “patch us up” and then let us fall apart. (Mt 9:16+, Mk 2:21+, Lk 5:36+) (4) The image of the wineskins teaches that He gives spiritual fullness. Jewish religion was a worn-out wineskin that would burst if filled with the new wine of the Gospel. Jesus did not come to renovate Moses or even mix Law and grace. He came with new life! (Mt 9:17+, Mk 2:22+, Lk 5:37-39+) (BEC) Mark 2:19 And Jesus said to them, "While the bridegroom is with them, the attendants of the bridegroom cannot fast, can they? So long as they have the bridegroom with them, they cannot fast. NET Mark 2:19 Jesus said to them, "The wedding guests cannot fast while the bridegroom is with them, can they? As long as they have the bridegroom with them they do not fast. GNT Mark 2:19 καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς ὁ Ἰησοῦς, Μὴ δύνανται οἱ υἱοὶ τοῦ νυμφῶνος ἐν ᾧ ὁ νυμφίος μετ᾽ αὐτῶν ἐστιν νηστεύειν; ὅσον χρόνον ἔχουσιν τὸν νυμφίον μετ᾽ αὐτῶν οὐ δύνανται νηστεύειν. NLT Mark 2:19 Jesus replied, "Do wedding guests fast while celebrating with the groom? Of course not. They can't fast while the groom is with them. KJV Mark 2:19 And Jesus said unto them, Can the children of the bridechamber fast, while the bridegroom is with them? as long as they have the bridegroom with them, they cannot fast. ESV Mark 2:19 And Jesus said to them, "Can the wedding guests fast while the bridegroom is with them? As long as they have the bridegroom with them, they cannot fast. NIV Mark 2:19 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. ASV Mark 2:19 And Jesus said unto 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. CSB Mark 2:19 Jesus said to them, "The wedding guests cannot fast while the groom is with them, can they? As long as they have the groom with them, they cannot fast. Can: Ge 29:22 Jdg 14:10,11 Ps 45:14 Song 6:8 Mt 25:1-10 Parallel Passages Mt. 9:14–17; Mk 2:18–22; Lk 5:33–39 Matthew 9:15+ And Jesus said to them, “The attendants of the bridegroom cannot mourn as long as the bridegroom is with them, can they? But the days will come when the bridegroom is taken away from them, and then they will fast. Luke 5:34+ And Jesus said to them, “You cannot make the attendants of the bridegroom fast while the bridegroom is with them, can you? 35 “But the days will come; and when the bridegroom is taken away from them, then they will fast in those days.” Guzik emphasizes that "A wedding feast was the most vivid picture of joy and happiness in that culture. During the weeklong wedding feast it was understood that joy was more important than conformity to religious rituals. If any ceremonial observance would detract from the joy of a wedding feast, it was not required. Jesus said that His followers should have this kind of happiness. Basically, they thought Jesus was too happy. When was the last time you were accused of being too cheerful or too happy? According to Pate, there was a popular rabbinic text called the Scroll of Fasting, and in it was a custom that said that fasting was forbidden on certain specified days devoted to joyous celebration of Israel’s blessings from God. Jesus appealed to this kind of thinking." (Enduring Word) And Jesus said to them, "While the bridegroom is with them, the attendants of the bridegroom cannot fast, can they? - Matthew has "The attendants of the bridegroom cannot mourn" instead of fast, clearly linking this fasting to mourning. Jesus answers their question with a rhetorical question, which clearly expects a negative reply. How absurd would it be for the attendants of the bridegroom to fast while the celebration is ongoing! The attendants of the bridegroom is literally "the sons of the bride-chamber." In those days a wedding would usually last seven days, and the bridegroom would choose his best friends as attendants to be responsible for the festivities. Matthew substitutes mourn for fast, in recording Jesus' question "The attendants of the bridegroom cannot mourn as long as the bridegroom is with them, can they?" (Mt 9:15+). This would indicate that the fasting the critics are referring to was associated with mourning. This helps make sense of Jesus' reply as if He is saying during the joyful time of a marriage ceremony you can't expect the attendants to fast and mourn! A T Robertson on attendants of the bridegroom (KJV = "the sons of the bridechamber") - Not merely the groomsmen, but the guests also, the paranumphs (paranumphoi of the old Greek). Jesus here adopts the Baptist’s own metaphor (John 3:29), changing the friend of the bridegroom (ho philos tou numphiou) to sons of the bridechamber.....Mourning does not suit the wedding feast. Mark, Matthew, and Luke all give the three parables (bridegroom, unfulled cloth, new wineskins) illustrating and defending the conduct of Jesus in feasting with Levi on a Jewish fast-day. Luke 5:36 calls these parables. Jesus here seems iconoclastic to the ecclesiastics and revolutionary in emphasis on the spiritual instead of the ritualistic and ceremonial....(in another note) Hebrew idiom for the wedding guests, “the friends of the bridegroom and all the sons of the bride-chamber” (Tos. Berak. ii. 10) Marvin
Marcos 2
Robertson reminds us that this is Jesus' second Sabbath confrontation in the Gospel of Luke - The first was Luke 4:31-41. There was another in John 5:1-47. See word study on the Hebrew word for Sabbath (07676) which is sabbat which derives from the verb shabath (07673) meaning to desist (from exertion), cease (see this use of the verb in Ge 8:22, Jer 31:36+), rest (first used of God resting in Creation - Ge 2:2-3), repose, cease from labor. So here the noun form sabbat means intermission, the Sabbath (day), the day of rest, the holy seventh day; a week, the sacred 7th year, a sabbatical year. It was not until the giving of the Law at Mt Sinai that the keeping of the Sabbath became a part of the law and a sign of God's covenant relationship with His people (Ex 20:8-11 Ex 31:12-17). Grainfields (4702)(sporimos from speiro = to sow) is an adjective (in neuter plural = tá spórima) which pertains to being sown and thus means sown fields, fields of growing grain (Three times in the NT = Mt. 12:1; Mark 2:23; Luke 6:1 and in the Septuagint only in Gen. 1:29 - twice and Lev. 11:37). The grain is most likely either wheat or barley and since it was ripe enough to eat, this event probably occurred in either spring or summer. Sabbath (4521)(sabbaton from shabath - 07673 = to cease from work, intermission - see note on shabath) in this context refers to the seventh day of the week, held sacred by the Jews (Mt 12:8; Mk 2:27f; Lk 6:7, 9; Jn 5:9f, 18; Acts 1:12; 13:27, 44) The Sabbath day (Sabbath is from a verb meaning “to cease, ““to desist,” or “to rest” cf. Ge. 2:2) was given to the Jews after they came out of Egypt (Ex. 20:8-11; Neh. 9:14) and was a special sign between Jehovah and His chosen people (Ex 31:13-17). It was to be a day of rest, refreshment, and worship for God's people. It was also a covenant sign indicative of Jehovah's authority in the nation of Israel. No other nation was given a Sabbath (cf Ps 147:19-20). When Israel kept the Sabbath, they showed the pagan nations that they were a distinctive people and were subject to their God. Keeping Sabbath was in a sense a way of demonstrating Israel's trust in God, trusting that He would honor their labors with fruit. We may plant the seeds and water them, but it is God who gives the increase (1 Cor 3:6). But the Jews had begun to cherish the Sabbath as a religious ritual. Jesus is in a sense "declaring war" on the religious establishment which worshiped the Sabbath but not necessarily the God of the Sabbath. Picking (5089)(tillo) means to pluck, to pull, to pull out commonly used to describe the action of picking or plucking something such as grass or heads of grain. Tillo was used in medicine to pull out hairs. This verb is incorporated in the name of a disorder known as trichotillomania in which people compulsively pull out their hair. Uses only in the synoptic accounts in Matt. 12:1; Mk. 2:23; Lk. 6:1. Liddell-Scott has other meanings in classic Greek - to tear one's hair in sorrow for any one, metaphorically to pluck, vex, annoy. Three times in the Septuagint - Ezra 9:3 ("pulled some of the hair from my head and my beard" - in great distress), Isa 18:7, Da 7:4. Heads (4719)(stachus) describes the the fruiting spike of a cereal grain, head or ear (of grain). It also means (not used this way in NT) the flower of the aromatic plant spikenard, shaped like a head of grain. Louw-Nida says stachus refers to "the dense spiky cluster in which the seeds of grain such as wheat and barley grow (restricted in NT contexts to references to wheat)" In Romans 16:9 it is a proper name of a man Stachys. L-S says that in classic Greek it could refer generally to a scion, child, progeny. This noun is frequently used in the Septuagint and in Greek literature denoting an “ear of corn (grain).” Stachus is used repeatedly in the Septuagint in the prophecy God gave to Joseph about the "seven ears of grain." (Ge 41:5) that resulted in him being elevated to the position of power in Egypt second only to Pharaoh. This is the word used in the providential meeting of Boaz and Ruth "And Ruth the Moabitess said to Naomi, “Please let me go to the field and glean among the ears of grain after one in whose sight I may find favor.” And she said to her, “Go, my daughter.”" (Ru 2:2). It is used in Dt 23:25 "When you enter your neighbor’s standing grain, then you may pluck the heads with your hand, but you shall not wield a sickle in your neighbor’s standing grain." Stachus NT uses - Matt. 12:1; Mk. 2:23; Mk 4:28 (twice), Lk. 6:1, Ro 16:9 - head(2), heads(2), heads of grain(1). Stachus in Septuagint - Gen. 41:5; Gen. 41:6; Gen. 41:7; Gen. 41:22; Gen. 41:23; Gen. 41:24; Gen. 41:26; Gen. 41:27; Exod. 22:6; Deut. 23:25; Jdg. 12:6; Jdg. 15:5; Ruth 2:2; Job 24:24; Isa. 17:5 Mark 2:24 The Pharisees were saying to Him, "Look, why are they doing what is not lawful on the Sabbath?" NET Mark 2:24 So the Pharisees said to him, "Look, why are they doing what is against the law on the Sabbath?" GNT Mark 2:24 καὶ οἱ Φαρισαῖοι ἔλεγον αὐτῷ, Ἴδε τί ποιοῦσιν τοῖς σάββασιν ὃ οὐκ ἔξεστιν; NLT Mark 2:24 But the Pharisees said to Jesus, "Look, why are they breaking the law by harvesting grain on the Sabbath?" KJV Mark 2:24 And the Pharisees said unto him, Behold, why do they on the sabbath day that which is not lawful? ESV Mark 2:24 And the Pharisees were saying to him, "Look, why are they doing what is not lawful on the Sabbath?" NIV Mark 2:24 The Pharisees said to him, "Look, why are they doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath?" ASV Mark 2:24 And the Pharisees said unto him, Behold, why do they on the sabbath day that which is not lawful? CSB Mark 2:24 The Pharisees said to Him, "Look, why are they doing what is not lawful on the Sabbath?" why are they doing: Mk 2:7,16 Mt 7:3-5 15:2,3 23:23,24 Heb 12:3 what is not lawful on the Sabbath: Ex 20:10 31:15 35:2,3 Nu 15:32-36 Ne 13:15-22 Isa 56:2,4,6 Isa 58:13 Jer 17:20-27 Parallel Passages Mk 2:23–28—Mt. 12:1–8; Lk 6:1–5 Matthew 12:2+ But when the Pharisees saw this, they said to Him, “Look, Your disciples do what is not lawful to do on a Sabbath.” Luke 6:2+ But some of the Pharisees said, “Why do you do what is not lawful on the Sabbath?” The Pharisees (pharisaios) were saying to Him - What were the Pharisees even doing out in the field? Clearly the implication is that they were looking for Sabbath violations! His disciples were picking but Jesus gets "picked on" by the Pharisees for He was their "target."Note that in Luke's parallel they address the disciples, while Matthew and Mark record they addressed Jesus Himself. Look - The verb Look is a command in the aorist imperative. In this context, it conveys a sense of condescending rebuke. Do this now Jesus! Pay attention! is the idea! If they only knew they were commanding the Commander in Chief! They are so deceived by their pride and legalism that they don't even realize that they are addressing this to the Lord of the Sabbath, the One Who sovereign reigns over the Sabbath! Mark it down, pride and deception often are also garbed in pretension. Why are they doing what is not lawful (exesti) on the Sabbath - These legalists pose a question which is really a veiled (perhaps not so veiled) accusation! Not (ou) signifies absolute negation. There was absolutely no room in the heart of the Pharisees for making an exception, even if someone was starving! The legalists had made their own rules many of which were utterly ridiculous but all of which made keeping them a great burden. It is fascinating that men's rules were far more difficult and detailed than God's rules! See MacArthur's description (below) of some of their outlandish rules! If the Pharisees' were alive today, their theme song would likely be Tevye's "Tradition" in Fiddler on the Roof, a good song but a bad practice. In effect the Pharisees were accusing Jesus' disciples of reaping (picking the grain), threshing (rubbing the husks together to separate the chaff from the grain), and winnowing (throwing the husks away), and thus preparing food! Is this not absurd? Jesus was in effect declaring open war on the Jewish traditions laden with legalism, and in this present case, He knew full well that what He was allowing His disciples to do would "get the goat" of the strict Pharisees who were following along just waiting for Him to make a mistake so they could pounce on Him. And now they felt they had their opportunity to attack. They thought to themselves that "We've got Him now. His men have broken our tradition." THOUGHT - In their deception the Pharisees thought they were worshipping God by keeping all of their rules, when in fact they were thoroughly displeasing to God! That's what "religion" without relationship will do. And we can fall into the same trap today, thinking if we go to church on Sunday, that is what God wants us to do. In part that may be true but it is so easy to come to church and miss Jesus by a mile, because we fall into the deception that our "tradition" will make us acceptable to God. The basic principle of 1 Sa 15:22 still applies "“Has the LORD as much delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices As in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, And to heed than the fat of rams." God wants our hearts. David affirms this principle writing "The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; A broken and a contrite heart, O God, You will not despise." (Ps 51:17+) The Pharisees were not broken in spirit, but prideful in spirit and that is why they failed to recognize the Lord of the Sabbath, even brazenly accusing Him of breaking the Sabbath! Beware of religious traditions (rituals)! Messianic Jewish writer Alfred Edersheim explains why in the eyes of the Pharisees what the disciples were doing was not lawful on the Sabbath - On any ordinary day this would have been lawful; but on the Sabbath it involved, according to the Rabbinic statutes, at least two sins, viz., plucking the ears, which was reaping, and rubbing them in their hands (Luke 6:1), which was sifting, grinding, or fanning. The Talmud says: 'In case a woman rolls wheat to remove the husks, it is considered as sifting; if she rubs the heads of wheat, it is regarded as threshing; if she cleans off the side-adherencies, it is sifting out fruit; if she bruises the ears, it is grinding; if she throws them up in her hand, it is winnowing'" (Life and Times of Jesus) Pharisees (5330)(pharisaios) is transliterated from Hebrew parash (06567 - to separate) which is from an Aramaic word peras (06537) ("Peres" in Da 5:28-note), signifying to separate, owing to a different manner of life from that of the general public. After the resettling of the Jewish people in Judea on their return from the Babylonian captivity, there were two religious groups among them. One party contented themselves with following only what was written in the Law of Moses. These were called Zadikim, the (so-called) "righteous one." The other group added the constitutions and traditions of the elders, as well as other rigorous observances, to the Law and voluntarily complied with them. They were called Chasidim or the pious, who beyond the legal requirements of ritual and ethical Jewish observance in daily life. From the Zadikim the sects of the Sadducees and Karaites were derived. From the Chasidim were derived the Pharisees and the Essenes. In 1 Macc 2:42RSV, among the persons who joined Mattathias against Antiochus IV (Epiphanes), about 167 b.c., are named the Asideans (Asidaíoi), who are described as voluntarily devoted to the law. The Asideans are mentioned also in 1 Macc 7:13RSV; 2 Macc14:6RSV. In the time of our Lord, the Pharisees were the separatists of their day, as well as the principal sect among the Jews. The Pharisees considered themselves much holier than the common people (Lk 18:11, 12+). They wore special garments to distinguish themselves from others (See Edersheim's description). PRINCIPLE TENETS OF PHARISEES: In opposition to the Sadducees, the Pharisees maintained the existence of angels and spirits and the doctrine of the resurrection (Acts 23:8+), which the Sadducees denied (Mt 22:23; Mk 12:18; Lu 20:27+). The Pharisees made everything dependent upon God and fate (see Josephus, The Jewish Wars, ii.8.14 - scroll down). However, they did not deny the role of the human will in affecting events (see Josephus, Antiquities, xviii.1.3). They prided themselves on their ZEAL FOR TRADITION: The Pharisees distinguished themselves with their zeal for the traditions of the elders, which they erroneously taught was derived from the same fountain as the written Word itself (LIKE SOME RELIGIONS DO TODAY PLACING PRONOUNCEMENTS OF MERE MEN ON THE SAME PEDESTAL AS PROCLAMATIONS OF THE HOLY GOD!), claiming both to have been delivered to Moses on Mount Sinai (Mt 15:1-6; Mk 7:3-5). See also paradosis (3862), tradition, and éntalma (1778), a religious precept versus entole (1785), commandment. (See more detailed notes from William Barclay) Baker's Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology has an excellent summary of Pharisees. Pharisees in the Gospel of Mark - Mk. 2:16; Mk. 2:18; Mk. 2:24; Mk. 3:6; Mk. 7:1; Mk. 7:3; Mk. 7:5; Mk. 8:11; Mk. 8:15; Mk. 10:2; Mk. 12:13; Lawful (1832)(exesti from from ek = out + eimí = to be) is an impersonal verb, signifying "it is permitted, it is lawful" (or interrogatively, "is it lawful?"). Exesti occurs most frequently in the synoptic Gospels and the Acts, especially in Jesus' conflicts with the Pharisees over His actions (and those of His disciples) on the Sabbath (Matt. 12:2; 12:4; 12:10; 12:12, etc). BDAG - 1. to be authorized for the doing of something - it is right, is authorized, is permitted, is proper. 2. to be within the range of possibility, it is possible (Acts 2:29) m. Šabbat 7.2 This passage from the Mishnah, if at all representative of the kinds of prohibitions in Jesus’ day, reveals the strictness with which the commandment “to keep the Sabbath holy” was understood. A. The generative categories of acts of labor [prohibited on the Sabbath] are forty less one: B. (1) he who sews, (2) ploughs, (3) reaps, (4) binds sheaves, (5) threshes, (6) winnows, (7) selects [fit from unfit produce or crops], (8) grinds, (9) sifts, (10) kneads, (11) bakes; C. (12) who shears wool, (13) washes it, (14) beats it, (15) dyes it; D. (16) spins, (17) weaves, E. (18) makes two loops, (19) weaves two threads, (20) separates two threads; F. (21) ties, (22) unties, G. (23) sews two stitches, (24) tears in order to sew two stitches; H. (25) he who traps a deer, (26) slaughters it, (27) flays it, (28) salts it, (29) curds its hide, (30) scrapes it, and (31) cuts it up; I. (32) he who writes two letters, (33) erases two letters in order to write two letters; J. (34) he who builds, (35) tears down; K. (36) he who puts out a fire, (37) kindles a fire; L. (38) he who hits with a hammer; (39) he who transports an object from one domain to another— M. lo, these are the forty generative acts of labor less one. THOUGHT: The Pharisees as usual were "splitting hairs." Stated another way the Pharisees were straining out gnats and swallowing camels as Jesus accused them of in Mt 23:24 declaring "You blind guides, who strain out a gnat and swallow a camel!" Jesus was saying that the Pharisees picked out the smallest and least points to focus on (which in fact were not even God's commandments but men's additions - see the "addition" in "B.(1)" above), while completely ignoring the most important matters, like compassion (they could care less that Jesus' disciples were hungry!). Jesus uses hyperbole imagining someone about to take a drink of water from a cup, noticing that there is a tiny gnat (pix) in it, and straining the water to remove the gnat and then drinks the water, never noticing that there was a camel floating in the cup (so to speak of course!) Jesus makes the point rather dramatically that the religious leaders were focusing on lesser matters written by fallen men, while completely ignoring the more important matters of the holy God! Isn't that what our flesh is so prone to do! We all have a bit of "Pharisee" in us from time to time. Lord, deliver us by Your Spirit and the Law of the LORD which is perfect reviving our souls. In Jesus Name. Amen (Ps 19:7+). John MacArthur on the endless number of Sabbath rules -"The Talmud devotes twenty-four chapters to Sabbath regulations, describing in painfully exhaustive detail what was and was not permitted to be done. The result was a ridiculously complex system of external behavior restraints—so much so that one rabbi spent two and a half years studying just one of the twenty-four chapters! For example, traveling more than 3,000 feet from home was forbidden. But if one had placed food at the 3,000 foot point before the Sabbath, that point would then be considered a home, since there was food there, and allow another 3,000 feet of travel. Similarly, a piece of wood or a rope placed across the end of a narrow street or alley constituted a doorway. That could then be considered the front door of one’s house, and permit the 3,000 feet of travel to begin there. There were also regulations about carrying items. Something lifted up in a public place could only be set down in a private place, and vice versa. An object tossed into the air could be caught with the same hand, but if it was caught with the other hand, it would be a Sabbath violation. If a person had reached out to pick up food when the Sabbath began, the food had to be dropped; to bring the arm back while holding the food would be to carry a burden on the Sabbath. It was forbidden to carry anything heavier than a dried fig (though something weighing half as much could be carried two times). A tailor could not carry his needle, a scribe his pen, or a student his books. Only enough ink to write two letters (of the alphabet) could be carried. A letter could not be sent, not even with a non-Jew. Clothes could not be examined or shaken out before being put on because an insect might be killed in the process, which would be work. No fire could be lit, or put out. Cold water could be poured into warm water, but not warm into cold. An egg could not be cooked, not even by placing it in hot sand during the summer. Nothing could be sold or bought. Bathing was forbidden, lest water be spilled on the floor and wash it. Moving a chair was not allowed, since it might make a rut in a dirt floor, which was too much like plowing. Women were forbidden to look in a mirror, since if they saw a white hair, they might be tempted to pull it out. Other forbidden things included sowing, plowing, reaping, binding sheaves, threshing, winnowing, grinding, kneading, baking, shearing, washing, beating, dyeing, or spinning wool, tying or untying a knot, catching, killing, or skinning a deer, salting its meat, or preparing its skin....It was to people crushed by the unbearable burden (Matt. 23:4; Luke 11:46; Acts 15:10) of manmade, legalistic regulations that the Lord Jesus Christ said, “Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest. Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For My yoke is easy and My burden is light” (Matt. 11:28-30-note). (See Luke Commentary) Mark 2:25 And He said to them, "Have you never read what David did when he was in need and he and his companions became hungry; NET Mark 2:25 He said to them, "Have you never read what David did when he was in need and he and his companions were hungry– GNT Mark 2:25 καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς, Οὐδέποτε ἀνέγνωτε τί ἐποίησεν Δαυὶδ ὅτε χρείαν ἔσχεν καὶ ἐπείνασεν αὐτὸς καὶ οἱ μετ᾽ αὐτοῦ, NLT Mark 2:25 Jesus said to them, "Haven't you ever read in the Scriptures what David did when he and his companions were hungry? KJV Mark 2:25 And he said unto them, Have ye never read what David did, when he had need, and was an hungred, he, and they that were with him? ESV Mark 2:25 And he said to them, "Have you never read what David did, when he was in need and was hungry, he and those who were with him: NIV Mark 2:25 He answered, "Have you never read what David did when he and his companions were hungry and in need? ASV Mark 2:25 And he said unto them, Did ye never read what David did, when he had need, and was hungry, he, and they that were with him? CSB Mark 2:25 He said to them, "Have you never read what David and those who were with him did when he was in need and hungry-- Have you never read: Mk 12:20,26 Mt 19:4 21:16,42 22:31 Lu 10:26 what David did when he was in need: 1Sa 21:3-6 Parallel Passages Mk 2:23–28—Mt. 12:1–8; Lk 6:1–5 Matthew 12:3+ But He said to them, “Have you not read what David did when he became hungry, he and his companions, Luke 6:3+ And Jesus answering them said, “Have you not even read what David did when he was hungry, he and those who were with him JESUS DEFENSE: THE OLD TESTAMENT! And He said to them - Jesus ever the perfect "Defense Attorney" answers their question with a question of His own. Have you never read - Stop right there! Can you imagine the hair standing up the back the necks of these self-righteous Pharisees at these first words from Jesus! You can hear them mumbling to themselves "How dare Him question our knowledge of the Bible. We are the experts in Israel! Doesn't He know who we really are?" Of course He did in fact know who they REALLY WERE! They were consummate religious actors, hypercritical hypocrites, men who were "like whitewashed tombs which on the outside appear beautiful, but inside they are full of dead men's bones and all uncleanness." (Mt 23:27). What David did when he was in need and he and his companions became hungry - In defense of His disciples, and ultimately of Himself for their accusations ultimately were aimed at Him, He reminds them of David, the most beloved of all Israel's kings. In so doing he is using this OT example to show that the spirit of the law takes priority over the letter of the law What David did - The context is that David had fled from King Saul who was opposed to David and tried to kill him (1 Sa 20:31–33). David went into hiding as a fugitive, taking a few men with him and while in the wilderness, they became hungry. One fact that is not found in the following account is that the priest Ahimelech sought the Lord's approval as we learn from the spy Doeg the Edomite's account in 1 Sa 22:10 stating that Ahimelech "inquired of the LORD for him, gave him provisions, and gave him the sword of Goliath the Philistine.” Ahimelech came to understand that the preservation of David's life was more important than the ceremonial regulations concerning consecrated bread! In short, the priest discerned the spirit of the law, not just the letter of the law! He is a good example for all us to emulate. Here is the story to which Jesus refers... Then David came to Nob to Ahimelech the priest (THIS TEXT DOES NOT SAY SPECIFICALLY IT WAS THE SABBATH); and Ahimelech came trembling to meet David and said to him, “Why are you alone and no one with you?” 2 David said to Ahimelech the priest, “The king has commissioned me with a matter and has said to me, ‘Let no one know anything about the matter on which I am sending you and with which I have commissioned you; and I have directed the young men to a certain place.’ (NOTE THAT DAVID ACTUALLY DECEIVES AHIMELECH - HE HAD NOT BEEN COMMISSIONED BY SAUL! - AND HIS LIE ULTIMATELY LED TO THE DEATH OF THE PRIESTS - 1 Sa 22:9-18! WE LEARN IN 1 Sa 22:10 THAT AHIMELECH HAD INQUIRED OF THE LORD WHO GAVE HIM PERMISSION TO GIVE THE BREAD TO DAVID) 3 “Now therefore, what do you have on hand? Give me five loaves of bread, or whatever can be found.” 4 The priest answered David and said, “There is no ordinary bread on hand, but there is consecrated bread; if only the young men have kept themselves from women.” 5 David answered the priest and said to him, “Surely women have been kept from us as previously when I set out and the vessels of the young men were holy, though it was an ordinary journey; how much more then today will their vessels be holy?” 6 So the priest gave him consecrated bread; for there was no bread there but the bread of the Presence which was removed from before the LORD, in order to put hot bread in its place when it was taken away (See Leviticus 24:5-9+, cf Ex. 25:23-30). (1 Sa 21:1-6) Comment - Notice that David broke a definite law given by Moses, for the consecrated bread was meant to be eaten only by the priests (Lev. 24:5-9), but Jesus' disciples had violated only a man-made rule! Mark 2:26 how he entered the house of God in the time of Abiathar the high priest, and ate the consecrated bread, which is not lawful for anyone to eat except the priests, and he also gave it to those who were with him?" NET Mark 2:26 how he entered the house of God when Abiathar was high priest and ate the sacred bread, which is against the law for any but the priests to eat, and also gave it to his companions?" GNT Mark 2:26 πῶς εἰσῆλθεν εἰς τὸν οἶκον τοῦ θεοῦ ἐπὶ Ἀβιαθὰρ ἀρχιερέως καὶ τοὺς ἄρτους τῆς προθέσεως ἔφαγεν, οὓς οὐκ ἔξεστιν φαγεῖν εἰ μὴ τοὺς ἱερεῖς, καὶ ἔδωκεν καὶ τοῖς σὺν αὐτῷ οὖσιν; NLT Mark 2:26 He went into the house of God (during the days when Abiathar was high priest) and broke the law by eating the sacred loaves of bread that only the priests are allowed to eat. He also gave some to his companions." KJV Mark 2:26 How he went into the house of God in the days of Abiathar the high priest, and did eat the shewbread, which is not lawful to eat but for the priests, and gave also to them which were with him? ESV Mark 2:26 how he entered the house of God, in the time of Abiathar the high priest, and ate the bread of the Presence, which it is not lawful for any but the priests to eat, and also gave it to those who were with him?" NIV Mark 2:26 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." ASV Mark 2:26 How he entered into the house of God when Abiathar was high priest, and ate the showbread, which it is not lawful to eat save for the priests, and gave also to them that were with him? CSB Mark 2:26 how he entered the house of God in the time of Abiathar the high priest and ate the sacred bread-- which is not lawful for anyone to eat except the priests-- and also gave some to his companions?" Abiathar 1Sa 22:20-22 23:6,9 2Sa 8:17 15:24,29,35 20:25 1 Ki 1:7 1 Ki 2:22,26,27 4:4 which is not lawful: Ex 29:32,33 Lev 24:5-9 Parallel Passages Mk 2:23–28—Mt. 12:1–8; Lk 6:1–5 Matthew 12:4+ how he entered the house of God, and they ate the consecrated bread, which was not lawful for him to eat nor for those with him, but for the priests alone? 5 “Or have you not read in the Law, that on the Sabbath the priests in the temple break the Sabbath and are innocent? 6 “But I say to you that something greater than the temple is here. 7 “But if you had known what this means, ‘I DESIRE COMPASSION (MERCY), AND NOT A SACRIFICE,’ you would not have condemned the innocent. Lenski on mercy and sacrifice - “If you had known” is a climax to the two questions, “Did you not read?” Jesus quotes Hos. 6:6 (as in 9:13). “Mercy,” eleos, is pity and sympathy for anyone in distress (Mt 5:7; Luke 6:36); Thusia is a sacrifice sent up in smoke, also the act of bringing sacrifice. As between the two, God wants the former. While he himself has ordered sacrifice, sacrifice alone could never satisfy him. God wanted the sacrifice of a true heart, one full of mercy, for instance, toward hungry fellow men, and corresponding acts for God’s sake. Jesus is not speaking of mere humanitarian pity, nor of merciful actions inspired by the law. The mercy that Hosea refers to comes from the gospel, which fills also the Old Testament. It is born of the new life kindled by this gospel. And so this mercy is known by the inner experience of having it and of putting it to delightful practice. When the Pharisees condemned the disciples, who were utterly guiltless, having transgressed not even a ceremonial law, they revealed that Hos. 6:6 (and every other gospel word similar to that) was foreign territory to them. Men’s actions reveal what affinity they have for God’s Word and how they meet or fail to meet what God really wants. (ISMG) Luke 6:4+ how he entered the house of God, and took and ate the consecrated bread which is not lawful for any to eat except the priests alone, and gave it to his companions?” Priests Changing Showbread each Sabbath The drawing depicts the priests removing the old consecrated bread and replacing with the new consecrated bread on the Sabbath. The priests were then allowed to eat the old consecrated bread. J
Marcos 2
Robertson comments on the addition of EVEN in Mark 2:28 writing that "Mark, Matthew (Matthew 12:8), and Luke (Luke 6:5) all give this as a climax in the five reasons given by Christ on the occasion for the conduct of the disciples, but Mark has the little word "even" (kai) not in the others, showing that Jesus knew that He was making a great claim as the Son of Man, the Representative Man, the Messiah looked at from His human interest, to lordship (kurios) even of the Sabbath. He was not the slave of the Sabbath, but the Master of it. "Even of the Sabbath, so invaluable in your eyes. Lord, not to abolish, but to interpret and keep in its own place, and give it a new name" (Bruce).