Marcos 3
J.C. Ryle · Citado em PreceptAustin
Marcos 3
Ryle - These verses show us our Lord again working a miracle. He heals a man in the synagogue, "who had a withered hand." Always about His Father's business--always doing good--doing it in the sight of enemies as well as of friends--such was the daily tenor of our Lord's earthly ministry. And He "left us an example that we should follow His steps." (1 Peter 2:21+, cf 1 Cor 11:1+) Blessed indeed are those Christians who strive, however feebly, to imitate their Master! (ED: See the only way a believer can possibly seek to imitate the Master - The Holy Spirit-Walking Like Jesus Walked!) He entered again into a synagogue - NAS leaves out the opening Greek word (kai) which is usually rendered "and," but in this context is more of "a topical connection with what precedes. As the last of five conflict stories, this incident forms the climax to these accounts of growing antagonism to Jesus." (Hiebert) The text says "He" with no mention of the disciples in any of the synoptic accounts. It was Jesus' custom to attend the synagogue service on the Sabbath. Was this the synagogue at Capernaum? We cannot be sure from the text (or comparing the other synoptic accounts). Mark 2:23-28 recorded a Sabbath confrontation in the grain field and now Mark records another Sabbath collision in the synagogue. Luke 6:6+ has "On another Sabbath He entered the synagogue and was teaching." What Sabbath? We cannot know for certain, but possibly soon after the Sabbath confrontation in the grainfields. Synagogue (4864)(sunagoge from sunágo = lead together, assemble or bring together) refers to a group of people “going with one another” (sunago) literally describes a bringing together or congregating in one place. And a man was there whose hand was withered - There "just happened" providentially to be a paralyzed person present! Jesus could have put off this healing until after the Sabbath, but this was an appointment for confrontation! It seems clear that Jesus intended to confront the false teaching of the Jews concerning the Sabbath and so He repeatedly healed on this day to which they had added many burdensome rules (Luke 4:31-35; 13:10-17; 14:1-6; John 5:1-9; 9:1-14). Withered is in the perfect tense which describes an action that took place in the past and was an abiding condition. It could have been from an accident or disease. In any case the tense speaks of the permanence of the condition. It is interesting that only Doctor Luke says it was specifically the man's right hand which is important because in this agrarian culture it would have been difficult for this man to engage in any meaningful labor. Some commentators believe the Pharisees planted him in the synagogue to set Jesus up, which is possible as these men were very conniving and we know that later they did try to trap Jesus to "trip" Him up. However this is conjecture and it is also possible this man was a regular attendee at the synagogue. Truth be told God in His sovereignty had "providentially planted" this man in the synagogue! Withered (dry) (3583)(xeraino from xeros = dry) means to become dry, to dry up and figuratively describes the whole body of a demon possessed boy that became stiffened and rigid (Mk 9.18). In Mark 3:1 it describes a limb which is shriveled, withered and has become useless. As plants are killed by drought, so the human body is damaged by certain harmful things. 15x in NT - Matt. 13:6; Matt. 21:19; Matt. 21:20; Mk. 3:1; Mk. 4:6; Mk. 5:29; Mk. 9:18; Mk. 11:20; Mk. 11:21; Lk. 8:6; Jn. 15:6; Jas. 1:11; 1 Pet. 1:24; Rev. 14:15; Rev. 16:12 THE HEALING OF THE WITHERED HAND - Ian MacPherson [Jesus] entered again into the synagogue; and there was a man there which had a withered hand.… And he saith unto the man, … Stand forth.… stretch forth thine hand. And he stretched it out; and his hand was restored whole as the other. —Mark 3:1, 3, 5 There is a powerful passage in one of the published sermons of J. H. Jowett in which the great preacher points out that when Jesus ordered the man with the withered hand to stretch forth that atrophied limb He commanded him to do the one thing which seemed to him impossible. Had He asked him to stretch forth his left arm, he could have done it; had He bade him extend his right foot, he would have had no difficulty in complying with the injunction. But his right hand! Ah, that was different. There it hung, nerveless, shriveled, impotent by his side, incapable of responding to the impulses of his brain. The will to do was there, but the power to perform was not. How vividly reminiscent of man’s moral condition apart from Christ! Here is how Paul puts it in a passage of poignant and revealing autobiography: “To will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not” (Rom. 7:18). When Christ comes on the scene the whole situation is dramatically changed. Amos R. Wells has given us in verse a graphic picture of it: I’ve a hand! a hand! a hand! To think He goes about So quietly, and does such things as this, Making poor half-men whole! Well, here’s a hand, A strong true hand that now is wholly His, To work or fight for Him or what He will: For He has been the Hand of God to me. Of the condition of the man with the atrophied hand four suggestive things may be said: 1. He had lost the executive of his will. In Ireland they tell of a left-armed sculptor who is alleged to have carved his masterpieces by holding the chisel between his teeth and tapping himself on the back of the head with a mallet. Most people prefer to do their work with their right hand! 2. He had lost the expression of his friendship. “I ask not, therefore, of him with whom I would unite in love, Are you of my church, of my congregation? Do you receive the same form of church government, allow the same church officers, with me? My only question is this: ‘Is thine heart right, as my heart is with thy heart?’ ” (John Wesley). 3. He had lost the extension of his grasp. He had, as we say, “lost grip.” There is more power in a clasped hand than in a clenched fist. Our grasp gives us away. What is it we are clutching at? Is it something we covet for ourselves or is it someone we want to save? 4. He had lost the exquisiteness of his touch. He had also got “out of touch” with things. The brother-in-law of Elvet Lewis, the Welsh poet-preacher, told me that when Lewis visited Israel after going blind what he most remembered in retrospect was the “feel” of the cool water through the skin of the leather bottles in that hot land. Sighted people do not always appreciate the sense of touch as they should. John H Jowett- THERE are withered limbs of the spirit as well as of the body. There are faculties and powers which are wasting away, sacred endowments which have lost their vital circulation. In some lives the will is a withered limb. In others it is the conscience. In others, again, it is the affections. These splendid moral and spiritual powers are being dried up, and they hang comparatively limp and useless in the life. They have been withered by sin and sinful negligence. And the Lord is the healer of withered limbs. He can deal with imprisoned affections as the warm spring deals with the river which has been locked in ice. He can minister to a stricken will, and make it as a benumbed hand when the circulation has been restored. He can give it grip and tenacity. And so with all our powers. He, who is the Life, can vitalize all! But here again the remnant of our withered endowment must be used in the healing. We must surrender to the Healer. We must obey. If the Lord says: “Stretch forth thy hand,” we must attempt the impossible! In this region the impossible becomes possible in sanctified endeavour. James Smith - Handfuls of Purpose - THE WITHERED HAND Mark 3:1–7 Observe here— I. Where the Saviour Was. He was in the synagogue, the public place of worship. What is the house of prayer if Jesus is not there? A mere recitation hall. When Jesus is present there is sure to be an interest. He loves to frequent the house of prayer. So do all that are like Him. Do you love the prayer meeting, or is it to you a dry, meaningless ceremony? If the latter, you must be a stranger to the loving Jesus. Those who have no desire to commune with Him can have no fitness to dwell with Him. Now notice— II. Whom the Saviour Met. 1. A MAN WITH A WITHERED HAND. Luke says it was his right hand, the hand we stretch out to receive. This may be taken to represent the faith by which the soul takes hold of the promises of God. How many withered hands there are still to be found at prayer meetings, how little taking hold of God? Friend, is your hand withered? Perhaps you are a backslider, and can remember the time when your hand of faith was healthy and strong. But now you have only the withered and helpless form. 2. MEN WITH WITHERED HEARTS. Those who “watched to accuse” (v. 2). This class is not yet ceased out of the house of God. Besides the sleepy indifference there is often the watchful faultfinder. Is your heart so withered that you have no love to Jesus and no sympathy with His work? To find fault with the all-wise Son of God and His infallible Word and working is surely the height of human arrogance. Remember, the eyes of the Almighty are watching you. Now hear— III. What the Saviour Said. 1. TO THE MAN WITH THE WITHERED HAND. “Arise, stand in the midst” (margin). This would not be very pleasant exercise for one that desired to conceal his need. He that covereth his sins shall not prosper. You cannot be in a fit state to be saved so long as you are ashamed to confess your need. The Lord could have cured this man sitting as easily as standing, and in his own house as readily as in the synagogue; but in all likelihood if he had remained at his own fireside he never would have been healed. If your backsliding and unbelief are to be healed you must confess them; and if you confess, He is “faithful and just to forgive” (1 John 1:9). 2. TO THOSE WITH THE WITHERED HEARTS, the fault-finders, He said, “Is it lawful to do good or evil, to save or to kill?” (v. 4). Not to do good when you can is to do evil; not to save when you might is to kill. “They held their peace.” Ah, yes! one word from His lips and the accusers are speechless. Are you among those who would rather hold a certain form of religion that kills than give it up for the reality that gives life? The letter withereth, bindeth, killeth. The Spirit reviveth, liberateth, giveth life. Is yours, then, the religion of joyous liberty, or formal, miserable bondage? IV. What the Saviour Felt. He— 1. WAS ANGRY. “He looked round about on them with anger.” In the Old Testament much is said about “the anger of the Lord.” In the New much is said about “the love of the Lord.” But remember, this one is Lord. “The wrath of the Lamb” is as holy as “the blood of the Lamb.” Oh! poor, self-righteous, fault-finding sinner, beware! If you do not confess your sins, and seek His mercy, and receive His forgiveness now, the awful look that renders speechless, and the awful wrath that makes eternal misery, will be yours. Despise His love, and you shall be despised. But more— 2. WAS GRIEVED “at the blindness (margin) of their hearts.” While He is justly angry at man’s presumption, He is sadly grieved at man’s ignorance. He was not grieved because He was watched and misunderstood and maligned. He says, “Weep not for me, but weep for yourselves and your children” (Luke 23:28), for well the Saviour knows what your end will be if you refuse Him. If you have never grieved over your own ignorance and hardness of heart, just think of the merciful Saviour’s grief over you. V. What the Saviour Did. He— 1. RESTORED THE WITHERED HAND. Nothing is impossible with Him. When this man “stood forth” at the word of Jesus, he no doubt expected that Jesus would heal him. So if you make full and honest confession of sin you may confidently expect forgiveness. Adam put forth his hand and took forbidden fruit, and immediately his spiritual hand was withered. All his sons are born with a withered hand. They can receive nothing unless it be given them of God. But when the hand is restored they can lay hold on eternal life. Is your hand withered? Jesus only can restore it. 2. WITHDREW HIMSELF (v. 7). There are three classes from whom Jesus withdraws Himself: the faultfinding, as we see here; the curious (John 12:21–36); and the unwilling (Luke 8:37). How sad when He who is the Light of the world turns His back upon those in blindness! Take care how you treat the gentle Lamb of God. Say unto Him, “Come,” and He cometh; but say, “Go,” and at last He goeth. HERE IS YOUR SOLEMN CHOICE: Restoration or withdrawal. Wilt thou be made whole, or must He depart? Croft Pentz - CHRIST THE HEALER (Mark 3:1–12) Jesus had a compassionate heart! Whenever He saw a person in need, He stopped and helped them I. THE SAVIOUR—Mark 3:1–4 A. The worshipping Saviour—“Entered into a synagogue” (Jesus took time to worship, so must you!—John 4:24) B. The watched Saviour—“Watched whether he would heal on the Sabbath” (People always sought to find fault with Jesus) C. The wise Saviour—v. 4 (Jesus always had an answer for His enemies and critics) II. THE STRETCHING—Mark 3:5 A. The command—“Stretch forth” (When Christ gives a command—obey) B. The faith—“He stretched it out” (To receive from God, you must have faith) C. The healing—“His hand was restored” (Obedience unto the Lord always brings results) III. THE SCHEME—Mark 3:6–8 A. The plan—“Took counsel to destroy him” (Satan tries every plan to destroy Christ and His followers) B. The escape—“Jesus withdrew himself” (If Jesus was killed before the cross, there would be no salvation) C. The excitement—“Great multitudes came to hear him” (Christ’s presence always brings excitement) IV. THE SPREADING—Mark 3:9–12 A. The speaking—v. 9 (Today God speaks through His Word, and Holy Spirit) B. The healing—v. 10 (The man came to Jesus because He had a compassionate heart) C. The power—v. 11 (The unclean spirit is cast out—all changed by His touch) D. The charge—v. 12 (Jesus had no pride—not anxious to receive credit for this) He is able to meet your need! Be it small or great, He will help you CHRIST OUR HELPER—Mark 3:1–19 Croft Pentz I. THE PROBLEM—vv. 1–6 A. Cripple—v. 1. A man was present with a withered hand. B. Curious—v. 2. The people watch Christ to see if He would heal on the Sabbath, so they might criticize Him. It seems that only those who do good are criticized. C. Christ—vv. 3–4. Christ asks if it is all right to heal on the Sabbath. Is the Sabbath a day to help others? They could not answer Him. D. Complete—v. 5. Jesus asks that the man stretch forth His hand. When he obeyed Christ, he was healed. Obedience always brings God’s blessings. E. Counsel—v. 6. The Pharisees meet with the Herodians (a Roman political party), seeking plans and ways of destroying Christ. They were not happy with His good work. They seek to destroy someone who was doing good! II. THE PERSON—vv. 7–12 Christ proves Himself as the Son of God by helping mankind. A. Seeking—vv. 7–8. Many seek Christ. They seek Him for help and blessing. Man always seeks Christ in time of need. However, we should always seek Him—not only in times of trouble. B. Sick—vv. 9–10. Many sick come, seeking healing. Often man is easy to win to Christ when he is sick because he needs help. A healthy person needs nothing, therefore he does not seek God. C. Saviour—v. 11. The evil spirit respects Christ as the Messiah, the Son of God. D. Self-contained—v. 12. He tells them not to make known His power. He was a very humble man. III. THE PLAN—vv. 13–19 A. Place—v. 13. Christ went up to the mountains to pray. He always sought the quietness of the mountains to pray and have fellowship with God. B. Preaching—v. 14. Christ ordains twelve to preach the gospel. C. Power—v. 15. The power to heal the sick and cast out devils. D. People—vv. 16–19. The names of the twelve disciples. Mark 3:2 They were watching Him to see if He would heal him on the Sabbath, so that they might accuse Him.
Marcos 3
Ryle on watching - What a melancholy proof we have here of the wickedness of human nature! It was the Sabbath day, when these things happened. It was in the synagogue, where men were assembled to hear the word and worship God. Yet even on the day of God, and at the time of worshiping God, these wretched formalists were plotting mischief against our Lord. The very men who pretended to such strictness and, sanctity in little things, were full of malicious and angry thoughts in the midst of the congregation. (Pr 5:14) Christ's people must not expect to fare better than their Master (Jn 15:18, 19, 20, Mt 10:24). They are always watched by an ill-natured and spiteful world. Their conduct is scanned with a keen and jealous eye. Their ways are noted and diligently observed. They are marked men. They can do nothing without the world's noticing it. Their dress, their expenditure, their employment of time, their conduct in all the relations of life, are all rigidly and closely marked. Their adversaries wait for their halting, and if at any time they fall into an error, the ungodly rejoice. It is good for all Christians to keep this before their minds. Wherever we go, and whatever we do, let us remember that, like our Master, we are "watched." The thought should make us exercise a holy jealousy over all our conduct, that we may do nothing to cause the enemy to blaspheme (cf 1 Pe 1:17+, 1 Pe 2:12+, 1 Pe 3:1,2+, 1 Pe 4:14-16+, Mt 5:11,12+). It should make us diligent to avoid even the "appearance of evil." (1 Th 5:22+) Above all, it should make us pray much, to be kept blameless in our tempers, tongues, and daily public demeanor. That Savior Who was "watched" Himself, knows how to sympathize with His people, and to supply grace to help in time of need (Heb 4:16+, Heb 2:18+). To see if He would heal him on the Sabbath - The Pharisees knew Jesus could heal and also knew He was compassionate, so this was a setup for Jesus to break their Sabbath regulations! But God's law did not forbid healing on the Sabbath. It was the additions by the rabbis which prohibited the "practice of medicine" on the Sabbath unless the person was on the verge of death. (Mishnah, m. Shabbat 6.3; 12.1; 18.3; 19.2; m. Yoma 8.6) For these Pharisees their legalistic proscriptions took precedence over the needs of a man with a withered hand! Talk about lack of compassion! Morison says these Pharisees were motivated by “the true spirit of ecclesiastical bloodhounds." A T
Marcos 3
Ryle - The beginning of this passage describes the appointment of the twelve apostles. It is an event in our Lord’s earthly ministry, which should always be read with deep interest. What a vast amount of benefit these few men have conferred on the world! The names of a few Jewish fishermen are known and loved by millions all over the globe, while the names of many kings and rich men are lost and forgotten. It is they who do good to souls who are had “in everlasting remembrance.” (Psalm 112:6. For he will never be shaken; The righteous will be remembered forever.)...Like the apostles, the faithful minister ought to keep up close communion with Christ. He should be much “with Him.” His fellowship should be “with the Son.” (1 John 1:3.) He should abide in Him. He should be separate from the world, and daily sit, like Mary, at Jesus’ feet, and hear His word. He should study Him, copy Him, drink into His Spirit, and walk in His steps. He should strive to be able to say, when he enters the pulpit, “that which we have seen and heard, declare we unto you.” (1 John 1:3.) Like the apostles, the faithful minister ought to be a preacher. This must ever be his principal work, and receive the greatest part of his thoughts. He must place it above the administration of the sacraments. (1 Cor. 1:17.) He must exalt it above the reading of forms. An unpreaching minister is of little use to the church of Christ. He is a lampless light-house, a silent trumpeter, a sleeping watchman, a painted fire. Like the apostles, the faithful minister must labour to do good in every way. Though he cannot heal the sick, he must seek to alleviate sorrow, and to increase happiness among all with whom he has to do. He must strive to be known as the comforter, the counsellor, the peacemaker, the helper, and the friend of all. Men should know him, not as one who rules and domineers, but as one who is “their servant for Jesus’ sake.” (2 Cor. 4:5.) Like the apostles, the faithful minister must oppose every work of the devil. Though not called now to cast out evil spirits from the body, he must be ever ready to resist the devil’s devices, and to denounce his snares for the soul. He must expose the tendency of races, theatres, balls, gambling, drunkenness, Sabbath-profanation, and sensual gratifications. Every age has its own peculiar temptations. Many are the devices of Satan. But whatever be the direction in which the devil is most busy, there ought the minister to be, ready to confront and withstand him. How great is the responsibility of ministers! How heavy their work, if they do their duty! How much they need the prayers of all praying people, in order to support and strengthen their hands! No wonder that St. Paul says so often to the churches, “Pray for us.” F B
Marcos 3
Ryle has a good word on the accusation that Jesus had lost His senses - There is nothing in this fact that need surprise us. The prophet who came to anoint Jehu was called a “mad fellow.” (2 Kings 9:11.) Festus told Paul that he was “mad.” (Acts 26:24+ mad = Greek word mania = insanity) Few things show the corruption of human nature more clearly, than man’s inability to understand zeal in religion. Zeal about money, or science, or war, or commerce, or business, is intelligible to the world. But zeal about religion is too often reckoned foolishness, fanaticism, and the sign of a weak mind. If a man injures his health by study, or excessive attention to business, no fault is found:—“He is a diligent man.”—But if he wears himself out with preaching, or spends his whole time in doing good to souls, the cry is raised, “He is an enthusiast and righteous over-much.” The world is not altered. The “things of the Spirit” are always “foolishness to the natural man.” (1 Cor. 2:14.) Let it not shake our faith, if we have to drink of the same cup as our blessed Lord. Hard as it may be to flesh and blood to be misunderstood by our relations, we must recollect it is no new thing. Let us call to mind our Lord’s words, “He that loveth father and mother more than me is not worthy of me.” Jesus knows the bitterness of our trials. Jesus feels for us. Jesus will give us help. Let us bear patiently the unreasonableness of unconverted men, even as our Lord did. Let us pity their blindness and want of knowledge, and not love them one whit the less. Above all, let us pray that God would change their hearts. Who can tell but the very persons who now try to turn us away from Christ, may one day become new creatures, see all things differently, and follow Christ themselves? C S Lewis in his classic Mere Christianity made the famous quote about Jesus "Liar, Lunatic or Lord?" - I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: I'm ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don't accept his claim to be God. That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic — on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg — or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut him up for a fool, you can spit at him and kill him as a demon or you can fall at his feet and call him Lord and God, but let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about his being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to. ... Now it seems to me obvious that He was neither a lunatic nor a fiend: and consequently, however strange or terrifying or unlikely it may seem, I have to accept the view that He was and is God. (Mere Christianity - online without restrictions) Josh McDowell - LORD, LIAR OR LUNATIC? The distinct claims of Jesus to be God eliminate the popular ploy of skeptics who regard Jesus as just a good moral man or a prophet who said a lot of profound things. So often that conclusion is passed off as the only one acceptable to scholars or as the obvious result of the intellectual process. The trouble is, many people nod their heads in agreement and never see the fallacy of such reasoning. To Jesus, who men and women believed him to be was of fundamental importance. To say what Jesus said and to claim what he claimed about himself, one couldn't conclude he was just a good moral man or prophet. That alternative isn't open to an individual, and Jesus never intended it to be. C. S. Lewis, who was a professor at Cambridge University and once an agnostic, understood this issue clearly. He writes: "I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: 'I'm ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don't accept His claim to be God.' That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic—on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg—or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse." Then Lewis adds: "You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come up with any patronising nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to."' F. J. A. Hort, who spent twenty-eight years in a critical study of the New Testament text, writes: "His words were so completely parts and utterances of Himself, that they had no meaning as abstract statements of truth uttered by Him as a Divine oracle or prophet. Take away Himself as the primary (though not the ultimate) subject of every statement and they all fall to pieces."2 In the words of Kenneth Scott Latourette, historian of Christianity at Yale University: "It is nothis teachings which make Jesus so remarkable, although these would be enough to give him distinction. It is a combination of the teachings with the man himself. The two cannot be separated." "It must be obvious," Latourette concludes, "to any thoughtful reader of the Gospel records that Jesus regarded himself and his message as inseparable. He was a great teacher, but he was more. His teachings about the kingdom of God, about human conduct, and about God were important, but they could not be divorced from him without, from his standpoint, being vitiated."3 Jesus claimed to be God. He didn't leave any other option open. His claim must be either true or false, so it is something that should be given serious consideration. Jesus' question to his disciples, "But who do you say that I am?" (Matthew 16:15 ) has several alternatives. First, consider that his claim to be God was false. If it was false, then we have two and only two alternatives. He either knew it was false or he didn't know it was false. We will consider each one separately and examine the evidence. WAS HE A LIAR? If, when Jesus made his claims, he knew that he was not God, then he was lying and deliberately deceiving his followers. But if he was a liar, then he was also a hypocrite because he told others to be honest, whatever the cost, while he himself taught and lived a colossal lie. More than that, he was a demon, because he told others to trust him for their eternal destiny. If he couldn't back up his claims and knew it, then he was unspeakably evil. Last, he would also be a fool because it was his claims to being God that led to his crucifixion. Many will say that Jesus was a good moral teacher. Let's be realistic. How could he be a great moral teacher and knowingly mislead people at the most important point of his teaching—his own identity? You would have to conclude logically that he was a deliberate liar. This view of Jesus, however, doesn't coincide with what we know either of him or the results of his life and teachings. Wherever Jesus has been proclaimed, lives have been changed for the good, nations have changed for the better, thieves are made honest, alcoholics are cured, hateful individuals become channels of love, unjust persons become just. William Lecky, one of Great Britain's most noted historians and a dedicated opponent of organized Christianity, writes: "It was reserved for Christianity to present to the world an ideal character which through all the changes of eighteen centuries has inspired the hearts of men with an impassioned love; has shown itself capable of acting on all ages, nations, temperaments and conditions; has been not only the highest pattern of virtue, but the strongest incentive to itspractice.... The simple record of these three short years of active life has done more to regenerate and soften mankind than all the disquisitions of philosophers and all the exhortations of moralists."4 Historian Philip Schaff says: "This testimony, if not true, must be downright blasphemy or madness. The former hypothesis cannot stand a moment before the moral purity and dignity of Jesus, revealed in his every word and work, and acknowledged by universal consent. Self-deception in a matter so momentous, and with an intellect in all respects so clear and so sound, is equally out of the question. How could he be an enthusiast or a madman who never lost the even balance of his mind, who sailed serenely over all the troubles and persecutions, as the sun above the clouds, who always returned the wisest answer to tempting questions, who calmly and deliberately predicted his death on the cross, his resurrection on the third day, the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, the founding of his Church, the destruction of Jerusalem—predictions which have been literally fulfilled? A character so original, so complete, so uniformly consistent, so perfect, so human and yet so high above all human greatness, can be neither a fraud nor a fiction. The poet, as has been well said, would in this case be greater than the hero. It would take more than a Jesus to invent a Jesus."5 Elsewhere Schaff gives convincing argument against Christ being a liar: "How, in the name of logic, common sense, and experience, could an impostor—that is a deceitful, selfish, depraved man—have invented, and consistently maintained from the beginning to end, the purest and noblest character known in history with the most perfect air of truth and reality? How could he have conceived and successfully carried out a plan of unparalleled beneficence, moral magnitude, and sublimity, and sacrificed his own life for it, in the face of the strongest prejudices of his people and age?"6 If Jesus wanted to get people to follow him and believe in him as God, why did he go to the Jewish nation? Why go as a Nazarene carpenter to a country so small in size and population and so thoroughly adhering to the undivided unity of God? Why didn't he go to Egypt or, even more, to Greece, where they believed in various gods and various manifestations of them? Someone who lived as Jesus lived, taught as Jesus taught, and died as Jesus died could not have been a liar. What other alternatives are there? WAS HE A LUNATIC? If it is inconceivable for Jesus to be a liar, then couldn't he actually have thought himself to be God, but been mistaken? After all, it's possible to be both sincere and wrong. But we must remember that for someone to think himself God, especially in a fiercely monotheistic culture, and then to tell others that their eternal destiny depended on believing in him, is no slight flight of fantasy but the thoughts of a lunatic in the fullest sense. Was Jesus Christ such a person? Someone who believes he is God sounds like someone today believing himself Napoleon. He would be deluded and self-deceived, and probably he would be locked up so he wouldn't hurt himself or anyone else. Yet in Jesus we don't observe the abnormalities and imbalance that usually go along with being deranged. His poise and composure would certainly be amazing if he were insane. Noyes and Kolb, in a medical text,' describe the schizophrenic as a person who is more autistic than realistic. The schizophrenic desires to escape from the world of reality. Let's face it; claiming to be God would certainly be a retreat from reality. In light of the other things we know about Jesus, it's hard to imagine that he was mentally disturbed. Here is a man who spoke some of the most profound sayings ever recorded. His instructions have liberated many individuals in mental bond-age. Clark H. Pinnock asks: "Was he deluded about his greatness, a paranoid, an unintentional deceiver, a schizophrenic? Again, the skill and depth of his teachings support the case only for his total mental soundness. If only we were as sane as he!"8 A student at a California university told me that his psychology professor had said in class that "all he has to do is pick up the Bible and read portions of Christ's teaching to many of his patients. That's all the counseling they need." Psychiatrist J. T. Fisher states: "If you were to take the sum total of all authoritative articles ever written by the most qualified of psychologists and psychiatrists on the subject of mental hygiene—if you were to combine them and refine them and cleave out the excess verbiage—if you were to take the whole of the meat and none of the parsley, and if you were to have these unadulterated bits of pure scientific knowledge concisely expressed by the most capable of living poets, you would have an awkward and incomplete summation of the Sermon on the Mount. And it would suffer immeasurably through comparison. For nearly two thousand years the Christian world has been holding in its hands the complete answer to its restless and fruitless yearnings. Here . . . rests the blueprint for successful human life with optimism, mental health, and contentment."9 C. S. Lewis writes: "The historical difficulty of giving for the life, sayings and influence of Jesus any explanation that is not harder than the Christian explanation is very great. The discrepancy between the depth and sanity . . . of His moral teaching and the rampant megalomania which must lie behind His theological teaching unless He is indeed God has never been satisfactorily explained. Hence the non-Christian hypotheses succeed one another with the restless fertility of bewilderment."10 Philip Schaff reasons: "Is such an intellect—clear as the sky, bracing as the mountain air, sharp and penetrating as a sword, thoroughly healthy and vigorous, always ready and always self-possessed—liable to a radical and most serious delusion concerning his own character and mission? Preposterous imagination!"6 WAS HE LORD? I cannot personally conclude that Jesus was a liar or a lunatic. The only other alternative is that he was the Christ, the Son of God, as he claimed. When I discuss this with most Jewish people, it's interesting how they respond. They usually tell me that Jesus was a moral, upright, religious leader, a good man, or some kind of prophet. I then share with them the claims Jesus made about himself and then the material in this chapter on the trilemma (liar, lunatic, or Lord). When I ask if they believe Jesus was a liar, there is a sharp "No!" Then I ask, "Do you believe he was a lunatic?" The reply is "Of course not." "Do you believe he is God?" Before I can get a breath in edgewise, there is a resounding "Absolutely not." Yet one has only so many choices. The issue with these three alternatives is not which is possible, for it is obvious that all three are possible. But rather, the question is "Which is more probable?" Who you decide Jesus Christ is must not be an idle intellectual exercise. You cannot put him on the shelf as a great moral teacher. That is not a valid option. He is either a liar, a lunatic, or Lord and God. You must make a choice. "But," as the Apostle John wrote, "these have been written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and"—more important—"that believing you might have life in His name" (John 20:31 ). The evidence is clearly in favor of Jesus as Lord. Some people, however, reject this clear evidence because of moral implications involved. They don't want to face up to the responsibility or implications of calling him Lord. (from More than a Carpenter) NOTES ON CHAPTER 2 1. C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity - online without restrictions (New York: The MacMillan Company, 1960), pp. 40-41. 2. F. J. A. Hort, Way, Truth, and the Life (New York: MacMillan and Co., 1894), p. 207. 3. Kenneth Scott Latourette, A History of Christianity (New York: Harper and Row, 1953), pp. 44, 48. 4. William E. Lecky, History of European Morals from Augustus to Charlemagne (New York: D. Appleton and Co., 1903), Vol. 2, pp. 8, 9. 5. Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1962). (Re-print from original 1910), p. 109 6. Philip Schaff, The Person of Christ (New York: American Tract Society, 1913), pp. 94-95; p. 97. 7. Arthur P. Noyes, and Lawrence C. Kolb, Modern Clinical Psychiatry (Philadelphia: Saunders, 1958). (5th ed.) 8. Clark H. Pinnock, Set Forth Your Case (New Jersey: The Craig Press, 1967), p. 62. 9. J. T. Fisher, and L. S. Hawley, A Few Buttons Missing (Philadelphia: Lippincott, 1951), p. 273. 10. C. S. Lewis, Miracles: A Preliminary Study (New York: The MacMillan Company, 1947), p. 113. Related Resources: Lewis' Trilemma - Lewis's trilemma is an apologetic argument traditionally used to argue for the divinity of Jesus by arguing that the only alternatives were that he was evil or deluded.[1] One version was popularised by University of Oxford literary scholar and writer C. S. Lewis in a BBC radio talk and in his writings. It is sometimes described as the "Lunatic, Liar, or Lord", or "Mad, Bad, or God" argument. It takes the form of a trilemma — a choice among three options, each of which is in some way difficult to accept. (Read more...) C S Lewis 1950 essay, What Are We to Make of Jesus? Mere Christianity (Wikipedia article) excerpt - Mere Christianity is a theological book by C. S. Lewis, adapted from a series of BBC radio talks made between 1941 and 1944,[2] while Lewis was at Oxford during the Second World War.[3] Considered a classic of Christian apologetics, the transcripts of the broadcasts originally appeared in print as three separate pamphlets: The Case for Christianity (Broadcast Talks in the UK) (1942), Christian Behaviour (1943), and Beyond Personality (1944).[4] See also Mere Christianity - online without restrictions or here. Josh McDowell's classic "More than a Carpenter" Mark 3:22 The scribes who came down from Jerusalem were saying, “He is possessed by Beelzebul,” and “He casts out the demons by the ruler of the demons.” NET Mark 3:22 The experts in the law who came down from Jerusalem said, "He is possessed by Beelzebul," and, "By the ruler of demons he casts out demons." GNT Mark 3:22 καὶ οἱ γραμματεῖς οἱ ἀπὸ Ἱεροσολύμων καταβάντες ἔλεγον ὅτι Βεελζεβοὺλ ἔχει καὶ ὅτι ἐν τῷ ἄρχοντι τῶν δαιμονίων ἐκβάλλει τὰ δαιμόνια. NLT Mark 3:22 But the teachers of religious law who had arrived from Jerusalem said, "He's possessed by Satan, the prince of demons. That's where he gets the power to cast out demons." KJV Mark 3:22 And the scribes which came down from Jerusalem said, He hath Beelzebub, and by the prince of the devils casteth he out devils. ESV Mark 3:22 And the scribes who came down from Jerusalem were saying, "He is possessed by Beelzebul," and "by the prince of demons he casts out the demons." NIV Mark 3:22 And the teachers of the law who came down from Jerusalem said, "He is possessed by Beelzebub! By the prince of demons he is driving out demons." ASV Mark 3:22 And the scribes that came down from Jerusalem said, He hath Beelzebub, and, By the prince of the demons casteth he out the demons. CSB Mark 3:22 The scribes who had come down from Jerusalem said, "He has Beelzebul in Him!" and, "He drives out demons by the ruler of the demons!" NKJ Mark 3:22 And the scribes who came down from Jerusalem said, "He has Beelzebub," and, "By the ruler of the demons He casts out demons." NRS Mark 3:22 And the scribes who came down from Jerusalem said, "He has Beelzebul, and by the ruler of the demons he casts out demons." YLT Mark 3:22 and the scribes who are from Jerusalem having come down, said -- 'He hath Beelzeboul,' and -- 'By the ruler of the demons he doth cast out the demons.' NAB Mark 3:22 The scribes who had come from Jerusalem said, "He is possessed by Beelzebul," and "By the prince of demons he drives out demons." NJB Mark 3:22 The scribes who had come down from Jerusalem were saying, 'Beelzebul is in him,' and, 'It is through the prince of devils that he drives devils out.' GWN Mark 3:22 The scribes who had come from Jerusalem said, "Beelzebul is in him," and "He forces demons out of people with the help of the ruler of demons." BBE Mark 3:22 And the scribes who came down from Jerusalem, said, He has Beelzebub, and, By the ruler of evil spirits he sends evil spirits out of men. scribes who came: Mk 7:1 Mt 15:1 Lu 5:17 He is possessed: Ps 22:6 Mt 9:34 10:25 12:24 Lu 11:15 Joh 7:20 8:48,52 10:22 Mark 3 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries CHRIST CHARGED WITH COLLUSION! Collusion is an agreement between two or more parties, sometimes illegal and therefore secretive and often for a deceitful purpose. Now the scribes accuse Jesus of being in collusion with Satan, Beelzebul! So first His family attacks His sanity (Mk 3:20-21, 31) and now His enemies attack His spirituality! First friends said He was "mad" and then foes said He was bad! But as