Lange Commentary - Mark 3:20 - 3:35

Online Resource Library

Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | Download

Lange Commentary - Mark 3:20 - 3:35


(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)

This Chapter Verse Commentaries:

1. Conflict of Jesus with the blaspheming Unbelief of His Enemies, and His Triumph over Human Wisdom . (Mar_3:20-30.)

2. His Conflict with the well-meaning Unbelief of His Friends; Triumph over Devilish Malice and Human Policy. (Mar_3:20-21, and Mar_3:31-35.)

(Parallels: Mat_12:22-50; Luk_8:19-21; Luk_11:14-26)

20And the multitude cometh together again, so that they could not so much as eat bread. 21And when his friends heard of it, they went out to lay hold on him: for they said, He is beside himself. 22And the scribes which came down from Jerusalem said, He hath Beelzebub, and by the prince of the devils casteth he out devils. 23And he called them unto him, and said unto them in parables, How can Satan cast out Satan? 24And if a kingdom be divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. 25And if a house be divided against itself, that house cannot stand. 26And if Satan rise up against himself, and be divided, he cannot stand, but hath an end. 27No man can enter into a strong man’s house, and spoil [plunder] his goods, except he will first bind the strong man; and then he will spoil [plunder] his house. 28Verily I say unto you, All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme: 29But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of [liable to] eternal damnation: 30Because they said, He hath an un cleanspirit. 31There came then his brethren, and his mother, and, standing without, sent unto him, calling him. 32And the multitude sat about him, and they said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren without seek for thee. 33And he answered them, saying, Who is my mother, or my brethren? 34And he looked round about on them which sat about him, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren! 35For whosoever shall do the will of God, the same is my brother, and my sister, and mother.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

See on the parallels.

Mar_3:21. When His (friends).—This very important feature in the evangelical narrative is peculiar to Mark. According to Baur, Mark here represents the mother of Jesus, with His brethren, as confederate with the Pharisees. Meyer, on the contrary, shows that their opinion, ὅôé ἐîÝóôé , was honest error (not wickedness), and that their design was to provide for Christ’s safety. But if they really had thought Him beside Himself, their care for his safety would have taken the form of an attempt forcibly to seize and detain Him. We regard the step as having been the result of timid policy. At the crisis, when Christ’s breach with the powerful party of the Pharisees was decided, they sought by a fiction to remove Him from publicity and a supposed extreme danger. We may regard the adoptive brethren of Jesus as the representatives of this idea; but it is evident that Mary also was drawn into this error of worldly policy (see the notes on Matthew). It is quite in keeping with the character of such a policy, that these brethren soon afterwards sought to thrust Him forward, Joh_7:1 seq.—The household of Jesus did not come from Nazareth to Capernaum, as Meyer supposes, but from the house of their abode in Capernaum to the place where the crowds were thronging Him. That the Pharisees would here come against him with a public accusation would very well be known in Capernaum.—For they said.—Themselves, of course, the household of Jesus; and not, as Olshausen thinks, “it was said” by the malicious Pharisees, or by others generally (Ewald), or by messengers (Bengel).—He is beside Himself.—Not, as Luther says, “He will be beside Himself;” but not, with Meyer, “He is mad.” It is designedly ambiguous, inasmuch as the ἐîÝóôç may mean, in a good sense, the being for a season rapt into ecstasy by religious enthusiasm (2Co_5:13), as well as, in a bad sense, the being permanently insanc. In His ecstasy, He is no longer master of Himself. The involuntary, religious ìáßíåóèáé is, indeed, not an Old-Testament idea, but a Greek one: it was, however, current in the Jewish popular notion; and the more ambiguous it was, the better it would suit the aim of their policy. It must not be confounded, as Theophylact confounds it, with the allegation of Christ’s opponents. On the contrary, if His opponents should say that He was raging in demoniacal possession, the politic answer was at hand, “He is, indeed, beside Himself, but it is in a good demoniacal ecstasy.” According to Meyer, this circumstance cannot be reconciled with the previous history of Mary in Matthew and Luke. The supposition of Olshausen (and Lange), that this was a moment of weakness in her life, he thinks very precarious. And Pius IX. would agree with him, though for a different reason. For the various interpretations of the passage, see Meyer. Euthym. Zigab.: “Some envious ones said so.” Schöttgen and Wolf: “The disciples said that the people were mad.” Grotius: “Report said that he had fainted.” Kuinoel: “It was the message to come home to eat, for maxime defatigatus est,” etc.

Mar_3:30. An unclean spirit.—Characterization of Beelzebub, in opposition to the Holy Spirit.

Mar_3:34. And He looked round about.—Mark often gives prominence to the Lord’s glance around. Here it is in contrast with the indignant looking around of Mar_3:5.

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. See on the parallels.—Mark omits, among other things, to give us the immediate occasion of the main matter of the section,—the healing of the demoniac. The reason that his friends came out to Him as they did seems to have lain in the thronging of the crowds, and in the fact that there was no room to eat. These facts, however, furnished them with a pretext for rescuing Him from the hands of His enemies, whose designs and power they well knew John came not eating and drinking, and they said He hath a devil. Spirit-like oblivion of the body and of its nourishment, they interpreted as involuntary demoniac enthusiasm. Thus did it seem to be with the Lord at this time; and using this representation, his family went out to gain their object.

2. The choice of the Twelve was soon followed by this erring conduct of His own friends towards Him, several of the Twelve being among them. These, therefore, mistook their vocation, in the same manner as Peter and the sons of Zebedee mistook theirs on another occasion. The new impulse given to the Lord’s cause, and the new step it had taken, is followed by a new defeat and counter-stroke. As soon as He takes assistants to Himself, they aim to infuse earthly policy into His plans.

3. The worst manifestation of the kingdom of evil is the blasphemy with which hypocrites, unconsciously standing in the service of darkness, interpret the most glorious manifestations of the kingdom of heaven as works from below. The blasphemy against the Son of God, as approximating to the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, is the most fearful display of the power of the arch-blasphemer.

4. While the pictorial vividness of the Evangelist is observable throughout the whole of the conflict which he depicts, he, however, omits the sign of Jonas, the statement concerning possession by seven devils, and the like.

5. And looking round.—Jesus, in His conflict with His enemies and the dark kingdom which they serve, does not trust to men, but does trust to His own influence on mankind; that is, he does not confide in His own friends, so far as they would dictate to Him with carnal policy as his natural family; but to His friends as they trustingly hang upon His lips as his spiritual family.

6. Christ’s defence becomes immediately an attack. Earnest apologetics pass over into polemics.

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

See on the parallels.—No room to eat. How often did the Lord, in the zeal of His vocation, forget eating and drinking and sleep!—The highest freedom of spirit and self-government are interpreted even by His people as bondage and being beside self.—How much to be reprobated is an ambiguous and feigned adoption of the notions of the enemies of truth, on the part of those who would represent the truth!—The concessions of carnal ecclesiastical policy to the unfriendly world always spring from evil.—The sound concession is the infinite forbearance with which Christ enters into the notions of His opponents to refute their assertions.—Christ exalted equally above the protection of His friends and the attacks of His foes.—Contrast between the Lord’s great conflict with His opponents and his disciples’ slight assistance: 1. Contrast in temper: heroic reliance in divine truth; petty trust in human cunning. 2. Contrast in the conflict itself: simple defence and simple attack; ambiguous apology and mediation. 3. Contrast in the result: high victory; deep humiliation.—The false and the true family of Jesus: 1. The one would watch over Him and His cause, the other will be watched over by Him; 2. the one would lead Him, the other will be led by Him; 3. the one would save Him, the other will be saved by Him; 4. the one would restrain and bring Him into danger, the other will be restrained and bound by His word and Spirit.—The Lord detects and cuts asunder the bands of perilous fellowship between His friends and His enemies: 1. He detects them: worldliness in religion, fear, cunning, and policy; 2. He cuts them asunder by the word of severance, by warning, and by blessing.—The divine dignity of our Lord in the decisive conflicts of His kingdom: 1. As opposed to His enemies, the instruments of darkness; 2. as opposed to His family, as they are confused by the apparent danger of His cause; 3. as opposed to His Church, which hangs upon His lips with child-like simplicity, not suspecting its danger.—Christ says to His people, in the days of apparent peril to religion: My thoughts are not your thoughts; neither are My ways your ways.—Christ’s defence is, in its own nature, also a victorious attack.—Blasphemy against the Spirit is eternal guilt, and therefore exposed to eternal condemnation.—The calm declaration of Christ, that He wrought in the power of the Holy Spirit, in opposition to His blaspheming enemies, who charged him with being possessed by the spirit of darkness and working under his influence.—Maintenance of this opposition: 1. Divine repose against devilish excitement; 2. divine forbearance against devilish hatred; 3. divine illumination against devilish confusion.

Starke:—Canstein:—If Christ endures, the Christian Church endures.—Zeisius:—The devil never gives up the work that his name imports—slandering the good; nor do those who are on his side, Joh_8:44.—Quesnel:—We must strive to preserve our honorable name, so long as it is possible.—It is awful to ascribe to the devil that which comes from God. Thus God is made into Satan:—The Creator endures this blasphemy, in His patience and long-suffering, and men will endure nothing. We should be imitators of God.—Wolf does not eat wolf, nor does Satan drive out Satan.—Satan does not persecute Satan, yet Christians persecute Christians. O fearful wickedness!—Rebellion and insurrection are destructive and ruinous.—When once the devil is master of any heart, none but Jesus Christ can drive him out.—Cramer:—Children must honor their parents; but in matters that pertain to office, and the things of God and conscience, they should not be overruled by any.—There is no carnal prerogative in the kingdom of God.—Quesnel:—Ha who doeth the will of God to the end enters into an eternal alliance with God as his Father, with Jesus Christ as his brother, with the angels and saints as his sisters, and with the heavenly Jerusalem as his mother.—Gerlach: According to Mark, Jesus distinguishes general blasphemy against God from the particular blasphemy against the Holy Spirit; according to Matthew and Luke, He distinguishes from it also the blasphemy against the Son of Man: in both cases there is the contrast between a revelation which has been more external, and one which has seized the inner man with more convincing divine power.—He that doeth the will of God:” He means thereby faith, which is the fount and beginning of all holy obedience.—Braune: We must watch over zeal, as over fire in a house. But that cold moderation which the world loves so well is most offensive to Christ, who will spue the lukewarm out of His mouth, Rev_3:16. This is our Lord’s official fidelity.—In the presence of this blaspheming malignity, the Redeemer exhibits a simplicity, a security, a freedom from all bitterness, Which must have produced a sacred impression upon all who beheld, even as upon us now.—It is in the Spirit of God that Jesus overcomes Satan.—Schleiermacher (on the words, He is beside Himself):—So those have always been accounted whom God in hard times has chosen for His special instruments: it was in the time of the Church’s Reformation, and it will always be so again when times of darkness shall return.—There have never been wanting such enemies of the truth, who have similarly sought to put another character upon that one only institute for human salvation which can never find a substitute. But, as in the text, their efforts are always vain.—How far blind and rash zeal may lead men!—“He that gathereth not with Me, scattereth.”—“He that for My sake forsaketh not father and mother is not worthy of Me.”—Christ on the cross: “Behold thy son ! Behold thy Mother!”—There should be, then, no conflict between our natural and spiritual relationships.—All the household must be members of the one same family.

Footnotes:

Mar_3:28.—The words ôïῖò õἱïῖò ôῶí ἀíèñþðùí precede ôὰ ἁìáñôÞìáôá in the best Codd.; and so they are placed in Griesbach, Lachmann, Tischendorf. B., D., G., Lachmann, and Tischendorf read ὅóá , instead of ὅóáò .

Mar_3:29.—The reading ἔíï÷üò ἐóôéí áἰùíßïõ ἁìáñôÞìáôïò , according to B., L., Ä ., and others, is accepted by Griesbach, Lachmann, and Tischendorf. The readings êñßóåùò and êïëÜóåùò seem to have been explanatory paraphrases of this strong and pregnant expression.

Mar_3:32.—“His mother and His brethren” is the reading of B., C., D., G., Versions, Griesbach, Scholz, Lachmann; better established than the order in the Recepta, “His brethren and His mother,” which is also adopted by Fritzsche and Tischendorf. Meyer holds to this last, thinking that the mother was afterwards put first on account of her rank, and in conformity with the parallels in Matthew and Luke. It may have been the purpose to make the mother less prominent, in a case of seeming error. An additional clause, êáὶ áἱ ἀäåëöáß óïõ , has A., D., E., &c., for it; B., C., L., and many Versions against it. Griesbach, Lachmann, Tischendorf accept it; so also De Wette and Meyer. We think the omission harder to account for than the insertion would be,—which probably had reference to Mar_6:3.

Mar_3:33.—B., C., L., Versions, Lachmann, and Meyer read êáὶ ïἱ , instead of ἤ ïἱ .

Mar_3:35.—The ìïõ after ἀäåëöÞ is omitted by Lachmann and Tischendorf, following preponderating authorities.

Namely, that he was in league with the demons.—Ed.