Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - Mark 3:20 - 3:20
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
,[73] 21
[73] Before καὶ ἔρχονται εἰς οἶκον would be the place where Mark, if he had desired to take in the Sermon on the Mount, would have inserted it; and Ewald (as also Tobler, die Evangelienfrage, 1858, p. 14) assumes that the Gospel in its original form had actually contained that discourse, although abridged, in this place,—which Weiss (Evangelienfrage, p. 154 f.) concedes, laying decided stress on the abridgment on the ground of other abridged discourses in Mark. Nevertheless, the abrupt and unconnected mode of adding one account to another, as here by the καὶ ἔρχονται εἰς οἶκον , as well as the omission of longer discourses, are peculiar to Mark and in keeping with the originality of his work; further, it would be quite impossible to see why the discourse, if it had originally a place here, should have been entirely removed, whether we may conceive for ourselves its original contents and compass in the main according to Matthew or according to Luke. Ewald’s view has, however, been followed by Holtzmann, whom Weiss, in the Jahrb. f. Deutsche Theol. 1864, p. 63 ff., and Weizsäcker, p. 46, with reason oppose, while Schenkel also regards the dropping out as probable, although as unintentional.—In respect of the absence from Mark of the history of the centurion at Capernaum (Mat_8:5 ff.; Luk_7:1 ff.), the non-insertion of which Köstlin is only able to conceive of as arising from the neutral tendency of Mark, Ewald supposes that it originally stood in Mark likewise before καὶ ἔρχονται εἰς οἶκον , and that in Matthew and Luke it still has the tinge of Mark’s language, in which respect ἱκανός and σκύλλειν are referred to (but comp. Mat_3:11; Mat_9:36; Luk_3:16; Luk_8:49). Weiss, p. 161, finds the hypothesis of Ewald confirmed by the affinity of that history, with the narrative of the Canaanitish woman, Mar_7:24 ff. Holtzmann appropriates the reasons of Ewald and Weiss; they are insufficient of themselves, and fall with the alleged disappearance of the Sermon on the Mount.
Mar_3:20,[74] 21. Peculiar to Mark, but in unity of connection with Mar_3:22 f.
καὶ ἔρχ . εἰς οἶκον ] The choice of the disciples, and what had to be said to them concerning it, was the important occasion for the preceding ascent of the mountain, Mar_3:13. Now they come back again to the house, namely, in Capernaum, as in Mar_2:2, to which also the subsequent πάλιν points back. De Wette is in error when he says that the following scene could by no means have taken place in the house. See, on the other hand, Mar_3:31 and Mat_12:46. Hilgenfeld finds in εἰς οἶκον even a misunderstanding of Mat_13:1.
The accusation ὅτι ἐξέστη , Mar_3:21, and that expressed at Mar_3:22, ὅτι Βεελζεβοὺλ ἔχει , are analogous; and these accusations are the significant elements in Mark,[75] with whom Mar_3:22 still lacks the special historical information that is furnished by Mat_12:22 f. (comp. Mar_9:33 f.); Luk_11:14. In the connection of Mark alone the retrospective reference to Mar_3:10-12 is sufficient; hence it is not to be supposed that in the primitive-Mark that cure of demoniacs given by Matthew and Luke must also have had a place (Holtzmann). See, moreover, Weiss, l.c. p. 80 ff. Mark, however, does not represent the mother and the brethren as “confederates of the Pharisees” (Baur, Markusevang. p. 23); their opinion ὅτι ἐξέστη is an error (not malicious), and their purpose is that of care for the security of Jesus.
αὐτούς ] He and His disciples.
μηδέ ] not even, to say nothing of being left otherwise undisturbed. Comp. Mar_2:2. According to Strauss, indeed, this is a “palpable exaggeration.”
ἀκούσαντες ] that He was again set upon by the multitude to such a degree, and was occupying Himself so excessively with them (with the healing of their demoniacs, Mar_3:22, and so on).
οἱ παρʼ αὐτοῦ ] those on His side, i.e. His own people. Comp. Xen. Anab. vi. 6. 24; Cyrop. vi. 2. 1; Polyb. xxiii. 1. 6; 1Ma_9:44. See Bernhardy, p. 256. By this, however, the disciples cannot here be meant, as they are in the house with Jesus, Mar_3:20; but only, as is clearly proved by Mar_3:31-32, His mother, His brethren, His sisters.
ἐξῆλθον ] namely, not from a place in Capernaum (in opposition to Mar_3:20), but from the place where they were sojourning, from Nazareth. Comp. Mar_1:9, Mar_6:3. It is not to be objected that the intelligence of the presence and action of Jesus in Capernaum could not have come to Nazareth so quickly, and that the family could not have come so quickly to Capernaum, as to admit of the latter being already there, after the reprimand of the scribes, Mar_3:23-30; for Mark does not say that that ἐξῆλθον , and the coming down of the scribes from Jerusalem, and the arrival of the mother, etc., happened on the same day whereon Jesus and the disciples had returned εἰς οἶκον . On the contrary, that intelligence arrived at Nazareth, where His relatives were setting out, etc.; but from Jerusalem there had already—when Jesus had returned to Capernaum and was there so devoting Himself beyond measure to the people—come down scribes, and these said, etc. This scene, therefore, with the scribes who had come down was before the arrival of the relatives of Jesus had taken place.
κρατῆσαι αὐτόν ] to lay hold upon Him, to possess themselves of Him. Comp. Mar_6:17, Mar_12:12, Mar_14:1; Mat_26:4; Jdg_16:21; Tob_6:3; Polyb. viii. 20. 8, al.
ἔλεγον ] namely, οἱ παρʼ αὐτοῦ . After ἐξῆλθον it is arbitrary to supply, with others (including Ewald): people said, which Olshausen even refers to “the malicious Pharisees.” So also Paulus, while Bengel thinks of messengers. Let it be observed that ἔλεγον , Mar_3:21, and ἔλεγον , Mar_3:22, correspond to one another, and that therefore, as in Mar_3:22, so also in Mar_3:21 there is the less reason to think of another subject than that which stands there.
ἐξέστη ] He is out of his mind, has become frantic; 2Co_5:13; Arist. H. A. vi. 22: ἐξίσταται καὶ μαίνεται , and see Wetstein. Comp. Xen. Mem. i. 3. 12 : τοῦ φρονεῖν ἐξίστησιν . This strong meaning (erroneously rendered, however, by Luther: He will go out of his mind) is contestably required by the forcible κρατῆσαι , as well as by the subsequent still stronger analogous expression Βεελζεβοὺλ ἔχει . Hence it is not to be explained of a swoon or the like, but is rightly rendered by the Vulgate: in furorem versus est. To the relatives of Jesus, at that time still (Joh_7:3) unbelieving (according to Mark, even to Mary, which certainly does not agree with the preliminary history in Matthew and Luke[76]), the extraordinary teaching and working of Jesus, far transcending their sphere of vision, producing such a profound excitement among all the people, and which they knew not how to reconcile with His domestic antecedents, were the eccentric activity of the phrenzy which had taken possession of Him. Comp. Theophylact (who regards ἘΞΈΣΤΗ as directly equivalent to ΔΑΊΜΟΝΑ ἜΧΕΙ ), Erasmus, Beza, Calvin, Maldonatus, Jansen, and others, including Fritzsche, de Wette, Bleek (according to whom they considered Him as “at the least an enthusiast”), Holtzmann, Weizsäcker, et al. The omission of the surprising historical trait in Matthew and Luke betrays a later sifting process.
[74] Before καὶ ἔρχονται εἰς οἶκον would be the place where Mark, if he had desired to take in the Sermon on the Mount, would have inserted it; and Ewald (as also Tobler, die Evangelienfrage, 1858, p. 14) assumes that the Gospel in its original form had actually contained that discourse, although abridged, in this place,—which Weiss (Evangelienfrage, p. 154 f.) concedes, laying decided stress on the abridgment on the ground of other abridged discourses in Mark. Nevertheless, the abrupt and unconnected mode of adding one account to another, as here by the καὶ ἔρχονται εἰς οἶκον , as well as the omission of longer discourses, are peculiar to Mark and in keeping with the originality of his work; further, it would be quite impossible to see why the discourse, if it had originally a place here, should have been entirely removed, whether we may conceive for ourselves its original contents and compass in the main according to Matthew or according to Luke. Ewald’s view has, however, been followed by Holtzmann, whom Weiss, in the Jahrb. f. Deutsche Theol. 1864, p. 63 ff., and Weizsäcker, p. 46, with reason oppose, while Schenkel also regards the dropping out as probable, although as unintentional.—In respect of the absence from Mark of the history of the centurion at Capernaum (Mat_8:5 ff.; Luk_7:1 ff.), the non-insertion of which Köstlin is only able to conceive of as arising from the neutral tendency of Mark, Ewald supposes that it originally stood in Mark likewise before καὶ ἔρχονται εἰς οἶκον , and that in Matthew and Luke it still has the tinge of Mark’s language, in which respect ἱκανός and σκύλλειν are referred to (but comp. Mat_3:11; Mat_9:36; Luk_3:16; Luk_8:49). Weiss, p. 161, finds the hypothesis of Ewald confirmed by the affinity of that history, with the narrative of the Canaanitish woman, Mar_7:24 ff. Holtzmann appropriates the reasons of Ewald and Weiss; they are insufficient of themselves, and fall with the alleged disappearance of the Sermon on the Mount.
[75] It is a hasty and unwarranted judgment that vv. 21, 22 appear in Mark as quite “misplaced,” and find a much better place just before ver. 31 (so Weiss, Evangelienfr. p. 162).
[76] It is entirely arbitrary for Theophylact, Beza, Maldonatus, Bisping, and others to desire to exclude Mary from sharing in the judgment ὅτι ἐξέστη . No better is the evasion in Olshausen, of a moment of weakness and of struggling faith. Similarly Lange finds here a moment of eclipse in the life of Mary, arising out of anxiety for her Son. If her Son had already been to her the Messiah, how should she not have found in His marvellous working the very confirmation of her faith in Him, and the begun fulfilment of the promises which had once been so definitely made to her!
REMARKS.
To get rid of this simple meaning of Mar_3:21, placed beyond doubt by the clear words, expositors have tried very varied expedients. Thus Euthymius Zigabenus, who in other respects is right in his explanation, arbitrarily suggests for the ἔλεγον the subject τινὲς φθονεροί , and adduces, even in his day, two other but unsuitable explanations.[77] According to Schoettgen and Wolf, the disciples ( οἱ παρʼ αὐτοῦ ) heard that so many people were outside, and went forth to restrain the multitude, and said: the people are frantic! According to Griesbach and Vater, the disciples likewise went forth after having heard that Jesus was teaching the people outside, and wished to bring Jesus in, for people were saying: “nimia eum omnium virium contentione debilitatum velut insanire!” According to Grotius, the relatives of Jesus also dwelt at Capernaum (which, moreover, Ewald, Lange, Bleek, and others suppose, although Mark has not at all any notice like Mat_4:13); they come out of their house, and wish to carry Jesus away from the house, where He was so greatly thronged, for the report[78] had spread abroad ( ἔλεγον γάρ ) that He had fainted (according to Ewald, Gesch. Chr. p. 334: “had fallen into a phrenzy from exhaustion”). According to Kuinoel, it is likewise obvious of itself that Jesus has left the house again and is teaching outside; while the mother and the brethren who are at home also go forth, in order to bring Jesus in to eat, and they say, with the view of pressing back the people: maxime defatigatus est! Comp. Köster, Imman. p. 185, according to whom they wish to hold Him on account of faintness. So again Linder in the Stud. u. Krit. 1862, p. 556. According to Ebrard, § 70, notwithstanding the εἰς οἶκον and the πάλιν , Jesus is not in Capernaum, but at the house of a host; and in spite of Mar_3:31-32, οἱ παρʼ αὐτοῦ are the people in this lodging,[79] who think, as they hear Him so zealously teaching (?), that He is out of His mind, and go out to seize upon Him, but are at once convinced of their error! According to Ammon, L. J. II. p. 155, the people have gathered together round His dwelling, while He is sitting at meat; He hastens into the midst of the people, but is extricated by His friends out of the throng, because in their opinion He has fallen into a faint. Lange, L. J. II. 2, p. 834, takes ἐξέστη rightly, but regards it as the presupposition of the popular judgment, into which the kinsfolk of Jesus had with politic prudence entered, in order on this pretext to rescue Him from the momentary danger, because they believed that He did not sufficiently estimate this danger (namely, of having broken with the hierarchical party). In this way we may read everything, on which the matter is to depend, between the lines. Schenkel also reads between the lines, that the relatives of Jesus had been persuaded on the part of His enemies that He Himself was a person possessed. It is aptly observed by Maldonatus: “Hunc locum difficiliorem pietas facit …; pio quodam studio nonnulli rejecta verborum proprietate alias, quae minus a pietate abhorrere viderentur, interpretationes quaesiverunt. Nescio an, dum pias quaererent, falsas invenerint.” According to Köstlin, p. 342, has, “after the manner of later pragmatists,” taken the ἔλεγον ὅτι ἐξέστη , which originally had the less exceptionable sense of enthusiasm, as a malicious calumny. Thus, indeed, what appears offensive is easily set aside and laid upon the compiler, as is done, moreover, in another way by Baur, Evang. p. 559.
[77] 1. ἐξῆλθον οἱ οἰκεῖοι αὐτοῦ κρατῆσαι αὐτὸν , ἵνα μὴ ὑποχωρήσῃ , ἔλεγον γάρ τινες , ὅτι ἐξέστη , ἤγουν ἀπέστη ἀπʼ αὐτῶν διὰ τὸν ὄχλον . 2. ἐξῆλθον … παραβοηθῆσαι , ἔλεγον γὰρ , ὅτι … παρελύθη τὸν τόνον τοῦ σώματος , ἄγαν κοπιάσας .
[78] Even Schleiermacher (L. J. p. (190 f.) presents the matter as if they had learnt by rumour that He was in an unsettled condition, and that they thought it better to detain Him ( κρατεῖν ) in domestic life.
[79] Kahnis (Dogm. I. p. 428 f.) also explains it of the hosts and disciples (not of the mother and the brethren). He thinks that they wished to bring Him into the house by saying that He was in the ecstatic state like the prophets.