41-Mark Commentary - Sorenson

THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO
ST. MARK
Introduction to the Gospel of Mark: The Gospel Accord-
ing to Saint Mark was written by John Mark. It is thought that
he was a nephew of Barnabas. He also traveled with Paul for a
season and is mentioned in a number of places in the New Test-
ament Acts 12:12,25; 15:37,39; Colossians 4:10, II Timothy
4:11, and Philemon 24.
Mark may be considered a condensed version of Matthew
though the very Jewish character of Matthew is not evident in
Mark. The Gospel seems to focus on Christ’s ministry as ‘the
servant of God.’ Mark provides no genealogy of Christ. Though
the smallest of the gospels, he presents details not found in the
others. The narrative begins with the ministry of John the Bap-
tist and ends with comments of Jesus not found elsewhere.
*****
Overview of Mark 1: The first chapter of Mark presents a

summary of a number of significant events in our Lord’s early
ministry. It begins with a synopsis of John’s ministry followed
by the baptism of Jesus. Mark here briefly touches upon the time
of Jesus’ temptation. The sacred writer then moves quickly
through the call of Peter, Andrew, James, and John. He contin-
ues recording the casting out of demons at Capernaum, the
329
330 Understanding Mark
healing of Simon’s mother-in-law, and more demons being cast
out. The chapter ends with Jesus preaching in Galilee and heal-
ing a leper.
1:1 Mark begins the book with the succinct introduction,

The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.
This is one of several ‘beginnings’ mentioned in the Bible. In
this case, it is of the ministry of our Lord. Mark so refers to it as
“the gospel of Jesus Christ.” The word translated as gospel (eu-
aggelion evanggelion) literally means ‘good news.’
1:2 He thence quotes from both Isaiah 40:3 and Malachi

3:1, As it is written in the prophets, Behold, I send my
messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way
before thee. Mark clearly will apply this prophecy of the fore-
runner of Christ to John the Baptist.
1:3 John Mark continues by quoting further from Isaiah

40:3, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye
the way of the Lord, make his paths straight. The application
again clearly is of John. As will be noted in the following verse,
his ministry began in the wilderness and was in preparation for
the impending ministry of Jesus. The word translated as
straight (euyuv euthus) means to be ‘straight,’ ‘level,’ or ‘true.’
John’s ministry was as a spiritual road builder—to make a
straight and level way for the coming Messiah. His ministry was
thus in preparing the way for the ministry of the Messiah about
to arrive on the scene.
1:4 The gospel writer thus summarizes John’s ministry

accordingly. John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach
the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins. It is
noteworthy that John’s ministry was Jewish in nature and prep-
aratory to Christ’s ministry. His preaching was to Jews in prep-
Understanding Mark 331
aration for the appearance of their King and His kingdom. He
therefore preached the baptism of repentance. John’s baptism
was not repentance of itself, but a symbol thereof after the fact.
It was an outward expression of the internal spirit of repentance.
It was a public identification with John and his message of re-
pentance. Thus, the recipient of his baptism was openly admit-
ting his or her repentance in preparation for the Messiah’s
appearance. Of further note is the word translated as for (eiv
eis). It most literally means ‘into’ or ‘unto.’ John’s baptism was
unto the remission of sins. His baptism did not remit (forgive)
sins. Rather, it indicated repentance on the part of the one being
baptized and thus was a step toward forgiveness which only
God can grant. Even as John’s ministry was in preparation of
Christ, his baptism was in preparation for forgiveness based
upon repentance.
1:5 Accordingly, there went out unto him all the land of
Judaea, and they of Jerusalem, and were all baptized of him
in the river of Jordan, confessing their sins. The thought is
not that every single person in the Judaea and Jerusalem went
out to John; but rather that people from all over that region came
to him. The word translated as confessing (exomologew ex-
omologeo) has the idea of ‘acknowledging.’ It is likely that
those coming to John did not confess their sins to him person-
ally, but rather acknowledged their sinful condition and need of
repentance.
1:6 Mark further records, And John was clothed with

camel’s hair, and with a girdle of a skin about his loins; and
he did eat locusts and wild honey. John lived an austere and
simple life. Clothing of camel hair was a coarse fabric which he
overlaid with a wide leathern belt. His food was simple and may
have been foraged from the land. Though not a western del-
icacy, locusts were considered palatable and nutritious. He
evidently had a source of wild honey to supplement his diet.
John’s appearance and life-style certainly were rustic and rural
compared to the urbane, civilized, and cosmopolitan living of
Jerusalem. For some, this may have added credence to him be-
ing a prophet after the order or Elijah.
1:7-8 In addition, His message was: There cometh one

mightier than I after me, the latchet of whose shoes I am not
worthy to stoop down and unloose. John knew he was the
forerunner of the Messiah. He knew of his relative insignif-
icance compared to the looming shadow of the coming One. His
reference to the latchet of his shoes is instructive. The word so
translated (imav himas) refers to the leather thongs of the
sandals of the day. It was customary for a servant or slave to
undo the thongs of his master’s sandals upon arrival. John
considered himself unworthy of even such a menial task for
Him who was coming. The statement not only revealed the
humility of John, but more importantly, it magnified the stature
of Christ.
He further exalted Him by proclaiming, 8 I indeed have
baptized you with water: but he shall baptize you with the
Holy Ghost. John immersed his followers in water. However,
He of whom he spoke (Christ) would in due season baptize
(immerse) in the Holy Spirit. The words translated as with
(both in regard to water and the Holy Spirit) is (en) en and most
frequently is translated as ‘in.’ Even as John immersed people
in water, Jesus would immerse them in the Holy Spirit. This
came to pass initially at Pentecost.
The baptism of the Spirit however is not be confused with
the filling of the Spirit and has nothing to do with charismatic
‘gifts.’ It rather refers to believers being immersed (placed) into
the body of Christ by the Holy Spirit. See I Corinthians 12:13
and notes thereto. John’s message to that degree was therefore
prophetic.
1:9 Mark moves on therefore to record the baptism of
Jesus. And it came to pass in those days, that Jesus came
from Nazareth of Galilee, and was baptized of John in
Jordan. Further detail is given in Matthew 3:13-17, which see.
The significance of Jesus’ baptism was to “fulfill all right-
eousness.” He was baptized primarily as an example for us. He
was—so should we. He publicly identified Himself with John’s
message of repentance and Messianic appearance. It should not
in anyway be construed that Jesus had sin of which to repent.
Rather, He, in so being baptized, validated the authority of
John’s ministry and message.
The word translated as baptized (baptizw baptidzo)
literally means to ‘immerse.’ Lest there be further question
thereto, the Holy Spirit so inspired Mark to record circum-
stantial evidence thereof. Verse 9 made note how Jesus was
baptized “in Jordan.” In verse 10, we read how he was “straight-
way coming up out of the water.” Why would one need go down
into a river and then come up out of the water if the mode of
baptism was sprinkling? The circumstantial evidence is
powerful. The etymology of the word baptidzo settles it. It
derives from a simpler word (baptw) bapto which meant to
‘dye.’ One does not dye a garment by sprinkling dye thereon.
Rather, it is immersed into the dye.
1:10 And straightway coming up out of the water, he

saw the heavens opened, and the Spirit like a dove descend-
ing upon him. As John finished baptizing Jesus, “he saw the
heavens opened, and the Spirit like a dove descending upon
him.” The word translated as opened (scizw schizo) has the
idea of being ‘divided’ or ‘rent.’ Evidently, the sky above parted
and the Spirit descended. It is significant that the Holy Spirit did
not descend as a dove, but like a dove. That is, His descent
fluttered down upon Jesus. The Holy Spirit is a spirit. When
Jesus was baptized, God gave a special unction (fullness) of His
Spirit upon His incarnate Son. Jesus’ earthy ministry in His
human body would thence onward be in the power of the Holy
Spirit. Though He was God the Son in human form, His
ministry would be empowered by the Holy Spirit.
1:11 As Jesus’ earthly ministry was about to commence,

His heavenly Father announced His approval and delight in His
Son. And there came a voice from heaven, saying, Thou art
my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. God was not just
content with Jesus’ incarnation and impending ministry, but
“well pleased.” He understood the willing obedience of His Son
and the work He was about to commence. As the ultimate
Father, He was totally pleased in His Son’s person and work.
1:12-13 After Jesus’ baptism, immediately the Spirit

driveth him into the wilderness. The word translated as
driveth (ekballw ekballo) also has the idea of being sent
away. The Holy Spirit thus constrained Jesus to go into the
nearby Judean desert.
The text records, 13 And he was there in the wilderness
forty days, tempted of Satan; and was with the wild beasts.
Mark gives no details of Jesus’ temptation, only mentioning its
occurrence. For further information, see Matthew 4:1-11 and
Luke 4:3-13. Mark’s comment of Him being with the wild
beasts paints a human touch. Jesus spent those forty nights with
the wild life of the region which very well may have included
wolves, boars, jackals, and mountain lions. That is not to men-
tion such nasty smaller creatures as venomous snakes and in-
sects like scorpions. He truly was tempted in all points like as
we are. Many of God’s people down through the ages have
faced nights alone in isolation, danger, and fear. Notwithstand-
ing, God’s mercy abounded as “angels ministered unto him.”
As promised in Psalm 91:11, God did give His angels charge
over Him notwithstanding Satan’s misappropriation and
distorted quote thereof. That blessed promise remains for God’s
people to this day.
1:14-15 Mark swiftly shifts the focus to the genesis of

Jesus’ ministry. Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus
came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of
God. He notes in passing that John by now had been impris-
oned. See further details thereto in Matthew 14:8. It is of not that
Jesus’ initial message was of the “gospel of the kingdom.” That
should not be confused with the gospel of salvation. The gospel
of the kingdom was the good news that the long-promised king-
dom of Israel was about to be restored and that Israel’s Messiah-
King was at hand.
It is helpful to recall the historical and political context in
which this message was delivered. Israel had not been a sover-
eign nation since the time of Daniel. It had been under the heel
of various, gentile nations ever since. The current occupation
forces of Rome were detested. Israel longed for the day when
their long-awaited Messiah would throw off the yoke of Rome
and make Israel the flagship nation of the earth. Jesus’ message
in this regard was spiritual as will be seen next. Sadly, most
Jews heard it in a political context with no regard to the right-
eous character of their King.
Jesus’ initial message was strikingly similar to that of
John’s (Matthew 3:2). 15 The time is fulfilled, and the king-
dom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel. The
long-awaited time had been fulfilled. The kingdom of God was
at hand. His directive for Israel therefore was as simple as it was
spiritual. “Repent ye, and believe the gospel.” Israel’s focus
was for the restoration of their political kingdom. Jesus’ focus
was for spiritual repentance. His message therefore contained
two simple ingredients: (1) repent, and, (2) believe the gospel of
the kingdom. That gospel was that the King had come. It was,
turn to Him in righteousness and trust Him as your God. That
message largely fell on deaf ears and blinded hearts. Israel
wanted a political king, political freedom, and an exaltation of
their nation to world prominence. They were not interested in
turning from their sin or trusting an unproven Messiah even if
He were from God.
The gospel of the kingdom would continue until such time
it was clear that Israel had rejected their King and His kingdom.
Thence onward, Jesus’ message shifted to the looming cross
and His resurrection. See Matthew 16:21-28, Mark 8:31-38,
and Luke 9:22-27.
1:16-18 Mark abruptly shifts the focus now to the western

shores of the Sea of Galilee. Now as he walked by the sea of
Galilee, he saw Simon and Andrew his brother casting a net
into the sea: for they were fishers. His message to them was
simple and direct. 17 Come ye after me, and I will make you
to become fishers of men. Simon Peter and his brother Andrew
were vocational fishermen. Jesus’ call to them was that they in
due season would become fishers of men. John’s Gospel gives
further details of the call and conversion of both Andrew and
Peter. However, Mark simply records that 18 straightway they
forsook their nets, and followed him. The word translated as
straightway (euyewv eutheos) has the sense of ‘immediately.’
They immediately left their nets and followed Jesus. The distill-
ed essence of discipleship is therein found. They followed Him.
1:19-20 Mark continues, And when he had gone a little

further thence, he saw James the son of Zebedee, and John
his brother, who also were in the ship mending their nets.
Two more of Jesus’ disciples-to-be were confronted. They, like
Peter and Andrew, were professional fishermen. Mark notes
that they were the sons of one Zebedee, the husband of Salome.
Jesus thereupon 20 called them: and they left their father
Zebedee in the ship with the hired servants, and went after
him. Little did these young Galilean fishermen likely realize
what lay ahead. It is of interest that with one exception (Judas
Iscariot), Jesus called all of His disciples from the rural region
of Galilee. His disciples, for the most part, were ‘blue-collar’
men with little formal education. However, our Lord evidently
saw the integrity of character in these that formal education
cannot give. In a short time, four of Jesus’ disciples were thus
called by Him.
1:21 As Jesus began His earthly ministry in the region of

Galilee, He and His disciples went into Capernaum; and
straightway on the sabbath day he entered into the syna-
gogue, and taught. Capernaum was a town on the northwest-
ern shore of Galilee near where the Jordan River flows into the
lake from the north. It was in some ways a ‘resort’ town and was
more cosmopolitan than many of the other communities of rural
Galilee. With the arrival of the Sabbath, Jesus straightway
entered the synagogue. As Luke 4:16 records, it was His custom
to be in the synagogue on the Sabbath. He promptly arrived at
the appointed hour. There was no question about it. On God’s
holy day, He was in the place of worship. It was customary in
synagogue services for the ruler thereof to extend an invitation
to any competent visitor to share his thoughts on the Scripture. Jesus
did exactly that. What a profound message that must have been.
Blessed indeed was the congregation that day. Of interest is that the
ruins of that very synagogue remain in Capernaum to this day.
1:22 They were not only blessed, they were astonished at

his doctrine: for he taught them as one that had authority,
and not as the scribes. The word translated as astonished
(ekplhssw ekplesso) has the sense of ‘amazed.’ It was the
custom of most scribes of that day to rise and expound upon the
oral traditions of other rabbis. It was the entangling, burden-
some minutia of the law which Jesus and Paul would so
condemn. Their only ‘authority’ was that of earlier rabbis. It
would be analogous to modern preachers rising and monoton-
ously quoting various commentaries, lexicons, and books. Je-
sus rather rose and essentially thundered, ‘Thus saith the Lord!’
Though no detail of His message is recorded, He likely went directly
to the Scripture and not the dry dead traditions of Judaism.
1:23-24 More astonishment was about to follow. And

there was in their synagogue a man with an unclean spirit;
and he cried out. Present at the service of the synagogue that
day was a man with a demon. See also Luke 4:31 ff. It is not
recorded whether the presence of the demon within was real-
ized by others. The man so afflicted likely sat composed during
the synagogue service. It gives pause to wonder if those with
unclean spirits do not sit undetected in churches today. Upon
hearing Jesus speak, this one cried out. The word so translated
(anakrazw anakrazo) has the thought of ‘a cry from the depth
of the throat’—almost a guttural cry.
The demon within thus cried out, 24 Let us alone; what
have we to do with thee, thou Jesus of Nazareth? art thou
come to destroy us? I know thee who thou art, the Holy One
of God. This foul spirit croaked for Jesus to leave them alone.
Only one unclean spirit is noted. However, he may have been
referring to the greater demonic realm. The phrase “what have
we to do with thee” was a common Jewish idiom with the idea,
‘Do not trouble us.’ It is of further interest that this demon knew
(1) who Jesus was and (2) that He would someday judge them.
This demon’s concern was that Jesus was about to condemn
him on the spot. He thus gave testimony to the true identity of
Jesus, “the Holy One of God.”
1:25-26 Jesus whereupon rebuked him, saying, Hold thy

peace, and come out of him. The demon was ordered to be
silent and to come out of the man. The demon complied,
however, not without incident. 26 And when the unclean spirit
had torn him, and cried with a loud voice, he came out of
him. The word translated torn (sparassw sparasso) also has
the sense of ‘convulsed.’ Apparently, before departing with a
shriek, the demon sent the poor man into a convulsion.
1:27 The congregation of the synagogue at Capernaum was

shocked. And they were all amazed, insomuch that they
questioned among themselves, saying, What thing is this?
what new doctrine is this? for with authority commandeth
he even the unclean spirits, and they do obey him. They may
have been shocked that one of their own who sat beside them in
the synagogue was possessed of a demon. They were aston-
ished that this Jesus had cast out the demon. They, moreover,
were amazed that Jesus, by His own word, had such authority.
The word translated as amazed (yambew thambeo) has the idea
of being astonished to the point of being terrified. Never before
had they experienced such events. Who was this Jesus?
1:28 Consequently, his fame spread abroad throughout

all the region round about Galilee. Word traveled rapidly
across the region of this Jesus of Nazareth.
1:29 Thereafter, when they were come out of the

synagogue, they entered into the house of Simon and
Andrew, with James and John. Though Peter and Andrew
were originally from Bethsaida (John 1:44) either they had
moved their residence there, or more likely, this was the home-
town of Peter’s wife. James and John followed along with the
others.
1:30 But Simon’s wife’s mother lay sick of a fever, and

anon they tell him of her. It is clear that Simon Peter was
married notwithstanding claims to the contrary by the Catholic
Church. His mother-in-law was sick. Jesus was immediately
informed of her condition. (The word anon is old English and
is translated from the word (euyewv) eutheos which all along
has been rendered as ‘straightway,’ that is, immediately.
1:31 Jesus therefore came and took her by the hand, and
lifted her up; and immediately the fever left her, and she
ministered unto them. When Jesus took her by the hand and
raised her up, not only did the fever leave on the spot, she also
got up and served them. Jesus’ work is always complete.
1:32-34 That evening, after the close of the Sabbath when

the sun did set, they brought unto him all that were
diseased, and them that were possessed with devils. All the
demon-possessed of that region were rounded up that night and
brought to where Jesus was (perhaps Peter’s mother-in-law’s
house).
The whole town turned out to see what would happen. 33
And all the city was gathered together at the door. Jesus
therefore 34 healed many that were sick of divers diseases,
and cast out many devils. All manner of diseases were healed
that night and many demons were cast out. However, a inter-
esting statement was made. He suffered not the devils to
speak, because they knew him. The demons knew precisely
the heavenly character of our Lord. It was not yet the time for
His public revealing unto Israel. Therefore, He enjoined them to
be silent lest they prematurely reveal who He was.
1:35 The next day, in the morning, rising up a great

while before day, he went out, and departed into a solitary
place, and there prayed. The word translated as morning
(prwi proi) refers literally to the fourth watch of the night
between 3 a.m. and 6 a.m. The simple point is that Jesus got up
early to pray. The word translated as solitary (erhmov eremos)
refers to a deserted or wilderness place. In other words, Jesus
got up early and went out into the country to pray.
1:36-37 In due season thereafter, Simon and they that

were with him followed after him. They that were with him
no doubt were other of His disciples, probably those noted in
verse 29. Upon finding Him, they said unto him, All men seek
for thee. They had either witnessed or heard of His miracles the
day and night before. They wanted to see more.
1:38-39 Jesus therefore announced, Let us go into the next

towns, that I may preach there also: for therefore came I
forth. For the purpose of proclaiming the truth of God, He had
come down from heaven. He therefore determined to go to the
surrounding towns. He was not interested in providing further
entertainment for the crowds in Capernaum.
He therefore 39 preached in their synagogues through-
out all Galilee, and cast out devils. We are told little of this
first preaching tour of Galilee. The region however was densely
populated. Josephus notes there were 240 towns and villages in
Galilee then.
1:40 At a time not disclosed, perhaps while on His

preaching tour of Galilee, there came a leper to him, be-
seeching him, and kneeling down to him, and saying unto
him, If thou wilt, thou canst make me clean. Considerable
insight into this poor man is evident. He came pleading with
Jesus, kneeling before Him. There was no question in this
man’s mind of the Deity of the One before him. There further-
more was no doubt in his mind that Jesus could heal him.
Evidenced therein was great faith. His only concern was
whether Jesus would so choose to heal him. He therefore pled,
“If thou wilt, thou canst make me clean.” He thus cast himself
upon the mercy of Jesus.
1:41-42 Jesus clearly was touched by this man’s plea and
faith. He therefore moved with compassion, put forth his
hand, and touched him, and saith unto him, I will; be thou
clean. Of interest is the word translated as moved with com-
passion (splagcnizomai splagchnizomai). It conveys the idea
of the time that the tender emotions welled up from the lower
abdomen. Inherent is the compassion of Jesus. He accordingly
healed the man. Therefore, 42 as soon as he had spoken,
immediately the leprosy departed from him, and he was
cleansed. Once again, Jesus’ work of healing was immediate
and complete. The man was healed on the spot.
1:43-44 Jesus therefore straitly charged him, and forth-

with sent him away; 44 And saith unto him, See thou say
nothing to any man: but go thy way, shew thyself to the
priest, and offer for thy cleansing those things which Moses
commanded, for a testimony unto them. The word translated
as straitly charged (embrimaomai embrimaomai) has the
sense ‘to sternly admonish.’ Once again, Jesus sought to con-
ceal Himself until the time of His revealing unto Israel. He then
directed the man to go to the appropriate priest (apparently at
Jerusalem) and present himself according to Moses’ com-
mandment in Leviticus 14:4-7. Then, and only then, could the
man be considered altogether and ceremonially clean.
1:45 Notwithstanding Jesus’ injunction to keep quiet, the

man went out, and began to publish it much, and to blaze
abroad the matter, insomuch that Jesus could no more
openly enter into the city. In what community it was that this
took place, we are not told. However, the healed man began to
spread abroad what Jesus had done like a racing prairie fire.
Jesus’ fame grew in such proportion, He could no longer enter
that city for the throngs of people flocking unto Him. He there-
fore resorted to the countryside, but they still “came to him from
every quarter.” The idea is from everywhere. What a glorious
beginning to the ministry of our Lord is recorded in this chapter.
*****
Overview of Mark 2: Jesus’ ministry is fully engaged by

Mark 2. Recorded is the incident of the palsied man being let
down through the roof at Capernaum and the call of Matthew
with the resultant complaint of the Pharisees. This is followed
by Jesus’ parable of the new cloth and new bottles. Finally,
Mark records the account of the Pharisees accosting Jesus be-
cause His disciples plucked grain to eat on the Sabbath.
2:1-2 Mark records the return of Jesus to Capernaum. And

again he entered into Capernaum after some days; and it
was noised that he was in the house. The word translated as
noised (akou akouo) simply means ‘heard.’ News quickly was
heard where Jesus was. Though not stated as such, it is thought
He was in the house of Simon and Andrew, where He was
before. See 1:29. Continuing, Mark wrote, 2 And straightway
many were gathered together, insomuch that there was no
room to receive them, no, not so much as about the door.
Immediately, such a crowd gathered, they could not get in the
door. Luke’s account (Luke 5:18-26) clearly implies the house
was filled and people thronged the doors to get in. Jesus there-
fore “preached the word unto them.” A succinct lesson is at
hand for every preacher to thus preach the Word!
2:3-4 As word spread through the region of Capernaum, a

man stricken with palsy was brought to the house where Jesus
was preaching and means were sought to bring him into contact
with Jesus. And they come unto him, bringing one sick of the
palsy, which was borne of four. Mark uses the historic
present, come, to place the event as happening now though it
certainly was completed action. It adds a more picturesque style
to his writing. Alas, the press of the crowd was such they could
not enter.
Therefore, 4 when they could not come nigh unto him for
the press, they uncovered the roof where he was: and when
they had broken it up, they let down the bed wherein the
sick of the palsy lay. Homes of the day often had a stairway up
one side of the house. This may have been the case here. In any
event, this group of men mounted the roof. Luke’s account
(Luke 5:19) indicates the house had a tile roof as many in the
Mediterranean world do. They evidently removed some of the
tiles and did whatever else necessary to making an opening
large enough to let the man down by ropes into the house. It
surely must have interrupted Jesus below. No mention is made
as to who or how the house was thereafter repaired. It may be
that Peter and Andrew fixed the roof afterward.
2:5 However, Jesus was not irritated by the interruption. To

the contrary, when He saw their faith, he said unto the sick of
the palsy, Son, thy sins be forgiven thee. Clear is the
indication that faith is a force which moves our Lord to action.
As we trust Him for our needs, He is pleased thereby and moved
to intervene on our behalf. See Hebrews 11:6.
2:6-7 Found here is Mark’s first record of Jesus’ encounter

with scribes. Luke’s account (Luke 5:17) notes that these were
Pharisees. Scribes were professional copyists of Scripture and
fancied themselves therefore as experts thereon. They more
often than not belonged to the Pharisee party, which was a sect
within Judaism, largely headquartered at Jerusalem. Distinctive
of their platform was a literal understanding and acceptance of
Scripture. Moreover, they were sticklers for the observance of
the Law of Moses to the nth degree. Jesus never criticized the
Pharisees for their doctrine or their observance of the Law.
Rather, He mercilessly chastened them for their hard-hearted,
legalistic, application of the law. The problem of the scribes and
Pharisees was not that of the doctrine. It was one of the heart.
There was no love, compassion, or concern for others, much
less faith. In short they were the epitome of religious hypocrites
which Jesus on numerous occasions excoriated.
It therefore was in keeping with their outlook to be immed-
iately critical of Jesus. 6 But there were certain of the scribes
sitting there, and reasoning in their hearts. The word
translated as reasoning (dialogizomai dialogizomai), in this
context, has the thought of ‘thinking critically.’ They sat there
seeking to point out flaws in Jesus’ teaching. They were not
long in reacting to what they just heard Jesus say. They
indignantly thought, 7 Why doth this man thus speak
blasphemies? who can forgive sins but God only? In one
sense, they were right. Indeed, only God can forgive sins. How-
ever, because of the hardness of their hearts, they were blind to
the fact that God incarnate was in their midst. They who pro-
fessed to be doctors of the Law did not know the God of the Law
when He appeared before them. Their immediate reaction
therefore was to find fault with Jesus, accusing Him in their
minds of being a blasphemer.
2:8 It is apparent these critics only harbored such critical

thoughts. They had not as yet got around to airing their foul
doubt. Notwithstanding, when Jesus perceived in his spirit
that they so reasoned within themselves, he said unto them,
Why reason ye these things in your hearts? Evident is the
Deity of our Lord for He knew the very thoughts of their hearts.
II Chronicles 6:30 makes clear only God knows the thoughts of
the hearts of men. Jesus therefore confronted them of their
critical spirit even before they opened their mouths. That in
itself should have convinced them of Who stood in their midst.
Either they had forgotten II Chronicles 6:30 or were aware of it,
but hardened their hearts to the obvious.
2:9-11 Continuing to confront them, Jesus said, Whether

is it easier to say to the sick of the palsy, Thy sins be forgiven
thee; or to say, Arise, and take up thy bed, and walk? In
effect, our Lord said, ‘Okay you guys. What’s easier to say:
your sins are forgiven; or, arise, take up your bed and walk?’ His
questioning likely was sharp in tone. He therefore delivered His
coup de grâce to His hard-hearted critics.
10 But that ye may know that the Son of man hath
power on earth to forgive sins, (he saith to the sick of the
palsy,) 11 I say unto thee, Arise, and take up thy bed, and go
thy way into thine house. Indeed, there is no difference in
character between the forgiveness of sins and healing of the
sick. Only God can do either. To make clear who He was, Jesus
therefore directed the palsied man to get up, pack his bedding,
and go home. Herein is Mark’s first record of Jesus referring to
Himself as the Son of man. Though God incarnate, the term
reflects more the humanity of our Lord. Jesus often used this
term, so referring to Himself ninety-three times in the gospels.
2:12 The palsied man therefore immediately arose, took

up the bed, and went forth before them all. The fellow, likely
known to the entire community as a life-long cripple, forthwith
got up, flipped his bedding over his shoulder, pushed his way
through the crowd, and headed home as Jesus had directed.
They all witnessed it including the scribes. The result was that
they were all amazed, and glorified God, saying, We never
saw it on this fashion. Of course they had not. The Son of God
heretofore had not been in their midst. That day they had
witnessed two miracles which only God can accomplish: the
forgiveness of sins and the healing of the sick. Jesus did both be-
fore their very eyes.
2:13 He thereafter went forth again by the sea side; and
all the multitude resorted unto him, and he taught them.
Jesus thus departed the house with its pressing crowd and
resorted to the shore of Galilee for fresh air. However, the
crowds of the city followed Him there. He thus taught them fur-
ther.
2:14 Meanwhile, as he passed by, he saw Levi the son of

Alphaeus sitting at the receipt of custom. Levi, the son of
Alphaeus, otherwise has been known as Matthew. He was
seated at the receipt of custom. The word thus translated
(telwnion telonion) refers to the ‘office’ or place where
Roman contract tax-collectors extracted taxes on behalf of
Rome. They were called ‘publicans.’ The Romans contracted
with them to collect a certain levy of taxes. As long as they met
their quota, they were pretty much on their own as to how they
extracted it. They carried the force of the authority of Rome. But
as long as the due taxes from a community were collected, the
Romans did not much care how they did so. Because in Israel
publicans were Jews, thus collaborating with the detested, gen-
tile, Roman occupiers; they too were detested.
As Jesus passed Levi (a.k.a. Matthew) sitting in his ‘of-
fice,’ He said unto him, Follow me. And he arose and follow-
ed him. The essence of discipleship is inherent in Jesus’ com-
mand: “Follow me.” With that, Matthew up and began to follow
Jesus. He no doubt had heard of Him and may already have sat
under His teaching and preaching. Why Jesus chose him, we are
not told. However, in His infinite wisdom, He clearly saw in
him the character, integrity, and potential He sought.
2:15 Luke records that Matthew whereupon invited Jesus

to his home for a great feast (Luke 5:29). Mark thus records,
And it came to pass, that, as Jesus sat at meat in his house,
many publicans and sinners sat also together with Jesus
and his disciples: for there were many, and they followed
him. Matthew evidently invited numerous others of his col-
leagues—publican tax-collectors—as well as others consid-
ered sinners by the Pharisees. These all enjoyed a meal with Je-
sus and His disciples. Hinted at is that Matthew was a man of
means to provide such a meal for such a gathering.
2:16 Once again the scribes and Pharisees reacted critic-

ally. And when the scribes and Pharisees saw him eat with
publicans and sinners, they said unto his disciples, How is it
that he eateth and drinketh with publicans and sinners? On
the one hand they had a valid question. Why would Jesus, who
manifested such godliness, resort to fellowship with presumed
sinners? Yet on the other hand, what is evident was the attitude
of their heart. Clearly, they had a critical spirit.
2:17 His disciples undoubtedly passed this question on to

Jesus. Therefore, when Jesus heard it, he saith unto them,
They that are whole have no need of the physician, but they
that are sick. With profound logic, Jesus silenced His critics.
Those healthy need not a doctor, but the sick. With a bit of irony
and holy sarcasm, Jesus described His ministry: I came not to
call the righteous, but sinners to repentance. His ministry
was to those willing to acknowledge their need. The Pharisees
and scribes in their religious self-righteousness figured they
needed no help.
It should be further noted that Jesus’ mingling with the
world’s crowd was not for fellowship or social intercourse.
Rather, He allowed Himself in their presence to reach them and
turn them to God.
2:18 In a new confrontation, Mark sets the scene by noting,

And the disciples of John and of the Pharisees used to fast.
The thought is that both the disciples of John and the Pharisees
were accustomed to regular fasting. The more strictly observant
Jews of that time would fast on the second and fifth day of the
week to demonstrate their piety and self-righteousness. Though
not noted as such, it very well may be that the feast given by
Matthew (a.k.a. Levi) was on just one such day of fasting. Thus
apparently, both disciples of John and of the Pharisees come
and say unto him, Why do the disciples of John and of the
Pharisees fast, but thy disciples fast not? (Again, Mark uses
the historic-present come and say. The past tense is clearly
implied, but he uses the historic-present for a more picturesque
realism.) Thus, John’s disciples joined with the Pharisees to
confront Jesus: ‘How come our disciples fast regularly and you
guys don’t?’ Implied is their self-righteous attitudes in that they
observed regular, outward rites and rituals, in this case, fasting.
2:19 Jesus answered their question with one of His own.

Can the children of the bridechamber fast, while the bride-
groom is with them? John the Baptist himself had implied that
Jesus was the long-awaited bridegroom. See John 3:29. The
background thought is the time of a wedding. Such is a time of
great joy and festivity, not of fasting. Jesus therefore answered
His own question. As long as they have the bridegroom with
them, they cannot fast. Implicit is that His disciples perceived
who He was. He was their long awaited Messiah. He was as the
groom at a great wedding. It was not the time to fast, but to
rejoice.
2:20 However, Jesus went on to point out, the days will

come, when the bridegroom shall be taken away from
them, and then shall they fast in those days. He knew only too
well, the time was coming when He would be taken from
them—first by crucifixion and then by ascension. He, in effect,
told His critics, ‘Don’t worry. The time is coming when they
will fast. Just wait.’
2:21 Mark thus records one of Jesus’ axiomatic proverbial
parables. No man also seweth a piece of new cloth on an old
garment: else the new piece that filled it up taketh away
from the old, and the rent is made worse. Jesus cryptically,
yet prophetically, referred to what lay ahead. An entirely new
dispensation, a new covenant, a new spiritual organism—the
church—was just ahead. He used the analogy of sewing new
cloth (perhaps linen or wool) onto an old garment. In due
season, as the garment was washed, the new material would
shrink causing a pulling away from the older already shrunken
material. To so patch an old garment accordingly was folly. The
thought, though largely foreign to us, likely was well under-
stood by his audience. It was an illustration from everyday life
then.
The application was to that which was coming. Neither His
disciples nor His critics had any inkling thereof. Jesus knew the
days were coming when He would be crucified, resurrected,
and ascended back to heaven. At that time, an entirely new
body, the church, structured by a new covenant would appear.
It would not be a patch or adjunct onto the Old Testament
system. Rather, it would be not only new, but totally apart.
2:22 Jesus uttered a second proverbial parable, parallel to

the first. He again used an illustration from everyday life,
clearly understood by those of that day. And no man putteth
new wine into old bottles: else the new wine doth burst the
bottles, and the wine is spilled, and the bottles will be
marred: but new wine must be put into new bottles. Israel
down through the centuries has long had vintners. Vineyards
and wine production to this day are common. The ancients
would place new wine into large leathern flasks called bottles
and seal them. As the wine aged and gave off gasses, the leath-
ern bottles would stretch. Once a leathern flask had been so
stretched by wine, it could never again be used for new wine. It
would rupture as the new wine matured, breaking the container,
and ruining both itself and its contents.
Again, as in the preceding parable, Jesus looked ahead to
the coming New Testament ministry of the church. God was not
going to pour it like new wine into the old stretched-out con-
tainer of Old Testament Judaism. It would be an entirely new
entity, independent and apart from Israel. Herein, is clear
teaching of the dispensational truth that the church is not an
extension of Israel, but an entirely separate entity before God.
2:23 Shortly thereafter, it came to pass, that he went

through the corn fields on the sabbath day; and his disciples
began, as they went, to pluck the ears of corn. The mention
of ears of corn (stacuv stachus) refers not to the American
form of ‘corn,’ which was unknown to them, but rather the more
generic thought of ‘grain.’ It was customary for Jews, while
traveling, to partake of standing grain for their personal con-
sumption and, in fact, the Law of Moses made allowance
thereto. See Deuteronomy 23:25.
2:24 Once again, the critical spirit of the self-righteous

Pharisees lifted its ugly head. And the Pharisees said unto
him, Behold, why do they on the sabbath day that which is
not lawful? As far as the Pharisees were concerned, they had
caught Jesus’ disciples in what they thought was a violation of
the Law. They were not concerned about the taking of grain
from someone else’s field. They knew the law allowed that.
However, in their minds, they equated the endless minutia of
rabbinical tradition with the Law itself. The tradition of the
elders had laid down thirty-nine, principal prohibitions regard-
ing the Law of Moses. From these there were an unending
number of derivative rules.
Reaping and threshing were forbidden on the Sabbath day.
Like hair-splitting lawyers, they took the position that plucking
an ear of grain was in fact reaping. Rubbing it in one’s hand to
their thinking was a form of threshing. Hence, Jesus and His
disciples had broken the Law!
What they had broken was only the hair-splitting minutia of
rabbinical tradition. Yet, to the Jewish mind set, to ignore the
position of the rabbis was to ignore the Law itself. They, for all
practical purposes, equated the two. Two faults thus are in view.
The critical spirit of the Pharisees and their equation of the Law
with human tradition.
2:25-26 Jesus therefore refuted them by pointing out an

incident in David’s life. 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? 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? The
reference is to I Samuel 21:1-6. Jews to this day take the position
that the ceremonial Law may be set aside in times of crisis or
when life or limb is threatened. Fighting back an enemy’s attack
on the Sabbath day is a classic example thereof. David’s
obtaining of leftover shewbread when on the verge of starvation
is another. Jesus thus thwarted the sniping of the His adversaries
with the common sense of God’s Word.
2:27 He stopped them in their tracks with a powerful one-

two blow. First, he said unto them, The sabbath was made
for man, and not man for the sabbath. He hearkened back to
the creative week when God ordained the sabbatical principle.
The Sabbath day was intended to be a blessing to man by giving
him a day from his labor. It was a gift of God; not a legal thicket
to ensnare and a burden to bear. The Pharisees and their count-
erparts in the rabbis had turned the Sabbath on its head. They
had made it a burdensome day when even the smallest ne-
cessities of life were made difficult. God had intended it to be
the opposite.
2:28 His second blow was His conclusion, Therefore the

Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath. Jesus once again
applied to Himself prerogatives due only to God. He who had
created the Sabbath in the first place remained the Lord thereof.
He who created it could abrogate it if He so chose. By
identifying Himself as Lord of the Sabbath, He once again left
a thinly veiled clue as to who He really was: God incarnate. He
thus could alter or dispense with the Sabbath if He so chose.
*****
Overview of Mark 3: Mark continues to detail the early

ministry of Jesus. Recorded in this chapter are the healing by
Jesus of a man on the Sabbath along with other healings, the
choosing of the twelve, teaching on the unforgivable sin, and
finally, a lesson on the essence of the family of God.
3:1-2 At the end of the preceding chapter, Jesus and his

disciples had been sharply criticized for plucking grain on the
Sabbath. It evidently is still the same Sabbath. Accordingly,
Mark continued, And he entered again into the synagogue;
and there was a man there which had a withered hand. The
word translated as withered (xhrainw xeraino) has the sense
of dried or shriveled. In short, it was incapacitated.
The they of verse 2 evidently were some of the same Phar-
isees mentioned at the end of chapter 2. They therefore 2
watched him, whether he would heal him on the sabbath
day; that they might accuse him. The idea is that these hard-
hearted Pharisees watched Jesus critically. They had a critical
spirit. They cared nothing whether the unfortunate man was
healed. Rather, they were looking for evidence with which they
might further accuse Jesus.
3:3-4 Jesus undoubtedly was aware of their critical hearts.

He also was aware of the pathetic estate of this fellow. He
therefore saith unto the man which had the withered hand,
Stand forth. The thought was for him to not only stand up, but
to come to the middle of the room. Jesus there asked all present,
4 Is it lawful to do good on the sabbath days, or to do evil? to
save life, or to kill? Jesus had them. They could only agree with
Him if for no other than political reasons. To publicly criticize
what Jesus was about to do would erode public support for these
worthless religious politicians. They therefore “held their
peace.”
3:5 Jesus looked round about on them with anger, being

grieved for the hardness of their hearts. Mixed emotions
welled up in our Lord. He was angered at the critical attitude of
these pompous Pharisees. Yet at the same time, He grieved over
the hardness of their hearts. The word translated as hardness
(pwrwsiv porosis) also relates to blindness and by extension,
a dulled perception. The root problem of the Pharisees is at
hand. In their zeal of partisan politics (Pharisees versus
Sadducees) and the blind allegiance to their traditions, they
were heartless toward others. They held to a synthetic form of
Judaism giving lip-service to the Law, but completely academic
with no compassion or concern for others.
Jesus therefore, saith unto the man, Stretch forth thine
hand. And he stretched it out: and his hand was restored
whole as the other. In that instant, the man’s withered hand
was healed in sight of all present. In one instant, our Lord not
only showed compassion on this unfortunate fellow, further
authenticating His ministry and Person, He also did so defying
His hypocritical opponents.
3:6 Therefore, the Pharisees went forth, and straightway
took counsel with the Herodians against him, how they might
destroy him. The Herodians represented another ‘party’ in
Israel. Herod the Great was the puppet ruler installed by the
Romans as the titular king of Israel. A half Jew, his allegiance
was to Rome. Though Herod by now was dead, the Herodians
remained a segment within Israel which were willing collab-
orators with the otherwise detested Roman occupation forces.
They were uninterested in things godly, but rather of political
advancement and whatever gain that might accrue to them-
selves by cooperating with the Romans. They were secular in
nature and attuned to Roman favor. The exceedingly religious
Pharisees normally had nothing to do with the Herodians. But
shared hatred creates strange bedfellows. These Pharisees
therefore began to plot with their normal adversaries, the Herodians,
how they together might destroy this Jesus of Nazareth.
3:7-8 Jesus rather withdrew himself with his disciples to the

sea: and a great multitude from Galilee followed him, and from
Judaea, 8 And from Jerusalem, and from Idumaea, and from
beyond Jordan; and they about Tyre and Sidon, a great
multitude, when they had heard what great things he did, came
unto him. Still in Galilee, perhaps near Capernaum, Jesus rather
resorted to the peaceful solitude of the shoreline of Tiberias.
Notwithstanding, crowds from the entire region found out
where He was and flocked to Him. They came from Galilee
(northern Israel), Judaea (southern Israel), Jerusalem (the cap-
ital city) Idumaea (the contemporary name for ancient Edom—
modern Jordan), and even Lebanon (Tyre and Sidon). Word
had spread of His miracles and people therefore flocked to Him.
3:9 Jesus therefore spake to his disciples, that a small

ship should wait on him because of the multitude, lest they
should throng him. Jesus directed that a boat be on standby
because of the press of the crowd on the beach. He could thus
slip out onto the water.
3:10-11 For he had healed many; insomuch that they

pressed upon him for to touch him, as many as had plagues.
11 And unclean spirits, when they saw him, fell down before
him, and cried, saying, Thou art the Son of God. Mark thus
briefly summarized Jesus’ ministry to date. And that is why the
crowds thronged Him. He had healed many and cast out
demons. Therefore, people with all manner of afflictions from
the surrounding regions pressed in upon Him, trying to at least
touch Him, hoping they might be healed. As demons were cast
out, they would openly confess, “Thou art the Son of God.”
3:12 Jesus therefore straitly charged them that they

should not make him known. The time for His public
revelation to Israel was not yet at hand. Jesus therefore rebuked
the demons, directing them to not reveal His true identity.
3:13-15 And he goeth up into a mountain, and calleth

unto him whom he would: and they came unto him. Jesus
thereafter spent the entire night in prayer according to Luke
6:12. The next day, He therefore went up onto an unnamed
mountain (high hill) apparently in the region of Capernaum. He
there formally called and appointed His twelve official dis-
ciples. Mark records, 14 And he ordained twelve, that they
should be with him, and that he might send them forth to
preach, 15 And to have power to heal sicknesses, and to cast
out devils. Jesus thus vested these twelve for four purposes: (1)
to be with Him, (2) to be sent forth to preach, (3) to have
authority to heal sickness, and (4) to cast out demons. The word
translated as ordained (poiew poieo) is the common word
which literally means ‘made.’ Twelve were formally made
disciples.
3:16-19 And Simon he surnamed Peter; 17 And James
the son of Zebedee, and John the brother of James; and he
surnamed them Boanerges, which is, The sons of thunder:
18 And Andrew, and Philip, and Bartholomew, and Mat-
thew, and Thomas, and James the son of Alphaeus, and
Thaddaeus, and Simon the Canaanite, 19 And Judas
Iscariot, which also betrayed him: and they went into an
house.
The twelve were: (1) Simon whom He surnamed Peter. (2)
The next was James the son of Zebedee. This James would later
be known as James the Great. (3) Then also was John the
brother of James. This John would later pen five books of the
New Testament. Jesus nicknamed John and James Boanerges
which in Aramaic meant, ‘the sons of thunder.’ Next was (4)
Andrew and (5) Philip followed by (6) Bartholomew, (7)
Matthew, (8) and Thomas. These were followed by (9) James
the son of Alphaeus. He came to be known as ‘James the less’
and was the brother of Matthew. Then was (10) Thaddaeus who
also was known as ‘Lebbaeus’ as well as Judas who evidently
wrote the epistle of Jude. Next was (11) Simon the Canaanite.
His nickname ‘Canaanite’ was an Aramaic word meaning
‘zealous.’ He therefore was also known as ‘Simon Zelotes,’
which was the more Greek rendering of the same.
Finally, (12) there was Judas Iscariot. Mark succinctly
comments that this Judas also betrayed Jesus. (Judas Iscariot
was the only one of the twelve not from Galilee.) Upon thus
ordaining His twelve disciples, Mark records, “and they went
into an house,” evidently at Capernaum.
3:20-21 And the multitude cometh together again, so

that they could not so much as eat bread. Upon arriving back
in town, word spread rapidly of His return. A crowd quickly
gathered at the house where he was at and pressed upon Him to
the degree He could not even eat. And then a strange thing
happened. 21 And when his friends heard of it, they went out
to lay hold on him: for they said, He is beside himself.
The word translated as friends (para para) is a common
preposition literally meaning ‘beside,’ ‘by,’ or ‘near.’ In this
context, it was used idiomatically to refer to His relatives or
close friends. Unfortunately, Jesus’ immediate family largely
as yet did not believe (John 7:5). They thought Him a bit
unbalanced and perhaps were embarrassed. Therefore, they
arrived to take Him forcibly if necessary. Their excuse to the
crowds was that He was beside Himself and needed help. What
came of this unfortunate confrontation is not further recorded.
3:22 However, it likely is not coincidence that Mark re-

corded the following section next. And the scribes which
came down from Jerusalem said, He hath Beelzebub, and
by the prince of the devils casteth he out devils. These scribes
had come from Jerusalem, their headquarters, to find out more
about this Jesus fellow. They were soul-mates with Pharisees if
not one and the same. They therefore were predisposed to be
critical of Jesus.
Upon arriving at Capernaum, they likely caught wind of the
unbelief of Jesus’ own family. They therefore offered their own
disparaging assessment of the situation. They accused Him of
being possessed by Beelzebub which was an Aramaic word for
Satan as prince of demons. They therefore blasphemously
claimed that Jesus cast out demons by the authority of the devil
himself.
3:23 Jesus quickly became aware of this blasphemy. He

was not intimidated by it and proceeded to confront His
antagonists. He therefore called them unto him, and said unto
them in parables, How can Satan cast out Satan? His
piercing logic once again skewered His enemies. He thus pre-
sented several parables for their consumption.
3:24-26 Jesus therefore first offered, And if a kingdom be
divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. 25 And if
a house be divided against itself, that house cannot stand. 26
And if Satan rise up against himself, and be divided, he
cannot stand, but hath an end. Axiomatic wisdom repeated
ever since was uttered. Neither a kingdom nor house divided
can stand. Therefore, if Satan were to oppose and divide his
own kingdom, neither he nor his kingdom would long last. If
Satan were to disrupt his own realm as these belligerent blas-
phemers alleged, his kingdom would collapse. Jesus turned
their blasphemy on its head.
3:27 Continuing, Jesus likewise charged, No man can en-

ter into a strong man’s house, and spoil his goods, except he
will first bind the strong man; and then he will spoil his
house. The illustration is simple. No one can break into a
powerful man’s home and plunder it until he first subdues and
ties up its owner. Then, he can proceed to plunder the place. The
analogy is apparent. One cannot plunder Satan’s realm until he
first binds him. In casting out demons, Jesus had not only spoil-
ed Satan’s kingdom, He also had first bound the devil in so
doing. Implicit is His Deity and omnipotence. His ugly critics
likely did not even catch that greater truth.
3:28 Jesus therefore expanded His comments to greater

spiritual truth. Verily I say unto you, All sins shall be forgiven
unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever
they shall blaspheme. In God’s mercy and grace, all sins are
forgivable, including blasphemy.
3:29 There is one exception to that rule, however. But he

that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never
forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation. One who
blasphemes the Holy Spirit risks never being forgiven and is in
danger of eternal judgment. Practically, these blasphemous
scribes from Jerusalem had rejected Christ. They had, contrary
to the conviction of the Holy Spirit, accused Jesus of being
Satan. In so doing, they had blasphemed the counsel of the Holy
Spirit. Men go to hell for only one sin. That is rejecting Christ.
But it is the Holy Spirit who draws men to Christ and convicts
them of their sin. Rejecting that conviction places men on the
precipice of being unforgiven and of eternal judgment. A sober-
ing truth is contained indeed.
3:30 Their blasphemy specifically was, Because they said,

He hath an unclean spirit. In so ascribing the work of Satan to
Jesus, they desecrated the work of the Holy Spirit in their own
hearts and ultimately blasphemed Him. Woe to such an one.
3:31-32 Thereafter came another encounter of Jesus and

His family. There came then his brethren and his mother,
and, standing without, sent unto him, calling him. 32 And
the multitude sat about him, and they said unto him, Be-
hold, thy mother and thy brethren without seek for thee.
His family evidently was on the outer edge of the crowd, so they
asked the crowd to pass the word on to Jesus which they did.
Though the Roman Church has long denied that Jesus had
physical brothers, claiming the perpetual virginity of Mary,
here Mark records the simple truth of His brothers. Lest there be
any attempt to spiritualize that, it is in the context of His mother.
These clearly were the half-brothers of Jesus.
3:33-35 Jesus thereupon answered them, saying, Who is

my mother, or my brethren? He answered with a question. It
should not be assumed that there was any disrespect or
impertinence in His answer. Rather, Jesus used the occasion to
teach a greater truth. (It should also be remembered that to this
point, as evidenced earlier in this chapter, His own immediate
family as yet were not believers.) He therefore 34 looked round
about on them which sat about him, and said, Behold my
mother and my brethren. However, it is clear though His
earthly family was present, a greater truth was at hand.
He thus declared, 35 For whosoever shall do the will of
God, the same is my brother, and my sister, and mother.
The greater truth Jesus presented was that for those willing to do
His will, these were His spiritual family—His true loved ones.
The verb translated as do (poiew poieo) is conjugated in the
subjunctive mode. The implication of that is, if anyone is
willing to do the will of God, the same is His true family. What
is touched upon is the issue of the human heart. The seat of the
will is in the heart. When one is willing to do God’s will, that is,
when one’s heart is willing to submit to God and freely trust and
obey Him, the same becomes a child of God. He thus becomes
a part of the family of God. They thus become the family of
Jesus. The key concept here is the willingness of the heart to
turn to, submit to, trust in, and obey God. That is the essence of
saving faith and it is that which conveys the new birth.
*****
Overview of Mark 4: The parable of the sower and the seed

is presented along with its explanation. Jesus also set forth the
parables of the hidden candle, of kingdom analogies, and es-
pecially of the mustard seed. The chapter ends with the account
of Jesus stilling the storm on Galilee.
4:1-2 As Mark presents the ensuing parable of the sower

and the seed, it is the first record in this gospel of a parable of
Jesus. And he began again to teach by the sea side: and there
was gathered unto him a great multitude, so that he entered
into a ship, and sat in the sea; and the whole multitude was
by the sea on the land. 2 And he taught them many things by
parables, and said unto them in his doctrine. As noted, the
scene was along the shore of Galilee. Because of the press of the
crowds, Jesus got into a boat, sat down therein, and had it moved
a short distance offshore. He there began to teach the throngs,
especially by parable.
The word translated as parables (parabolh parabole)
literally means placing two things side by side for comparison.
However, its use in the Bible is usually as a metaphor and has
the purpose of illustrating a spiritual truth by comparison to
everyday life.
4:3 Our Lord therefore launched into one of His classic

parables, the parable of the sower and the seed. Hearken;
Behold, there went out a sower to sow. The word translated as
sow (speirw speiro), of course, refers to the planting or
scattering of seed. The typical pattern of the day was for the
sower to walk through a field with a bag of seed slung over his
shoulder. He then would ‘broadcast’ or fling the seed in
crescent shaped patterns as we walked systematically up and
down the field. Four categories of soil will be illustrated in the
parable. These are typical of the soil conditions of Israel and
Jesus’ audience surely could relate thereto.
4:4 The first category is thus. And it came to pass, as he

sowed, some fell by the way side, and the fowls of the air
came and devoured it up. The primary application of the par-
able will be explained in verse 14 and following. The word
translated as wayside (‘odov hodos) refers to a pathway or
road. It thus was compacted and hardened soil. Accordingly,
birds swooped down and devoured the seed.
4:5-6 In the second category, some fell on stony ground,

where it had not much earth; and immediately it sprang up,
because it had no depth of earth: 6 But when the sun was up, it
was scorched; and because it had no root, it withered away. The
word translated as stony ground (petrwdhv petrodes) refers
to shallow soil underlaid by ledge (bed) rock. Because of the
shallowness thereof, ground moisture is quickly evaporated
away and the heat of the sun bakes the soil. Of interest is the
implication that the seed planted here did in fact germinate and
spring forth. Yet because of the shallowness of the soil and the
resultant lack of roots, the young plant soon withered.
4:7 In the third category, some fell among thorns, and the
thorns grew up, and choked it, and it yielded no fruit. Here,
the seed fell on ground already sprouting weeds, in this case,
thorn bushes. Clearly implied is the germination of the seed and
its springing forth. However, the overshadowing thorn plants
choked it out. Notice the key statement: “and it yielded no fruit.”
Herein lies the essence of the parable.
4:8 The fourth category is best of all. And other fell on

good ground, and did yield fruit that sprang up and in-
creased; and brought forth, some thirty, and some sixty,
and some an hundred. Here, the seed fell on the best soil in the
field. It was free of underlying rock. It was not weedy. And, it
was not the compacted soil along the pathway by the edge. In
due season, the seed germinated, sprang up, and in due course
brought forth a productive harvest. In some places, it brought
forth a thirty-fold yield. In other places, the yield was sixty fold,
and in others yet, it was one-hundred fold. The primary econ-
omy of the day was agrarian and small, family-run operations.
The majority of Jesus’ audience undoubtedly directly related to
His parable.
4:9 Jesus concluded the initial pronouncement of the par-

able with the admonition, He that hath ears to hear, let him
hear. The gospels record three other instances wherein Jesus so
admonished His hearers. It was a warning to take heed to what
He had uttered. His admonitions to the seven churches of Asia,
found in Revelation 2-3, each contain a similar injunction: “He
that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the
churches.”
4:10 Thereafter, when he was alone, they that were

about him with the twelve asked of him the parable. The
illustration of the parable was obvious. His disciples however
did not understand the spiritual truth it illustrated. Or put
another way, they understood the answer, but what was the
question?
4:11-12 Jesus therefore explained to them, Unto you it is

given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto
them that are without, all these things are done in parables.
Jesus was more than willing to be clear in working with His
disciples. However, for Israel at large, He would be less forth-
coming. Several key background principles lay just beneath the
surface in this event. (1) Notice that Jesus referred to the
“{mystery of the kingdom of God.” The word translated as
mystery (musthrion mysterion) has the sense of that which is
hidden or not obvious to the understanding. The mystery in
question was of the kingdom of God.
The Jewish nation thought thereon in political terms. They
wanted a political ruler (a king) to arise and throw off the Ro-
man yoke of tyranny and establish them once again as an inde-
pendent state among the nations. However, Jesus knew the
kingdom of God was primarily spiritual in nature. It would arise
only as Israel repented of the unbelief, disobedience, sin, and
rebellion they had manifested for so many centuries. Then, and
only then, would the King arise and elevate the Jewish state to
be the capital nation of the world. That ultimately will be when
Jesus Christ establishes Himself as King of kings and Lord of
lords in His millennial reign. But before that would ever
happen, the mandatory predicate was repentance. Sadly, Israel
was not interested therein.
That led to the second underlying principle to be addressed:
12 That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing
they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they
should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them.
That second principle (2) was the curse placed by God upon
Israel in Isaiah 6:9-10. This is essentially quoted in the verse at
hand. God then pronounced that because of Israel’s rebellious
spirit and hardened heart, they would see the truth and not per-
ceive it. They would hear the truth and not understand it. That
curse remains in place to this hour. However, at God’s perfect
time during the Tribulation, the spiritual eyes of Israel will be
opened and they will understand, turning to their rejected
Messiah.
Meanwhile, Jesus would continue to teach in oblique par-
ables. To those whose hearts were receptive to the Savior, the
truth would be clear. To those hardened in their refusal to
repent, they would see and not perceive and hear but not under-
stand. The time was not yet for the nation to be converted. The
curse of Isaiah 6:9-10 remained in place.
4:13 Having touched upon that foreboding principle, Jesus

thereafter turned to His disciples and said unto them, Know ye
not this parable? and how then will ye know all parables?
He in essence asked, ‘Do you not understand this parable? How
then will you understand other related ones?’
4:14 Jesus therefore began to elucidate the parable line by

line. A key concept is here set forth: The sower soweth the
word. The seed of the initial parable is the Word of God. Even
as natural seeds have the miraculous ability for biological life to
spring from death, likewise the Word of God brings spiritual
life to those who are dead in trespasses and sins. It is miraculous
not only in its intrinsic character, but in its life-giving ability.
4:15 Jesus therefore proceeded to further explain the

parable. And these are they by the way side, where the word
is sown; but when they have heard, Satan cometh
immediately, and taketh away the word that was sown in
their hearts. The greater overview of the parable is the key to
understanding each of its constituent parts. It often is presumed
that the lesson of the parable is how and why some people get
saved and some don’t. However, with the exception of the first
category, that is not the case. Rather, in each of the succeeding
categories, the emphasis rather is upon why most Christians
don’t bear fruit while some do. The reason for no fruit is appar-
ent in the first category. No regeneration took place there in the
first place. Here, the seed of the Word of God fell upon hard-
ened hearts. Like the hardened compacted soil of the wayside,
the seed never penetrates. Therefore, Satan, like a scavenging
bird, swoops down and plucks the seed away. There is no new
life spiritually and, of course, no fruit thereafter.
(The question therefore arises, what is fruit for the Savior?
Throughout the New Testament spiritual fruit is alluded to.
There is that internal fruit of the Spirit described in Galatians
5:22-23. However, there also is the external fruit of spiritual
reproduction. Here likely is the winning of others to Christ. The
seed of the Word is planted. New life springs forth in the new
birth. People are thus saved and begin to grow as Christians.
That likely is the application of fruit in this context.)
4:16-17 In the second category, these are they likewise

which are sown on stony ground; who, when they have
heard the word, immediately receive it with gladness; 17
And have no root in themselves, and so endure but for a
time: afterward, when affliction or persecution ariseth for
the word’s sake, immediately they are offended.
Here, the seed fell upon shallow earth underlain by ledge
(bed) rock. However, in this case, the seed (the Word) was re-
ceived with gladness. Clearly implied is the germination of the
seed and the new life therefrom in that there is some root, but not
much. Moreover, it is of significance that they have “no root in
themselves.” There evidently is a lack of underlying discipline
of life (i.e., character). Therefore, they continue for a while in
the Christian life. However when trouble or opposition comes
because of the Word, as inevitably it does, like the sun-baked,
shallow soil; these give up and whither away spiritually.
Are these saved? Apparently, yes. But do they bring forth
fruit? Clearly, no. Sadly, legion are their number. Every church
has seen many. They receive the gospel with gladness and begin
the process of Christian growth. However, there is no depth of
character to begin with. Their life heretofore has been shallow,
undisciplined, and self-centered. When opposition or trouble
comes in the Christian life, as it inevitably does, these give up
and fade back to live a backslidden, carnal, Christian life. They
are miserable and never bring forth fruit for the Savior.
4:18-19 Jesus therefore explained the third category. And

these are they which are sown among thorns; such as hear
the word, 19 And the cares of this world, and the deceitf-
ulness of riches, and the lusts of other things entering in,
choke the word, and it becometh unfruitful. Once again, as
the seed of the Word of God is heard, implied is that it ger-
minates and springs forth as a new life in Christ. However, as is
so often the case, competing things choke out the new spiritual
life. The result is unfruitfulness in the Christian life.
Three categories of spiritual competition are noted: (1) “the
cares of this world.” The thought is of the worries of life—‘how
are we going to pay the bills or how are we going to make it?’
Implicit is a lack of faith in trusting God to meet our needs.
Defeated by worry and cares, no fruit for Christ is pursued. (2)
Then, there is “the deceitfulness of riches.” They indeed are
deceitful. Myriad are those deceived into thinking that money
brings happiness. For many, it therefore becomes life’s pursuit.
See I Timothy 6:9-10. However, in so pursuing affluence, no
fruit is brought forth for the Savior.
Finally, (3) “the lusts of other things”—the distraction of
other interests divert attention from bearing fruit for the Master.
See II Timothy 2:4. These three either individually or collect-
ively, like spiritual weeds, choke out the vitality of the new
nature. The result is unfruitfulness.
4:20 Finally, these are they which are sown on good

ground; such as hear the word, and receive it, and bring
forth fruit, some thirtyfold, some sixty, and some an
hundred. There are also those who receive the gospel, are born
again, and are not spiritually afflicted as the others. Their hearts
are not hardened by sin. There is intrinsic discipline of life from
which Christian character can spring forth. And, they are not
encumbered by the pursuit of riches or material things. Their
lives therefore become focused on serving their Savior. Over
the course of their lives, many come to Christ as a result of their
witness. For some, they see thirty people come to Christ over
their lifetime. For others, it is sixty. And for others still, they
have the privilege of seeing one-hundred people come to Christ
through their ministry.
4:21 The placement of the parable to follow is likely not

coincidence. Its essence follows in the direct context of the
preceding parable. And he said unto them, Is a candle
brought to be put under a bushel, or under a bed? and not
to be set on a candlestick? The reference to a candle probably
refers to an olive-oil lamp, but that is without regard to the intent
of Jesus’ question. The question is rhetorical. No one would
light a candle (or lamp) and put in under a bushel basket, much
less a bed. Rather, lighted candles are to be placed on a candel-
abra. They are lighted to give light. The spiritual implication is
clear. We have been given the light of the gospel. It is a travesty
to hide it. Rather, by its intrinsic nature it is to be shone unto
others. Thus in this chapter, Jesus has illustrated the gospel as both
seed and light. In either case, its purpose is to be spread abroad.
4:22-23 The conjunction for links the former to what is at

hand. For there is nothing hid, which shall not be mani-
fested; neither was any thing kept secret, but that it should
come abroad. Jesus utters what is essentially an axio-matic
proverb. In the context of the preceding, the thought likely is
this. One hiding the gospel will eventually be found out,
especially at the judgment. Surely nothing remains secret
forever. Sins of omission in hiding the gospel will someday be
confronted and made known at the Judgment Seat of Christ.
To that Jesus once again warns, 23 If any man have ears to
hear, let him hear. Unfruitfulness for the reasons such as lack
of character, the pursuit of affluence, and materialism will
someday be called to account. In that day, they will be made
manifest. Jesus warned, take heed!
4:24-25 Perhaps hearkening back to the matter of His

disciples’ question about the parable of the seed, Jesus contin-
ued (verse 11). In that context, Jesus reminded them of the curse
upon hard-hearted Israel (verse 12). Jesus further therefore
warned, And he said unto them, Take heed what ye hear:
with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you: and
unto you that hear shall more be given. Accountability for
what we have heard is noted. He thus sets forth another axio-
matic proverb: “with what measure ye mete, it shall be mea-
sured to you.” As we give, so shall it be given to us. However,
here Jesus applies the proverb to what we hear: “unto you that
hear shall more be given.” The thought is as they would receive
(willingly hear) His Word, more would be given.
25 For he that hath, to him shall be given: and he that
hath not, from him shall be taken even that which he hath.
If the context ties back to verses 10-12, which it likely does,
Jesus’ thought is that they who receive the Word of God will be
given more. However, for him who hardens his heart thereto,
“from him shall be taken even that which he hath.” The linkage
with the first category of the parable of the sower is apparent.
Those who harden their hearts to the gospel, like the seed on the
wayside, likely will have it snatched away by the devil. Jesus
therefore warned especially hard-hearted Israel of the conse-
quences of their recalcitrance. Those who receive His Word
will be rewarded with even greater truth. Those who reject His
Word will have even that taken from them.
4:26-27 As he begins a corollary parable regarding the

kingdom of God, there is again direct linkage to the preceding
as noted in the word so. Jesus therefore continued, So is the
kingdom of God, as if a man should cast seed into the
ground; 27 And should sleep, and rise night and day, and the
seed should spring and grow up, he knoweth not how. Once
again, a parable of the kingdom is set forth. Though there no
doubt are parallels and applications to the church, the direct
context is of the kingdom which pertains to Israel. The ultimate
fulfillment will be found in the Millennium someday.
The greater thought is once again the miracle of a seed, how
it germinates and springs forth to new life. After planting seed,
though we watch it day and night, we really don’t know how it
springs up and grows.
4:28-29 Continuing therefore, Jesus said, For the earth

bringeth forth fruit of herself; first the blade, then the ear,
after that the full corn in the ear. 29 But when the fruit is
brought forth, immediately he putteth in the sickle, because
the harvest is come. He carried the primary thought of the
parable to its conclusion. Seed planted in the earth in due season
brings forth fruit. It begins with a tender shoot (blade) which
develops into a stalk with ears of grain and finally the mature
grain in the ear. At the appropriate time, the harvest is made.
The connection clearly is of the kingdom (verse 26). There
likely thus are eschatological implications. It may be that Jesus
is alluding to the growth and development of the kingdom in the
Millennium. Yet, at the end with the uprising of the Battle of
Gog and Magog (Revelation 20:7-9), God puts in His sickle of
judgment. The analogy of the sickle and judgment is also clear
in the context of the Tribulation and Armageddon, noted in
Revelation 14:15-19. However, the context here does not seem
to be related to the Tribulation. It may be that Jesus is giving
insight into the why of the rebellion of Gog and Magog at the
conclusion of the kingdom. See further comments thereto for
Revelation 20:7-9.
4:30 Jesus therefore prepared to deliver another parable

related to the kingdom. However, before doing so, he asked,
Whereunto shall we liken the kingdom of God? or with
what comparison shall we compare it? Of interest is the word
translated as comparison (parabolh parabole) and compare
(paraballw paraballo). The former is the word normally
translated as ‘parable.’ Both illustrate the intrinsic essence of a
parable which is a comparison.
Jesus therefore queries by way of introduction, to what
shall we liken the kingdom of God? (It will be helpful to recall
that the kingdom of God is primarily a reference to the coming
reign of Christ during the Millennium. There may be spiritual
applications and parallels for the church today, but the kingdom
by its very nature is yet to come.)
4:31-32 Jesus answers His question in the verse above
accordingly. The kingdom of God is like a grain of mustard
seed, which, when it is sown in the earth, is less than all the
seeds that be in the earth: 32 But when it is sown, it groweth
up, and becometh greater than all herbs, and shooteth out
great branches; so that the fowls of the air may lodge under
the shadow of it. A mustard seed is a very small seed. Never-
theless, it can produce a very substantial plant in which even
birds can lodge.
The application is not specific. However, Jesus’ thought
may be that the coming kingdom of God has its origin in ob-
scurity in so far as the world is concerned. It is like the tiny
mustard seed. However, the day will come when it will rule the
entire earth. The various nations, like the birds of heaven, will
dwell under that ruling umbrella. The significance of this parable
is best understood in the mentality of the day. The Jews were looking
for their King to ride in on a white charger and with great fanfare
forcibly evict the Romans. He thence would re-establish the
kingdom of Israel to become the chief nation of the world.
Well, that indeed will happen someday. But the kingdom
has its origins in the humble reception of the Word of God,
particularly by Israel. By comparison, it was like unto a mustard
seed—small and seemingly insignificant. Nevertheless, such
spiritual repentance and redemption would in due season blos-
som into the millennial reign of the Messiah after Christ’s
return.
4:33-34 Mark thus comments, And with many such

parables spake he the word unto them, as they were able to
hear it. 34 But without a parable spake he not unto them:
and when they were alone, he expounded all things to his
disciples. Jesus’ ministry to the greater masses of Israel was by
and large through parables. However, when alone with His
disciples, he explained these to them. The word translated as
expounded (epiluw epiluo) literally means to ‘unloose’ or
‘untie.’ By extension it has the sense ‘to explain.’
4:35 All of this teaching had taken place over the period of
one day. Mark therefore continues, And the same day, when
the even was come, he saith unto them, Let us pass over unto
the other side. He had delivered these parables from a boat just
offshore (verse 1). By now it was evening. Perhaps to escape the
press of the crowds, Jesus therefore suggested they sail to the
other side of the Sea of Galilee.
Therefore, 36 when they had sent away the multitude,
they took him even as he was in the ship. And there were
also with him other little ships. People had gotten into other
boats to be near Jesus that day. However, His disciples sent
them away that evening. They therefore joined Jesus in the boat
and sailed onto the evening seas. What a pleasant end to what
must have been a hectic day.
4:37 As is not unusual on the Sea of Galilee, there arose a

great storm of wind, and the waves beat into the ship, so that
it was now full. As weather patterns in the heights above the
lake change, violent wind storms rolling down onto the lake are
not uncommon. That evidently happened that night. The seas
rose to such a height their boat was shipping water over the gun-
wales and was in danger of completely swamping.
4:38 Jesus undoubtedly knew what would happen that

evening. But great lessons were to be learned by His disciples.
He therefore was in the hinder part of the ship, asleep on a
pillow. What a fascinating picture. He, the Prince of Peace, was
the epitome of peace in the midst of the storm. Asleep in the
stern of this vessel, His disciples therefore desperately awake
him, and say unto him, Master, carest thou not that we
perish? (Mark once again uses the historic present tense for
emphasis.) In their terror, they rebuked Jesus. They in effect
said, ‘Master, don’t you care that we are about to drown?’ They
no doubt shouted at Him. How could Jesus be asleep at a time
like this! They were fighting for their lives and He was asleep.
4:39 Jesus thereupon arose, and rebuked the wind, and

said unto the sea, Peace, be still. And the wind ceased, and
there was a great calm. Several miracles took place in that
instant. Angry seas and high winds do not halt in a moment. In
fact, even after a storm has passed, great swells continue as a
body of water slowly oscillates back to normal. Going from
rough seas to calm, flat water in an instant is a miracle in itself.
Moreover, even more miraculous is the fact that the storm
ceased at the word of Jesus. Only God can calm the stormy seas.
Only the Prince of Peace can bring “great calm”
4:40 Jesus intuitively knew the astonishment in the minds

of His disciples. He therefore asked, Why are ye so fearful?
how is it that ye have no faith? Clearly implicit is that fear
manifests a lack of faith. The contrasting truth is that as we live
by faith, there comes the peace of God. See Isaiah 26:3. Paul
taught the same in Philippians 4:6-7. Trusting the Master will
dissolve raging fears into perfect calm.
The greater lesson is that God has never promised there will
not be storms in the Christian life. However, when they come
(and they will) and as we trust Him, He gives peace in the storm.
4:41 The disciples however, feared exceedingly, and said

one to another, What manner of man is this, that even the
wind and the sea obey him? Evident was a lingering lack of
faith on their part. However, they were now astounded by what
they witnessed Jesus do. Indeed, who can command the wind
and seas? The answer to that question is God alone. Deity was
in their midst. Yet, they seemed not to realize it.
Overview of Mark 5: The fifth chapter of Mark presents
three incidents at length: (1) the healing of the maniac of Ga-
dara, (2) the healing of the of the hemorrhaging woman, and (3)
the raising of Jairus’ daughter.
5:1 After the episode the night before of Jesus stilling the
waves, that morning, they came over unto the other side of
the sea, into the country of the Gadarenes. Jesus and His
disciples landed their boat on the southeast shore of the Sea of
Galilee. That region was called Gadara, named after the chief
and capital city of the Peraea. Matthew’s account called the area
the country of the Gergesenes. The seeming conflict is resolved
in understanding that the town of Gergasa was on the sea shore
and its immediate environs was called Gergesene. It however
was a part of the larger region of Gadara. The region was more
gentile in character than Jewish. Of interest is that the Ger-
gesenes of Jesus day is the Golan Heights of today.
5:2-5 Mark records how when he was come out of the

ship, immediately there met him out of the tombs a man
with an unclean spirit, 3 Who had his dwelling among the
tombs; and no man could bind him, no, not with chains. 4
Because that he had been often bound with fetters and
chains, and the chains had been plucked asunder by him,
and the fetters broken in pieces: neither could any man
tame him. 5 And always, night and day, he was in the
mountains, and in the tombs, crying, and cutting himself
with stones.
Jesus was thus accosted by a man (1) having an “unclean
spirit.” He was demon possessed. (2) He spent his time living in
a local cemetery, giving some indication of the affinity of the
occult with the dead. (3) This man by the power of the devil
possessed supernatural strength, breaking chains used to re-
strain him. (4) He was thought to be a ‘wild man’ whom no one
could ‘tame.’ Moreover, (5) this poor fellow also sought refuge
in uninhabited mountainous areas where he routinely injured
himself with stones. Tragic indeed are those bound by the
power of the devil. Their ultimate end is wretched
5:6-7 This man possessed by demonic spirits had watched

the boat containing Jesus and His disciples beach on the shores
near him. However, when he saw Jesus afar off, he ran and
worshipped him, And cried with a loud voice, and said,
What have I to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of the most high
God? I adjure thee by God, that thou torment me not. Of
interest is that the unclean spirit within the man immediately
recognized Jesus and knew who He was. With his own better
interests in mind, the demon in the man caused him to worship
Jesus. However, the man deranged by Satan began to shout at
him. The phrase 7 What have I to do with thee, Jesus, thou
Son of the most high God? might be paraphrased, ‘What am I
doing with thee, Jesus, etc.’ The demon knew precisely that
Jesus was the “Son of the most high God.”
It should be noted that demons, who possess men, can at
their will take charge of their vocal chords and speak through
them. The demon was well aware of his final destiny in hell. He
knew it was only by the dispensation of God that he was not al-
ready there. He therefore implored Jesus, whom he had known
in ages past in heaven, to not so torment him then and there. He
knew that Jesus had the authority to cast him into hell and he
feared that Jesus might do so on the spot.
5:8 It is apparent from the text that Jesus had already

ordered the demon out of the man, For he said unto him, Come
out of the man, thou unclean spirit.
5:9 Jesus therefore asked him, What is thy name? Of

further interest is Jesus’ demand to know the name of the de-
mon. Clearly implied is (1) that demons have names and are
personalities. (2) Though Jesus in His omniscience no doubt
knew the name of this demon, it may be that He rather thought
to put the demon on notice and put him on the spot.
The demon therefore answered, My name is Legion: for
we are many. A full Roman legion had 6,826 men. The demon
may have been speaking figuratively. However, in any event,
there were a large number of unclean spirits dwelling within
this deranged man. Clearly implied is that numerous demons
can occupy one individual. This man was utterly infested with
them.
5:10-12 The demon which was spokesman for the rest

therefore besought him much that he would not send them
away out of the country. 11 Now there was there nigh unto
the mountains a great herd of swine feeding. 12 And all the
devils besought him, saying, Send us into the swine, that we
may enter into them. These demons were comfortable in the
region where they were. They seemingly desire to indwell some
sort of body. They therefore implored Jesus to send them into a
large herd of hogs feeding nearby on the hillside, which today is
part of the Golan Heights.
5:13 Therefore, Jesus forthwith gave them leave. And the

unclean spirits went out, and entered into the swine: and the
herd ran violently down a steep place into the sea, (they
were about two thousand;) and were choked in the sea. The
herd of two-thousand hogs, immediately spooked by the de-
monic presence, stampeded down a steep embankment into the
sea of Galilee and were all drowned. Clear is the violent react-
ion of even animals to satanic power. It is destructive to
whatever it contacts. Though this region was not officially of
Israel, nevertheless, Jesus had no mercy for those who raised
hogs for food which was a clear violation of the Jewish law.
5:14-15 The men hired to watch over the herd of hogs fled,
and told it in the city, and in the country. And they went out
to see what it was that was done. They promptly returned back
to the city and told everyone there, and in between, what they
had witnessed. Whereupon, many in the village of Gergasa
came out 15 to Jesus, and see him that was possessed with the
devil, and had the legion, sitting, and clothed, and in his
right mind: and they were afraid. The gawkers quickly
showed up to see what had happened. They perhaps had already
heard of this Jesus and now word came He was in their com-
munity. Moreover, they no doubt were incredulous about the
man formerly possessed of the demons and what had happened
to them.
They therefore came and found the man (1) sitting at peace
rather than convulsing and screaming as they had previously
known him. (2) He was fully clothed rather than partially or
totally naked as they had heretofore known. Moreover, and
most importantly, (3) he was in his right mind. Something pro-
found had taken place that day and they therefore were
frightened by the implications thereof.
5:16-17 Consequently, they that saw it told them how it

befell to him that was possessed with the devil, and also
concerning the swine. The eyewitnesses to it all told the gawk-
ers from town what had happened. It very well may be that the
owners of the herd came out to see what had befallen their
livestock. Therefore, 17 they began to pray him to depart out
of their coasts. The word translated as coasts (‘orion horion)
has the sense of ‘region.’ Not being godly men, and certainly not
observant Jews; having seen their livestock destroyed, the local
businessmen urged Jesus to leave the area.
5:18 That Jesus was willing to do. Accordingly, when he

was come into the ship, he that had been possessed with the
devil prayed him that he might be with him. The poor fellow,
formerly deranged by Satan, wanted to come along.
5:19-20 However, Jesus suffered him not, but saith unto

him, Go home to thy friends, and tell them how great things
the Lord hath done for thee, and hath had compassion on
thee. Jesus would not permit him to accompany them. Rather,
He directed him to return to his home and friends and tell them
what great things He had done to him, showing compassion on
him. Inherent is the natural dynamic in personal evangelism.
Those who are our family and friends are always the best ‘pros-
pects’ for the gospel. Jesus sent this man with the zeal of his
deliverance to witness to his sphere of influence. That he did.
He thus 20 departed, and began to publish in Decapolis
how great things Jesus had done for him: and all men did
marvel. Decapolis was a region east of Galilee of ten towns,
including Gadara. This man could preach Christ because he had
experienced firsthand His saving power. The word translated as
publish (khrussw kerusso) is most commonly translated as
‘preach.’ This formerly demon-possessed fellow became a
preacher to the region of Decapolis, which was largely gentile
in nature.
The disciples had witnessed unforgettable things the
preceding day. They had heard Jesus teach profound parables
the day before. That night, they had witnessed Jesus still the
storm. And that morning they had witnessed Him cast out a
legion of demons. Powerful indeed must have been the impact
of the Master on their hearts and minds.
5:21 That day, the boat carrying Jesus and his disciples
sailed back across the Sea of Galilee, returning probably to Ca-
pernaum. And when Jesus was passed over again by ship
unto the other side, much people gathered unto him: and he
was nigh unto the sea. Not much had changed from the day
before. As soon as word spread of His return, “much people
gathered unto him” right on the beach.
5:22-24 In the crowd, there was a ruler of the local syna-

gogue, Jairus by name; and when he saw him, he fell at his
feet, 23 And besought him greatly, saying, My little
daughter lieth at the point of death: I pray thee, come and
lay thy hands on her, that she may be healed; and she shall
live. This poor man had a daughter at home near death. Rather
than spend those final hours with her, he rather, upon hearing
that Jesus was back, immediately went directly to where He
was. Great faith is implicit in the simple fact of his turning to
Jesus for help.
He therefore pled with Jesus, My little daughter lieth at
the point of death: I pray thee, come and lay thy hands on
her, that she may be healed; and she shall live. No question
was in this man’s mind of Jesus’ ability to heal his daughter.
More faith was exhibited. He called on Jesus for help. He only
asked that Jesus lay His hands upon her. He knew that is all it
would take. Jesus therefore 24 went with him; and much
people followed him, and thronged him. As Jesus made His
way to this man’s home, the local population mobbed Him on
every side.
5:25-26 Meanwhile there was in the crowds a certain

woman, which had an issue of blood twelve years, 26 And
had suffered many things of many physicians, and had
spent all that she had, and was nothing bettered, but rather
grew worse. This poor woman had been afflicted with a men-
strual hemorrhage for twelve years. She had gone to many
physicians with her problem (who only made it worse) and had
spent all she had on them. To the contrary, her condition only
worsened. This poor woman knew nothing of the urgency of
Jesus’ mission concerning the dying, little girl.
5:27-28 Consequently, When she had heard of Jesus,
came in the press behind, and touched his garment. 28 For
she said, If I may touch but his clothes, I shall be whole. She,
too, had heard of Jesus. She as well had the simple faith to
believe if she only could make contact with Him, she would be
healed. She therefore joined in the mob of people pressing
around Jesus. She too was urgent to touch Him. In fact, she rea-
soned, if she could only touch His garment, she would be
healed. She therefore pushed her way through the crowd to
where she could touch the garment of Jesus. That she did.
5:29 Immediately, the fountain of her blood was dried up;

and she felt in her body that she was healed of that plague. As she
was able to jostle through the crowd to touch Jesus, she immediately
perceived her condition had been healed.
5:30-31 At that instant, Jesus, immediately knowing in

himself that virtue had gone out of him, turned him about in
the press, and said, Who touched my clothes? Jesus at once
knew what had happened. The word translated as virtue (dun-
amiv dunamis) literally means ‘power.’ He knew His divine
power had been tapped. Therefore, He turned around in the
crowd and wanted to know who touched His clothes.
His disciples thought it was almost funny. They were
incredulous. Mobs of people were jostling against Jesus as they
trudged to the home of the dying girl. They accordingly said to
Him, 31 Thou seest the multitude thronging thee, and sayest
thou, Who touched me? They were astounded. There were all
kinds of people bumping into Jesus in the crowd. And He asked,
“Who touched me?” Amazing!
5:32-33 Jesus therefore looked round about to see her

that had done this thing. 33 But the woman fearing and
trembling, knowing what was done in her, came and fell
down before him, and told him all the truth. The poor wo-
man suddenly was terrified. She had not asked permission to
touch Jesus. She had not asked Him to heal her. She had in
simple faith taken matters into her own hands. She, therefore
knowing she was found out, fell down before Jesus and told
Him the whole story.
5:34 Jesus therefore compassionately answered her, Daugh-

ter, thy faith hath made thee whole; go in peace, and be
whole of thy plague. His reference to her as daughter is of
interest. She was a daughter of Abraham as was Jesus. But He
did not call her sister. It certainly was a term of civility and even
affection. However, it may be that Jesus knew in that instant she
had become a child of God and thus addressed her. The word
translated as hath made thee whole (swzw sodzo) is the
normal word for ‘saved.’ Jesus in effect said, ‘thy faith has sav-
ed thee.’ Clearly implied is that this poor woman was not only
healed of her physical affliction, but was saved on the spot
spiritually. The simple but clear agency thereof was faith. In
simple faith, she sought out Jesus, trusting Him to meet her
need. That He did.
5:35 In the meantime, While he yet spake, there came

from the ruler of the synagogue’s house certain which said,
Thy daughter is dead: why troublest thou the Master any
further? What crushing news this must have been for the ruler
of the synagogue.
5:36-37 Nevertheless, As soon as Jesus heard the word

that was spoken, he saith unto the ruler of the synagogue, Be
not afraid, only believe. What profound assurance! In the
midst of devastating news, the simple direction of our Lord was
“only believe.” The antidote to fear is faith. This must have been
the darkest hour of this poor man’s life. The ray of hope offered
by our Lord was faith. “Only Believe.” It is presented in the
imperative mode. When there seems to be no other hope, we can
always in simple faith turn to Jesus.
Jesus therefore permitted 37 no man to follow him, save Peter,
and James, and John the brother of James. These three disciples
were becoming Jesus’ ‘inner circle.’ These same three were allowed
with Him on the mount of transfiguration. They also went apart with
him later at Gethsemane. Moreover, in the mouth of two or three
witnesses would a matter be established.
5:38-39 Jesus therefore arrived at the house of the ruler of

the synagogue, and seeth the tumult, and them that wept
and wailed greatly. The word translated as tumult (yorubov
thorubos) also has the sense of ‘uproar.’ The scene was typical
of middle-eastern mourning. Family and friends had already
arrived to console the family as the girl languished near death.
Upon learning of her decease, they broke out into the very vocal
and tumultuous weeping and wailing of the Middle East. It truly
was a scene of uproar.
Jesus, upon His arrival asked, 39 Why make ye this ado,
and weep? the damsel is not dead, but sleepeth. Why all the
commotion? She is only sleeping. Jesus knew she was dead and
may have used the euphemism of sleep to get their attention.
She was dead, but Jesus knew not for long. He therefore used
this figure of speech.
5:40 The scene changed instantly. Whereas their had been

an uproar of weeping and wailing, upon Jesus’ comment, they
rather laughed him to scorn. The tone changed to uproarious
laughter. They laughed in Jesus’ face. Their laughter was to
such a degree, it became derision and they intended it so.
Jesus thence, when he had put them all out, he taketh the
father and the mother of the damsel, and them that were
with him, and entereth in where the damsel was lying. Mark
again uses the historical present to introduce what was about to
happen. He chased everyone out except the girl’s parents and
His three chosen disciples. They therefore entered the room
where the girl was lying.
5:41-42 Jesus therefore took the damsel by the hand, and

said unto her, Talitha cumi; which is, being interpreted,
Damsel, I say unto thee, arise. The words Talitha cumi are
Aramaic, the vernacular of the region. Jesus simply command-
ed her to rise.
That she did. 42 And straightway the damsel arose, and
walked; for she was of the age of twelve years. And they
were astonished with a great astonishment. She immediately
sat up and then began to walk. For all present, the amazement
went to astonishment. He who had stilled the storm and healed
the sick, now, before their very eyes, had raised the dead.
5:43 Notwithstanding, he charged them straitly that no

man should know it; and commanded that something
should be given her to eat. Jesus directed the girl be given
food. However, He ordered that this incident not be publicized.
He was in the midst of Jewish people. The time for His official
presentation as Messiah and King to Israel had not arrived.
Though He was laying a profound foundation of proof thereto,
in the meantime, that announcement was not to be made.
*****
Overview of Mark 6: Mark presents significant events in

our Lord’s ministry including: the unbelief of His immediate
family, the Twelve being sent out to preach, the martyrdom of
John the Baptist, the five thousand fed, Jesus walking on the
sea, and further healing.
6:1-2 Following the healing of Jairus’ daughter, Jesus
returned to His home town of Nazareth. And he went out from
thence, and came into his own country; and his disciples
follow him. Though Nazareth as such is not mentioned, that
indeed was His home community.
Whereupon, 2 when the sabbath day was come, he began
to teach in the synagogue: and many hearing him were
astonished. It was Jesus’ custom to be in the synagogue on the
Sabbath. See Luke 4:16. When the doors were open, He was
there! His ministry to this point had not been focused at Naz-
areth, however, His reputation had reached there. The people
He grew up with openly asked, From whence hath this man
these things? and what wisdom is this which is given unto
him, that even such mighty works are wrought by his
hands? They would not believe He was of God.
6:3 Their reaction was, Is not this the carpenter, the son
of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and
Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were
offended at him. Significant detail into Jesus’ earlier life is
revealed. First, He is described as “the carpenter.” In Matthew
13:55, He is described as the carpenter’s son, referring to
Joseph’s trade. However, it is clear from Mark that Jesus Him-
self practiced carpentry as did His step-father. What type of
carpenter He was, we are not told. Specific mention is made of
Mary, but nothing of Joseph. It well may be assumed that by
now Joseph was deceased.
Then, Mark records four brothers, James, Joses, Juda, and
Simon. Some have suggested that these were actually the son of
Alphaeus and therefore cousins to Jesus. However, they clearly
are identified as the brothers of Jesus. It is clear that Mary bore
at least seven children. This countermands the claim of Rome of
her perpetual virginity. Of the four, there is only further scrip-
tural record of James. He later became a believer, went on to
pastor the church at Jerusalem, and wrote the epistle bearing his
name. Record is additionally made of Jesus’ sisters. Who they
were, we do not know. There is no subsequent details of them in
Scripture.
His brothers and sisters at this point “were offended at
him.” The word translated as offended (skandalizw skandal-
idzo), in this context, has the idea of being ‘displeased,’
‘indignant,’ or perhaps, ‘embarrassed.’ They perhaps thought
that Jesus had become a publicity seeker, some sort of eccentric,
or a religious nut. As the oldest son of His widowed mother,
they may have been upset that He had left home, no longer
supporting her. At this point, it is clear they did not believe. See
3:31-35.
6:4 Jesus therefore set forth before His unbelieving family

and former neighbors what is essentially an axiomatic proverb.
A prophet is not without honour, but in his own country,
and among his own kin, and in his own house. The
hometown folks knew Him. They had watched Him grow up.
To them, He was just the kid next door. They were unwilling to
grant Him favorite-son status.
6:5 Accordingly, he could there do no mighty work, save

that he laid his hands upon a few sick folk, and healed them.
Apart from healing a few people, Jesus was thwarted from re-
vealing His power there.
6:6 The reason is revealed. And he marvelled because of

their unbelief. It is clear the unbelief of those who knew Him
hindered His working. The converse clearly is that faith is a
catalyst, stirring the power of God. Therefore, he went round
about the villages, teaching. The unbelief of Nazareth turned
Jesus elsewhere. He thus went to surrounding villages teaching
where He received a more favorable reception.
6:7 Thereafter, Jesus called unto him the twelve, and
began to send them forth by two and two; and gave them
power over unclean spirits. He delegated authority to His
twelve disciples over unclean spirits, sending them out in pairs.
Thus to that degree, Jesus multiplied His ministry six-fold in
sending them in six different directions. In 6:12, it is mentioned
that they also went preaching repentance. Of interest is the word
translated as send forth (apostellw apostello) which is the
verbal form of (apostolov) apostolos (apostle). Though these
at this juncture were not officially called apostles, they surely
were sent forth by Christ.
6:8-9 The twelve were directed to take nothing for their

journey, save a staff only; no scrip, no bread, no money in
their purse: 9 But be shod with sandals; and not put on two
coats. A scrip was a leathern sack in which provisions such as
bread were carried. They were not even to take money with
them. A purse was a money-belt-type accessory used to carry
money. They were to wear shoes, but not to take more than one
coat—no suitcases.
Precisely why the disciples were enjoined to take es-
sentially nothing on their preaching tour is not noted. It may
be that Jesus was teaching them to live by faith as they ven-
tured forth into His work. It may be, He wished those hearing
their message to perceive them as prophets who generally
presented an austere manner of living. It likely was a com-
bination of both.
6:10 Jesus continued, In what place soever ye enter into

an house, there abide till ye depart from that place. If they
were received into a home for dwelling in a given place, they
were there so to remain until they moved on. It has been sug-
gested that they were therefore not to be choosy about their
accommodations nor be dissatisfied where they were received.
In other words, in whatsoever state they found themselves, they
were therewith to be content.
6:11 However, whosoever shall not receive you, nor

hear you, when ye depart thence, shake off the dust under
your feet for a testimony against them. As they came as
emissaries of the King and were therefore rejected, they were to
shake the dust of their very feet off against them. This was a
middle-eastern custom of disdain and contempt. Jesus went on
to warn, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha
in the day of judgment, than for that city. The fate of Sodom
and Gomorrha was well known. What is of interest is that Jesus
referred to judgment in the context of a given city. There will be
a judgment of sheep and goat nations when Christ returns. See
Matthew 25:32 ff. However, there the focus is upon the peoples
and nations in relation to Christ.
Here, the focus is upon individual towns. The day of
judgment is not specified. It may be that during the time when
Titus inexorably crushed the Judean rebellion in A.D. 68-70.
Then, some towns received terrible punishment thereby. Or, if
there in fact are eschatological implications, the same judgment
may fall during the Tribulation as the antichrist and the nations
of the world invade Israel, wreaking havoc therein. Or, it may
refer to some more generic catastrophe befalling such commun-
ities sometime thereafter.
The greater point is that there are consequences for
rejecting Christ and the gospel. Those consequences may not
occur immediately, but they will happen. To be warned of judg-
ment worse than Sodom and Gomorrha gives pause for
consideration.
6:12-13 The Twelve therefore went out, and preached

that men should repent. It is helpful to recall the setting of this
preaching. They went to the various villages within Israel. Most
of Israel of that day held a nominal regard to the God of Jacob.
It was their national heritage and religion. But spiritually, they
were far from God. They, for the most part, knew and
understood that the Law and the Prophets were the Word of
God. They believed that. They had learned the hard way via the
Babylonian captivity to be monotheistic, serving only Jehovah-
God. However, they, like so many nominal Christians of this
day, were far from Him. They put on their Sabbath best and their
religious face and went to the synagogue on the Sabbath. But
the rest of the week, they lived in sin.
The message of the disciples at this point was not to believe
in Jehovah-God. They already did. Their message, like that of
John the Baptist, was to repent. The word so translated (meta-
noew metanoeo) has the sense to change one’s mind or heart.
The thought here therefore is to turn back to God.
At this point, Jesus’ ministry still was offering the kingdom to
Israel. The primary condition thereof was repentance, a turning back
to God. As it became clear that Israel as a nation rejected that
message, the focus of our Lord’s ministry would turn to the cross.
To authenticate their divine message, Jesus therefore
granted that 13 they cast out many devils, and anointed with
oil many that were sick, and healed them. Though there no
doubt was compassion in helping people in distress, the mir-
acles of our Lord (and in this case His disciples) also served to
verify the messenger as from God. To ignore their message be-
fore such miraculous power only served to point out the hard-
ness of heart so prevalent in Israel.
6:14 The focus now shifts altogether to Herod and his

treatment of John the Baptist. And king Herod heard of him;
(for his name was spread abroad:) and he said, That John
the Baptist was risen from the dead, and therefore mighty
works do shew forth themselves in him. There are several
Herods mentioned in the New Testament. The greatest and
namesake of them all was Herod the Great. It was he who killed
the infants around Bethlehem after Jesus’ birth. However, here,
the Herod was the son of Herod the Great and Malthace, a
Samaritan woman. After the death of his father, he was ap-
pointed by the Romans as tetrarch of Galilee and Peraea. He
thus was the presiding governor of the region of Galilee whence
most of the miracles of Jesus took place.
He had heard of Jesus “for his name was spread abroad.”
He therefore feared that Jesus was in fact John the Baptist
whom Herod had cruelly and unjustly beheaded. In his guilty
conscience and superstition, he thought that John had come
back from the dead and was performing the mighty works done
by Jesus.
6:15 Mark thus proceeds to further comment regarding

what others said about Jesus and who He was. Some said, That
it is Elias. And others said, That it is a prophet, or as one of
the prophets. Elias was Elijah. Because Elijah had not suffered
physical death, some speculated that Jesus must have been his
reincarnation. Others thought still that Jesus was some other
prophet returned from the dead. It is apparent that not many
were willing to ascribe Him Deity to which all His miracles and
ministry pointed.
6:16 Returning to Herod, Mark continues, But when

Herod heard thereof, he said, It is John, whom I beheaded:
he is risen from the dead. Record is thus made of the demise
of John the Baptist. As will be detailed momentarily, Herod had
beheaded him. His guilty conscience convicted him that John
had come back from the dead in the person of Jesus to avenge
himself. Herod therefore had a special interest in Jesus.
6:17-18 Mark therefore unveiled the untimely end of John.

For Herod himself had sent forth and laid hold upon John, and
bound him in prison for Herodias’ sake, his brother Philip’s
wife: for he had married her. Herod’s first wife was the daughter
of Aretas, king of Arabia. In the course of events, he left her and
began an affair with his sister-in-law Herodias. Though he then
married her, it was a marriage born of adultery, the type of
remarriage Jesus so strongly rebuked as ongoing adultery.
John had publicly criticized Herod’s adulterous relation-
ship, proclaiming 18 it is not lawful for thee to have thy
brother’s wife. To silence this brash fundamentalist preacher,
Herod ordered John bound in prison.
6:19-20 However, Herodias, the adulterous woman, was

even more incensed at John. Mark indicates that she had a
quarrel against him, and would have killed him; but she
could not. Powerful people in high places will routinely attack
those who accuse them. If she had her way, John would have
been long dead. However, Herod 20 feared John, knowing
that he was a just man and an holy, and observed him.
Though immoral, Herod had enough background to realize
John was a man of God. The word translated as observed
(sunthrew suntereo) most literally has the sense ‘to preserve.’
Therefore, Herod preserved the life of John, fearing him. Mark
goes on to note that when Herod would slip away to hear John,
he did many things, and heard him gladly.
Implied is that Herod would steal away to the prison and
allow John to speak to him. He would take to heart what John
said and listened intently. Though a hedonistic adulterer, this
king still had a hunger in his soul for the truth. The pleasures of
sin brought no peace or satisfaction. He sought out John to fill
the spiritual void within him.
6:21-22 Meanwhile, Herodias bade her time. She knew

Herod’s birthday was coming. She therefore schemed to rid her-
self of that preacher who had called to account her sin. There-
fore, when a convenient day was come, that Herod on his
birthday made a supper to his lords, high captains, and
chief estates of Galilee. Come his birthday, Herod threw a party
for his chief subordinates and other dignitaries of Galilee.
Herodias, no doubt, arranged for her daughter to sensuou-
sly dance at the party. Alcohol, no doubt, had flowed freely. It
was a practice of the day to hire call-girls to come and provide
lewd, strip-tease type of dancing at such events. Herodias, how-
ever, stooped to have her own daughter do her bidding. Anti-
cipating Herod would offer anything after such an exhibition,
she sent her daughter out to dance. Mark therefore records, 22
And when the daughter of the said Herodias came in, and
danced, and pleased Herod and them that sat with him, the
king said unto the damsel, Ask of me whatsoever thou wilt,
and I will give it thee.
6:23 Upon the completion of the performance, Herod as

presumed said unto the girl, Whatsoever thou shalt ask of me,
I will give it thee, unto the half of my kingdom. He thus made
a swaggering oath he soon would regret.
6:24-25 The young woman promptly went forth, and said

unto her mother, What shall I ask? And she said, The head
of John the Baptist. Herodias’ scheme had gone according to
plan. She sprung the trap shut. Her daughter therefore 25 came
in straightway with haste unto the king, and asked, saying,
I will that thou give me by and by in a charger the head of
John the Baptist. The word translated as charger (pinax
pinax) simply refers to a ‘platter.’
6:26 Herod was in a bind. He had made a public promise

before his cronies and sworn thereto by an oath. Therefore, the
king was exceeding sorry; yet for his oath’s sake, and for
their sakes which sat with him, he would not reject her.
6:27 Therefore, the king immediately sent an executioner,
and commanded his head to be brought: and he went and
beheaded him in the prison. The web of his sin was such that
Herod was caught. Though he had respect to John and had ev-
idently befriended him, the scheming fury of his wicked adult-
erous wife prevailed.
6:28 The executioner having done the deed, brought his

head in a charger, and gave it to the damsel: and the damsel
gave it to her mother. Thus was the end of a godly man. He was
persecuted and martyred for righteousness’ sake. Great will be
his reward in heaven. Hell will not be hot enough for Herod,
Herodias, and their ilk.
6:29 Upon hearing of their master’s untimely demise, His

disciples came and took up his corpse, and laid it in a tomb.
Mark herein has provided the greatest detail of John’s demise
than any of the other gospel writers.
6:30-32 After describing what had happened to John, Mark

essentially picked up the narrative left off at 6:13. There, the
twelve had been sent out two by two. Now he records their
return. And the apostles gathered themselves together unto
Jesus, and told him all things, both what they had done, and
what they had taught. Their initial, preaching ministry was
complete. They returned to report to Jesus. Of interest is that
this is the first time in Mark’s gospel that the disciples are called
apostles. The word so translated (apostolov apostolos) lit-
erally means ‘a sent messenger.’
Their ministry undoubtedly had been tiring. Moreover,
upon arriving back with Jesus, 31 he said unto them, Come ye
yourselves apart into a desert place, and rest a while: for
there were many coming and going, and they had no leisure
so much as to eat. The compassion and sensitivity of our Lord
to His workers is evident. He took note that they were weary and
had not even had a chance to eat. The word translated as desert
(erhmov eremos) among other things can have the sense ‘out in
the country.’
That evidently is where Jesus directed his weary disciples:
a place of solitude out in the country for rest. They therefore 32
departed into a desert place by ship privately. Slipping into
a boat on the shore, they sailed to a more remote place for
solitude.
6:33 No doubt to their chagrin, the people saw them

departing, and many knew him, and ran afoot thither out of
all cities, and outwent them, and came together unto him.
Though Jesus and His disciples had tried to slip away unnotic-
ed, the local populace recognized Him. Word spread fast.
Crowds therefore ran along the shore of Galilee in the direction
of the boat and when it put ashore, they were waiting there for
Him.
6:34 Our Lord not only had compassion on His disciples,

He also, when he came out, saw much people, and was
moved with compassion toward them, because they were as
sheep not having a shepherd: and he began to teach them
many things. Throughout the New Testament, there recurs the
three-fold sequence manifest here. In this case, Jesus (1) came,
(2) He saw, and (3) He was moved with compassion. The three
go together. Before compassion develops, one must first see the
need of others. However, that requires going to where people
are and seeing them in their need.
Rather than be upset that His plan for rest had been thwart-
ed, Jesus saw needy lives and empty hearts. He therefore had
compassion upon them. He perceived they were as sheep
without a shepherd, having no spiritual direction. He therefore
“began to teach them many things.”
6:35-36 By now, when the day was now far spent, his
disciples came unto him, and said, This is a desert place, and
now the time is far passed. Afternoon was well accomplished.
It certainly was after three o’clock and probably later. (The
word translated as far spent and far passed, referring to the
time of day, is (poluv) polus which literally means ‘great’ or
‘large.’ It was an idiom meaning the day was well developed—
almost gone.) The disciples therefore urged Jesus, 36 Send
them away, that they may go into the country round about,
and into the villages, and buy themselves bread: for they
have nothing to eat. The disciples, noticing the looming pro-
blem, approached it humanly. Their solution was to send the
crowds into the local villages to buy food.
6:37-38 Jesus had greater plans. His mighty power would

again be manifested as well as His great compassion. He surely
was aware of the potential problem, more so than His disciples.
However, to teach them a lesson, He answered and said unto
them, Give ye them to eat. They could not believe what they
heard. Incredulous, His disciples replied, Shall we go and buy
two hundred pennyworth of bread, and give them to eat?
The word translated as pennyworth (dhnarion denarion)
was a Roman coin otherwise called a denarius. It was roughly
equivalent to a day’s wage in the economy of that day. Or, put
another way, two-hundred pennyworth was the equivalent of a
year’s wages. They were talking significant money. Jesus knew
that, but a lesson was to be taught to His disciples.
He therefore asked them, 38 How many loaves have ye? go
and see. And when they knew, they say, Five, and two fishes.
The loaves referred to would approximate a large hamburger
bun. Jesus therefore directed the disciples to find out how much
food was in the crowd. The disciples returned and glumly re-
ported, “Five loaves and two fishes.” As it turned out, these five
loaves (buns) and two pieces of dried fish were the lunch some
thoughtful mother had made for her son that day. See John 6:8.
That was pretty slim pickings for what turned out to be in excess
of five-thousand people.
6:39-42 Jesus therefore directed them to make all sit down

by companies upon the green grass. 40 And they sat down in
ranks, by hundreds, and by fifties. Perhaps at the direction of
Jesus or of the disciples, the crowd sat down on the grass in
groups of fifties and hundreds. Of interest is how God’s work is
always orderly.
Jesus therefore took the meager meal of five loaves and two
fishes. He therefore 41 looked up to heaven, and blessed, and
brake the loaves, and gave them to his disciples to set before
them; and the two fishes divided he among them all. 42 And
they did all eat, and were filled. Before proceeding further,
Jesus first thanked God and asked His blessing on the food
about to be received. The word translated as blessed (eulogew
eulogeo) can among other things have the sense, ‘to ask God’s
blessing on a thing’ or, ‘pray God to bless it to one’s use.’ This
clearly is the sense at hand. In other words, before eating, Jesus
paused and asked God’s blessing upon the food. The poor
disciples probably were uncertain of what to expect next. They
may have hoped Jesus would not be embarrassed.
However, He took the loaves and fishes and began to brake
them into smaller pieces. To the amazement of the disciples, the
food just kept on braking and braking and braking. It grew from
Jesus’ hands. Often overlooked is that Jesus with His own
hands directly prepared the food for the five-thousand plus
people. Not only did all eat thereof, they all were filled. A tre-
mendous miracle had been wrought at Jesus’ hand. The crowd
may not have fully understood whence came the food they ate.
But the disciples certainly did. Jesus had therein taught them a
great lesson in compassion as well as the ability of God to meet
and provide for the needs of His people.
6:43-44 The miracle was not as yet over. And they took up
twelve baskets full of the fragments, and of the fishes. Truly,
little is much when God is in it. Some have postulated that the
twelve basket of leftovers were Jesus’ way of providing for His
weary disciples. That may well be. Others have suggested that
Jesus repaid the boy twelve-fold for the gift of his sack lunch.
That may be as well. In either case, we are not told. However,
one thing is for sure, God well recompenses those who sacri-
ficially serve Him.
As it turned out, 44 they that did eat of the loaves were about
five thousand men. Matthew’s account adds “beside children and
women” (Matthew 14:21). The crowd probably was predominantly
men. However, there were women and children present which made
the magnitude of the miracle all that much greater.
6:45-46 Jesus’ goal of granting His disciples some rest was

yet to be accomplished. Therefore, straightway he constrain-
ed his disciples to get into the ship, and to go to the other side
before unto Bethsaida, while he sent away the people. He
first made His disciples get back into their boat with instructions
to return to Bethsaida, the hometown of Andrew, Peter, John,
and Philip. Meanwhile, Jesus ordered the crowds to return home as
well. It by now was evening. They all evidently dispersed.
Therefore, 46 when he had sent them away, he departed
into a mountain to pray. It had been a long day. Much had
transpired. In the cool quiet of the evening, Jesus therefore got
alone to spend time in prayer at the close of the day. He had
spent the day in the bustle of the ministry. Now, He needed time
to get alone with His heavenly Father. There, He was refreshed
and found renewed strength. He evidently spent a season of
time in prayer before the fall of darkness.
6:47-48 Meanwhile, when even was come, the ship was

in the midst of the sea, and he alone on the land. From the
heights of the mountain adjacent to the seashore, he saw them
toiling in rowing; for the wind was contrary unto them. The
poor disciples still had found no relaxation. Northerly winds
had come up that night and now they had struck their sail and
were rowing into the head-wind.
48 And he saw them toiling in rowing; for the wind was
contrary unto them: and about the fourth watch of the
night he cometh unto them, walking upon the sea, and
would have passed by them. Therefore, “about the fourth
watch of the night he cometh unto them, walking upon the sea,
and would have passed by them.” The Romans divided the night
into four, three-hour watches beginning at 6 p.m. The Jews had
adopted that. The fourth watch would be the wee hours of the
morning between 3 a.m. and 6 a.m. The disciples evidently had
been struggling against the weather all night. Apparently in the
grey light prior to dawn, Jesus went out to them, “walking upon
the sea.” In fact, He would have walked right by them.
6:49-50 However, when they saw him walking upon the

sea, they supposed it had been a spirit, and cried out. There
was enough light to see something out there, but they could not
tell who or what it was. Their first reaction was they had seen an
apparition of some sort. The word translated as spirit (fant-
asma phantasma) has the sense of a ‘phantom’ or an ‘appar-
ition.’ The disciples were genuinely frightened for they cried
out. The word so translated (anakrazw anakrazo) has the
sense of ‘a cry from the depth of the throat.’ The reflex of deep
feared caused them to literally cry out with a guttural shriek.
They were scared to death. Moreover, “they all saw him, and
were troubled.” They all had seen the misty form out on the
water and they all were shook up.
50 For they all saw him, and were troubled. And
immediately he talked with them, and saith unto them, Be
of good cheer: it is I; be not afraid. To their surprise and
perhaps consternation, Jesus immediately “talked with them,
and saith unto them, Be of good cheer: it is I; be not afraid.” He
walked right up to the boat and in perhaps a chipper tone of
voice, in effect said, ‘Cheer up. It’s just me. Don’t be afraid.’
6:51-52 And he went up unto them into the ship; and the
wind ceased: and they were sore amazed in themselves
beyond measure, and wondered. Jesus thus climbed into the
boat “and the wind ceased.” There is no indication there was a
violent storm running that night. However, the disciples had
had to row against a stiff head-wind. When Jesus got into the
boat, the seas became calm—instantly. They thus “were sore
amazed in themselves beyond measure, and wondered.” The
thought is that they were utterly astonished and wondered at
what they had just experienced. How soon they had forgotten
that not too very long before, Jesus had stilled a violent storm on
Galilee—before their very eyes.
Moreover, they had forgotten what Jesus had done the day
before. 52 For they considered not the miracle of the loaves:
for their heart was hardened. The word translated as
hardened (pwrow poroo) can also have the sense of ‘blinded’
as in having a hardened scale over one’s eyes. With the
frustration of a night in rowing into the wind, they forgot what
Jesus had done the evening before in feeding the five thousand.
In the flesh, they were weary, aggravated, and instinctively
reacted in fear when they saw the form of Jesus on the sea.
6:53 Jesus had directed them to go to Bethsaida. However,

because they fought head-winds most of the night, when they
had passed over, they came into the land of Gennesaret, and
drew to the shore. John’s account suggests that this might be
one and the same with Capernaum. See John 6:17-14. Though
in the same region at the northern end of the lake, they probably
are not precisely the same. Gennesaret is somewhat south and
west of Capernaum. Josephus, however, says that the land of
Gennesaret was watered with a very excellent spring, which the
inhabitants of that place called Capernaum hence the other
name thereof. The name generically means, ‘place of comfort.’
6:54-55 However, as soon as Jesus landed, when they

were come out of the ship, straightway they knew him. The
local populace instantly recognized Jesus. From their
perspective, a celebrity was in their midst: Jesus of Nazareth,
the miracle worker. Hence, they 55 ran through that whole
region round about, and began to carry about in beds those
that were sick, where they heard he was. As the previous day
had ended, the new day began alike.
6:56 Thus, whithersoever he entered, into villages, or

cities, or country, they laid the sick in the streets, and
besought him that they might touch if it were but the border
of his garment: and as many as touched him were made
whole. Wherever Jesus went, whether in town or in the
countryside, those sick were laid on their beds along the
roadways. The people besought Jesus to get close enough for
the sick to touch but the hem of His robe. For those that did, they
were healed. Once again, the word translated as whole (swzw
sodzo) has the alternate and more common sense of being
‘saved.’ As poor sick people in simple faith reached out to touch
Him, that simple faith expressed was enough for Jesus to heal
them and quite possibly save them altogether. They touched
Him and His saving grace flowed freely to them.
*****
Overview of Mark 7: As the gospel continues, Mark pre-

sents teaching of Jesus regarding tradition versus truth. Jesus
then made transition that the real problem was the heart. There
also is record of the healing of the Syrophenician woman as
well as the deaf and dumb man healed in the region of
Decapolis.
7:1 Jesus’ ministry to this point had largely been in the

region of Galilee. The seat of Judaism was Jerusalem and word
of Jesus’ ministry had reached there. Accordingly, there came
together unto him the Pharisees, and certain of the scribes,
which came from Jerusalem. They undoubtedly came to see
firsthand about this Jesus of Nazareth of which they had heard.
7:2-3 However, when they saw some of his disciples eat

bread with defiled, that is to say, with unwashen, hands,
they found fault. Insight into the attitude and heart condition of
the scribes and Pharisees is herein found: “they found fault.”
One characteristic of the Pharisees was a critical spirit. Jesus
never took them to task for their doctrinal position. They were
orthodox. However, one major problem was their critical
attitude.
Mark goes on to present further insight into their mind-set.
3 For the Pharisees, and all the Jews, except they wash their
hands oft, eat not, holding the tradition of the elders. The
issue at hand was not sanitation or personal hygiene as such.
The key to the problem is found in the “tradition of the elders.”
Jewish tradition had been developed into voluminous com-
mentary on the Scripture. Traditions developed by various
rabbis had come to be viewed as having the same authority as
Scripture. Here, insight is given in to the rabbinical idea of holi-
ness. To them, holiness pertained to external rites such as
washing of hands prior to eating. Therefore, observant Jews,
seeking to please the rabbis, would always wash their hand be-
fore eating. It is evident that some of Jesus’ disciples were not
so encumbered. The critical Pharisees immediately noticed that
they at times ate without washing their hands. They therefore
found fault with both them and Jesus for allowing such.
7:4-5 Moreover, this fixation upon external washing ex-

tended to other areas of daily life as well. For example, when
they come from the market, except they wash, they eat not.
And many other things there be, which they have received
to hold, as the washing of cups, and pots, brasen vessels, and
of tables. Of interest is the focus upon external purity by the
Pharisees and scribes. There was little or no thought of spiritual
impurity or filthiness of heart. Accordingly, 5 the Pharisees
and scribes asked him, Why walk not thy disciples accord-
ing to the tradition of the elders, but eat bread with unwash-
en hands?
7:6-7 Jesus lost no time in replying. The pompous Phar-

isees may have been taken aback. They had self-righteously
criticized Jesus and His disciples. He rather set them on their
ear. Jesus thus answered and said unto them, Well hath
Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This
people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far
from me. The quotation is from Isaiah 29:13 whence
Jehovah had taken Israel to task for their outward piety while
at the same time being full of inward apostasy. Jesus, in
applying this to His audience, called them hypocrites. The
word so translated (‘upokrithv hupokrites), though
literally referring to an actor, in this context has the sense of
a ‘pre-tender’ or a ‘fake.’ The pretense of these religious
pretenders was apparent to Jesus.
He accordingly hit the nail on the head. 7 Howbeit in vain
do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the com-
mandments of men. The heresy of rabbinical Israel was their
penchant for setting forth human precepts as having divine
authority. They were not dissimilar to many modern ‘denom-
inations’ within Christendom which routinely add catechism,
creeds, additional books, and dogma to the Scripture, elevating
these to the same rank as God’s Word. It was vain then. It is vain
today. The word translated as doctrines (didaskalia didas-
kalia) literally means ‘teachings.’ However, in this con-text, it
has the sense of authoritative teaching or divine doctrine.
What is of further interest is that Jesus equated Himself
here to Jehovah God. In quoting from Israel 29:13, where Je-
hovah took Israel to task, Jesus then, in that same context,
referred to Jehovah in verse 7 as me. The Deity of Christ is clear-
ly in view as well as the equation of Jehovah of the Old Test-
ament with Jesus of the New.
7:8-9 Jesus therefore further confronted these religious

ritualists to wit. For laying aside the commandment of God,
ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and
cups: and many other such like things ye do. Jesus charged
these religious leaders with disregarding the commandments of
God to focus upon their trivial, religious minutia such as the
ceremonial purification of pots and cups, etc. Jesus went a step
further.
They not only had disregarded God’s Word, but 9 full well
ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your
own tradition. Serious charges were these. It is one thing to
ignore God’s Word. It is another to reject it. With that Jesus
charged them. What they replaced Scripture with was the ob-
servance of their own tradition.
The word so translated (aradosiv paradosis), in this
context, refers to the body of precepts, especially the rituals,
which in the opinion of the later Jews were orally delivered by
Moses and orally transmitted in unbroken succession to subse-
quent generations. They held these precepts as both illustrating
and expanding the written Law and they were to be obeyed with
equal reverence. In short, these rabbinical traditions had been
given the rank of Scripture and had taken its place. Much
religion to this day does the same.
7:10-12 Jesus proceeded to illustrate His point. He quoted

from Exodus as written by Moses, Honour thy father and thy
mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die
the death. The first quotation is from Exodus 20:12 and the
latter from Exodus 21:17. The Law of Moses clearly ordered
respect for one’s parents. Disregard of such was at the pain of
death. (The reference to “die the death” was a first-century id-
iom thus translated from the Hebrew text referring to summary
execution.)
However, in contrast to that clear commandment of God,
rabbinical Israel, personified in the Pharisees, decreed, 11 If a
man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to
say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me;
he shall be free. The word transliterated Corban refers to a gift
dedicated to the Temple. It derived from the Hebrew word pro-
nounced the same which referred to the free-will sweet-savor
offerings described in Leviticus 1 and 2. An observant Jew
could bring of his resources such a free-will sweet-savor offer-
ing at any time.
The problem Jesus attacked was the practice of hypo-
critical Jews in directing sizeable resources to the Temple as a
form of religious lobbying. They thus curried the political favor
of the ruling elites in the high priests and Temple authorities for
pay-backs in return. In so doing, they deprived their elderly
parents who depended upon them for support. Notwithstand-
ing, the scribes and Pharisees proclaimed such practice as
lawful and proper. It would be analogous today to someone
giving a large gift to his church in return for political pay-backs
(and tax write-offs) while this same one’s elderly parents were
living in poverty. These wicked hypocrites did exactly that and
allowed him 12 no more to do ought for his father or his mother.
In other words, if a party gave a big check to the Temple, he was
thereby exempted from assisting his elderly parents.
7:13 They thus were making the word of God of none ef-
fect through their tradition, which ye have delivered: and
many such like things do ye. The word translated as none
effect (akurow akuroo) has the sense of ‘null and void.’ They
effectively nullified the Word of God by their religious tradi-
tions. Moreover, Jesus implied this was not the only problem.
There were many other similar disgraceful practices allowed in
the name of the traditions of rabbinical Judaism.
7:14-16 In that immediate context, and no doubt with the

critical Pharisees and scribes listening, when he had called all
the people unto him, he said unto them, Hearken unto me
every one of you, and understand. He in effect sternly said,
‘Listen to me and understand what I am about to say!’ Jesus thus
confronted head-on the apostate philosophy of Jewish exter-
nalism. 15 There is nothing from without a man, that
entering into him can defile him: but the things which come
out of him, those are they that defile the man.
Contrary to the prevailing rabbinical position, Jesus taught
that nothing outward (dirty hands for example) can spiritually
defile a man. The spiritual dimension was not even on the radar
screen of the Pharisees. Their scope and perspective were all
externals. Rather, Jesus taught how that which comes out of a
man is what defiles. As will be further explained momentarily,
Jesus was not speaking of bodily elimination. Rather, he referr-
ed to spiritual impurity which emanates from within. That is
what defiles. He thus warned, 16 If any man have ears to hear,
let him hear. In other words, if you can hear this, take heed
thereto. (There may be a latent reference to the curse upon Israel
found in Isaiah 6:9-10 regarding having ears which can hear, but
will not, etc.)
7:17-19 This was direct contradiction of conventional
rabbinical teaching. His audience was astounded. Never before
had they heard anything like this. Therefore, when he was
entered into the house from the people, his disciples asked
him concerning the parable. Though the common word for
‘parable’ is used (parabolh parabolé), it here has a less known
idea. That is of ‘a pithy and instructive saying, involving some
likeness or comparison and having preceptive or admonitory force.’
Or in other words, the disciples asked Him what this all meant.
Jesus therefore answered, 18 Are ye so without under-
standing also? Do ye not perceive, that whatsoever thing
from without entereth into the man, it cannot defile him. His
simple point was that external matter even in being ingested
does not spiritually defile a person.
Continuing, Jesus said, 19 Because it entereth not into his
heart, but into the belly, and goeth out into the draught,
purging all meats? Whatever happens to be eaten, even with
dirty hands or unclean eating utensils, does not enter the heart.
It goes into the stomach and eventually winds up in the sewer
thus eliminating all bodily waste. But Jesus was not talking about
the defilement of the body and its normal elimination. He was talk-
ing about the human heart, the spiritual center and seat of our being.
7:20-23 To the contrary, That which cometh out of the

man, that defileth the man. The word translated as cometh
out (ekporeuomai ekporeuomai) has the thought of ‘proceed-
ing’ or ‘emanating.’ In other words, what a person says or does
is what defiles him.
Accordingly, Jesus presented a foul list of sin which eman-
ates from within the human heart. 21 For from within, out of
the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries,
fornications, murders, 22 Thefts, covetousness, wickedness,
deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, fool-
ishness. All manner of sin in the human experience emanates
from within the heart whether it be evil thoughts, sexual sin,
murder, dishonesty in any form, a foul mouth, pride, foolishness
or whatever. The reference to an “evil eye” likely alludes to an
eye that pierces with its gloating stare. The word translated as
blasphemy (blasfhmia blasphemia), though it certainly can
refer to irreverent or unrighteous statements about God, here
likely has its more generic sense. That is nasty or harsh com-
ments about anyone. It refers to a foul mouth. The word
translated as foolishness (afrosunh aphrosune), among other
things, has the sense of ‘recklessness’ or wicked folly.
It all emanates from the sinful human heart as Jesus noted.
23 All these evil things come from within, and defile the man.
The Pharisees taught that defilement (sin) came from silly
externals such as eating without washing. Jesus rebutted that
folly by pointing out the real source of defilement was the
human heart. From thence emanated all manner of putrid sin.
7:24 After this incident, Jesus arose, and went into the
borders of Tyre and Sidon, and entered into an house, and
would have no man know it: but he could not be hid. He thus
sought retreat from the press of the ministry in Galilee. There
had been the interminable press of the multitudes, the harass-
ment of the Pharisees, and the lack of perception by His own
disciples. He therefore traveled further north and west into
Lebanon and the vicinity of Tyre and Sidon. This was gentile
country and Jesus, perhaps, sought a few days of respite. Never-
theless, His fame followed Him even here. Though he sought
refuge in a private home, “he could not be hid.”
7:25-26 There, a certain woman, whose young daughter

had an unclean spirit, heard of him, and came and fell at his
feet. Moreover, 26 the woman was a Greek, a Syrophenician
by nation; and she besought him that he would cast forth
the devil out of her daughter. The reference to her being a
Greek likely is in the generic sense whereby Jews often so
referred to gentiles. That likely is the thought. She was a gentile.
Specifically, she was of a nationality of that day which was part
Syrian and part Phoenician. In any event, she begged Jesus to
cast out the demon in her daughter. Significant is the fact that
she realized what her daughter’s affliction was. She was
‘demon possessed.’
7:27-28 Jesus knowing she was a gentile tested her. He thus

said unto her, Let the children first be filled: for it is not meet
to take the children’s bread, and to cast it unto the dogs. The
thought on its surface is that one’s children ought to be fed first
before anything is given to the dogs. (The word translated as
meet {kalov kalos} simply means ‘good.’) What Jesus how-
ever was referring to, and the woman undoubtedly understood,
was that Jesus’ ministry with all its benefits (in this case
healing) was to go first to the Jews. They commonly referred to
neighboring gentile nations as ‘dogs.’ The woman in all like-
lihood understood what Jesus meant.
Nevertheless, she pressed him further. 28 Yes, Lord: yet
the dogs under the table eat of the children’s crumbs. Using
the same idiom that Jesus had used, she noted a simple axiom of
life. Dogs routinely get what falls off the table. She was not
deterred by Jesus’ snub. It only caused her to press Him further
to heal her daughter. That did not escape Jesus.
It should be noted that Jesus was not trying to be rude or cast
this gentile woman’s problem aside. Rather, He was testing her
faith. Unlike many of the self-righteous Jews in nearby Israel,
she was more than willing to humble herself before Jesus. The
greater principle was the woman’s faith. She, moreover, per-
sisted therein. For that reason, Jesus answered her petition.
7:29-30 And he said unto her, For this saying go thy

way; the devil is gone out of thy daughter. 30 And when she
was come to her house, she found the devil gone out, and her
daughter laid upon the bed. Jesus therefore said to her, “For
this saying go thy way; the devil is gone out of thy daughter.”
Again, the word translated as devil (daimonion daimonion) is
a reference to a demon—a subordinate, unclean spirit of Satan’s
realm. Without question, the woman must have rushed home in
anticipation. To her delight, upon arriving home, “she found the
devil gone out, and her daughter laid upon the bed.” The word
translated as laid (ballw ballo) is a perfect, passive, participle
and has the sense how this girl had been thrown onto her bed.
Evidently, as the demon departed, it threw the girl down on her
bed. But she had been made whole by Jesus. Praise God!
7:31-32 And again, departing from the coasts of Tyre

and Sidon, he came unto the sea of Galilee, through the
midst of the coasts of Decapolis. 32 And they bring unto him
one that was deaf, and had an impediment in his speech;
and they beseech him to put his hand upon him. Jesus
thereafter headed back to more familiar country. Jesus traveled
all the way from Lebanon across northern Israel (Galilee) on
further east into the region of Decapolis (so named because of
ten cities there ranging from Damascus to Gadara). In that area
was one brought to Him which was “deaf, and had an imped-
iment in his speech; and they beseech him to put his hand upon
him.” Mark again uses the historic present to add further drama
to the record. The man brought to Jesus was not only deaf, but
had a speech defect. It may be in never hearing, he never learned
to properly speak. The word translated as impediment in his
speech (mogilalov mogilalos) literally means to ‘speak with
difficulty.’
7:33-35 Jesus therefore took him aside from the

multitude, and put his fingers into his ears, and he spit, and
touched his tongue; 34 And looking up to heaven, he sighed,
and saith unto him, Ephphatha, that is, Be opened. This was
a peculiar miracle indeed. However, it may be that Jesus real-
ized that this poor man could not hear Him speak. Therefore, He
used a form of simple sign language. He first touched the man’s
ears putting His finger actually into both of them. The next step
is slightly ambiguous. However, Jesus evidently placed a bit of
spit on a His fingertip and then touched the man’s tongue. In so
doing, He touched both defective organs in a most graphic
object lesson. Jesus thence looked up to heaven with a sigh (a
groan or an inarticulate sound) and said to the man, Ephphatha.
The latter was an Aramaic word (which was the vernacular of
that region). As noted in the text, it simply meant, “Be opened.”
35 And straightway his ears were opened, and the string
of his tongue was loosed, and he spake plain Immediately
therefore, this fellows “ears were opened, and the string of his
tongue was loosed, and he spake plain.” Not only could he now
hear, an even greater miracle had taken place. He who had never
heard a spoken word was now completely articulate. Mark uses
the descriptive reference to the “string of his tongue.” It literally
refers to the band which held it. The word translated as plain
(orywv orthos) literally means ‘right.’ He could not only now
speak, but he could do so properly.
7:36-37 And he charged them that they should tell no

man: but the more he charged them, so much the more a
great deal they published it; 37 And were beyond measure
astonished, saying, He hath done all things well: he maketh
both the deaf to hear, and the dumb to speak. Jesus therefore
ordered all present “that they should tell no man: but the more
he charged them, so much the more a great deal they published
it.” (The word translated as published {khrussw kerusso}
has the common sense ‘to preach.’) Though Jesus was not offic-
ially in the territory of Israel, He was near. As was often the case
throughout His ministry, He urged people upon whom He had
performed miracles to not further announce it. The reason likely
is that the time for His official revelation as the Messiah of Israel
was not yet at hand. That would not take place until His official
entry into Jerusalem the Sunday prior to His crucifixion. Not-
withstanding His orders to the contrary, those present preached
all the more what Jesus had done.
Moreover, the crowds present “were beyond measure
astonished, saying, He hath done all things well: he maketh both
the deaf to hear, and the dumb to speak.” Though utterly
amazed, they could only proclaim that He had done all things
well. Indeed, that remains true to this day.
*****
Overview of Mark 8: In this chapter, Jesus feeds four thou-

sand people. Then after Pharisees had asked Him for a sign, Je-
sus warned His disciples of the leaven of the Pharisees. Record
is also made of Jesus healing the blind man of Bethsaida. Mark
then records Peter’s confession of faith. The chapter concludes
with Jesus’ lesson on the true cost of discipleship.
8:1-3 As Jesus’ ministry progressed, Mark recorded the

following. In those days the multitude being very great, and
having nothing to eat, Jesus called his disciples unto him,
and saith unto them, 2 I have compassion on the multitude,
because they have now been with me three days, and have
nothing to eat: 3 And if I send them away fasting to their
own houses, they will faint by the way: for divers of them
came from far. The word translated as compassion (splag-
cnizomai splagchnizomai) is of interest. It has the literal sense
‘to be moved as to one’s bowels.’ The ancients thought that the
bowels were the seat of love and pity—the tender emotions.
The thought is of concern for others welling up from the depth
of one’s being. The sensitivity of our Lord is thus in view. He
perceived that those following Him had not opportunity to eat a
decent meal in three days.
Jesus’ reference to fasting on their part was not voluntary
fasting, but rather the simple matter of not having anything to
eat. He knew if He sent them on their ways, many of them would
collapse from exhaustion. In that regard, He knew that a large
proportion of His following was from all over the greater region.
8:4 The disciples had quickly forgotten that Jesus a while

earlier had fed five-thousand people in similar straits. See Mark
6:34 ff. In their spiritual myopia, they therefore asked Him,
From whence can a man satisfy these men with bread here
in the wilderness? The disciples exhibited the tunnel vision of
unbelief. Humanly, there was no resource available for the
need. They thus saw no solution to the problem.
8:5-7 Jesus however was not so encumbered. He thus asked

the disciples, How many loaves have ye? And they said,
Seven. The word translated as loaves (artov artos) literally
means ‘bread.’ Here, it likely referred to the then typical ‘loaf’
of bread which was about the size of a modern hamburger bun,
perhaps slightly larger. Jesus therefore 6 commanded the
people to sit down on the ground: and he took the seven
loaves, and gave thanks, and brake, and gave to his disciples
to set before them; and they did set them before the people.
In fashion similar to the feeding of the five thousand earlier,
Jesus had the people sit down (likely in orderly fashion). He
then openly gave thanks to God for the food before them. A
lesson remains to this day for the same. He then broke the bread
into smaller pieces and gave it to His disciples who in turn dis-
tributed it to the people.
The disciples also discovered 7 they had a few small
fishes. Jesus therefore blessed, and commanded to set them
also before them. Implied is that the fish were brought forth
after the bread had been distributed. Jesus therefore blessed the
fish which was thence miraculously distributed to the people.
Of interest is that Jesus both thanked God for the bread and then
placed His blessing upon the fish. Again, an example is set
before us to seek God’s blessing upon the food which we eat.
8:8-9 From these meager resources, the multitudes did eat,

and were filled. If that were not a miracle enough, they took up
of the broken meat that was left seven baskets. Truly, little is
much when God is in it. Mark goes on to record, 9 they that had
eaten were about four thousand: and he sent them away.
Upon meeting the needs of His followers, Jesus then sent them
away.
Several major principles are in view. First, Jesus knew the
needs of His followers and met those needs. Truly, He does the
same to this day. Second, though their resources were small,
Jesus demonstrated His ability to use little to do much. His com-
passion, power, and omniscience are at hand.
8:10 Though not noted earlier in the chapter, it is clear the

events therein took place in the vicinity of the Sea of Galilee. He
thereafter immediately entered into a ship with his disciples,
and came into the parts of Dalmanutha. Though no longer
existing, Dalmanutha was thought to be a village on the western
shore of Galilee. Matthew’s account refers to the same place as
Magdala. See Matthew 15:39.
8:11 Upon arrival in the region of Dalmanutha, Pharisees

came forth, and began to question with him, seeking of him
a sign from heaven, tempting him. Though not noted, the
Pharisees may have been from Jerusalem. The reference to
them questioning Jesus has the sense of interrogating or
examining Him as a lawyer might do to a witness in court
proceedings. They sought a sign from Him. The idea likely was,
if you are the Messiah, show a sign to prove it. The word trans-
lated as tempting (peirazw peirazo) has the sense to in this
context ‘to test.’ They thus tested Jesus to see how He would
respond.
Jews historically have sought signs from God. For exam-
ple, in John 2:18, they demanded a sign from Jesus. Paul noted
in I Corinthians 1:22 that the Jews require a sign. The
significance of such sign seeking is a manifest lack of faith. Not-
withstanding the mighty miracles done before their very eyes,
they wanted Jesus to do more to prove His identity. Their
seeking after a sign had the significance of saying, ‘We might
believe you if you showed us more signs.’ It was a tacit ad-
mission of unbelief. Implied is that if Jesus really did a big mir-
acle, they might believe.
8:12 Whereupon, Jesus sighed deeply in his spirit, and

saith, Why doth this generation seek after a sign? verily I
say unto you, There shall no sign be given unto this gener-
ation. The exasperation and frustration of Jesus are clearly
manifested. He sighed deeply. It manifested an aggravation
which went to the bottom of His spirit. He therefore announced,
no sign would be given to that generation. (See also Matthew
12:39-40 where on another occasion, Jesus told other critical
Jews the only sign He would give them would be that of His
resurrection.)
8:13-14 Jesus thus left them, and entering into the ship
again departed to the other side. In the face of such unbelief,
Jesus therefore got back into the boat and went to the other side
of Galilee (possibly Bethsaida—see 8:22). This time it was His
disciples who didn’t have any food. They 14 had forgotten to
take bread, neither had they in the ship with them more
than one loaf.
8:15 Jesus knowing that used the occasion to warn them,

Take heed, beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, and of the
leaven of Herod. He here spoke not only of the leaven of the
Pharisees, but also that of Herod. Leaven, of course, was yeast.
It was used to cause the dense dough to rise by permeating it
with its gasses (carbon dioxide). In the Scripture it conveyed the
sense of sin as well as the pervasive, infiltrating nature of sin.
Jesus thus warned His disciples of the insidious influence of the
Pharisees. They had just witnessed it in the Pharisees’ un-
believing interrogation of Jesus. It typified doubt and unbelief,
which if left unchecked, would infect others. In Matthew’s
account of this incident (Matthew 16:6), he recorded Jesus as
referring to the leaven of the Sadducees. In combining the two,
Jesus undoubtedly referred to all three parties. In all likelihood,
Jesus warned His disciples of the untoward spiritual influence
of the Pharisees and Sadducees as well as the secular outlook of
Herod.
8:16-18 And they reasoned among themselves, saying,

It is because we have no bread. 17 And when Jesus knew it,
he saith unto them, Why reason ye, because ye have no
bread? perceive ye not yet, neither understand? have ye
your heart yet hardened? 18 Having eyes, see ye not? and
having ears, hear ye not? and do ye not remember? The
disciples were not on the same page with Jesus. They thought
He was talking about food. They thus “reasoned among them-
selves, saying, It is because we have no bread.” However, when
Jesus perceived they did not understand Him, He said, “Why
reason ye, because ye have no bread? perceive ye not yet, nei-
ther understand? have ye your heart yet hardened?” Jesus first
accosted the dull thinking of His disciples. Note that He
questioned their reasoning and perception. Then, He quest-
ioned their hearts. Were their hearts hardened? Then He turned
to their physical faculties, “Having eyes, see ye not? and having
ears, hear ye not?” Jesus in effect said to them, ‘Haven’t you
seen and heard what I have done?’ Then He focused upon their
memories, ‘and do ye not remember?”
8:19-20 Jesus therefore interrogated them. When I brake

the five loaves among five thousand, how many baskets full
of fragments took ye up? They say unto him, Twelve. He
asked further, 20 And when the seven among four thousand,
how many baskets full of fragments took ye up? And they
said, Seven.
8:21 And he said unto them, How is it that ye do not

understand? Jesus therefore asked them, “How is it that ye do
not understand?” He cross-examined their entire being. He
questioned their thinking. He questioned their hearts. He
questioned their eyesight and hearing. He finally questioned
their memories. He concluded this interrogation by asking why
they did not understand. It is one of the sharpest incidents in our
Lord’s ministry with His disciples. It was one thing for the
unbelieving Pharisees to provoke Him. It was still another for
His own disciples to manifest such spiritual blindness.
Jesus truly was exasperated with them. After all they had
witnessed with their very eyes and heard with their ears, how
could they be so spiritually imperceptive? No further comment
is made as to the reaction of the disciples. There likely was stun-
ned silence. Mark thence directs the narrative to Jesus’ healing
of a blind man. That may not be coincidental.
8:22 Once again using the historic present tense, Mark

records, And he cometh to Bethsaida; and they bring a blind
man unto him, and besought him to touch him. Who the they
are, we are not told. They likely were people of the community.
It is of further note that they simply asked Jesus to touch the
man. Implicit is great faith, knowing that by merely touching the
man, Jesus could heal him.
8:23 And he took the blind man by the hand, and led
him out of the town; and when he had spit on his eyes, and
put his hands upon him, he asked him if he saw ought. Jesus
therefore, “took the blind man by the hand, and led him out of
the town; and when he had spit on his eyes, and put his hands
upon him, he asked him if he saw ought.” Why Jesus led the
man out of town is not clear. Some have speculated that it was
to avoid the glare of publicity of the crowds in this town. Of
interest are the various ways in which Jesus touched the man.
He first led him by the hand. He then spat upon his darkened
eyes. He then placed His hands upon the man. Though those
who brought the man to Jesus clearly had faith to believe that
Jesus could heal him, it may be the man himself did not. There-
fore, it may be that Jesus took him through this extended ex-
ercise to prime faith in the man. Each form of Jesus’ touch led
to greater expectation. Finally, Jesus asked the man if he could
see anything.
8:24 And he looked up, and said, I see men as trees,

walking. The fellow replied, “I see men as trees, walking.” The
healing was not complete. It may be that the man had yet to
completely trust Jesus. However, now he had clear indication of
Jesus’ power. He could see men, but they were not in focus.
Notwithstanding, the man now knew that Jesus could heal if He
would.
8:25 Jesus therefore put his hands again upon his eyes,
and made him look up: and he was restored, and saw every
man clearly. This is the only record of a progressive healing by
Jesus. However, it would seem He was enabling one who was
not so sure about the whole matter to have the faith to trust Him
altogether. (Of interest is the word translated as restored
{apokayistemi apokathistemi}. It implies the man once had
sight and had lost it. Jesus restored it. He thus recognized men
and trees he once had known.)
8:26 And he sent him away to his house, saying, Neither

go into the town, nor tell it to any in the town. Jesus therefore
sent the man away directing him, “Neither go into the town, nor
tell it to any in the town.” The miracle took place at Bethsaida.
It was in Israel. The time for Jesus’ revelation as Messiah and
King was not as yet at hand. He therefore sought to diminish any
premature proclamation of His true identity. There may again
be overtones of Isaiah 6:9-10. Israel saw but did not perceive.
They heard, but did not understand. Jesus thus may have in-
tended that as fulfillment of the prophecy in Isaiah 6.
8:27 Thereafter, Jesus went out, and his disciples, into

the towns of Caesarea Philippi. This region was considerably
north of Galilee in what might be considered modern Lebanon
or Syria. The significance of this is that He was, for all practical
purposes, out of Israel. He was beyond the ears of unbelieving
Jews. It was in the vicinity of Mount Hermon and it may be that
there the following incident took place.
As they walked along in the way he asked his disciples,
saying unto them, Whom do men say that I am? While in the
midst of unbelieving Israel, Jesus had taught in parables, hinting
at the truth, but often not explicitly so. However, now He was
with His trusted disciples away from doubting Jews. He thus
asked them who the men of Israel said He was.
8:28 His disciples promptly replied, John the Baptist: but

some say, Elias; and others, One of the prophets. Some Jews
thought He was John the Baptist in resurrected form. Others
thought He was a reincarnation of Elijah. Others thought He
was the revisiting of some other of the prophets.
8:29 Jesus however asked them, But whom say ye that I

am? And Peter answereth and saith unto him, Thou art the
Christ. Peter hit the nail on the head. Notwithstanding times of
spiritual immaturity or dullness, He knew that His Lord was the
Christ.
8:30 And he charged them that they should tell no man

of him. However, as in so many other situations, Jesus “charged
them that they should tell no man of him.” The time of His
official revelation to Israel was not yet. As will be seen in the
following text, Israel had already rejected Jesus as Messiah for
all practical purposes. The final rejection would take place
when He officially and formally presented Himself to them as
their King. The die had been cast and the mold was set. In the
meantime, He therefore suppressed public pronouncement of
His divine identity.
8:31 This is the turning point in our Lord’s earthly ministry.

Though as yet unofficial, Israel had rejected Him as their Savior
and King. His focus now was toward Calvary and the cross. He
therefore began to teach them, that the Son of man must
suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders, and of the
chief priests, and scribes, and be killed, and after three days
rise again.
Jesus thus summarized the final months of His remaining
ministry. It was ominous and foreboding. For only the third time
in Mark’s gospel, He referred to Himself as the Son of man. He
thus noted how that (1) He would “suffer many things.” He
would (2) “be rejected of the elders, and of the chief priests, and
scribes.” In short, Jesus foretold that He would be utterly
rejected by official Israel of which these officers represented.
(3) He would be killed. And finally (4), He would rise again. He
thus precisely, without parable or allegory, foretold what lay
ahead. His ministry no longer was preaching “repent for the
kingdom of God is at hand.” His focus now upon was the cross.
Everything in His ministry from this point onward was now
under the shadow of the cross.
8:32 And he spake that saying openly. And Peter took

him, and began to rebuke him. Peter typified the conventional
wisdom of the day. Israel was looking for a political and
military savior who would forcibly expel the Romans, restore
Israel to being an independent state, and exalt it to be a super-
power among the nations. Peter believed that Jesus was in fact
the Messiah—the Son of the living God. However, there
undoubtedly were still overtones of the conventional wisdom
regarding the Messiah in His mind. He knew Jesus was the
Messiah, but he had no inkling that the Messiah would be
crucified much less rise again.
Notwithstanding that Jesus “spake that saying openly,”
Peter “took him, and began to rebuke him.” Though unrecord-
ed, by Mark, Matthew wrote that Peter said, “Be it far from thee,
Lord: this shall not be unto thee” (Matthew 16:22). Peter in
effect challenged Jesus. He impulsively said in effect, ‘No way.
That will never happen to you!’
8:33 But when he had turned about and looked on his

disciples, he rebuked Peter, saying, Get thee behind me,
Satan: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but
the things that be of men. The gravity of Jesus’ response is
shown not only in how that He turned around for all to hear, but
in how He rebuked Peter. Jesus therefore, “rebuked Peter, say-
ing, Get thee behind me, Satan: for thou savourest not the things
that be of God, but the things that be of men.” To Peter’s
astonishment, Jesus likened him to Satan. The word satan can
also have the generic sense of ‘adversary.’ Whether Jesus
intended that or implied Satan himself is not clear. It may be that
even as the devil had tempted Jesus on the mount as His minis-
try began, he again spoke at least in philosophy through Peter.
The word translated as savourest (fronew phroneo), in
this context, has the sense ‘to understand.’ Jesus in effect said to
Peter, ‘You don’t understand the things of God, but rather that
of men.’ Peter had spoken from the naturalistic, political un-
derstanding of the Messiah so prevalent in that day. That quite
evidently was the philosophy Satan was more than happy to
promote. It was 180 degrees out of phase with the true work of
Christ.
Jesus’ ministry was spiritual in turning men’s hearts back to
God. The political idea of the Messiah placed the focus on man
and human politics. Satan not only was happy with that view,
but may have even invented it himself. Jesus’ focus, however,
would continue to draw toward the cross.
8:34 Notwithstanding Jesus attempt to escape the crowds

in unbelieving Israel, evidently local gentiles caught wind of
His presence and began to gather. Therefore, when he had
called the people unto him with his disciples also, he said
unto them, Whosoever will come after me, let him deny
himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.
For the first time in Mark’s gospel the word cross appears.
It is in the direct context of Jesus’ comment of being killed in
verse 31. He clearly was now operating under the shadow of the
cross. Though still ahead, Jesus knew He was on His way
thereto. Accordingly, He therefore taught that if one were to
come after Him (i.e., become a disciple), he must first (1) “deny
himself” and then (2) “take up his cross,” and finally (3) “follow
me.” True discipleship requires a willingness to not only come
to Christ, but to deny self with all its desires and interests. It
means assuming the burden and reproach which is exemplified
in the cross of Christ.
Jesus’ hearers understood the significance of taking up a
cross. Crucifixion was a Roman form of execution. They no
doubt had witnessed or at least heard of a crucifixion. Part of
that process involved the condemned dragging his own cross to
the place of execution. It became a metaphor of not only a great
burden, but also of reproach. One carrying a cross was con-
demned and essentially dead.
Being a disciple of Jesus has never been easy. It is fraught
with trouble and reproach from the world. Finally, in so denying
oneself and bearing one’s cross, discipleship then required
following Christ altogether. Clearly, discipleship carries a great
cost. It is not easy. It demands a denial of self and a willingness
to suffer for Christ’s sake. His disciples would learn that lesson
indeed in the years to come.
8:35 Jesus therefore taught one of several great paradoxes.

For whosoever will save his life shall lose it; but whosoever
shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel’s, the same shall
save it. Jesus’ likely thought is that saving one’s life is to live for
self. To so live is to lose it. The word translated as lose (apol-
lumi apollumi) is most frequently rendered as ‘perish.’ In
essence, Jesus taught that when people live for themselves, they
will perish. The reference to losing one’s life likely refers to
denying it for His sake and the gospel. In so denying our own
selfish interests and taking up the cross in serving Him, we will
save it. The word translated as save (swzw sodzo), though
normally referring to salvation as such, here, likely has the
thought of ‘preservation.’
The greater thought is that in losing ourselves for Christ and
the gospel’s sake by denying ourselves and accepting the
burden of the cross, the reward is a preservation of life. It comes
not only in this life, but on into eternal life. The overarching
thought at hand is that living for self leads to perishing whereas
living for Christ leads to life altogether.
8:36 Jesus puts it another way. For what shall it profit a

man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?
He here puts the matter in financial terms. To paraphrase, Jesus
essentially said, ‘For what profit is it if a man shall become the
richest man in the world, but lose his own soul?’ If it were
possible for one man to own the entire world, what would be his
gain in losing his soul? Jesus put things into perspective which
in this life we often don’t.
The devil had in effect offered Jesus the same ‘bargain’ in
offering Him all the kingdoms of this world on the mount of
temptation. Only a fool would sell his soul to the devil for the
gain he can give. Nevertheless, men do it all the time. It is a rip-
off of eternal dimensions.
8:37 Jesus put it even more succinctly. Or what shall a

man give in exchange for his soul? The answer to that
question should be apparent. There is not enough money in the
world ten times over which can compensate the loss of one’s
eternal soul. To live for self and fortune while losing one’s soul
is not only stupidity, it is the depths of folly.
8:38 Jesus thus concluded this pungent lesson with the

following warning. Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed
of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful
generation; of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed,
when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy
angels. He warned of being ashamed (1) of not only Him, but
also of (2) His words. Implicit is the verbal inspiration of the
Bible. It is not only the Word of God (which it is), but it also is
the very words of God. The very words of the Bible are crucial.
They are the building blocks of the greater Word of God.
Jesus warned against those who will be ashamed of Him
and His words before the present adulterous, sinful generation.
Not a great deal has changed since then. Sin in general and adultery
in particular were common in that day. The same is true today.
In that regard, Jesus warned that at His coming (clearly
implying His return), He would be ashamed of the same feeble
disciples. Moreover, when He returns, it will be with the glory
of the Father and with the angelic realm. The second coming of
Christ is clearly in view. See Revelation 19:11-16.
Thus, in this pointed paragraph, Jesus has set forth the
conditions of true discipleship. It is not easy. It requires sacrifice
and right perspective. Moreover, for those professed disciples
who are ashamed of Him in this world, He will be ashamed of
them when He returns. In Revelation 17:14, mention is made of
those returning with Him as being “called, and chosen, and
faithful.” What might be implied is that those who have live a
compromised Christian life, ashamed of their Lord, will not
have the privilege of being in the vanguard of His return in that
day. He will be ashamed of them and will not grant them the
glory and rank of being at the forefront of His return in power
and great glory.
*****
Overview of Mark 9: This chapter contains a number of

significant events in our Lord’s ministry. First, there is the ac-
count of His transfiguration. Then, Mark records the disciples’
inability to cast out a demon. After foretelling again of His
death and resurrection, Mark records the petty squabbling
between the disciples over who would be the greatest. Finally,
Jesus warned of hell and its terrible character.
9:1 Mark now shifts to the events surrounding the
transfiguration of Jesus. And he said unto them, Verily I say
unto you, That there be some of them that stand here, which
shall not taste of death, till they have seen the kingdom of
God come with power. To the thinking of the disciples, they
probably concluded Jesus was speaking of the arrival of the
long-awaited, political kingdom in Israel. In hindsight, we
know that did not happen. We also know that the kingdom of
God will not take place until Jesus returns in power and great
glory. Therefore, what did Jesus have in mind?
The answer in all likelihood is in the next verse. Though
some have sought to apply the kingdom to the church, that cer-
tainly is not the primary application thereof. All of the disciples
saw the advent of the church with the exception of Judas. None
saw a physical, political restoration of the Jewish kingdom.
Rather, Jesus foretold His disciples that soon some of them
would catch a glimpse of the power and glory of the coming
kingdom.
9:2 Therefore, after six days Jesus taketh with him Peter,
and James, and John, and leadeth them up into an high
mountain apart by themselves: and he was transfigured
before them. Less than a week later, some of Jesus’ disciples
(Peter, James, and John to be exact) went with Him onto a high
mountain. Though not certain, it is likely that the mount of
transfiguration was Mount Hermon north of Caesarea Philippi.
There, He was transfigured. The word so translated (meta-
morfow metamorphoo) is whence the English word metamor-
phis derives. Here, it has the sense of being ‘transformed.’ As
will be seen, Jesus was temporarily transformed into the glory
He had with His Father, prior to leaving glory. Since His
resurrection, this evidently is the form of His body. It will be in
that form that He will rule and reign in the kingdom of God.
9:3 Mark then records how that his raiment became

shining, exceeding white as snow; so as no fuller on earth
can white them. The thought is that His clothing became bril-
liant and sparkling, exceeding the whiteness of fresh snow.
They were whiter than any laundry could clean and bleach
them. Before their very eyes, Jesus was transformed into the
glorified form He will have when He returns. See the similar
description of Him in Revelation 1:14-16. When Paul saw Him
in His glorified body, He was blinded. These three disciples saw
Jesus in His glorified form He now has and will have in His
coming kingdom.
9:4 In the meantime, there appeared unto them Elias

with Moses: and they were talking with Jesus. Elias of
course is Elijah. Both he and Moses evidently were temporarily
resurrected from Paradise to converse with Jesus. What their
conversation was about can only be conjectured.
9:5-6 Peter, in seeing and hearing what was going on,

impulsively blurted out; Master, it is good for us to be here:
and let us make three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for
Moses, and one for Elias. Peter in effect said, ‘Master, it is
great for us to be here and witness this. Let us therefore make
three shrines: One for you, and one each for Moses and Elijah.’
Little did Peter realize how foolish his careless suggestion was.
However, Mark does add, 6 For he wist not what to say; for
they were sore afraid. In witnessing what they had, Peter did
not know what to say. They all were frightened at the spectacle
before them. If there is a lesson at hand, it is if we don’t know
what to say, don’t say anything. Peter would have been better
served to keep his mouth shut.
9:7-8 In response, there was a cloud that overshadowed

them: and a voice came out of the cloud, saying, This is my
beloved Son: hear him. God immediately sent a cloud, envel-
oping them therein. The voice emanating therefrom clearly was
that of God the Father. The Father made essentially the same
statement at Jesus’ baptism. The gross faux pas of Peter was
inadvertently equating Elijah and Moses with Jesus. God made
clear, it was His beloved Son in which He was well pleased. His
injunction was as simple as it was direct. “Hear him!” No toler-
ation would be made of placing Elijah and Moses on the same
plane with Jesus.
Accordingly, 8 and suddenly, when they had looked
round about, they saw no man any more, save Jesus only
with themselves. Lest Peter proceed to further folly, God
removed Moses and Elijah, leaving Jesus only with the three
disciples. Though they may not have at first perceived it, these
three disciples had in fact witnessed the kingdom of God in po-
wer in the person of their glorified King.
9:9-10 Thereafter, as they came down from the moun-

tain, he charged them that they should tell no man what
things they had seen, till the Son of man were risen from
the dead. Jesus’ instruction was simple. They were to tell no
one what they had seen until “the Son of man were risen
from the dead.” Peter, James, and John were willing to obey
their Lord’s command, but they were puzzled at Jesus’ final
comment.
They thus 10 kept that saying with themselves. However,
they questioned one with another what the rising from the
dead should mean. They knew that Jesus called Himself the
Son of man. Notwithstanding that, Jesus had not long before
told them He would die and rise again (8:31), it clearly had not
soaked in. They knew Him to be the Christ, the Messiah of God.
Yet, they could not comprehend Him dying. Therefore, His
comments about being risen from the dead made even less
sense. It also is clear that Jesus’ focus no longer was upon
offering the kingdom to Israel. Rather, His perspective was now
the cross.
9:11 The disciples still were focused upon an immediate
reappearance of the kingdom for Israel. From that perspective,
they asked him, saying, Why say the scribes that Elias must
first come? The scribes correctly taught, based upon Malachi
4:5, that Elijah would come before the return of the Messiah.
The three disciples had witnessed Elijah on the mount. Now
they were altogether confused in the matter.
9:12 Jesus therefore answered them, Elias verily cometh

first, and restoreth all things; and how it is written of the
Son of man, that he must suffer many things, and be set at
nought. The point Jesus was making to His confused disciples
is that Elijah had in fact come in the person of John the Baptist
in seeking to restore Israel to their God by repentance.
The latter portion of the verse is slightly enigmatic. The
word commonly translated as how (pwv pos) can also have in
this context the sense, ‘in that manner.’ Thus Jesus in effect
continued, ‘in that manner it is written of the Son of man that He
must suffer many things, and be rejected.’ Jesus linked His re-
jection, death, and resurrection with the rejection of John the
Baptist’s message.
9:13 To clarify Himself for the disciples’ sake, Jesus add-

ed, But I say unto you, That Elias is indeed come, and they
have done unto him whatsoever they listed, as it is written of
him. Elijah had already come in the person of John the Baptist
and they did to Him as they desired. This likely refers to Herod’s
execution of John. There is no known reference to John (Elijah)
being thus rejected. The comment Jesus therefore made, “as it
is written of him,” very well refers to Himself. Jesus in effect
foretold that as they had rejected John, so they would reject
Him. It was that truth with which the disciples were struggling.
They could not come to grips with the concept of a suffering
Messiah.
9:14-16 The scenario now changes altogether. Whereas the
previous sections from 8:27 onward had been Jesus alone with
His disciples, the focus returns again to Him being confronted
by hypocritical, unbelieving scribes.
Mark thus records, And when he came to his disciples, he
saw a great multitude about them, and the scribes
questioning with them. The thought of the scribes questioning
Jesus’ disciples has the sense of ‘disputing’ with them. More-
over, 15 all the people, when they beheld him, were greatly
amazed, and running to him saluted him. The word trans-
lated as saluted (aspazomai asipazomai) simply means
‘greeted.’
The common people, in recognizing Jesus, also noticed that
the scribes were in a verbal confrontation with His disciples.
Sensing a showdown, they ran (1) to see how things would turn
out and (2) to greet Jesus.
Upon arriving, Jesus 16 asked the scribes, What question
ye with them? Jesus’ question to the scribes may have been as
much ‘What are you questioning them?’ as ‘Why are you dis-
puting with them?’
9:17-18 In the mean time, one of the multitude answered

and said, Master, I have brought unto thee my son, which
hath a dumb spirit; 18 And wheresoever he taketh him, he
teareth him: and he foameth, and gnasheth with his teeth,
and pineth away. Insight is given into one form of demon
possession. The poor young man had been struck dumb by this
unclean spirit. It also sent him into convulsions and during such
seizures, the fellow foamed at the mouth and gnashed his teeth.
It was virtually destroying this young man.
The man went on to further pour out his heart, and I spake
to thy disciples that they should cast him out; and they could
not. He had hoped the disciples of Jesus could bring the relief
he sought. Alas, they could not.
9:19 Jesus in apparent exasperation answereth him, and
saith, O faithless generation, how long shall I be with you?
how long shall I suffer you? bring him unto me. The
displeasure of Jesus was not with the man who in simple faith
had sought help. He evidently was put out with His disciples for
their lack of faith to handle the situation. To that degree, they
were likened unto the unbelieving generation all around them.
The word translated as faithless (apistov apistos) in this
context essentially means ‘unbelieving.’ Implied is that the
disciples did not exercise faith in God to deal with the problem.
They may of their own ability sought to cast out the demon.
Jesus had earlier given them that authority. See Mark 6:6. Here,
they evidently sought to do it in their own ability. Jesus was thus
disgusted with them. He in effect asked, ‘How long am I going
to be with you? How long do I have to put up with you?’ He was
upset that His disciples had spiritually dropped the ball. He thus
summoned the afflicted young man.
9:20 They thus brought him unto him: and when he saw
him, straightway the spirit tare him; and he fell on the
ground, and wallowed foaming. Upon seeing Jesus, the
unclean spirit immediately sent the fellow into a seizure. There,
he rolled on the ground foaming at the mouth.
9:21 Jesus therefore asked his father, How long is it ago

since this came unto him? In other words, how long has your
son been so afflicted? The man replied, Of a child. That is, he
had been so afflicted since he was a child.
9:22 The distraught man continued, And ofttimes it hath

cast him into the fire, and into the waters, to destroy him.
The destructive nature of demonic activity is further described.
The spirit frequently would seek to throw him into an open fire
or even into water to destroy him. Satan’s realm is always
destructive. In the long run, he never does good but only brings
destruction. The vicious nature of demonic spirits is herein
made apparent.
The poor father therefore in desperation pled with Jesus,
but if thou canst do any thing, have compassion on us, and
help us. The pathos and desperate plea of this man is evident.
He had no other recourse than to turn to Jesus. There was no
other solution.
9:23 Jesus therefore went to the heart of the matter. He said,

If thou canst believe, all things are possible to him that
believeth. The latter phrase could be literally rendered, ‘If you
are able to believe, all things are possible to him who is believ-
ing.’ The key to the power of God is faith. God’s power is
unlimited. He can do anything. But that which moves Him to
intervene on our behalf is (1) believing He is able and (2) then
based upon that faith, imploring Him to do so. Faith is as simple
as coming to God with our problem, believing He is able to
solve it, and then asking Him to do so.
9:24 And straightway the father of the child cried out,

and said with tears, Lord, I believe; help thou mine unbe-
lief. The distraught father, with poignant pathos, immediately
cried out weeping, “Lord, I believe; help thou mine unbelief.”
What a wonderful lesson! The man believed to the best he
could. He was not sure that was enough. Therefore, he besought
Jesus to grant whatever was lacking in his faith. Implicit is that
the Lord will hear such prayer. Our faith may be weak.
However, as we come to him seeking further faith, implied is
that necessary faith will be granted.
9:25-26 When Jesus saw that the people came running

together, he rebuked the foul spirit, saying unto him, Thou
dumb and deaf spirit, I charge thee, come out of him, and
enter no more into him. The reference to Jesus seeing the
people come running likely refers back to verse 15. This en-
counter with this distraught father likely took place as people
were gathering to see the confrontation between the scribes,
Jesus, and His disciples.
Therefore as this was all unfolding, Jesus “rebuked the foul
spirit, saying unto him, Thou dumb and deaf spirit, I charge thee,
come out of him, and enter no more into him.” The word
translated as foul (akayartov akathartos) is otherwise
translated as ‘unclean.’ It refers to the demonic spirit at hand.
Moreover, this same spirit had not only made the fellow dumb,
but deaf as well. Jesus therefore ordered the demon out and
commanded him to never enter him again.
Perhaps in a fit of temper, the foul spirit 26 cried, and rent
him sore, and came out of him: and he was as one dead;
insomuch that many said, He is dead. In one last act of
defiance, the demon convulsed the fellow as he came out with
a scream. The poor young man thus fell to the ground limp like
a dead man. Bystanders in fact thought he had died. The vicious
power of Satan was apparent.
9:27 Jesus therefore took him by the hand, and lifted him
up; and he arose. The touch of Jesus completed the miracle.
The young man was restored to health, his full faculties, and his
sanity.
9:28-29 And when he was come into the house, his

disciples asked him privately, Why could not we cast him
out? Thereafter, Jesus and his disciples retired into what appar-
ently was the man’s home. There “his disciples asked him
privately, Why could not we cast him out?” 29 And he said unto
them,This kind can come forth by nothing, but by prayer
and fasting. A clear linkage between faith, prayer, and fasting
are established. Prayer is faith in action. It is the vehicle of faith.
Faith is exemplified in prayer. Thus, the greater the degree of
prayer, the likely greater degree of faith. Moreover, fasting,
though in itself having no power, offers this enhancement. (1)
David spoke of humbling his soul with fasting in Psalm 35:13.
To deny oneself the simple pleasure of eating for a season is one
way of humbling ourselves before God. God told Solomon that
when His people would humble themselves in prayer, He would
hear them (II Chronicles 7:14). (2) Fasting is a simple means to
demonstrate to God we are serious in a matter. It demonstrates
a willingness to set aside simple pleasures of life to focus upon
seeking His face. Therefore, prayer coupled with fasting is a
way of enhancing the effectiveness of prayer on our part.
Together, they are a faith multiplier.
It is noteworthy that the modern critical text either deletes
or questions this verse. Yet, the church of Jesus Christ received
this portion of Scripture for 1800 years. It surely is a part of the
preserved Word of God.
9:30 After the event of the transfiguration and the healing

of the deaf and dumb man, they departed thence, and passed
through Galilee. Though not explicit in the text, Jesus and
party traveled southward back into the Galilee proper. Assum-
ing Mount Hermon to be the place of the transfiguration,
Galilee is to the south thereof. Jesus therefore would not that
any man should know it. He sought to travel incognito for the
time. The reason will be explained in the next verse.
9:31-32 For he taught his disciples, and said unto them,

The Son of man is delivered into the hands of men, and they
shall kill him; and after that he is killed, he shall rise the
third day. The thought is that the son of man ‘is about to be
delivered, etc.’ Therefore, Jesus sought to keep a low profile.
He once again clearly foretold His disciples how that He would
be apprehended, violently killed, and then rise the third day.
Notwithstanding He had already foretold His disciples this
several times, 32 they understood not that saying, and were
afraid to ask him.
9:33-34 Upon arriving back in Galilee, they came to

Capernaum: and being in the house he asked them, What
was it that ye disputed among yourselves by the way? Jesus
was well aware of the spiritual immaturity of His disciples.
Along the way, they had argued over who was the greatest
among them. Mark accordingly notes that they thus 34 held
their peace: for by the way they had disputed among
themselves, who should be the greatest. The immaturity of the
disciples is apparent. Anytime Christians will argue over such
an adolescent issue reveals a lack of spiritual depth. Being con-
fronted by Jesus, the disciples were embarrassed and said
nothing.
9:35 Jesus thus sat down, and called the twelve, and saith
unto them, If any man desire to be first, the same shall be
last of all, and servant of all. Our Lord therefore proceeded to
teach one of the profound paradoxes revealed in Christianity.
To seek prominence, especially before God, will only relegate
one to last place. In God’s economy, to climb to the top will only
cause one to slide to the bottom. God is not impressed with
carnal ambition. In fact, as he perceives it, He will thwart the
would-be prominence seeker. That may not be the case in the
world’s way of doing things, but it surely is true in God’s econ-
omy. Thus, he that exalteth himself shall be abased. See Luke
14:11
9:36-37 In that context and in the midst of that same con-

versation, Jesus took a child, and set him in the midst of
them. Our Lord was about to illustrate the greater principle
through a child at hand. The word translated as child (paidion
paidion) implies a young child. We would no doubt consider
such to be of preschool age. Jesus therefore, when he had
taken him in his arms, he said unto them, 37 Whosoever
shall receive one of such children in my name, receiveth me.
Our Lord thus began an extensive discourse, using the child He
held as a pointed object lesson.
He first noted by receiving a little child in His name that it
was analogous to receiving Him. The greater context remains of
the disciples fussing over who was the greatest. Jesus as Lord
submitted that receiving Him was tantamount to receiving a
small child. The disciples were thinking in terms of the coming
kingdom of God (politically). They were aspiring as to who
would have high rank in that kingdom. Jesus deflated all that
foolishness by placing Himself on the same plane as the little
child He held. In contrast to the disciples lofty, immature, and
carnal ambitions; a little child was totally insignificant. Yet,
Jesus likened Himself thereto. Clearly implied is true humility.
Implied is that if one desired to be great, He first must come as
an innocent, humble little child.
Jesus therefore continued, and whosoever shall receive
me, receiveth not me, but him that sent me. To so receive
Christ (as Lord and Savior) is to receive not only Him but His
Father who sent Him. Clearly implied is the necessity to humble
oneself in coming to Christ. However, in so humbling our-
selves, we are thus entered into a relationship with our heavenly
Father. Just beneath the surface lies the broader principle of
repentance. It is a humbling of ourselves altogether.
9:38 And John answered him, saying, Master, we saw

one casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not us:
and we forbad him, because he followeth not us. Though not
stated as such, John seemingly tries to change the subject. He no
doubt was embarrassed by Jesus catching wind of their folly. He
thus complained to Jesus, “Master, we saw one casting out
devils in thy name, and he followeth not us: and we forbad him,
because he followeth not us.” John may have expected praise
from Jesus.
He thus boasted to Jesus that he and the other disciples had
witnessed someone casting out demons in Jesus’ name. Be-
cause this fellow was not of their immediate fellowship, they
ordered him to cease and desist. Who this fellow was, how
effective he was, or what his relationship to Jesus was; we are
not told. He no doubt had come into contact with Jesus at some
point and was attempting to cast out demons as Jesus had done.
9:39-40 But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no

man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly
speak evil of me. It likely was that Jesus knew John was trying
to change the subject and thus did not discuss the matter more
fully. Nevertheless, Jesus replied, “Forbid him not: for there is
no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly
speak evil of me.” The thought is, ‘Don’t interfere. No man
doing a miracle in my name, can easily speak against me.’ Jesus
thus continued, 40 For he that is not against us is on our part.
More literally, the comment is, ‘For he that is not against us
is for us.’ In other words, Jesus in effect said, this fellow is
actually on our side. He is pulling for us. The greater lesson may
be that though we may not always know or agree with others in
God’s work, they will answer to Him and not to us. It therefore
behooves us to plow our row as God has so led us. He will deal
with of others claiming to serve Him.
9:41 For whosoever shall give you a cup of water to

drink in my name, because ye belong to Christ, verily I say
unto you, he shall not lose his reward. Our Lord used a very
small gesture of service, offering a cup of water to someone in
His name. Even the smallest act of Christian service truly per-
formed will be rewarded at the appropriate time.
Jesus further hinted at what is elsewhere directly taught. It
is possible for one to lose reward in glory. One’s salvation or the
security thereof is not in view. Rather, what Jesus is hinting at
is that it is possible to lose a portion of the potential rewards at
the Bema. Galatians 5:21 indicates that sin in the life of a
Christian will unravel inheritance in that day. That in all like-
lihood refers to the rewards spoken of herein. In Revelation
21:7, Jesus promised, “He that overcometh shall inherit all
things.”
The greater truth our Lord is touching upon is that service
for Christ, be it ever so humble, will be rewarded. The context
still remains of who would be the greatest. Jesus clearly taught
again that humble service, whether as by a small child or as
menial a task as giving a cup of water, if done with the right mo-
tive, will someday merit reward. Once again, He is not speaking
in the context of salvation, but rather of rewards in heaven.
9:42 The context has not changed. Jesus in all likelihood

was still holding the small child. He therefore concluded the
matter by warning, And whosoever shall offend one of these
little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone
were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea. The
first question at hand is who are the “little ones” to which Jesus
is referring? He quite apparently was still holding the little child
He had picked up in verse 36. However, He added another qual-
ification, “that believe in me.” He thus is speaking of perhaps
(1) believing children, or (2) those young in the Lord of any
physical age, or (3) possibly both. The latter likely is in view.
To offend a young Christian, whatever his age may be, is a
serious matter. How many a young Christian has been washed
out or discouraged beyond measure by the careless testimony of
an older believer? Their number is legion. Carnality, sin, care-
lessness, and selfishness by older Christians have done grave
damage spiritually to many a babe in Christ.
Jesus therefore warned that it would be better for the
offender to have a millstone tied around his neck and thrown in
the ocean. That clearly speaks of drowning. Millstones ob-
viously were of significant weight. The Greeks at times had
practiced just such a form of execution. The greater truth at
hand is that those who damage babes in Christ will answer for
their sin directly to Christ. Whether He sends chastening in the
meantime or waits until the Bema, the clear thought is of stern
reckoning for driving a young believer away. His dealing with
such sin will be analogous to being drowned by a millstone.
Sober indeed is such a prospect.
It may be that Jesus, in not too subtle fashion, warned His
disciples about their foolish arguing. It might be implied that
their foolishness risked offending young believers nearby. He
thus served them fair warning.
9:43-44 Jesus thus shifts to judgment in general. And if thy

hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into
life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the
fire that never shall be quenched. Several comments are
clearly at hand.
Jesus is warning about judgment to come. He speaks of
going to hell. The word so translated (geenna gehenna) is one
of several basic words translated as ‘hell’ in the New Testa-
ment. Gehenna originally referred to the valley of Hinnom,
outside the ancient wall of Jerusalem, where the garbage and
dead animals of the city were cast out and burned. (Hinnom is
Hebrew. Gehenna is the Greek form thereof.) It came to be a
metaphor of the everlasting fire in hell. Such ancient city dumps
routinely caught fire from spontaneous combustion. They thus
would burn incessantly. The dump at Jerusalem—Gehenna—
thus became an illustration of the unending fire in hell. It never
will be quenched. See further comments thereto in Matthew
5:22.
Jesus’ comment about cutting off one’s hand in this regard
is somewhat enigmatic. However, what He likely had in mind is
what He said. It is better to go through life thus maimed than to
go to hell with a complete body. Clearly implied is that the
wicked in hell will have a body. It evidently will be the same
body they had on earth. Moreover, whatever physical limit-
ations or amputations there are in this life will be carried over
into hell. When one stops to consider the implications thereof,
it is sobering indeed. Implied is that unsaved people will spend
eternity in hell with bodies worn from age or diminished by
disease. Though believers will receive a new glorified body in
heaven, the lost will be consigned to their old, sin-damaged
body forever. That in itself will be wretched.
Jesus thence added further forewarning of hell. It will be a
place 44 where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not
quenched. The word translated as worm (skwlhx skolex)
refers to the type of worms which prey upon dead bodies. In
hell, even the maggots will not die but will rather eat away at the
damned therein forever. Moreover, Jesus repeated again the
ominous fact that the fire therein is never quenched. It will never
be extinguished.
Thus, hell is described as a place of inextinguishable fire. It
is a place where the unsaved dead will spend eternity in their
old, geriatric, diseased bodies. And, it is a place where the worms
of death will work forever. What a terrible place it will be.
9:45-46 Undoubtedly for emphasis, Jesus essentially

reiterated the same warning. He only shifted to the foot. And if
thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter
halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the
fire that never shall be quenched: 46 Where their worm
dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. The same truth
remains. It is better to go through life halt (i.e., crippled) than to
be cast into hell whole. Jesus reiterates, in double fashion, that
there the fire is not quenched. Moreover, repeated again is the
warning of worms in hell.
9:47-48 Lest one has not got the picture yet, Jesus restated
in similar fashion His warning about hell. And if thine eye
offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the
kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be
cast into hell fire: 48 Where their worm dieth not, and the
fire is not quenched. The reference to an offending eye may
refer to the lust of the eye. It is better for an unsaved man to go
to hell with only one eye than with two. One whose eyes look
lustfully at the opposite sex is likely in view. See Matthew 5:28.
Jesus warned of the horrors of hell in a three-fold fashion.
In each case its unquenchable everlasting fire is in view. In each
case, the human body in whatever form it entered death is im-
plied. And in every case, Jesus warned of the gross worms of
hell. Our Lord clearly was issuing tacit warning to avoid it at all
costs.
9:49 Our Lord nears the end of this lesson with this truth.
For every one shall be salted with fire, and every sacrifice
shall be salted with salt. Several metaphors are blended
together. Let us consider the latter first. In referring to how
“every sacrifice shall be salted with salt,” Jesus touched upon a
proverbial axiom known to all Jews. Every sacrifice at the
Temple was first seasoned with salt prior to its offering by fire
on the altar. It was a metaphor of inevitability. There also un-
doubtedly is an intended play on words in the implication of
fire.
The first metaphor refers to how salt was used as a
preservative for meats and other foods. Foods were routinely
salted for their long-term preservation. In the context of hell and
its fire, Jesus therefore added these compound metaphors. Just
as it was inevitable that every sacrifice would be salted with salt,
likewise would everyone in hell be salted with fire. Implied is
the long term continuance thereof.
Another hint of suffering in hell may be in view as well.
Salt, as a symbol of righteousness, also causes great pain when
poured into a wound. What may be hinted at is that those in hell
will face the suffering of the salt of righteousness being applied
to their burns. If it is not literal, it likely may symbolize mental
anguish. Sinners will perhaps be reminded of righteousness all
the while they are in hell, realizing they could have received the
righteousness of God through Christ.
9:50 Jesus therefore concluded, Salt is good: but if the salt

have lost his saltness, wherewith will ye season it? Have salt
in yourselves, and have peace one with another. Our Lord
likely here draws the entire matter begun in verses 33-35 to its
conclusion. Salt throughout the Bible was a general synonym
for righteousness. Jesus accordingly referred to salt as good.
However, when salt no longer exuded its purifying qualities
(righteousness) it was good for little. He therefore admonished
His disciples (likely in the context of their selfish squabbling)
Have salt in yourselves, and have peace one with another. In
other words, Jesus directed them to be righteous and be at peace
with each other. Stop arguing. To do less (1) risks offending
young believers, (2) risks loss of reward in heaven, and (3) risks
God’s judgment.
*****
Overview of Mark 10: The tenth chapter of Mark contains

a number of significant events in the ministry of our Lord. In
response to a trick question by Pharisees, Jesus presented a
cryptic lesson on marriage and divorce. He blessed children.
He responded to the rich young ruler and taught a lesson
therefrom, warning about the dangers of affluence. He foretold
his death once again. He rebuked two disciples for their foolish
ambitions. Finally, Jesus healed blind Bartimaeus.
10:1 In the greater scope of our Lord’s ministry, a signif-

icant amount of time had passed since the end of Mark 9. One-
third of Luke’s gospel takes place in this interval. From this
point onward, there are only a few weeks left in His ministry. As
was the custom of that era, multitudes of Jews traveled toward
Jerusalem at this season for observance of Passover. Jesus was
part of that multitude.
Once again using the historic present tense, Mark records
how that Jesus arose from thence, and cometh into the coasts
of Judaea by the farther side of Jordan: and the people
resort unto him again; and, as he was wont, he taught them
again. Though this was not Jesus’ first journey from Galilee to
Judea, this is the first record made thereof by Mark. It in fact will
be His last. (In general terms, Galilee was the northern more
rural portion of Israel of that day. Judea was the southern more
metropolitan region wherein lay Jerusalem, its capital. It
reflected the seat of official Israel.)
The reference to the “coasts of Judaea” refers to the region
or district thereof. Mark notes that He in part had journeyed on
the east side of the Jordan River apparently crossing back into
Judea at or near Jericho. The word translated as resort unto
(sumporeuomai sumporeuomai) can have the sense of ‘jour-
neying together.’ Thus, the people noted resorting unto him
likely were of the multitudes journeying to Passover at Jeru-
salem. They apparently were followers of Him or at least kindly
disposed toward Him and His ministry.
Mark thus notes that “as he was wont, he taught them
again.” The word translated as wont (eyw etho) has the sense of
‘custom.’ Therefore, as Jesus was accustomed to doing, He
taught them again.
10:2 Being in Judea, Jesus was now on the home turf of the
Pharisees. They were headquartered at Jerusalem. Their largest
concentration was thus in Judea. Jesus had come to them and
they seized the opportunity to try and discredit Him. Accord-
ingly, the Pharisees came to him, and asked him, Is it lawful
for a man to put away his wife? tempting him. As they did on
a number of occasions in our Lord’s ministry, the Pharisees
confronted Jesus with what amounted to a trick or loaded
question. Mark indicates the same by noting they were “tempt-
ing him.” They were laying a trap for Jesus. The question at
hand in all likelihood was not extemporaneous or a spur of the
moment thought. The Pharisees undoubtedly had long schemed
for a way to snare Him in His words. They knew He would
likely come to Jerusalem for Passover and they were waiting for
Him with their loaded question.
To this day, one of the most delicate and controversial
topics is the matter of marriage and divorce. Their question in
this regard was not by accident. They knew how sensitive an
issue it was and they hoped to snare Jesus thereby. They thus
publicly confronted Him asking, “Is it lawful for a man to put
away his wife?” Matthew adds, “for every cause” (Matthew
19:39). The word translated as put away (apoluw apoluo) lit-
erally has the sense to ‘release’ or ‘dismiss.’ However, the
context here clearly is of divorce.
10:3 Jesus therefore answered, What did Moses com-

mand you? In other words, what does the Word of God say (in
this case the Law of Moses)?
10:4 The Pharisees in referring to Deuteronomy 24, re-

plied, Moses suffered to write a bill of divorcement, and to
put her away. The word translated as suffered (epitrepw
epitrepo) has the sense to ‘permit.’ Moses wrote in Deuter-
onomy 24:1, “When a man hath taken a wife, and married her,
and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because
he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a
bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of
his house.” God is never for divorce. It is never His perfect will.
However, as this verse quoted makes clear, God has permitted
divorce and has established rules to regulate it.
10:5-6 And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the
hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept. To this
Jesus replied, “For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this
precept.” The word translated as precept (entolh entole)
actually is otherwise overwhelmingly rendered as ‘command-
ment’ which is its basic sense. Regulations concerning divorce
were a part of the commandments of the law. However, Jesus
noted that divorce is always because of hardness of heart.
Hardness of heart is one unwilling to forgive another. There is
no sin or wrong too great to be forgiven.
Hardness of heart is one or both parties in a marriage living
without regard to the other. It reflects not only spiritual im-
maturity, but blatant carnality as well (even if there is no
immorality). There is really one reason why people get a
divorce. One or the other (or both) have hardened hearts. Love
can be rekindled. Wrong can be forgiven. Immaturity can be
overcome. Divorce is never God’s perfect will!
Jesus therefore quoted Scripture as well. In referring to the
creation and the first marriage, He noted, 6 But from the
beginning of the creation God made them male and female.
God ordained marriage. It is His perfect will. The quotation is
from Genesis 1:27.
10:7-8 Jesus continued quoting further from Genesis. For

this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and
cleave to his wife; 8 And they twain shall be one flesh: so
then they are no more twain, but one flesh. This quotation is
from Genesis 2:24. Of further interest is the word translated as
cleave (proskollaw proskollao). It has the sense ‘to be glued
unto.’ Insight is thus found as to God’s plan for marriage. A
couple ought to be glued together, never breaking that bond.
The reference to being one flesh refers to more than just the
physical union of marriage. It alludes to the entire marriage
bond: spiritual, mental, emotional, and physical. A husband and
wife are not only one flesh in physical intimacy, they should be
one in every other part of life. A married couple is not two
people living in one house. They ought to be as one unit.
10:9 Jesus’ answer to the Pharisees was simple. What

therefore God hath joined together, let not man put as-
under. The word translated as put asunder (cwrizw chorizo)
has the basic sense to ‘separate’ and in this case to ‘divorce.’
God’s perfect will is clearly set forth. Divorce never is the
answer and never is the best solution to a troubled marriage.
10:10 Thereafter, out of earshot of the Pharisees, in the

house his disciples asked him again of the same matter.
10:11-12 Jesus thus was more explicit to His disciples.

And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife,
and marry another, committeth adultery against her. 12
And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be mar-
ried to another, she committeth adultery. God’s basic law
concerning marriage, divorce, and remarriage is set forth. To
ditch one’s spouse to marry another more attractive is only
extended adultery, plain and simple.
However, it should be noted that Mark did not mention all
that Jesus said on this occasion. See notes for Matthew 19:1-12
for His full comments. More often than not, marriage trouble is
not so simple as divorcing a mate for a more attractive alter-
native. Moreover, there is the matter of the innocent spouse or
an unbelieving spouse. Jesus dealt with these problems in
Matthew 19. The Apostle Paul also had further comments in
this regard in I Corinthians 7:10-16, 26-28. The foundational
principle regarding divorce and remarriage is first stated in
Deuteronomy 24:1-2. There, remarriage after divorce was per-
mitted only under very stringent conditions.
To summarize, divorce, much less remarriage, is never
God’s perfect will. However, because of the hardness of the
human heart, God has tolerated the former with regulations
noted in Deuteronomy. Under very limited circumstances noted
in Deuteronomy 24, Matthew 19, and I Corinthians 7, re-
marriage is grudgingly permitted. It is never God’s perfect will.
But nevertheless, the Scripture has made very limited
allowance thereof.
10:13 Mark changes the subject. At an unspecified time

and place by unspecified persons, they brought young
children to him, that he should touch them: and his disciples
rebuked those that brought them.
10:14 However, when Jesus saw it, he was much dis-

pleased, and said unto them, Suffer the little children to
come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the
kingdom of God. The word translated as suffer (afihmi
aphiemi) has the sense to ‘allow’ or to ‘permit.’ Jesus further
directed His disciples to not forbid the bringing of little
children to Him. The word so translated (paidion paidion)
refers generally to young children as implied in the text. It might
be safely assumed that the children brought to Jesus were what
we today would call preschool age.
His comment, “for of such is the kingdom of God,” likely
refers to the spiritual character of the coming kingdom of God.
Small children, as a rule, are of humble spirit lacking pride,
ambition, and self righteousness. Little children by their very
nature are trusting. Jesus said in Matthew 18:3, “And said,
Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as
little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.”
The thought is of the humility, faith, and the implied innocence
of little children.
Baby-baptizers frequently resort to this and similar
passages in Matthew and Luke to support their distorted view of
baptism. First, there is no hint of baptism in either the immediate
or extended context. It simply is not in the picture. Secondly,
such baby-baptizers are guilty of circular reasoning. They begin
with the assumption that people are saved in some fashion by
baptism. Therefore, the injunction to allow little children to
come to Him, to them, implies salvation. Ergo, Jesus was talk-
ing about baptism. It is not only fallacious logic, but it is totally
unsupported either in the immediate context or the greater
scope of the New Testament.
The simple truth is that Jesus viewed the little children
brought to Him as an illustration of the spiritual character of the
coming kingdom. That view is buttressed in the following
verse.
10:15-16 Jesus accordingly announced, Verily I say unto

you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a
little child, he shall not enter therein. Receiving the kingdom
of God, though no doubt having long-term spiritual impli-
cations, likely had application closer at hand. Within perhaps
the next week, Jesus would officially present Himself as King
to official Israel. In their hardened hearts, unbelief, and self
righteousness; they would categorically reject Him. Jesus’
point is that only by the innocent faith of a humble child could
one receive the kingdom. Official Israel utterly missed that
opportunity.
The greater and long-term application of receiving the
kingdom as a little child may well refer to coming to Christ in
simple faith, turning to Him, and trusting Him. It is only as
sinners so come to Him that they receive eternal life and en-
trance in the promised kingdom.
16 And he took them up in his arms, put his hands upon
them, and blessed them. To illustrate His point, Jesus took
several small children “up in his arms, put his hands upon them,
and blessed them.” What a privilege for those small children
(and their parents). No special grace much less baptism or
salvation took place. Rather, Jesus simply blessed the humble
little children brought before Him.
10:17 The following account likely is not coincidental.

Jesus had just taught that the kingdom of God (and its King) can
be received only as a little child—in faith and humility. In con-
trast to that, when he was gone forth into the way, there came
one running, and kneeled to him, and asked him, Good
Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?
Luke’s account describes this man as a ruler (Luke 18:18).
Matthew 19:20 notes this same man as young. All accounts
eventually describe him as being rich. Hence, his general
description is as the ‘rich young ruler.’ Of interest is how this
young man “came running, and kneeled to him.” He thus came
eagerly. However, his eagerness was for all the wrong reasons
as will be seen.
In contrast to the humble, innocent, little children
mentioned above; this fellow evidently was ambitious. He
already had great earthly wealth. Now, he apparently wanted to
add eternal life to his portfolio. Implied throughout this con-
frontation is that this young man was not truly interested in
spiritual things. Rather, he wanted the result of the spiritual—
eternal life.
10:18 Jesus immediately picked up on the wrong motives

of this fellow. Jesus’ aloof answer indicates the insincerity of
this affluent inquirer. And Jesus said unto him, Why callest
thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God. Jesus
saw right through this man. Therefore, He answered his
question with a question. Truly, there is none altogether good
but God.
10:19 Jesus accordingly continued, Thou knowest the

commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do
not steal, Do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honour
thy father and mother. Jesus mentioned six of the Ten Com-
mandments. His reference to “defraud not” alludes to the eighth
commandment, “thou shalt not steal.”
10:20 Insight into this young man’s attitude is reflected in

his answer. And he answered and said unto him, Master, all
these have I observed from my youth. There are inherent
shades of the Pharisee in the Temple. See Luke 18:9-11. There,
the pompous Pharisee was self-righteous. This rich young ruler
manifested the same basic attitude. Rather than confess himself
as a sinner before God, he proudly claimed to have kept all the
commandments throughout his life. He was proud, arrogant,
self-righteous, and spiritually blind.
10:21-22 Jesus therefore beholding him loved him, and

said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell
whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt
have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and
follow me.
Mark adds one detail the other gospels do not and that is the
comment of Jesus loving him. Though this fellow’s attitude was
wrong, Jesus nevertheless had compassion on him and loved
him. His instruction to sell his possessions, giving them to
charity, are not indicative of God’s plan of salvation. Rather,
Jesus knew the man needed first to have a change of attitude.
His god was his wealth. Jesus therefore directed him to get rid
of that first and then he could have treasure in heaven.
Finally, Jesus instructed him to come, take up the cross,
and follow me. Eternal life is inherent in coming to Christ.
Matthew’s account adds, “if thou wilt be perfect” (Matthew
19:21). Upon coming to Christ, spiritual maturity is developed
as we are willing to take up His cross, with all its implications,
and follow Him. The cross to the world of that day was a symbol
of death. Jesus, in effect, told this fellow to not only come to
Himself, but to die to self, thus following Him. Implicit is not
only repentance leading to saving faith, but also self-denial.
22 And he was sad at that saying, and went away
grieved: for he had great possessions. Sadly, the man went
away grieved: for he had great possessions. In contrast to the
little children who came to Jesus in simple faith, this man had
come with the arrogance of affluence. Jesus knew his god was
his wealth. He also knew his self-righteous attitude. He thus
directed him to essentially humble himself, come unto Him, and
then sacrificially follow Him.
10:23-24 In response to this incident, Jesus looked round

about, and saith unto his disciples, How hardly shall they
that have riches enter into the kingdom of God! The word
translated as hardly (duskolw duskolos) has the sense ‘with
difficulty.’ Jesus thus in effect exclaimed, perhaps in amaze-
ment, ‘How difficult shall it be for they that have riches to enter
the kingdom of God.’
24 And the disciples were astonished at his words. But
Jesus answereth again, and saith unto them, Children, how
hard is it for them that trust in riches to enter into the
kingdom of God! The disciples were astonished at that com-
ment. However, “Jesus answereth again, and saith unto them,
Children, how hard is it for them that trust in riches to enter into
the kingdom of God!” Further insight into the rich young ruler’s
problem is now revealed. This fellow, like many other of the
wealthy, trusted in his riches. Compounding his arrogance and
self righteousness was the further problem of trusting in his
wealth. Rather than trust Christ, the temptation of the affluent is
to trust their resources.
10:25 Jesus therefore commented, It is easier for a camel

to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to
enter into the kingdom of God. Various ideas have been
advanced over the years as to the intent of this enigmatic state-
ment by Jesus. One common thought is that the eye of the needle
referred to a small door in the large city gate. At night, when the
gates were closed for security reasons, one could enter the city
only through the small ‘eye of the needle.’ For a camel to do so
meant with considerable difficulty he had to get down on his
knees and crawl through. That is an interesting story but there is
no scriptural foundation thereof. Another thought is that the
term ‘camel’ refers to a type of rope of the day. To thread a
needle with such would be difficult if not impossible. Again,
there is no scriptural authority for such.
Another thought is that the eye of the needle was the
defensive slits in a city wall from which defenders could shoot
arrows at attackers. However, being high off the ground seems
to have no relevance to a camel. Each of these ideas may be val-
id. However, the greater truth Jesus taught was that it is difficult
for rich men to get saved. In addition to the need for repentance
and faith, they are encumbered by arrogance, self-righteous-
ness, and trust in their own wealth.
10:26-27 And they were astonished out of measure,

saying among themselves, Who then can be saved? The
disciples’ reaction was one of utter astonishment. They mutter-
ed among themselves, “Who then can be saved?” To which
Jesus answered, 27 With men it is impossible, but not with
God: for with God all things are possible. Though it is
uncommon and difficult for affluent men to be saved, it is not
impossible. God can work for His own purposes. What a
blessed assurance to realize that with God, all things are pos-
sible. That in itself is a solid foundation for faith. The disciples
concept of the kingdom may have colored their astonishment.
They likely still thought in terms of a physical political
kingdom. If the prominent of the day could not be saved, then
who could?
10:28 Then Peter began to say unto him, Lo, we have

left all, and have followed thee. This prompted Peter to
impulsively reply, “Lo, we have left all, and have followed
thee.” Peter and the other disciples were men of humble means.
But almost as if to remind Jesus of that, Peter made sure that
Jesus remembered that they had left all and followed Him.
10:29-30 To that, Jesus replied, Verily I say unto you,

There is no man that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters,
or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my
sake, and the gospel’s, 30 But he shall receive an hundred-
fold now in this time, houses, and brethren, and sisters, and
mothers, and children, and lands, with persecutions; and in
the world to come eternal life.
Jesus made clear a wonderful principle to His disciples.
When one is willing to sacrifice family and wealth for His sake
and the gospel’s sake, he will be rewarded by God. (Land then
was a reference to prosperity. Real estate and the crops there-
from were a major source of wealth.) Jesus spoke of being
willing to leave such material blessing behind for the sake of
the gospel. However, He promised that those making that
sacrifice would receive family and blessings now and on
into eternity. The greater truth is that God rewards His ser-
vants handsomely. He will bless in this life for faithful
service. Moreover, such faithful, sacrificial service to Christ
will be rewarded in heaven. Jesus here is in effect referring to
laying up treasure in heaven.
Several further things beg comment. First, our Lord was not
teaching abandonment of family to serve Him. Rather, the
thought likely is of foregoing having a family in the interim to
serve Christ. God will so reward with family if not physically,
certainly spiritually. Less clear is His remark, “with perse-
cutions.” The idea may be that though God will bless His
servants for faithfully serving Him, there may in fact come
persecutions nevertheless. However, the overarching thought is
that in being willing to sacrifice the comforts of life and the
potential for gain, God will richly reward His servants both now
and on into eternity. The proportion of one-hundred fold is
some indication of God’s return to those who serve Him.
Though we may not altogether see that increase now, by faith
we can see it afar off.
10:31 Jesus concluded this section with the cryptic and

enigmatic comment, But many that are first shall be last; and
the last first. In the context, the thought likely is this. Those in
this life who through wealth are in prominent positions, will be
last in the kingdom of God (if they attain it at all). However,
those who in this life, willing to serve Jesus Christ and are in last
place as far as the world is concerned, will in that day be in po-
sitions of prominence. Only one life ‘twill soon be past. Only
what’s done for Christ will last. Wealth and its incumbent
prominence now will mean nothing then. Service to Christ,
though meaning nothing to the world now, will advance to
prominence then.
10:32 Jesus and His entourage were slowly but surely on their
way to Jerusalem for an appointment with destiny. They evidently
were traveling southward down the Jordan River valley.
And they were in the way going up to Jerusalem; and
Jesus went before them: and they were amazed; and as they
followed, they were afraid. And he took again the twelve,
and began to tell them what things should happen unto him.
It was no secret that the Jewish authorities in Jerusalem had
issued a warrant for the arrest of Jesus. Few close to Jesus
doubted the intentions of their intent to put Him to death.
Nevertheless, “Jesus went before them.” He led in the forefront
of His party. His disciples and others traveling with Him were
thus amazed and fearful of what was coming. Jesus therefore
took the twelve aside “and began to tell them what things should
happen unto him.”
10:33 Jesus therefore warned them, Behold, we go up to

Jerusalem; and the Son of man shall be delivered unto the
chief priests, and unto the scribes; and they shall condemn
him to death, and shall deliver him to the Gentiles. He refers
to Himself again as the Son of man and notes that upon arrival
in Jerusalem, He would be delivered. The word so translated
(paradidwmi paradidomi) also has the sense of ‘betrayed’ and
is the word used to later described His betrayal by Judas. See
Mark 14:44. Jesus accurately foretold how that He would thus
be betrayed to the “chief priests, and unto the scribes; and they
shall condemn him to death, and shall deliver him to the
Gentiles.” That is precisely what happened not long thereafter.
The Gentiles, of course, refers to the Romans to which Jesus
was delivered for crucifixion. It is likely Judas was already en-
tertaining thoughts of betraying Jesus and he no doubt heard
Jesus thus foretell that betrayal.
10:34 Moreover, Jesus foretold how they would mock

him, and shall scourge him, and shall spit upon him, and
shall kill him: and the third day he shall rise again. With
accurate foreknowledge, our Lord indicated precisely what the
Roman soldiers would do after His arrest. See Mark 15:19. Not
only did Jesus once again foretell His death, but more im-
portantly, His resurrection. This is the third record in Mark’s
account of Jesus foretelling His death and resurrection. See also
Mark 8:31 and 9:31. However, it never really soaked in, even
after the fact. Even after He arose, the disciples had to be
convinced thereof.
10:35-37 In a revealing incident, we catch a glimpse of the

spiritual immaturity still prevailing amongst the disciples. It is
even more so when considering one of these involved was John
who was probably the most mature of all the disciples. 35 And
James and John, the sons of Zebedee, come unto him,
saying, Master, we would that thou shouldest do for us
whatsoever we shall desire. Moreover, they in effect asked
Jesus to grant their request even before they revealed it to Him.
Jesus therefore 36 said unto them, What would ye that I
should do for you?
37 They said unto him, Grant unto us that we may sit,
one on thy right hand, and the other on thy left hand, in thy
glory. To sit at the right and left hand of a ruler implied being his
number one and two men. It implied rank and position. James
and John in effect asked to be Jesus’ top subordinates in His
coming kingdom. Though they did not understand the descrip-
tion of His death and resurrection, they did understand that
Jesus would someday be King over Israel.
10:38-39 Jesus therefore replied, Ye know not what ye

ask: can ye drink of the cup that I drink of? and be baptized
with the baptism that I am baptized with? Jesus used several
metaphors of what lay ahead. He referred to His impending
passion as a cup. The thought implies what was in that cup. He
also referred to His impending arrest and death as a baptism.
Paul would later so refer to Jesus’ death as a baptism. See I
Corinthians 15:29, Romans 6:3-6, and Colossians 2:12. In both
metaphors, Jesus alluded to His official rejection, betrayal, and
impending death. In effect, He advised them, ‘You don’t know
what you are talking about.’
To Jesus’ question, could they endure what lay ahead, these
two, ambitious disciples replied, 39 We can. In turn, Jesus
replied, Ye shall indeed drink of the cup that I drink of; and
with the baptism that I am baptized withal shall ye be
baptized. As early church history would unfold, both these dis-
ciples faced fierce persecution. James was murdered. See Acts
12:1-2. John would eventually be exiled to die upon a desert
island (Patmos). They had no idea of what lay ahead. Jesus did.
They in due season partook of His cup of rejection and His
baptism of persecution.
10:40 However, Jesus informed them, to sit on my right

hand and on my left hand is not mine to give; but it shall be
given to them for whom it is prepared. In Matthew’s account
(Matthew 20:23), Jesus made clear the decision of whom would
sit upon His right or left hand would be made by His Father.
Further implied is that such privilege will be earned by faithful
service and not by personal fiat, even by Jesus. Clear indeed is
the New Testament teaching that those who have faithfully
served Jesus Christ in this life will rule and reign with Him in
His kingdom. Moreover, the description of the twenty-four
elders in Revelation 4-5 implies that they will be of the church
age upon thrones before the throne of God.
10:41 And when the ten heard it, they began to be much
displeased with James and John. They were not happy with
their two colleagues.
10:42-44 But Jesus called them to him, and saith unto

them, Ye know that they which are accounted to rule over
the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and their great
ones exercise authority upon them. In response to all of this,
Jesus drew an illustration from the politics of the day. Those
who were rulers in the gentile world forcibly ruled over them.
Especially powerful gentile rulers wielded great authority.
However, in Christ’s coming kingdom that will not be the case.
43 But so shall it not be among you: but whosoever will
be great among you, shall be your minister. In God’s
economy, greatness is measured by service to others. The word
translated as minister (diakonov diakonos) also has the sense
of ‘servant.’ Moreover, Jesus continued, 44 And whosoever of
you will be the chiefest, shall be servant of all. The word
translated as chiefest (prwtov protos) literally means ‘first.’ In
Christ’s coming kingdom, those who are of first rank will in fact
be a servant for all. (The word thus translated here is (doulov
doulos.) Though Christ’s kingdom has yet to arrive, the spiritual
principles remain the same at this hour. True greatness resides
in serving others. To be first requires willingness to be a servant.
The implication of a servant’s heart is thus closely related to the
matter of greatness.
10:45 In that direct context, Jesus replied further, For even

the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to
minister, and to give his life a ransom for many. A profound
lesson and example is thus found in the life and ministry of our
Lord. He, who is not only the Son of man but also the Son of
God, came not to be served, but to serve. The words translated
as ministered/minister (diakonew diakoneo) both have the
simple sense to ‘serve’ or to ‘be a servant.’ He who is King of
kings and Lord of lords came first as a servant. A profound
lesson was thus given to His wrangling disciples. It remains to
this day.
Jesus again alluded to His impending death as He referred
to giving “his life a ransom for many.” The word translated as
ransom (lutron lutron) refers to the price for redeeming a
slave. It thus alludes to the broad principle of redemption. Jesus
therefore not only touched upon His example as a servant, He
also concisely foretold His coming work of redemption. His life
and particularly His life’s blood would become the ransom for
our redemption. See I Peter 1:18-19.
10:46 The entire episode above apparently took place just

north (or possibly east) of Jericho. As Jesus and His party
continued on their journey to Jerusalem, Mark shifts to another
incident taking place en route. And they came to Jericho: and
as he went out of Jericho with his disciples and a great
number of people, blind Bartimaeus, the son of Timaeus,
sat by the highway side begging. Mark’s account is the only
one which mentions the name of the blind man, Bartimaeus, or
anything else about him (“the son of Timaeus”). Matthew’s
account in fact records that there were two blind men. The name
Bartimaeus is Aramaic and simply means the son of Timaeus as
noted in the text. This man evidently made his living by sitting
on the shoulder of the road (leading out of Jericho toward Jeru-
salem) and begging.
10:47 And when he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth,

he began to cry out, and say, Jesus, thou Son of David, have
mercy on me. Blind Bartimaeus clearly had heard of Jesus. He
conceivably may have even heard Him speak at some point
earlier in His ministry. Moreover, it is apparent that Bartimaeus
knew about Jesus for he called “thou Son of David.” Whether
he actually knew the tribal lineage of Jesus in not likely. Rather,
he had been made aware that Jesus of Nazareth was the Messiah
and therefore the Son of David. There thus was no question in
this poor man’s mind that Jesus could heal him. He therefore
cried out in simple faith, “have mercy on me.” The word trans-
lated as cry out (krazw kradzo) implies just that. He lifted up
his voice and shouted. Implied in the term is also passion and
pathos. He literally begged Jesus to help him.
10:48 Meanwhile, the crowds traveling with Jesus charg-

ed him that he should hold his peace. In other words, the
crowd told him to be quiet. Notwithstanding, he cried the more
a great deal, Thou Son of David, have mercy on me. He in
frustration at being rebuked by the crowd yelled all the more,
“Thou Son of David, have mercy on me.” The faith of this man
was as simple as it was forceful. There was no doubt, whatsoever,
in his mind that Jesus could heal him if He would. He therefore
would not allow this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to pass by.
10:49-50 And Jesus stood still, and commanded him to

be called. And they call the blind man, saying unto him, Be
of good comfort, rise; he calleth thee. Upon hearing the
commotion, Jesus stopped and directed that the man be brought
to Him. Word was quickly passed back to Bartimaeus to be en-
couraged and stand up because Jesus had called for him. Barti-
maeus wasted no time. He therefore 50 casting away his
garment, rose, and came to Jesus. In his eagerness and haste,
he cast aside his coat. In modern terms, we might call it his
jacket. It was the spring of the year and the weather apparently
was still cool. However, Bartimaeus wasted no time in jumping
up to meet Jesus.
10:51 Jesus therefore asked him, What wilt thou that I

should do unto thee? Jesus no doubt knew what this blind man
wanted. However, to further focus this poor man’s faith, Jesus
simply asked him what he wanted. Bartimaeus whereupon
likely, with much emotion, blurted out, Lord, that I might
receive my sight. The word translated as receive my sight
(anablepw anablepo) has the sense to ‘recover sight,’ imply-
ing he at one time may have had sight.
10:52 To this desperate plea, Jesus replied, Go thy way;
thy faith hath made thee whole. The word translated as hath
made thee whole (swzw sodzo) is the same word commonly
translated as ‘saved.’ Implied is that this man was saved on the
spot. The simple yet profound agency thereof was his faith in
Jesus. It was apparent. He knew that Jesus was his only hope
and he pled for His mercy. There is no clearer illustration of
saving faith.
Moreover, immediately he received his sight, and
followed Jesus in the way. Not only was he saved, he also
received sight. He therefore followed Jesus on the road to
Jerusalem along with the rest of the multitude traveling with
Him. What became of Bartimaeus is not recorded. But it is
likely that he became part of the soon to be formed early church.
He had met the Savior and experienced His saving grace.
*****
Overview of Mark 11: This chapter marks the beginning of

the end of Jesus’ earthly ministry. Here, Jesus officially pre-
sents Himself to Israel as her King. Also, the incident of the
barren fig tree is noted. Early in that fateful week, Jesus purged
the Temple again. Hearkening back to the barren fig tree, Jesus
taught a lesson of prayer and faith. Finally, in having His au-
thority questioned, Jesus would not respond to the Jewish
leadership.
11:1-2 The last chapter left Jesus on the outskirts of

Jericho. Mark now picks up the record on the outskirts of
Jerusalem. On the eastern side of the base of the Mount of
Olives were two small villages, Bethphage and Bethany. And
when they came nigh to Jerusalem, unto Bethphage and
Bethany, at the mount of Olives, he sendeth forth two of his
disciples. The final week in our Lord’s ministry was at hand.
Knowing all things were about to be fulfilled, Jesus sent two of
His disciples into the village (Bethphage—see Matthew 21:1)
to procure for Him a mount. 2 And saith unto them, Go your
way into the village over against you: and as soon as ye be
entered into it, ye shall find a colt tied, whereon never man
sat; loose him, and bring him. Mark does not mention that the
colt was that of a donkey as noted in Matthew 21:2. It may be
that the two disciples were Peter and John, though there is no
record of that.
11:3-6 Jesus instructed them, And if any man say unto

you, Why do ye this? say ye that the Lord hath need of him;
and straightway he will send him hither. Therefore, the two
disciples 4 went their way, and found the colt tied by the
door without in a place where two ways met; and they loose
him. The young donkey was tied outside a door evidently near
the intersection of two roads. Mark once again uses the historic
present tense in noting that “they loose him.” As predicted by
Jesus, 5 certain of them that stood there said unto them,
What do ye, loosing the colt? Though only a colt of a donkey,
taking the animal without permission was tantamount to horse
stealing (or in more modern terms ‘car theft’). The first miracle
of the day thus took place. In response to being challenged, the
two disciples simply informed the interrogators 6 even as Jesus
had commanded: and they let them go. To allow someone to
take one’s valuable beast merely because the perpetrators
claimed the Lord had need was a virtual miracle. Clearly, God
had prepared the hearts of the animal’s owners to so acquiesce.
11:7-8 The several disciples therefore brought the colt to

Jesus, and cast their garments on him; and he sat upon him.
Another miracle was in the making. A colt is an unbroken
animal. (A case could be made how that the animal was ‘virgin’
in that no man had ever sat upon it. See Luke 19:30.) Notwith-
standing, no one had ever ridden the animal, Jesus did and the
animal submitted. That was a miracle indeed. The disciples
meanwhile had fashioned a saddle of sorts out of their outer
coats.
Though not explicitly noted by Mark, Jesus clearly rode the
relatively short distance from Bethany down through the
Kidron Valley and up into Jerusalem itself. As He rode thereto,
8 many spread their garments in the way: and others cut
down branches off the trees, and strawed them in the way.
John’s account notes that the branches were from palm trees.
See John 12:13. A sizeable entourage had followed Jesus from
Galilee and no doubt many of them were in the gathering,
cheering crowds. Furthermore, there undoubtedly were others
from the vicinity of Bethany and Jerusalem itself which were
sympathetic to Jesus, if not believers themselves. As He
approached the city, these turned into a cheering throng. A
victor’s welcome was spontaneously being given to Jesus. They
perhaps wittingly or unwittingly were giving Him a reception
due a king. He was. Mark does not make mention thereof, but
Matthew clearly notes that this was a direct fulfillment of
Zechariah 9:9.
11:9-10 His cheering supporters, they that went before,

and they that followed, cried, saying, Hosanna; Blessed is he
that cometh in the name of the Lord. The word translated as
Hosanna is a rough translated of Psalm 118:25 and has the
sense of ‘save us we beseech thee.’ Whether these cheering
throngs understood the implication of what they cried can only
be speculated. However, God providentially saw to it that the
implicit prophecy of Psalm 118:25 was fulfilled. The remainder
of the verse, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the
Lord, is a quotation from Psalm 118:26. They continued to cry
out, 10 Blessed be the kingdom of our father David, that
cometh in the name of the Lord: Hosanna in the highest. It
is apparent that some in the crowd understood who Jesus was
and the significance of His entrance. Some perceived Him to be
the long awaited Messiah, the descendant of King David.
Moreover, He came in the name of the Lord. They thus cried out
the more for Him to save them: “Hosanna in the highest.” The
latter has the sense, ‘Save us we pray by the Highest.’ Or, the
thought more simply is ‘Save us we pray, O God.’
Jesus in so making His entrance into Jerusalem was offic-
ially presenting Himself as King of Israel. Many received Him
as such, as noted by the cheering throngs. However, it is clear
they were a distinct minority. Moreover, as will be soon noted,
official Israel categorically rejected Him. He came unto His
own and His own received Him not!
11:11 His first stop upon arriving in Jerusalem was the

temple. In fact, He may have dismounted the donkey just
outside and walked directly into the temple through its northern
gate. Thus, Jesus entered into Jerusalem, and into the tem-
ple: and when he had looked round about upon all things,
and now the eventide was come, he went out unto Bethany
with the twelve. It is apparent that Jesus’ official entry into the
city and Temple, that fateful Palm Sunday, was well into the
afternoon. Mark notes how that upon arrival, He looked about
perhaps the city in general and the Temple in particular.
Because the day was waning, He and His twelve disciples
walked the two miles back to Bethany.
Matthew records that Jesus and the twelve spent that night
there. See Matthew 21:17. None of the gospel writers give
details regarding those evenings. He had friends in Mary, Mar-
tha, and Lazarus. However, it would seem an imposition for a
party of thirteen to try and lodge there. Of further significance
is the comment in John 18:2 regarding Gethsemane that “Jesus
ofttimes resorted thither with his disciples.” Matthew 21:17
notes how he lodged at Bethany. However, the word so trans-
lated there (aulizomai aulizomai) refers more to ‘camping’ out
in the open air rather than spending the night in a house. That
probably is what Jesus and the disciples did that final week.
They likely slept in the Garden of Gethsemane each night not
far from Bethany.
11:12-14 The next morning when they were come from

Bethany, he was hungry. Of interest is our Lord’s obvious
humanity. He was hungry. 13 And seeing a fig tree afar off
having leaves, he came, if haply he might find any thing
thereon: and when he came to it, he found nothing but
leaves; for the time of figs was not yet.
The word translated as haply (ara ara) has the sense of
‘therefore.’ It was early spring, between mid March and mid
April. Figs trees in Israel customarily set on fruit before the
development of their leaves. Thus, a tree fully leafed out would
lead one to believe the tree had figs. The figs then matured and
fully ripened to be harvested in early autumn. Jesus came to this
tree seeing leaves and therefore expected to find fruit. He found
none.
There undoubtedly is a spiritual application. How many a
church or Christian has all the outward trappings of Christian-
ity. Yet, in the final analysis, they bear little or no fruit for the
Master.
Whereupon, 14 Jesus answered and said unto it, No man
eat fruit of thee hereafter for ever. And his disciples heard
it. Our Lord thus cursed the unfruitful tree. In noting Jesus’
comment thereto, Mark will revisit the matter again in verses
20-21. An application might be made how that fruitless Christ-
ians or churches will face the loss of God’s blessing to the point
they wither away as noted in verse 20-21. When we lose our
focus for winning others, it is only a matter of time before our
spiritual vibrancy withers away.
11:15-16 Thus, Monday morning of that fateful week,
Jesus and His disciples came to Jerusalem: and Jesus went into
the temple, and began to cast out them that sold and bought in
the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers,
and the seats of them that sold doves; 16 And would not suffer
that any man should carry any vessel through the temple.
As is more fully described in notes on Matthew 21:12-16,
a series of businesses had sprung up in the very Temple
complex. Jewish pilgrims arriving from around the world to
offer the prescribed sacrifices and offerings either could not or
did not bring such animals with them. Moreover, the Temple
authorities insisted that the Temple tax due from each Jewish
man be made in the prescribed half-shekel. That was a local
Jewish coin not in circulation elsewhere in the Roman Empire.
Therefore, the Temple authorities apparently sold
franchises to enterprising businessmen from Jerusalem and
environs to act as money changers and sell the various animals
prescribed for sacrifice. They accordingly set up kiosks in the
Temple courts to that end. The problem was that which had
begun as a service to pilgrim visitors had turned into a crooked
racket. Exorbitant prices were charged for animals for sacrifice.
Moreover, the money changers gouged unwary pilgrims with
rates far above the prevailing exchange rate.
The Temple had not only become a place of commerce, it
was crooked commerce at that. Jesus in righteous indignation
therefore literally and forcibly threw out these corrupt busi-
nessmen. He tipped over the tables for money exchange. The
money thereon no doubt went flying. The word translated as
vessel (skeuov skeuos) in this context can have the sense of
‘stuff.’ Even those coming and going supplying the merchants
were stopped by Jesus.
11:17 Jesus therefore lectured, Is it not written, My house

shall be called of all nations the house of prayer? The first
half of the verse is a quotation from Isaiah 56:7. The last half,
but ye have made it a den of thieves, is a quotation from
Jeremiah 7:11. Jesus full well understood the venal and corrupt
practices going on. It was not so much that He was upset with
the selling of animals as a service to pilgrim travelers. Rather,
He was incensed with their crookedness in taking advantage of
innocent pilgrims who had traveled from afar to worship God.
Implied but not stated is that the Temple authorities received
kick-backs or franchise fees from this evil operation.
11:18 Not surprisingly, when the scribes and chief priests

heard it, and sought how they might destroy him: for they
feared him, because all the people was astonished at his
doctrine. Jesus had invaded their turf. He was upsetting their
operation not only from a theological perspective, but polit-
ically and commercially as well. The word translated as de-
stroy (apollumi apollumi) has the additional sense to ‘kill.’
Their intent was simple. Get rid of Jesus. If that meant killing
Him, fine.
However, these corrupt, venal hypocrites were both cow-
ards as well as savvy politicians. The multitudes of common
people were taken by His teaching. They were fascinated by
both Him and His message. Moreover, the local common
people were well aware of the corrupt practices of the
merchants and money changers. They therefore saw in Jesus a
Robin-Hood type of character that attracted popular support.
The leadership therefore was wary of openly confronting Jesus.
11:19-21 And when even was come, he went out of the

city. 20 And in the morning, as they passed by, they saw the
fig tree dried up from the roots. 21 And Peter calling to
remembrance saith unto him, Master, behold, the fig tree
which thou cursedst is withered away And in the morning,
as they passed by, they saw the fig tree dried up from the
roots. That Monday evening, Jesus and His disciples “went out
of the city.” Though unstated, they evidently retired to
Gethsemane near Bethany. See further comments thereto for
11:11.
On Tuesday morning of that fateful week, Jesus and
disciples arose and headed back toward Jerusalem. Therefore,
“as they passed by, they saw the fig tree dried up from the roots.”
The word translated as dried up (xhrainw xeraino) can also
have the sense of ‘withered.’ Therefore, “Peter calling to re-
membrance saith unto him, Master, behold, the fig tree which
thou cursedst is withered away.” The word translated as cursed
(kataraomai kataraomai) also has the sense of ‘doomed.’
Jesus did not curse it in the sense of untoward language. Rather,
He doomed it to wither away as noted in verse 14. This became
the catalyst of a broader discourse that Tuesday morning.
11:22 And Jesus answering saith unto them, Have faith

in God. In the direct context of Peter’s comment about the
withered fig tree, Jesus replied, “Have faith in God.” The word
translated as have (ecw echo) is in the imperative mode. It is a
command. Jesus in effect ordered, ‘Trust God!!’ Peter evidently
was astonished that after one day, the fig tree had already with-
ered away. Jesus’ cryptic rejoinder by implication was trust
God and he too could see mighty works. The following lesson
clearly teaches that.
11:23 Jesus therefore continued, For verily I say unto

you, That whosoever shall say unto this mountain, Be thou
removed, and be thou cast into the sea; and shall not doubt
in his heart, but shall believe that those things which he
saith shall come to pass; he shall have whatsoever he saith.
Our Lord chose an illustration that on its face was impossible.
He spoken of commanding a mountain to move and be thrown
into the sea. Humanly, that is impossible. However, for God it
is not. Therefore, if we can motivate God to so move the
mountain, it will be accomplished.
However, doubt neutralizes such spiritual power. To doubt
that God can solve mountain-size problems negates Him inter-
vening. Moreover, doubt will preclude one from even asking.
The key is (1) believing that God can move the mountain of our
problem, and (2) believing that He will if we ask Him to do so.
The greater lesson is not about asking God to capriciously
throw mountains around. Rather, Jesus, in all likelihood, was
referring to the problems of life which seem by comparison to
be mountains. Yet, as we believe that God can and will move
them if prevailed upon, He can and will intervene on our behalf.
The final phrase, “he shall have whatsoever he saith,” indicated
the universal application of the principle. Any mountain-like
problem can be moved by God as we come to Him in total faith
and without doubt.
11:24 With that mighty truth in view, Jesus expanded the

thought further. Therefore I say unto you, What things so-
ever ye desire, when ye pray, believe that ye receive them,
and ye shall have them. The unvarying key to answered prayer
is faith that God can and will intervene as we beseech Him to do
so. Of interest are the verb conjugations. The word translated as
believe (pisteuw pisteuo) is in the imperative mode. It is a
command. We are commanded to pray in total faith. Then, the
word translated as receive (lambanw lambano) is in the indic-
ative mode. The indicative mood is a simple statement of fact.
Implied is that when we come to God in prayer and in total faith,
the accomplishment of what we ask is already fact. It is already
being accomplished. The key to answered prayer therefore is
simple faith with no doubt intermingled.
11:25-26 Jesus added another prerequisite for answered

prayer. And when ye stand praying, forgive, if ye have ought
against any: that your Father also which is in heaven may
forgive you your trespasses. The word translated as stand
(sthkw steiko) can also have the sense to ‘persevere’ or to
‘persist.’ The idea is, ‘when you persist in praying, etc.’ How-
ever, the greater truth is having our hearts emptied of bitterness
and unforgiveness. Continuing, Jesus noted, 26 but if ye do not
forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive
your trespasses. The secondary lesson is that God will not
forgive us when we will not forgive others. However, the
primary lesson is in the greater context of answered prayer. To
not forgive another is to render powerless the transmitter of
prayer in our life. Sin short circuits prayer. It de-tunes the
antenna thereof. To not forgive another is sin. Hence, having
power in prayer requires not only absolute faith, it also requires
a heart clean of sin, especially bitterness toward another.
11:27-28 Recall the chronology of recent events. The day

prior, Monday of Jesus’ final week, He had driven the corrupt
and crooked merchants out of the Temple. It was the next
morning—Tuesday. Therefore, as they come again to Jeru-
salem: and as he was walking in the temple, there come to
him the chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders. (Mark
again uses the historic present tense in using ‘come’ for ‘came,’
etc.) Jesus therefore was confronted by what apparently was a
committee-of-the-whole of the Jewish leadership. It included
the chief priests, scribes, and the elders of Israel. The latter well
may imply most of the Sanhedrin. In so confronting Jesus, they
came as a large delegation. They were only too aware how that
Jesus had, with profound logic, devastated other critics on other
occasions. Moreover, by coming as a seemingly united front of
the official leadership of Israel, they hoped to mitigate any
uprising of the common people on Jesus’ behalf.
They therefore, no doubt with much pomposity and indig-
nation 28 say unto him, By what authority doest thou these
things? and who gave thee this authority to do these things?
Their demand was simple. Who gave you the authority to upset
the established order in the Temple? What authority do you
have to do this?
11:29-30 Jesus, well aware of their hope to ensnare Him in

His own words, answered their questions with a question. It was
a clever one at that. And Jesus answered and said unto them,
I will also ask of you one question, and answer me, and I will
tell you by what authority I do these things. 30 The baptism
of John, was it from heaven, or of men? answer me. Jesus
hearkened back to the days more than three years earlier when
John the Baptist was still baptizing. Official Israel in the chief
priests, scribes, and elders rejected him and his ministry as well.
Once again, they tried to ride the political fence by not en-
dorsing or attacking John. Jesus therefore in so many words
asked, ‘was John’s baptism of God or not?’ He concluded His
question with the demand, Answer me! The word thus trans-
lated (apokrinomai apokrinomai) is presented in the imper-
ative mode. Jesus demanded an answer.
11:31-32 The pompous leadership representing official

Israel conferred among themselves. They thus reasoned with
themselves, saying, If we shall say, From heaven; he will
say, Why then did ye not believe him? 32 But if we shall say,
Of men; they feared the people: for all men counted John,
that he was a prophet indeed. Jesus had them upon the horns
of a dilemma. He knew the political winds and sentiments as
well as His antagonists did. Moreover, there likely was a large
crowd which had gathered to witness this showdown between
Jesus and the big-shots of the Temple.
The pompous dignitaries therefore knew they must be all
the more discreet in how they answered. If they acknowledged
that John was of God and thus from heaven, Jesus would ask
why they did not believe Him. Clearly they had not. If they in
this public forum rather accused John and his ministry to being
just some crackpot man, they knew the multitude would erupt in
an uproar. The common people of Israel viewed John as a pro-
phet. Thus, Jesus paralyzed their attempted confrontation. He
left them hanging on the horns of their own dilemma.
11:33 And they answered and said unto Jesus, We

cannot tell. And Jesus answering saith unto them, Neither
do I tell you by what authority I do these things. All they
could do was lamely answer, “We cannot tell.” The word trans-
lated as tell (eidw eido) most commonly means ‘know.’ To
Jesus’ question, all they could answer was, ‘We don’t know.’
They continued to try and ride the fence. True politicians they
were. Therefore, Jesus replied, “Neither do I tell you by what
authority I do these things.” He thus went His way.
*****
Overview of Mark 12: As Mark continues to detail events

in the final week of Jesus’ ministry, he records (1) the parable
of the landowner traveling to a far country; (2) the question of
tribute money; (3) the question regarding the resurrection and
marriage; (4) Jesus’ comments on the greatest command-
ments; (5) Jesus’ confounding of the Pharisees regarding
Psalm 110; and finally (6) the incident of the widow’s mite.
12:1 The precise day is not noted, but it likely is still the
Tuesday of Jesus’ final week. Mark therefore records, And he
began to speak unto them by parables. Jesus thence pro-
ceeded to present the parable of the landowner and his depart-
ure. A certain man planted a vineyard, and set an hedge
about it, and digged a place for the winefat, and built a
tower, and let it out to husbandmen, and went into a far
country. As the parable will unfold, it is clearly allegorical of
the rejection of Jesus and His offer of the kingdom to Israel.
(That was in the process of taking place as He spoke.)
Jesus alludes to a landowner who owned a vineyard there-
on. Jesus thus described a typical vineyard of the day with its
walls, wine vat, and incumbent tower. The landowner in due
course leased the vineyard to hired husbandmen and thus went
into a far country.
Jesus’ reference to a vineyard was not coincidental. One of
the historic and scriptural figures of Israel was that of a
vineyard. See Isaiah 5:1-7. There, a strikingly similar parable is
set forth by Jehovah pertaining to Israel. The parallel likely did
not escape Jesus’ audience. His reference to the landowner
clearly is an allusion to God. The husbandmen clearly refers to
Israel in the land. God provided them not only with a good land,
but also all that was necessary for the accomplishment of His
objectives.
12:2-5 Continuing, Jesus noted, And at the season he sent

to the husbandmen a servant, that he might receive from
the husbandmen of the fruit of the vineyard. The servant in
all likelihood was an Old Testament prophet. Unfortunately, 3
they caught him, and beat him, and sent him away empty.
The allusion is clearly how Israel treated some of the prophets
sent by God throughout Old Testament history. Likewise, the
landowner again 4 sent unto them another servant; and at
him they cast stones, and wounded him in the head, and sent
him away shamefully handled. The reference may be to
Zechariah the prophet in II Chronicles 24:20-21. The parable
continued noting how the landowner again 5 sent another; and
him they killed, and many others; beating some, and killing
some. Thus in like fashion, Israel of old rejected the prophets
God had sent.
12:6-8 The parable nears its apex. Having yet therefore
one son, his wellbeloved, he sent him also last unto them,
saying, They will reverence my son. The application to Jesus
Christ is only too apparent. Nevertheless, 7 those husbandmen
said among themselves, This is the heir; come, let us kill
him, and the inheritance shall be our’s. Though there is no
direct record of the Jewish leadership scheming to take the
nation of Israel unto themselves as such, what is apparent is that
official Israel was jealous of their prerogative and the perqui-
sites of power they enjoyed. This is clearly hinted at in John
11:48 wherein the chief priests and Pharisees plotted, “If we let
him thus alone, all men will believe on him: and the Romans
shall come and take away both our place and nation.”
Therefore, 8 they took him, and killed him, and cast him
out of the vineyard. The parable is not only accurate but also
prophetic. Before the week was out, that is exactly what the
leadership of official Israel would do. Moreover, they categor-
ically cast their own Messiah out of the vineyard of Israel.
12:9 Jesus therefore in concluding the parable asked the

question, What shall therefore the lord of the vineyard do?
He answered His own question, he will come and destroy the
husbandmen, and will give the vineyard unto others. The
other synoptic gospels make clear that Jesus’ audience included
the Pharisees and chief priests as noted in 11:27. Jesus’ point did not
escape them. In Luke’s account they gasped, “God forbid” (Luke
20:16). In all likelihood, their concern was not of any impending
judgment upon themselves. Rather, the Jewish leadership clearly
understood the implication of the vineyard in the parable. For Israel
to be given over to gentiles was abhorrent to their thinking.
12:10-11 Jesus therefore asked, And have ye not read this

scripture; The stone which the builders rejected is become
the head of the corner: 11 This was the Lord’s doing, and it
is marvellous in our eyes? The quotation is from Psalm
118:22-23 and refers to an otherwise unspecified event during
the construction of Solomon’s Temple in which the cornerstone
of the temple was sent ahead from the quarry and was set aside
by the builders. It was forgotten with weeds growing up around
it. When they were ready for it, they sent word back to the
quarry to ship the cornerstone only to be told it had already been
sent earlier. They had rejected the cornerstone. Jesus clearly
applied this event to Himself. He, the Chief Cornerstone, was in
the process of being rejected. Nevertheless, it all was the Lord’s
doing and marvelous to behold.
12:12 Jesus’ antagonists therefore sought to lay hold on

him, but feared the people: for they knew that he had
spoken the parable against them: and they left him, and
went their way. Politicians these religious leaders were. They
were more than ready to arrest Jesus and had already issued a
warrant for His arrest. However, they could read the political
winds. They knew the common people held Jesus in high re-
gard. They therefore, leaving Him alone, slunk away hoping for
a more advantageous time to seize Him.
12:13 The context remains in the last several days prior to

Jesus’ arrest. The leadership of official Israel is by now beside
themselves trying to thwart or even arrest Jesus. Therefore, they
sent unto him certain of the Pharisees and of the Herodians,
to catch him in his words. Desperate men create strange
alliances. The super-religious Pharisees normally would have
nothing to do with the secular, non-observant Herodians. The
latter were collaborators with Rome in alliance with Herod.
They normally gave only lip service to observance of the Law
of Moses, focusing rather on politics and power. However, in
order to snare Jesus, the Pharisees were willing to cooperate
with their normal adversaries.
12:14 They therefore concocted a trick question by which
they thought Jesus would be snared no matter how He answer-
ed. It would parallel the old saw, ‘Have you stopped beating
your wife yet?’ Therefore, when they were come, they say
unto him, Master, we know that thou art true, and carest
for no man: for thou regardest not the person of men, but
teachest the way of God in truth.
They confronted Jesus by piously (and hypocritically)
complimenting His integrity and character. They then sprang
their loaded question. “Is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar, or
not?” Several dynamics were at work behind the scenes. The
Romans demanded payment of taxes. The word translated as
tribute (khnsov kensos) referred to a Roman census tax im-
posed especially upon subjugated nations such as Israel. The
Jews detested it. The Romans were extremely sensitive to
anyone advocating tax evasion.
Therefore, if Jesus answered ‘yes’ to their question, they
would trumpet that to the people insinuating that Jesus was
sympathetic to the Roman occupation. That would severely
damage His popularity and credibility among the common
people. On the other hand, if He said ‘no,’ they would then
trumpet the same and place Jesus in immediate, legal jeopardy
before the ever present Romans. They figured either way that
Jesus answered, they would damage Him.
12:15 They continued to press Him on the issue. Shall we

give, or shall we not give? But he, knowing their hypocrisy,
said unto them, Why tempt ye me? bring me a penny, that
I may see it. The word translated as penny (dhnarion denar-
ion, or in Latin, denarius) was a standard coin of Roman money.
12:16-17 And they brought it. And he saith unto them,

Whose is this image and superscription? And they said unto
him, Caesar’s. 17 And Jesus answering said unto them,
Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God
the things that are God’s. And they marvelled at him. Jesus
however, did not answer as His antagonists had assumed. Upon
receiving the coin, Jesus asked, “Whose is this image and
superscription? And they said unto him, Caesar’s.” The Ro-
mans by this point in history were minting relatively standard
silver coins with the image of Caesar stamped upon them as
well an engraving denoting a recent Roman Caesar.
Jesus therefore answered, “Render to Caesar the things that
are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” Jesus
thwarted their scheme. He adroitly noted unto whom the coin-
age ultimately belonged. The answer to their question therefore
was simple. If it belongs to Caesar, therefore return to him what
is his. In a broader sense, Jesus did tacitly endorse payment of
taxes. Paul made that very clear in Roman 13. Moreover, clearly
implied is a separation between the things of God and human
government—the separation of church and state. Though
modern, pagan courts have sadly abused this principle, in its
essence, it has scriptural origins.
12:18 Then come unto him the Sadducees, which say

there is no resurrection; and they asked him, saying. Having
failed to snare Jesus in their first attempt, another tack was tried.
This time there came “unto him the Sadducees, which say there
is no resurrection; and they asked him.” In distinction to the
Pharisees which were conservative in their doctrinal position,
the Sadducees were the theological liberals of their day. Among
other things, they denied the entire concept of a resurrection,
even for the righteous. They therefore came with their
carefully-crafted trick question, hoping to embarrass Jesus
before the multitudes.
12:19-23 These pompous religionists therefore confronted

Jesus with the following absurd hypothetical story. Master,
Moses wrote unto us, If a man’s brother die, and leave his
wife behind him, and leave no children, that his brother
should take his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother. The
reference is to Deuteronomy 25:5 which in its essence was
quoted by the Sadducees. Based upon that, they cobbled
together the following hypothetical situation. 20 Now there
were seven brethren: and the first took a wife, and dying left
no seed. 21 And the second took her, and died, neither left he
any seed: and the third likewise. 22 And the seven had her,
and left no seed: last of all the woman died also. (There
mention of seed here refers to children.)
Based upon that improbable hypothesis, the Sadducees
therefore asked Jesus, 23 In the resurrection therefore, when
they shall rise, whose wife shall she be of them? for the seven
had her to wife. The Sadducees likely perceived from Jesus’
extensive ministry that He believed and taught there would be
a resurrection both of the just and the unjust. (See Luke 14:14
and John 5:29.) They therefore hoped to embarrass Him with
their carefully constructed question. It should be noted that
liberals routinely operate on the level of questioning and
doubting. That certainly was the case here. They rarely advance
direct positive truth. Their purpose was to question and under-
cut the simple biblical teaching of the resurrection. Their whole
‘case’ was built around such an absurd hypothesis as they
presented Jesus.
12:24 Before addressing their foolish question directly,

Jesus rebuked them in principle. And Jesus answering said
unto them, Do ye not therefore err, because ye know not the
scriptures, neither the power of God? The word translated as
err (planaw planao) has the more primary sense ‘to deceive’
and here is in the passive voice. Jesus in effect said, ‘Are you not
therefore being deceived?’ The reason was because they knew
neither the Scriptures nor the power of God. Though they
professed to be the intelligentsia of their day, they in fact were
ignorant of their own Hebrew Scriptures. See for example
Daniel 12:2 or Job 19:26. As all liberals to this day, they thought
in naturalistic and human terms. They accordingly rejected out
of hand any concept of miracles. These, of course, are always by
the power of God. But they as liberals today know neither God’s
Word nor the God of the Word.
12:25 Jesus therefore addressed the substance of their

foolish question. For when they shall rise from the dead,
they neither marry, nor are given in marriage; but are as
the angels which are in heaven. Jesus therefore provided
insight into life in heaven. Quite apparently, the redeemed in
their glorified resurrected bodies will all be of one gender
(evidently, nominally male). Moreover, clearly implied is that
the human institution of marriage will not exist in heaven. That
is not to say that love relationships, long established on earth,
will not continue there. Rather, the physical aspect of marriage
quite apparently will no longer continue in our glorified bodies.
We in fact will be as the angels.
12:26-27 Jesus continued, And as touching the dead, that

they rise: have ye not read in the book of Moses, how in the
bush God spake unto him, saying, I am the God of
Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? His
quotation is from Exodus 3:6. What is significant is that the text
quoted is the present tense (am). God did not say to Moses, ‘I
was the God of Abraham.’ Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob had long
been dead when God spoke to Moses at the burning bush. The
point is as simple as it is singular. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob
were still alive, though not on the earth. Implicit is an impending
resurrection.
Jesus therefore further embellished lest they missed His
point. 27 He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the
living: ye therefore do greatly err. The godly saints of the Old
Testament era, though departed from this life, were still alive
implying a coming resurrection. Jesus, from their own Hebrew
Scripture —the Law of Moses, had cut them off at the knees.
The Sadducees therefore gave up on trying to entrap Jesus.
12:28 Listening to all of this was a scribe, a professional

copyist of Scripture. They were reputed to be authorities in the
understanding and interpretation of Scripture. Therefore, one
of the scribes came, and having heard them reasoning
together, and perceiving that he had answered them well,
asked him, Which is the first commandment of all? The
hubris of this fellow is apparent. Though Jesus had stopped the
Pharisees, Herodians, and Sadducees cold in their tracks, he
thought he could trip up Jesus. He therefore lobbed another
loaded question at Jesus. He hoped that Jesus would go out on
a limb and take a position he could thereafter attack with ease.
12:29-30 Jesus however adroitly replied, The first of all

the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is
one Lord. The reference is from Deuteronomy 6:4. This is the
first verse the Jews were to put in their phylacteries and was to
be repeated twice each day in the morning and the evening. Its
formal title was the kiriathshema or ‘the reading of the Shema.’
The quotation continued from Deuteronomy 6:5, 30 And thou
shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all
thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength.
Jesus whereupon noted, this is the first commandment.
12:31 Jesus therefore quoted from Leviticus 19:18 noting

that the second great commandment was, Thou shalt love thy
neighbour as thyself. Jesus thus noted, There is none other
commandment greater than these. In Matthew’s account, he
recorded Jesus as having added, “On these two commandments
hang all the law and the prophets” (Matthew 22:40). In other
words, condensed in these two precepts were the essence of the
entire Old Testament.
12:32-33 The smug scribe therefore informed Jesus, Well,

Master, thou hast said the truth: for there is one God; and
there is none other but he. His arrogance and condescension
is apparent. This patronizing scribe in effect told Jesus, ‘Good
for you. You got the right answer.’ Moreover, he condes-
cendingly continued, 33 And to love him with all the heart,
and with all the understanding, and with all the soul, and
with all the strength, and to love his neighbour as himself, is
more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices. Not
unlikely there is a tone of sarcasm. This egotistical scribe was
not interested in learning from Jesus. His motive was to
demonstrate his own acumen. He wanted to go toe to toe with
Jesus and come out on top, proving for all listening his own
brilliance.
12:34 Jesus perceived all of this. And when Jesus saw

that he answered discreetly, he said unto him, Thou art not
far from the kingdom of God. The word translated as
discreetly (nounecwv nounechos) has the additional sense of
‘carefully’ though ‘discreetly’ accurately conveys the thought.
As a lawyer carefully choosing and parsing his words, the scribe
had answered Jesus accurately. What he said was correct. How-
ever, it is apparent the man’s heart was not in what he said.
Jesus’ reply, Thou art not far from the kingdom of God, was
ironic. The man had the right answer. He was so close and yet
so far. He knew the right answers but was light years from
actually being in the kingdom. He typified so many who have
head knowledge of the gospel. They know the language and
have the right answers, but they in reality are far from the king-
dom. Subsequently, no man after that durst ask him any
question. As Jesus had adroitly demolished the arguments and
ploys of his adversaries, no one else had the courage to further
confront Him.
12:35-37 Now it was Jesus’ turn. And Jesus answered

and said, while he taught in the temple, How say the scribes
that Christ is the Son of David? Jesus had His own ‘loaded’
question for His hypocritical antagonists, the leadership of
official Israel. The official position of orthodox Judaism was
that the Messiah (the Christ) would be descended of the lineage
of David. To all, that was agreed.
However, Jesus continued, 36 For David himself said by
the Holy Ghost, The LORD said to my Lord, Sit thou on my
right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool. Jesus
quotation was from Psalm 110:1. The thought is how David
wrote that Jehovah God said to David’s Lord (the Messiah),
“Sit on my right hand . . ..” The quotation clearly refers to Jesus
being seated at the right hand of the Father after His ascension
until such time as all His enemies are subjugated at the end of
the Tribulation. We, as New Testament Christians, can under-
stand that with the assistance of other Scripture. However, He
knew that the Scribes and Pharisees struggled with this portion
of Psalms. They could not understand it. Of interest is Jesus’
comment how that David wrote “by the Holy Ghost.” Clearly
implied is the inspiration of the book of Psalms.
Jesus therefore sprang His coup de grâce. 37 David
therefore himself calleth him Lord; and whence is he then
his son? Jesus’ riddle was simple. David called the Messiah his
Lord. How could He therefore be his son? The Pharisees and
official Israel present obviously had no answer. (The answer is
simple. The Messiah indeed is descended from David. But
David will someday be in the kingdom and then call him, Lord.)
To this, the common people heard him gladly. Though
official Israel was the enemy of Jesus, the common people
remained open to His message. Implied is that they were
bemused to see their pompous religious leadership confounded
by Jesus. They reveled in seeing the hypocritical windbags sty-
mied.
12:38-40 Jesus therefore proceeded to add insult to injury.

He warned of the pretentious hypocrisy of these religious fakes.
And he said unto them in his doctrine, Beware of the
scribes, which love to go in long clothing, and love salu-
tations in the marketplaces, 39 And the chief seats in the
synagogues, and the uppermost rooms at feasts: 40 Which
devour widows’ houses, and for a pretence make long
prayers: these shall receive greater damnation.
Jesus gave insight into the pretense of the professional
religionists of His day. It is not greatly dissimilar to more
modern charlatans. The scribes preferred to wear long black
robes which identified them as ‘reverends.’ It was the clerical
garb of the day, not unlike to modern clergy with their clerical
collars or the long robes of traditional ‘priests.’ Jesus reference
to them loving “salutations in the marketplaces” would be
analogous to modern clergy being greeted as ‘reverend’ or
‘father’ out in public. The scribes reveled in that as do modern
clergy. These ambitious religious professionals desired places
of prominence in their synagogues and at special dinners.
Yet, Jesus warned that they in fact devoured widows’
homes. The thought likely refers to the practice of talking poor
widows into donating their homes to the Temple for some pre-
sumed benefit. However, the scribes thus through crafty legal
maneuvering were able to obtain the real estate for themselves.
Yet, these pious hypocrites would turn around and pretent-
iously make ostentatious, grandiloquent, public prayers, dem-
onstrating their piety.
Jesus spoke of these abominable, religious frauds as re-
ceiving “greater damnation.” The thought literally is of the
worst judgment. Clearly implied are degrees of judgment. Quite
apparently, the worst places in hell will be reserved especially
for such hypocritical impostors.
12:41 In that same context (still in the final days of His

earthly ministry), Jesus sat over against the treasury, and
beheld how the people cast money into the treasury: and
many that were rich cast in much. At one entry to the Temple
were thirteen chests, called trumpets from their shape, which
stood in the court of the women. They were at the entrance to the
Temple treasure-chamber. Nine chests were designated for
money-gifts in lieu of sacrifice. Four were for free-will offer-
ings. Jesus thus used this occasion to further demonstrate the
hypocrisy of official Israel. The fact that Jesus sat down
indicates not only His humanity and weariness, but also that the
storm of confrontations was over for the moment. He thus took
note how that the rich were ostentatiously casting much into the
Temple treasury chests.
12:42 Mark, by way of contrast, notes that there came a

certain poor widow, and she threw in two mites, which
make a farthing. The word translated as mite (lepton lepton)
referred to a small brass coin which in modern terms might be
analogous to a penny. The word translated as farthing (ko-
dranthv kodrantes) was worth somewhat more than a penny,
perhaps analogous to a modern ‘nickel.’ The point is clear
however. In contrast to wealthy men, openly and ostentatiously
dropping their sizeable offerings (no doubt in gold coinage) into
the treasury receptacles, this poor widow modestly put in her
pittance.
12:43-44 Jesus therefore called unto him his disciples,

and saith unto them, Verily I say unto you, That this poor
widow hath cast more in, than all they which have cast into
the treasury: 44 For all they did cast in of their abundance;
but she of her want did cast in all that she had, even all her
living.
The affluent had given of their abundance. Implied is that
the balance in their checking account was still substantial,
notwithstanding their generous offering. In contrast, this poor
widow of her poverty had put in the last money she had. The
word translated as living (biov bios) literally means her ‘life.’
In other words, she gave her all.
The contrast between the affluent, likely representing the
top layer of official Israel, and this poor widow illustrated a
more profound truth. The former clearly were hypocritical and
vain. The widow likely represented that humble, still sincere
and godly remnant within Israel. It was not they who would
soon demand Jesus’ crucifixion, but official Israel with their
allies in the rich and powerful.
*****
Overview of Mark 13: The thirteenth chapter of Mark pre-

sents the Olivet Discourse delivered by our Lord in the days just
prior to His crucifixion.
13:1-2 Following the confrontation of Jesus by the

Pharisees, as he went out of the temple, one of his disciples
saith unto him, Master, see what manner of stones and what
buildings are here! Because their immediate destination was
the Mount of Olives, it is likely that Jesus and His disciples
exited the Temple from either the eastern gate or one of the
gates along the southern portion of the Temple.
The Temple of Jesus’ day had just recently underwent
close to fifty years of renovation and expansion at the hands of
Herod the Great. Herod, perhaps the greatest builder in Israel
since the time of Solomon, had rebuilt the Temple complex into
one of the architectural marvels of the world. The Temple
platform built up above of the Kidron and Tyropoeon valleys at
one point rose three hundred feet above its base in the Kidron
Valley. (This was the pinnacle of the Temple from which the
devil tempted Jesus.)
The Temple complex was vast in its dimensions, covering
approximately thirty-five acres within its walls. The stones
noted by the disciples may have been the massive, yet perfectly
cut and fitted ‘master course’ near the base of the Temple wall
which weighed up to four-hundred tons each. The Temple
complex was a magnificent collection of buildings including
the actual Temple itself. These were crafted of finely-cut white
limestone. On the Temple itself, much of the ornate stonework
was overlaid with pure gold which glistened in the sun. The
complex, in all likelihood, was larger and more ornate than even
in Solomon’s day. It was the epitome of ancient grandeur. As
Jews, the disciples were proud of this massive monument, not
only to their God but of their nation.
Jesus however was not impressed. He warned, 2 Seest thou
these great buildings? there shall not be left one stone upon
another, that shall not be thrown down. That awesome
prophecy was fulfilled about forty years later when Titus
besieged Jerusalem in crushing the revolt of the Zealots. In A.D.
70, Titus’ forces broke into the weakened city and destroyed it.
In the ensuing looting and burning, the Temple itself caught
fire, causing its ornamental gold to melt and run down into the
rubble. Upon cooling, the Romans literally left not one stone
upon another, searching for the melted gold in the ruins. More-
over, Titus ordered the rubble of much of the Temple mount to
be pushed over the edge of the Temple platform down into the
valleys below. Some of it remains to this day. In A.D. 135 when
the Jews revolted again under Bar Kokhba, the Romans wreak-
ed even further destruction upon Jerusalem, leaving virtually
nothing standing. The prophecy of Jesus was fulfilled in its final
detail.
13:3-4 Thereafter, Jesus and His disciples traversed the

Kidron Valley up onto the adjacent Mount of Olives. Mark
records, And as he sat upon the mount of Olives over against
the temple, Peter and James and John and Andrew asked
him privately, 4 Tell us, when shall these things be? and
what shall be the sign when all these things shall be fulfilled?
These four disciples (if not the rest) were perplexed by
what they had heard Jesus say just outside the Temple. They
therefore asked Him privately when this would take place and
what sign would precede it. This occasioned Jesus uttering what
has come to be known as the Olivet Discourse because He
taught it from the Mount of Olives. One helpful key in under-
standing the Olivet Discourse is that its fulfillment takes place
after the Rapture. The church is not in view therefore. The focus
is upon Israel, particularly believing Israel during the Trib-
ulation.
13:5-6 When recalling that the Olivet Discourse was utter-

ed one or two days prior to Jesus’ crucifixion, it provides insight
into the profound character thereof. Jesus was giving to His
disciples (and by extension to believing Israel during the
Tribulation) an overview of what would take place during the
seventieth week of Daniel.
Therefore, Jesus answering them began to say, Take
heed lest any man deceive you: 6 For many shall come in my
name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many. Our Lord
warned of false messiahs. They have come and gone down
through the ages. Apparently, during the initial stages of the
Tribulation, there will be a flurry of such activity, culminating
with the arrival of the man of sin who will set himself up as God
in the newly rebuilt Temple at Jerusalem.
13:7-8 In that day, Jesus warned they would hear of wars
and rumours of wars, be ye not troubled: for such things
must needs be; but the end shall not be yet. 8 For nation shall
rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom.
Down through the centuries, even in the first century, there
certainly have been wars and rumors of war with nations rising
again nation and kingdoms against kingdoms. However, here
Jesus seems to be clearly speaking eschatologically and of the
seventieth week of Daniel (the Tribulation) in particular. His
reference to these being the “beginning of sorrows” strongly
implies that He is referring to the initial stages of the Tribu-
lation. What Jesus foretold here seems to dovetail with what
was revealed to John in Revelation 6:1-8 and the first four seal
judgments. Moreover, further implied is that Israel at that time
will only hear of wars and rumors of wars. The composite
mosaic of biblical prophecy regarding Israel in the Tribulation
seems to indicate that Israel will enjoy relative if not absolute
peace during the first half of the Tribulation.
Jesus went on to note that there shall be earthquakes in
divers places, and there shall be famines and troubles: these
are the beginnings of sorrows. Though in recent generations
amongst pre-millennial Christians, there has been a tendency to
view earthquakes as a sign of the times, earthquakes have gone
on down through the centuries in divers (varying) places. These
further are along with “famines and troubles.” The latter word
is translated from (tarach) tarache which has the sense of
civil commotion or unrest. Again, the thought clearly parallels
that of Revelation 6:1-8. As noted by Jesus, these together are
only the beginning of sorrows. Of interest is that the word so
translated (wdin odin) actually has reference to birth pangs
(travail). Hinted at is the fulfillment of Isaiah 66:8.
13:9 Jesus warned further, But take heed to yourselves:

for they shall deliver you up to councils; and in the
synagogues ye shall be beaten: and ye shall be brought
before rulers and kings for my sake, for a testimony against
them. Presuming the Rapture has already taken place, the focus
evidently is upon Jews who turn to Christ during the Tribula-
tion. Jesus warned that they now, as despised turncoats and
‘Christians,’ will be fiercely persecuted by the local Jewish
populace and in the synagogues of the land. Moreover, they will
be even brought before the civil authorities on trumped up
charges for His sake. This will stand as testimony against hard-
hearted authorities who have no mercy upon these newly-
believing Jews. (Of interest, at the date of this writing, there are
even now messianic congregations of Jewish believers
throughout the land of modern Israel. However, Orthodox Jews
and their rabbis already are persecuting these believers, but not
to the degree described here.)
13:10 Jesus therefore uttered a cryptic and yet profound

prophecy. And the gospel must first be published among all
nations. The word translated as published (khrussw kerus-
so) is most commonly translated as ‘preached.’ Keeping in
mind that the Olivet Discourse is fulfilled in the Tribulation and
the church is no longer in view, the fulfillment of the gospel
being preached throughout the world during the Tribulation is
of interest. It very well may be that the fulfillment of this is by
the 144,000 witnesses described in Revelation 7 and 14.
Though there is no textual connection to these, this along with
other clues in Scripture seems to hint that the ministry of the
144,000 is to preach the gospel the world around, no doubt to
the Jews of the Diaspora first, and then to any gentile who will
listen.
13:11-13 Jesus therefore warned His beleaguered brethren

of that day how to react when the inevitable persecution arrived.
These young, recently converted Jewish believers are warned,
But when they shall lead you, and deliver you up, take no
thought beforehand what ye shall speak, neither do ye
premeditate: but whatsoever shall be given you in that
hour, that speak ye: for it is not ye that speak, but the Holy
Ghost. Rather than fretting over how they will defend
themselves before unsympathetic authorities, Jesus foretells
how the Holy Spirit will speak through them in that day.
Moreover, 12 brother shall betray the brother to death,
and the father the son; and children shall rise up against
their parents, and shall cause them to be put to death. 13 And
ye shall be hated of all men for my name’s sake. Though
there has been antisemitism down through the ages as well as
persecution of the church, here the animosity reaches down into
the very family unit. Down through the centuries, Jews (and
Christians) though persecuted have usually respectively stood
together. However, during the Tribulation, a believing Jew will
be betrayed by his unbelieving brother. Parents will turn in their
children and vice versa. Such will be the hatred against Jews
who turn to Christ during those dark days. Believers in Christ in
that day will be hated universally, but especially those Jews
who turn to Jesus. They will suffer not only the wrath of their
own countrymen but likely that of the antichrist as well.
Jesus noted however, but he that shall endure unto the
end, the same shall be saved. The context clearly points to
physically surviving to the end of the Tribulation. The word
translated as saved (swzw sozo) can also be rendered as ‘deliv-
ered’ and that likely is the thought here. At the end of those days,
Jesus Himself will return and deliver them from the ferocious
opposition they had endured.
13:14 Jesus therefore gave the ‘sign’ the disciples had

asked for. But when ye shall see the abomination of
desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing where
it ought not, (let him that readeth understand,) then let
them that be in Judaea flee to the mountains. The
“abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet”
refers back to Daniel 9:27. In the greater context of New
Testament eschatology, this likely refers to the erection of the
image of the antichrist in the newly rebuilt Temple and his
announcement that he is in fact God. See II Thessalonians 2:3-
4. This evidently will take place at the mid-point of the
Tribulation and marks the breaking of the peace settlement the
man of sin made with Israel. He, at this time, apparently will
turn his wrath against Israel and particularly those who have
turned to Christ. Jesus therefore warns these to flee to the moun-
tains of Judea. These are the rugged, desolate, desert mountains
south of Jerusalem.
13:15-18 Jesus went on to warn of the urgency of that hour.

And let him that is on the housetop not go down into the
house, neither enter therein, to take any thing out of his
house: 16 And let him that is in the field not turn back again
for to take up his garment. 17 But woe to them that are with
child, and to them that give suck in those days! 18 And pray
ye that your flight be not in the winter.
The ferocity and swiftness of the persecution of the
antichrist against believing Jews in that day will be such that
Jesus warned them to flee immediately upon hearing of the
desecration of the new Temple with the image of the antichrist.
Whether in the city or in the countryside, Jesus said flee as fast
as you can. Those with small children will face particular
difficulty in that day. Hopefully, this will not take place during
the bad-weather months of winter. Implied is that these will be
‘camping out’ in the elements in their flight.
13:19 There never has been nor will be such a time of

persecution. For in those days shall be affliction, such as was
not from the beginning of the creation which God created
unto this time, neither shall be. The word translated as
affliction (yliqiv thlipsis) is more commonly rendered as
‘tribulation.’ In the last half of the Tribulation there will be per-
secution, perhaps against Jews in general but clearly against
believing Jews in particular. Such persecution will be such as
has not been since the creation.
13:20 Jesus went on to warn that except that the Lord had
shortened those days, no flesh should be saved: but for the
elect’s sake, whom he hath chosen, he hath shortened the
days. In collating prophecy pertaining to the Tribulation in
Daniel and Revelation, it is clear that the latter half of the
Tribulation will be 1,260 days (also noted as forty-two months).
See Revelation 11:2,3; 12:6; and 13:5. There seems to be no
exception to this precise timetable. However, Revelation 8:12
indicates that during this time, God will reduce the length of the
days by one third so that a day becomes sixteen hours. It clearly
is done out of mercy for the sake of Israel, and believing Israel
in particular, “the elect’s sake whom he hath chosen.”
13:21-23 Jesus again warned of false messiahs particularly

in that day. And then if any man shall say to you, Lo, here is
Christ; or, lo, he is there; believe him not: 22 For false
Christs and false prophets shall rise, and shall shew signs
and wonders, to seduce, if it were possible, even the elect. 23
But take ye heed: behold, I have foretold you all things. In
this day, there have been eminent Jewish Rabbis whom their
followers thought to be the messiah.
Jesus, however, may rather be hinting at the work of the
antichrist Himself and the false prophet as they perform signs
and wonders to deceive the world. Even some of the elect
(Israel) will be deceived thereby. See Revelation 13:13-15.
Jesus warned those who will in that day read this gospel that
they had been forewarned.
13:24-26 Thereafter, in those days, after that tribulation,
the sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not give her
light, 25 And the stars of heaven shall fall, and the powers
that are in heaven shall be shaken. 26 And then shall they see
the Son of man coming in the clouds with great power and
glory. In one of the clearest indicators of a pre-millennial return
of Christ, Jesus noted “after that tribulation” will the Son of man
return. However, immediately prior thereto, the sun shall be
darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, And the
stars of heaven shall fall, and the powers that are in heaven
shall be shaken. The latter may be a reference to the final
judgments of the Tribulation in its waning days. See Revelation
16:8-11 as well as Joel 2:10. It is at that time that Jesus Christ
will return “in the clouds with great power and glory to assume
absolute control of this earth.”
13:27 Moreover, at that same general time, And then shall

he send his angels, and shall gather together his elect from
the four winds, from the uttermost part of the earth to the
uttermost part of heaven. The elect here and throughout this
chapter clearly refers to Israel. The reference to them being
scattered to the four winds and to the uttermost part of the earth
undoubtedly refers to the Jewish diaspora to this day. In the
greater context of prophecy in this regard, this may refer to
believing Israel, who though scattered around the world, have
been converted to Christ during the Tribulation. In any event,
Israel as a people will be returned altogether in belief to the land
very shortly after Christ returns at His second coming. They
thus will be installed in their long promised land for the
millennial reign of Christ.
13:28-29 The several disciples had asked Jesus for a sign in

13:4 when all of this would come to pass. Jesus therefore further
obliged them. Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When her
branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that
summer is near: 29 So ye in like manner, when ye shall see
these things come to pass, know that it is nigh, even at the
doors. In a simple lesson from agronomy that all can under-
stand, Jesus used the illustration of a tree (in this case a fig tree)
in the spring. As it sets on leaves, it is a clear indication of the
coming of summer. Jesus then noted that when they saw all
these things come to pass, they would know that summer was at
hand. The reference likely may be the ‘summer’ of the millen-
nial reign of Christ. However, that will not take place until all
which He had foretold in the Olivet Discourse had taken place.
In other words, Israel must go through the ‘winter’ of the
Tribulation before they can expect the ‘summer’ of the
kingdom of God.
13:30 Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall

not pass, till all these things be done. Moreover, “this gener-
ation shall not pass, till all these things be done.” Some have
attempted in the mid-twentieth century to make application of
the budding of the fig tree to the return of many Jews to Pales-
tine after World War II. They therefore concluded that their
generation would see the coming of Christ. Well, that has not
taken place for most of that generation. That likely is not what
Jesus had in mind. Rather, as the generation that witnesses all of
what has been foretold in the Olivet Discourse, particularly
from the perspective of a believing Jewish remnant in the Tribu-
lation, that generation will not pass till all is fulfilled. They will
witness the blossoming of the kingdom of God in the millennial
reign of Christ.
13:31 Not long prior to His crucifixion, Jesus made clear

the veracity of His written Word in His absence. Heaven and
earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away.
Clearly implied is that the heavens and earth will someday pass
away. See Revelation 21:1. Notwithstanding that, His words
will never pass away. The faithful transmission and preserva-
tion of His very words is foretold. Moreover, it is not just the
general thoughts or doctrinal truths which will be preserved, but
the very words. It is hard to believe that God allowed His very
words to be lost until the late 19th century when they suddenly
reappeared in the critical text. Rather, the more tenable view is
that they have been available all along in the text received by
Bible-believers from the first century—the received traditional
text of God’s Word.
13:32 Jesus thence returns to His eschatological com-

ments. But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no,
not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the
Father. No man nor angel (including Satan) knows when all
these things will come to pass. Jesus’ denial of knowing the time
does not preclude His Deity. Rather, it reveals His humanity and
His voluntary limiting of some of His prerogatives (e.g., omni-
science) in His earthly tenure. That, however, has been fully
restored in His glorification. If even Jesus Himself did not know
the time of the end in His humanity, how utterly foolish for
lessor men to try and set such dates.
13:33 Rather than try and foolishly embark on date setting

schemes, Jesus directed, Take ye heed, watch and pray: for
ye know not when the time is. Our duty is to be watching and
praying in the meantime.
13:34-37 Mark does not include, at least in detail, the par-

able of the absent lord as found in Matthew 25:14-30. However,
he may have presented its distilled essence here. For the Son of
man is as a man taking a far journey, who left his house, and
gave authority to his servants, and to every man his work,
and commanded the porter to watch. 35 Watch ye
therefore: for ye know not when the master of the house
cometh, at even, or at midnight, or at the cockcrowing, or in
the morning: 36 Lest coming suddenly he find you sleeping.
And what I say unto you I say unto all, Watch.
The simple lesson Jesus has given for His people in the
meantime is to watch. The word so translated (grhgorew gre-
goreuo) has the sense to ‘be vigilant’ and to ‘ever pay attention.’
Of interest is that Jesus mentioned the four watches of the night:
evening, midnight, cockcrowing, and morning. Our injunction
is simple. “Watch ye therefore: for ye know not when the master
of the house.” Again, 37 what I say unto you I say unto all,
Watch. That injunction remains to this hour.
*****
Overview of Mark 14: Here, the final day or two of Jesus’ life
prior to His crucifixion are noted. Included is Jesus being anointed
in Bethany, the last supper with its associated events, Gethsemane,
and His arrest and initial proceedings followed by Peter’s denial.
14:1-2 An important date-marker is here noted. After two

days was the feast of the passover, and of unleavened bread:
and the chief priests and the scribes sought how they might
take him by craft, and put him to death. But they said, Not
on the feast day, lest there be an uproar of the people.
The traditional day for Jesus’ crucifixion is Friday, known
world-around as ‘Good Friday.’ However, the scriptural indi-
cators are that Jesus could not have been crucified on Friday.
Matthew 12:40 notes that He was in the heart of the earth three
days and three nights. It is impossible to fit that between Friday
evening and Sunday morning. With the events which have been
detailed since His triumphal entry on Palm Sunday and the note
here there were still two days unto Passover, it seems apparent
that Jesus was crucified on either Wednesday or Thursday. The
chronology of the week and the events which took place therein
leans toward Thursday. Passover was considered a sabbath, and
in fact a high sabbath as indicated in John 19:31. The Passover
as a sabbath could fall upon any day of the week. Thus, in any
event, Jesus was crucified on the eve of a sabbath, probably on
Thursday.
The power elite of Jerusalem, the chief priests and scribes,
were carefully plotting how they might take Him by craft. The
word so translated (dolov dolos) has the idea of ‘deceitfully’ or
‘surreptitiously.’ Politicians these leaders were. They also were
cowards. They knew that Jesus was popular, at least senti-
mentally, among the common people. They believed that if they
arrested Jesus openly, especially on Passover, they would ignite
a riot. Therefore, they plotted how they might seize Him
covertly to kill Him. It is noteworthy that they had already made
up their minds as to what they planned to do upon arresting Him.
Their kangaroo-court trial to come was merely a ruse for their
true intentions to kill Him.
14:3 Mark thus shifts the scene to Bethany. And being in

Bethany in the house of Simon the leper, as he sat at meat,
there came a woman having an alabaster box of ointment of
spikenard very precious; and she brake the box, and
poured it on his head.
The village of Bethany is near Jerusalem as a virtual
suburb. It was to the east of the city, just behind the Mount of
Olives which faced the Temple complex. Mark notes that He
was seated in the home of “Simon the leper.” Nothing else is
known of this man. However, it may be assumed that Jesus had
healed Him for he now was at home in his house. That would
not have been possible if the leprosy were still active.
Mark does not identify the woman. It has been assumed by
some that the woman was Mary, the sister of Lazarus as noted
in John 12:1-8. However, the similar incident in John 12 took
place prior to Jesus’ triumphal entry. Here, it took place there-
after. The simple reconciliation of these two accounts is that
two different women did so. In John’s account it took place at
Martha’s home. Here, it was at Simon’s home.
The word translated as sat at meat (katakeimai kata-
keimai) actually has the sense to ‘recline’ at a formal dinner. It
was the custom of the day for formal meals to be eaten from a
semi-reclining position around a low table. The idea was of rest
and comfort as a full evening meal is slowly partaken.
While Jesus thus reclined around the table, the woman
came “having an alabaster box of ointment of spikenard very
precious; and she brake the box, and poured it on his head.” The
word translated as spikenard (nardov nardos) refers to a fra-
grant eastern perfume which was costly. An alabaster box was
a container carved out of alabaster in which the ancients kept
expensive perfumes or other unguents. To break the box
probably referred to breaking the seal of its lid.
The pouring of this perfumed oil upon the head of Jesus
was an anointing of Him in every sense of the Old Testament
tradition regarding anointing. Of further interest is the title
Christ (Cristov christos) which literally means ‘the anointed
one.’ If at no other time, Jesus was here anointed. This very
likely may be a foreview of Him being anointed as priest and
king prior to His passion. Jesus Himself noted a few moments
later that the woman had anointed Him prior to His burying.
14:4-5 However, not all were pleased. And there were

some that had indignation within themselves, and said,
Why was this waste of the ointment made? 5 For it might
have been sold for more than three hundred pence, and
have been given to the poor. And they murmured against
her. Matthew notes that the some were a portion of the dis-
ciples. Though not noted by name by Mark, John notes that
Judas was the ringleader of this grumbling. Three-hundred
pence was a significant sum. In modern terms, it would approxi-
mate a year’s wages. That is a handsome sum in any economy.
The word translated as murmured (embrimaomai embrima-
omai) actually has a stronger sense of ‘snorting with anger’ or
to ‘sternly challenge.’ Judas saw money flying away which he
could have embezzled. He unfortunately infected several other
disciples with his attitude. His protestation about it being given to the
poor was a sham, as often is the case even in modern politics.
14:6-7 Jesus quickly picked up on this and said, Let her

alone; why trouble ye her? she hath wrought a good work
on me. 7 For ye have the poor with you always, and whenso-
ever ye will ye may do them good: but me ye have not
always. He promptly rebuked His grumbling disciples. The
woman indeed had wrought a good deed upon Him, probably
more than she understood. Her anointing of Jesus likely was not
happenstance or coincidence. She likely had been led of the
Spirit of God to do so for the profound implications pertaining
to Jesus. He had already fulfilled His ministry as a prophet. He
was about to enter into His work as priest. He someday will
return as King.
Though by no means a treatise on economics, Jesus noted
that there always will be the poor. Poverty stems in some mea-
sure from unfortunate circumstances in which people find
themselves. However, it also is caused by sin and laziness. All
of those factors remain to this day. Jesus, perhaps brusquely, re-
minded His disciples they could help the poor anytime, but they
would not long have Him in their midst. They did not understand
that, but hindsight allows us the realization how true it would be.
14:8 Jesus therefore said, She hath done what she could:
she is come aforehand to anoint my body to the burying. It
is likely, as noted above, that which this woman did was by the
leading of the Holy Spirit. She likely had no inkling that Jesus
was about to be put to death other than she undoubtedly knew
that He was wanted by the authorities at Jerusalem. However,
Jesus fully knew what was going on. He knew that He was being
anointed for burial before the fact.
It was the custom of the Jews to anoint a dead body with
perfumes as they wound it in cloth for burial. The perfume
helped to mask the odor of death as well as show respect to the
deceased. Jesus again foretold His death, though few if any
present picked up on it.
14:9 Jesus therefore commented, Verily I say unto you,

Wheresoever this gospel shall be preached throughout the
whole world, this also that she hath done shall be spoken of
for a memorial of her. Our Lord foretold that in the ages to
come as the gospel would be preached the world around, what
this woman had done would be told over and over again. Truly,
her kindness bestowed upon Jesus that fateful day has become
a memorial to her name from that day to this.
14:10-11 Meanwhile, perhaps in disgust, Judas Iscariot,

one of the twelve, went unto the chief priests, to betray
him unto them. 11 And when they heard it, they were
glad, and promised to give him money. And he sought
how he might conveniently betray him. What evidently
was the evening prior to Jesus’ betrayal, Judas of Kerioth
sought out the chief priests of the Temple and offered to betray
Him. They must have been beside themselves with glee. They
therefore quickly agreed to pay him for his deed. The word
translated as conveniently (eukairwv eukairos) has the idea of
‘opportune.’ But the thought of ‘conveniently’ certainly con-
veys the lack of character in Judas. He sought for an easy way
to accomplish his despicable deed. He would not have long to
wait.
14:12 Jesus and His disciples evidently spent that night
either in Bethany or perhaps at Gethsemane which is not far
distant. In any event, the next day was the first day of
unleavened bread, when they killed the passover. Therefore,
his disciples said unto him, Where wilt thou that we go and
prepare that thou mayest eat the passover? The first day of
the Feast of Unleavened Bread coincided with Passover. The
disciples, concerned that they properly observe this high holy
day, inquired of Jesus where to go and prepare.
14:13-15 Jesus therefore sent forth two of his disciples,

and saith unto them, Go ye into the city, and there shall meet
you a man bearing a pitcher of water: follow him. Luke
notes the two as Peter and John (Luke 22:8). Jesus gave them a
sign which would be obvious in the culture of the day. He told
them to look for a “man bearing a pitcher of water.” In the social
customs of the day, it was the women who carried the water,
usually upon their head in a clay vessel. To see a man doing such
was unusual indeed. Therefore, in finding such a rare occur-
rence, they would know they had found the right man. Jesus
said, follow him.
He thus directed, 14 And wheresoever he shall go in, say ye to
the goodman of the house, The Master saith, Where is the
guestchamber, where I shall eat the passover with my disciples?
15 And he will shew you a large upper room furnished and
prepared: there make ready for us. The water-carrying man in
all likelihood was a servant. Jesus instructed them that upon
arriving at his destination to inquire of the homeowner, “Where
is the guestchamber, where I shall eat the passover with my
disciples?” Though the finding of the man and the right place
was a miracle in its own right, the guestchamber fully-prepared
may have had a more prosaic explanation.
Multiplied tens of thousands of Jews made pilgrimages to
Jerusalem for both the holy season surrounding Passover in the
Spring and Yom Kippur in the Fall. At Passover, enterprising
local Jews would rent out dining rooms fully prepared to
itinerant pilgrims to observe Passover. Though not so stated, it
is quite possible that this was just such a room which God had
providentially allowed to be available upon the arrival of the
disciples. No one else had reserved it. God had prepared the
place for the Last Supper.
14:16 Accordingly, his disciples went forth, and came

into the city, and found as he had said unto them: and they
made ready the passover. The city of course was Jerusalem.
The disciples came in from neighboring Bethany or adjacent
Gethsemane.
14:17-18 That fateful evening as they sat down to partake

of the Passover supper, Jesus cometh with the twelve. 18 And
as they sat and did eat, Jesus said, Verily I say unto you, One
of you which eateth with me shall betray me. To their
consternation and astonishment, Jesus announced by way of a
question that one of them eating with Him would betray Him.
14:19-21 Immediately, they began to be sorrowful, and

to say unto him one by one, Is it I? and another said, Is it I?
Each disciple was astounded and perhaps in utter sincerity
asked, “Is it I?” It is not known if the response ever got around
to Judas. Perhaps, before it got to that point, Jesus 20 answered
and said unto them, It is one of the twelve, that dippeth with
me in the dish. It was Jewish custom to dip broken bread into
broth or soup. This was especially so when unleavened bread
was used such as at Passover. In John’s account, he spoke of the
sop being dipped (John 13:26-30). Jesus evidently dipped a
piece of unleavened bread into the broth at hand and handed it
to Judas. John notes that thereafter Judas immediately left to
effect his deed (John 13:30).
Jesus then announced, 21 The Son of man indeed goeth, as
it is written of him: but woe to that man by whom the Son
of man is betrayed! good were it for that man if he had never
been born. It is likely that the rest of the disciples did not pick
up on Jesus’ handing to Judas the sop of dipped bread. He obli-
quely noted that He was on His way to that which had long been
prophesied regarding Him, likely in Isaiah 53 and other
Messianic passages in the Old Testament. However, He also
ominously warned that it would have been better for the one
betraying Him if he had never been born.
14:22-24 As they continued with the Passover meal, Jesus

made another profound announcement. And as they did eat,
Jesus took bread, and blessed, and brake it, and gave to
them, and said, Take, eat: this is my body. He held up a piece
of unleavened bread and blessed it. The thought likely is that He
prayed over it, perhaps giving thanks to God for it. He then
broke the piece and gave to each of His disciples (minus Judas).
In directing His disciples to “take, eat: this is my body,” it is ap-
parent He spoke of neither transubstantiation nor consubstan-
tiation, but rather figuratively. In Luke’s account, it is recorded
that Jesus said, “this do in remembrance of me” (Luke 22:19).
Paul made that manifoldly clear in I Corinthians 11:23-26.
Likewise, 23 And he took the cup, and when he had given
thanks, he gave it to them: and they all drank of it. 24 And he
said unto them, This is my blood of the new testament,
which is shed for many. Clearly, a momentous event was
taking place. Jesus was instituting a new covenant. The New
Testament epistles, particularly the book of Hebrews, will
detail how that this new testament superceded the old which
was now being rendered inoperative. Moreover, Jesus noted
that the fruit of the vine in the cup was His blood which would
soon be shed for many. Though the disciples likely did not grasp
what He was saying, with the benefit of hindsight, we clearly
understand that the grape juice in that cup symbolized not only
the inauguration of a new testament between God and man, but
also the shed blood of Christ with all its implications.
Again, the Apostle Paul in I Corinthians 11:23-26 makes it
manifoldly clear that the cup of grape juice was not only a sym-
bol but a memorial of Christ’s work. Neither transubstantiation
nor consubstantiation is even in the ballpark. The Last Supper
administered by Jesus was a portent of what would happen the
next day on Calvary. It also became the precursor of the soon-
to-be-inaugurated ordinance of the local church in the Lord’s
Supper. In its entirety, it is symbolic both by way of preview as
well as a memorial thereafter. It in no way was ever sacramental
or efficacious.
14:25 With that, Jesus announced, Verily I say unto you,

I will drink no more of the fruit of the vine, until that day
that I drink it new in the kingdom of God. Though Jesus did
dine with His disciples on several occasion after His resur-
rection, there is no record that He drank any fruit of the vine.
That would be reserved until the day He returns and establishes
His kingdom. Perhaps, it will be that He will be the first to
partake of the new wine of the first harvest in the kingdom.
It should be noted that in no place in the four gospels is it
mentioned that Jesus or His disciples partook of wine at the Last
Supper. The word translated as wine (oinov oinos) can refer to
either fermented or unfermented wine. However, the Holy
Spirit was careful to not confuse the issue by so using the word
oinos regarding the Last Supper. Rather, the term used was “the
fruit of the vine.” All indications of Scripture regarding fer-
mented wine are negative. Alcoholic wine is always presented
in the Bible as wrong and sinful. It therefore seems clear that the
fruit of the vine (wine) used at the Last Supper was unferment-
ed. Moreover, it may be safely assumed that Jesus throughout
His earthly life never ingested fermented wine. The Jews then
and to this day had long perfected a technique of producing a
sparkling wine which was not fermented. It is still available in
grocery stores to this day.
14:26 Thereafter, when they had sung an hymn, they

went out into the mount of Olives. It was customary for obser-
vant Jews to sing the Hallel psalms on the night of the Passover.
The Hallel psalms, or songs of praise, consisted of six Psalms,
the 113th through the 118th Psalm. They did not sing all of
these, but parts thereof. Just before the drinking of the second
cup and eating of the lamb, they sang the first part of it, which
contained parts of the 113th and 114th Psalms; and on drinking
the fourth and last cup, they completed the Hallel, by singing
parts of the rest of the Psalms, beginning with the 115th Psalm,
and ending with the 118th. When finished, they sang what they
called the ‘blessing of the song,’ which was Psalm 145:10.
Though not obliged, if they drank a fifth cup, they would then
sing Psalm 136. Portions of these Psalms are clearly Messianic
and Jesus no doubt led His disciples in singing thereof.
It undoubtedly was dark by now and may have been as late
as nine o’clock. Jesus and His disciples therefore began what
must have been a leisurely and thought provoking walk from the
upper room in the city of Jerusalem to the Mount of Olives. It is
likely that John 15-17 was uttered during this intense walk.
From the city, they likely descended down into the adjacent
Kidron Valley to the east and came to the base of the Mount of
Olives where was located Gethsemane. Remarkably, the city of
Jerusalem is in full view from the Mount of Olives. And though
we do not know whether the sky was overcast that night or not,
the lights of the city would have been clearly visible not more
than a quarter of a mile to the west.
14:27-28 Literally in the shadows of Jerusalem that night,

Jesus saith unto them, All ye shall be offended because of me
this night: for it is written, I will smite the shepherd, and the
sheep shall be scattered. 28 But after that I am risen, I will go
before you into Galilee. How tragically true Jesus’ words
would prove to be. Before that night was over, all the disciples
would be embarrassed and chagrined that their Master has been
ignominiously arrested as a common criminal and hauled off
into custody. Most would flee altogether. Peter would publicly
deny Him. Though not otherwise noted, even John was embar-
rassed and offended. He whom he had thought to be the Mes-
siah was now being treated as a criminal. The disciples had been
amply warned by Jesus of His looming arrest. However, they
may have thought that if He indeed were the Messiah, He would
shake off His opponents harmlessly.
Jesus in so warning them quoted from Zechariah 13:7, “I
will smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered.” How-
ever, in giving them again a brilliant ray of hope, He foretold
how after He had risen, He would go before them into Galilee.
Again, Jesus clearly foretold not only His impending death, but
even more importantly, His pending resurrection. Sadly, the
disciples did not pick up on the latter.
14:29-30 But Peter said unto him, Although all shall be

offended, yet will not I. 30 And Jesus saith unto him, Verily
I say unto thee, That this day, even in this night, before the
cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice. Impetuous Peter
fired back, “Although all shall be offended, yet will not I.’ Jesus
therefore replied, “Verily I say unto thee, That this day, even in
this night, before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me
thrice.” Jesus solemnly rebuked Peter, informing him that be-
fore that very night was over and before the rooster crowed
twice, Peter would have denied Him three times.
14:31 That was more than poor Peter could bear. He

therefore spake the more vehemently, If I should die with
thee, I will not deny thee in any wise. Likewise also said they
all. Peter in effect said, ‘No way! If I have to die with you, I will
never deny you in any way.’ The other disciples chimed in the
same. How sad. Before the dawn, Jesus’ words would have
been proven painfully true.
14:32-33 At the western base of the Mount of Olives just

across the brook Kidron and adjacent to Jerusalem was a private
park-like garden called Gethsemane. The name means ‘olive
press.’ The Mount of Olives then was just that. Generations of
Jews had planted groves of olive trees up the terraced face of the
mount. It was only natural to find an olive press at the foot
thereof near to the city. Jesus evidently had been granted per-
mission to go there, for He resorted there often at night when in
Jerusalem. See John 18:2. Ominously, Judas knew that as well.
Therefore, 32 they came to a place which was named
Gethsemane: and he saith to his disciples, Sit ye here,
while I shall pray. 33 And he taketh with him Peter and
James and John, and began to be sore amazed, and to be
very heavy. Once again at a climactic point in His ministry,
Jesus took with Him His inner circle of Peter, James, and John.
Moreover, knowing the crisis of the ages and of His eternal
being was at hand, Jesus did what was the most effective thing
to do. He went to prayer. A lesson remains. When a crisis is at hand,
go to prayer.
Mark notes that He began to be sore amazed. The word so
translated (eekyambew kthambeo) has a spectrum of thought
ranging from being ‘astonished’ to being ‘struck with terror.’
He also began to be very heavy. The word so translated (adh-
monew ademoneo) ranges in thought from great distress or
anguish to depression. Though our Lord was Deity, He also was
a man. Though He had from eternity past known of this hour and
prepared thereto, now the crisis of the ages was about to begin
and it would fall completely upon His sacred shoulders. As a
man, He therefore was frightened and distressed. He knew what
He was about to go through and it evidently terrified Him
humanly.
14:34 He accordingly said to His disciples, My soul is

exceeding sorrowful unto death: tarry ye here, and watch.
The word translated as exceeding sorrowful (perilupov
perilupos) as rendered has the sense of being overcome with
sorrow. His spiritual agony was even to the point of death.
Hinted at is a note of desperation and terror. His only recourse
was to go out and pray. He thus instructed His disciples to wait
and watch. It was at this general time that God sent an angel to
strengthen Him. See Luke 22:43. The work of Calvary followed
by the brilliant dawn of the resurrection was at hand. God would
graciously do all that was necessary to enable Him to go through
with what lay ahead.
14:35-36 Mark thus records his account of Jesus’ first

prayer in Gethsemane. And he went forward a little, and fell
on the ground, and prayed that, if it were possible, the hour
might pass from him. 36 And he said, Abba, Father, all
things are possible unto thee; take away this cup from me:
nevertheless not what I will, but what thou wilt. The inten-
sity and the gravity of the situation is clearly implied in that
Jesus “fell on the ground.”
Humanly, there was the dread of terrible anticipation of
what lay just ahead. In fear as a man, He cried, “Abba Father, all
things are possible unto thee; take away this cup from me.”
Jesus well knew what was about to take place. He knew of His
impending arrest with its incumbent mockery, torture, and
rejection. He knew of the horrors of crucifixion which awaited
Him. Even more terrifying, He knew the next day, He would
become sin for us who throughout all eternity had never known
the bitter defilement thereof. He knew that the next day, His
beloved heavenly Father would turn His back upon Him as He
hung suffering and dying. And, He knew before another sunset,
He would taste the pains of death as every other man had done.
He would enter that uncertain, ethereal world of the dead.
Of interest is His use of the phrase “Abba Father.” The
former word (Abba Abba) is Aramaic in its origins and is a term
of familial intimacy. It would approximate the European word
papa or the more American word dad. The latter word is trans-
lated from the Greek word (pathr) pater and is the common
word thereof for ‘father.’ Jesus likely prayed that night in
Aramaic. Mark may have recorded for both the Jewish as well
as Greek mind the intensity of what Jesus prayed by noting both
the Aramaic familial word for father as well as the more proper
Greek word thereof.
Jesus knew God could do all things. Thus He pled, all
things are possible unto thee, take away this cup from me.
The reference to “this cup” is an idiomatic expression referring
to what Jesus was about to go through. His humanity dreaded
what lay ahead. However, in His Deity, He submitted to His
Father’s will, making that clear as he prayed, nevertheless not
what I will, but what thou wilt. The quintessence of being
Christ-like is total submission to God. Jesus was totally
obedient to His heavenly Father and in complete submission to
His will.
14:37-38 After that first intense season of prayer, Jesus

cometh, and findeth them sleeping, and saith unto Peter,
Simon, sleepest thou? couldest not thou watch one hour?
Watch ye and pray, lest ye enter into temptation. The spirit
truly is ready, but the flesh is weak. It had been a long day and
by now it was well into the night. The disciples succumbed to
the very-real human urge to sleep. Rather than focus on the
spiritual, they had yielded to the natural need for sleep. Jesus
thus gently chided Peter, calling him by his original name
Simon. Jesus’ reference to “one hour” likely is figurative of a
short time. Though possible, it is not likely that Jesus had just
spent an entire hour in prayer.
Jesus thus admonished them to 38 watch ye and pray, lest
ye enter into temptation. The word translated as watch
(gregoreuo) in this context has the basic thought to stay awake.
In its more figurative sense, it refers to being vigilant which
Jesus may have implied. It also has the idea of knowing what
was about to take place. However, He uttered more profound
truth. It is as we are in prayer that we preclude temptation. When
we are in conversation with God, the devil can’t get through.
The line is busy. To this day, the more time we spend in prayer;
the less opportunity that temptation can do its work, not only
when we are praying but in the interval thereafter.
In a gentle rebuke aimed at Peter, perhaps more than the
others, Jesus sighed, “The spirit truly is ready, but the flesh is
weak.” Peter not long earlier had vowed, “Although all shall be
offended, yet will not I.” Jesus wearily noted that though Peter’s
spirit was willing, he couldn’t keep his eyes open.
14:39-40 Jesus thus again went away, and prayed, and

spake the same words. Luke’s account notes that He departed
from them about a stone’s cast. He thus continued in prayer as
He taught us to do. Sadly, 40 when he returned, he found them
asleep again, (for their eyes were heavy,) neither wist they
what to answer him. The word translated as wist (eidw eido)
is old English and simply means ‘know.’ They did not know
what to say when Jesus found them sleeping again.
14:41-42 He thus returned to His place of prayer the third

time, and saith unto them, Sleep on now, and take your rest.
His direction for them to sleep on clearly is both ironic and
figurative. They were oblivious to what was impending. To that
degree, they were spiritually asleep. With perhaps a sigh of
resignation, Jesus in effect said, keep on sleeping. Sadly, in the
greatest crisis of His eternal existence, His disciples were not
only asleep physically, but spiritually as well. When they con-
ceivably could have provided encouragement and support to
their Lord, they were asleep in every respect.
With that, Jesus announced, it is enough, the hour is
come; behold, the Son of man is betrayed into the hands of
sinners. The word translated as it is enough (apecei apechei)
essentially means, ‘you have had enough (sleep).’ His betrayal
was at hand. Therefore, He roused them, 42 Rise up, let us go;
lo, he that betrayeth me is at hand. Judas had gone out from
supper to effect his evil deed. Though the other eleven disciples
were unaware of it, Judas was on his way into the garden with
the authorities as Jesus spoke.
14:43 The Garden of Gethsemane is at the foot of the

Mount of Olives, directly across the Kidron Valley from the
eastern gate to the Temple. It was literally in sight thereof and at
night possibly even within earshot. Judas thus guided the
authorities to the place where he knew Jesus resorted. And
immediately, while he yet spake, cometh Judas, one of the
twelve, and with him a great multitude with swords and
staves, from the chief priests and the scribes and the elders.
The other gospels also note that in this multitude were officers
of the Temple police and Pharisees. The mention of the elders
likely refers to some members of the Sanhedrin. These repre-
sented the civil and religious authorities of Jerusalem and as
such, official Israel.
14:44 And he that betrayed him had given them a

token, saying, Whomsoever I shall kiss, that same is he; take
him, and lead him away safely. Judas had prior “given them a
token, saying, Whomsoever I shall kiss, that same is he; take
him, and lead him away safely.” Of note is that Mark seems
loathe to mention the name of Judas any more than necessary.
The treachery of this traitor goes to the depths of human
depravity. He promised to identify Jesus with a kiss, the symbol
of affection.
14:45 Thus, as soon as he was come, he goeth straight-

way to him, and saith, Master, master; and kissed him.
Mark again uses the historic present. The utter hypocrisy and
the depths of betrayal are only exacerbated by Judas calling
Jesus, Master, master. The words so translated (rabbi rhabbi)
can generically mean ‘teacher’ (and is the basic word for rabbi).
However, it also had the sense of a ‘great one’ or an ‘honorable
one.’ Judas’ mode of betrayal bypassed irony to become the
abomination of the ages.
14:46 The authorities accordingly laid their hands on

him, and took him. Jesus was thus arrested and apparently
bound.
14:47 Mark records, And one of them that stood by drew

a sword, and smote a servant of the high priest, and cut off
his ear. That one, of course, was Peter as noted in John’s
account. Though not stated, what is implied is that Peter was
aiming at more than the man’s ear. Clearly, he had intentions to
take the man’s head off. The man apparently saw the blow
coming and ducked. Peter only got his ear. Mark does not men-
tion it, but of course, Jesus healed the unfortunate man and
restored his ear.
14:48-49 Jesus therefore replied and said unto them, Are

ye come out, as against a thief, with swords and with staves
to take me? 49 I was daily with you in the temple teaching,
and ye took me not: but the scriptures must be fulfilled.
Jesus confronted their cowardice. He reminded them that He
had openly and daily taught in the temple and they dared not
take Him in broad daylight. They were politicians with broad
yellow stripes running down their backs. They feared open con-
frontation and the political ramifications thereof. Therefore,
they schemed to take Him at night. The Scripture being fulfilled
may refer to Psalm 41:9, 55:14 or 69:25 wherein Judas’ betrayal
was foretold.
14:50-52 Sadly, they all forsook him, and fled. In Jesus’

hour of crisis, all His disciples ran. Notwithstanding, 51 there
followed him a certain young man, having a linen cloth cast
about his naked body; and the young men laid hold on him:
52 And he left the linen cloth, and fled from them naked.
Some have conjectured that this young man was Mark. Others
have speculated it was the Apostle John. Because verses 51-52
do not appear in the other gospels, some think this one was
Mark. As the son of Mary and in whose house they may have
met for the Passover, he may have followed them to Geth-
semane but now fled in terror.
14:53 Gethsemane is not far from the walls of Jerusalem. It

certainly was within sight thereof and possibly within earshot.
This band of civil and religious authorities therefore marched
Jesus down into the Kidron Valley and up stairs on the other
side to the house of Caiaphas which looked out over the Kidron
Valley toward Olivet. John’s account (18:13-14) indicates that
they took Him first to Annas’ house who was father-in-law to
Caiaphas. The Jews thought he should be the rightful high
priest, but for political reasons, the Romans had installed
Caiaphas instead. Both were powerful men of the elite of
official Israel. Apparently, in deference to the greater age and
perhaps influence of Annas, Jesus was taken to him first. It
should be recalled that it was the middle of the night. However,
in all likelihood, both of these men were aware that Jesus was to
be taken that night and therefore were awaiting His seizure.
Mark thus notes, 53 And they led Jesus away to the high
priest: and with him were assembled all the chief priests
and the elders and the scribes. The top leaders of official
Israel were all on hand. They had their man. What was to follow
was only pro forma.
14:54 Mark wryly records how that Peter followed him

afar off, even into the palace of the high priest: and he sat
with the servants, and warmed himself at the fire. To his
credit, he evidently had recovered from his initial fear and flight
and had trailed the authorities to the palace of Caiaphas. How-
ever, on the darker side, Peter to a degree walked in the counsel
of the ungodly, stood in the way of sinners, and wound up sitting
in the seat of the scornful.
14:55-59 Though not noted here as such, word quite evi-

dently had gone out during the night to the other members of the
Sanhedrin that Jesus was in custody. (Perhaps this is why Jesus
had first been taken to the house of Annas to allow the others
time to gather at the palace of Caiaphas.) They therefore quickly
assembled for the travesty of the ages—a kangaroo court held in
the middle of the night. They already knew what they were
going to do. They merely sought a facade of respectability for
what was planned.
Mark therefore records, And the chief priests and all the
council sought for witness against Jesus to put him to death;
and found none. 56 For many bare false witness against him,
but their witness agreed not together. 57 And there arose
certain, and bare false witness against him, saying, 58 We
heard him say, I will destroy this temple that is made with
hands, and within three days I will build another made
without hands. 59 But neither so did their witness agree to-
gether. The word translated as council (sunedrion sunedrion)
was the Sanhedrin. Though the middle of the night, they were
only too happy to rise and settle their score with Jesus once and
for all.
In a futile attempt to show proper adjudication (though a
trial in the middle of the night violated not only Jewish law, but
also common decency), witnesses even at that hour were sought
against Him. Their intent was clear. They already planned “to
put him to death.” That decision had already been made. They
merely sought to provide a facade of proper proceedings in
seeking witnesses. To the chagrin of even these evil men, the
false witnesses procured contradicted each other. Some of the
many false witnesses may have been the religious authorities
themselves as they heard Jesus teach at the Temple.
Finally, the powers that be rounded up two men whose
stories corroborated each other. Though every part of these
proceedings reeked of a kangaroo court, they nevertheless
steadfastly sought to keep some semblance of legality.
According to Deuteronomy 19:15-17, only in the mouths of two
witnesses could capital punishment proceed. Indeed, Jesus as
recorded in John 2:19 had foretold the destruction of the
Temple of His own body. However, the Jews utterly did not
comprehend what Jesus was talking about three years earlier.
To the Jewish mindset of the day, to even hint at the destruction
of their vast, beautiful Temple was treasonous and blasphemy.
However, even these two, seemingly corroborating witnesses
were not in complete agreement.
14:60 Therefore, the high priest stood up in the midst,

and asked Jesus, saying, Answerest thou nothing? what is it
which these witness against thee? For greater solemnity, he
arose to make up by bluster their lack of evidence.
14:61-62 With the dignity of silence, Jesus held his peace,

and answered nothing. The high priest, likely frenetically
pacing in front of Jesus and impatiently interrogating Him,
asked, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed? To this 62
Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on
the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.
What Jesus said infuriated His antagonists on two points. (1) He
replied by saying “I am” which both He and the Sanhedrin knew
was a veiled reference to Jehovah. (The Old Testament word
thereof literally meant ‘I am.’) And, (2) He acknowledged
Himself as someday again seated at the right hand of God before
returning from heaven. The implications thereof did not escape
His adversaries.
14:63-64 Accordingly, the high priest rent his clothes,

and saith, What need we any further witnesses? 64 Ye have
heard the blasphemy: what think ye? And they all con-
demned him to be guilty of death. It was the prescribed
custom for the high priest to rip his clothes in abhorrence upon
hearing what he perceived to be blasphemy. It indicated his
supposed holiness and revulsion to presumed blasphemy. The
high priest here undoubtedly did so for dramatic and theatrical
effect. He intended to convey to the rest of the Sanhedrin his
conclusion. They understood the symbolic significance of what
he had done. When he asked them what they thought, he had
already signaled the appropriate answer to them. They therefore
“all condemned him to be guilty of death” which was the
prescribed penalty for blasphemy.
It is ironic that when they dragged Jesus before Pilate, they
came up with altogether different charges. As weasel-word
politicians, they changed their tune accordingly to what they
thought would have maximum impact. They had gone through
the formality of condemning Him to death. That was a foregone
conclusion before they ever arrested Him. But at least now, they
had the pretense of having conducted a trial though in many
respects it was altogether illegal even by their own law.
14:65 As condemned, some began to spit on him, and to
cover his face, and to buffet him, and to say unto him,
Prophesy: and the servants did strike him with the palms of
their hands. The hatred and malevolence of the leadership of
official Israel against Jesus was unmasked. Not only did they
reject His offer of the kingdom, they hated Him personally for
who He was and all for which He stood. Accordingly, they spit in
His face. Few actions are more an act of hatred and insult than that.
Others in cruel comedy, blindfolded Him, hit him in the
face and then urged Him to prophecy who did so. What makes
this all the more unseemly is that these were the august, senior
leaders of official Israel. The wickedness of their evil hearts was
thus undressed. Though purportedly men of high estate and
even ‘holy’ men, the degeneracy of their evil hearts oozed out.
They accordingly in undignified and sophomoric actions vent-
ed their hatred against Jesus. In all likelihood, they were being
urged on by the fiends of hell who no doubt were vicariously
reveling in every blow landed upon Jesus.
14:66-67 Meanwhile, as Peter was beneath in the palace,

there cometh one of the maids of the high priest: 67 And when
she saw Peter warming himself, she looked upon him, and said,
And thou also wast with Jesus of Nazareth. The palace of
Caiaphas was built upon the sides of a steep hill, offering a view of
the valley below. The reference to Peter being “beneath in the
palace” likely refers to the lower level thereof. There he sat,
warming himself around a fire built from the chill of the night air of
early spring and late winter. A maid of the high priest recognized
him. It may have been stirred by his Galilean accent. She very well
may have seen him in the Temple with Jesus in recent days. In any
event, she recognized Peter and identified him with Jesus.
14:68 To his eternal regret, Peter denied, saying, I know

not, neither understand I what thou sayest. And he went out
into the porch; and the cock crew. By now dawn was break-
ing. Peter thus walked out onto an adjacent porch looking out
over the valley to the east “and the cock crew.” Ominously, a
neighboring rooster announced the dawn.
14:69-70 What evidently was another maid saw him again,

and began to say to them that stood by, This is one of them. 70
And he denied it again. And a little after, they that stood by said
again to Peter, Surely thou art one of them: for thou art a
Galilaean, and thy speech agreeth thereto. This maid quickly
sensed that Peter was associated with Jesus. She accordingly
accused Peter of being one of them. He flatly denied it.
Jerusalem and environs were not only the political and
religious seat of Israel, but also the cultural center thereof.
‘Correct speech’ was practiced there. Galilee, by contrast, was
the back country and people therefrom had a back-country
accent with its unique attendant colloquialisms. Others heard
him speak and quickly picked up on where he was from. They,
too, accused him of being of them. His accent had betrayed him.
14:71-72 Immediately, Peter began to curse and to

swear, saying, I know not this man of whom ye speak. The
word translated as curse (anayematizw anathematizo) does
not necessary imply vulgarities or obscenities. Rather, it has the
sense of invoking oaths. (The noun form thereof is anathema.)
Likewise, the word translated as swear (omnuw omnuo) has the
sense to ‘affirm or threaten with an oath.’ It is not likely that
Peter uttered profanities or vulgarities. Rather, he probably
invoked oaths and swore that he did not “know not this man of
whom ye speak.” The greater point is that he went out of his way
to utterly deny Jesus and disavow having anything to do with
Him.
As the dawn brightened, 72 the second time the cock crew.
The nearby rooster, by his crowing, announced Peter’s abject
failure. And Peter called to mind the word that Jesus said
unto him, Before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me
thrice. And when he thought thereon, he wept. (Mark’s
gospel is the only one which notes the rooster crowing twice.)
Peter, immediately remembered what Jesus had said the night
before and realized what he had just done. He could only flee
and weep bitterly.
*****
Overview of Mark 15: This fifteenth chapter presents

Mark’s account of Jesus before Pilate, His abuse by the Roman
soldiers, and His crucifixion. The chapter concludes with the
record of His burial.
15:1 And straightway in the morning the chief priests

held a consultation with the elders and scribes and the
whole council, and bound Jesus, and carried him away, and
delivered him to Pilate. By now, morning had barely dawned.
The entire Sanhedrin had in the meantime assembled and Jesus
was brought before them for their rubber-stamp approval.
Those not already aware of what was going on had been roused
during the night. The leadership therefore perfunctorily con-
sulted with them. They in turn bound Jesus and hustled Him off
to Pilate. Under Roman rule, the Jewish authorities had no au-
thority to execute capital punishment. Only the sitting
procurator had that authority. They thus hoped to persuade
Pilate that Jesus was guilty of crimes against the state to effect
His execution.
Pontius Pilate was the sitting procurator of Judea. His
normal residence was at Caesarea on the Mediterranean coast.
However, perhaps because of the Passover events, he had come
up to Jerusalem. He there resided in quarters of the Antonio
fortress which Herod had built adjacent to the Temple complex
at its northwest corner. There, Rome could keep a close watch
over the center of Israel, their beloved Temple. Though the Jew-
ish Sanhedrin likely was more than willing to be roused in the
wee hours of the night to condemn Jesus, Pilate undoubtedly
was not so enthused. By now it was not yet 6 o’clock in the
morning. See John 19:14.
15:2 Upon being rousted out of bed by the insistent Jewish

authorities, Pilate asked him, Art thou the King of the Jews?
And he answering said unto him, Thou sayest it. Though not
recorded here, Pilate had evidently heard of the rumor that this
Jesus of Nazareth was proclaimed by some to be the Jewish
Messiah and thus the next king of the Jews. So he confronted
him with it. To claim to be a king within the Roman empire
without Roman sanction was treasonous and that really is all
that Pilate cared about. To Pilate’s query, Jesus’ answer, “Thou
sayest it,” essentially was, ‘You said it, not me.’
15:3 Whereupon the chief priests erupted and accused him

of many things: but he answered nothing. In majestic silence,
He refused to dignify their wild accusations with a reply.
15:4-5 Pilate therefore asked him again, saying, Answerest

thou nothing? behold how many things they witness against
thee. But Jesus yet answered nothing; so that Pilate marvelled.
The Roman governor was astonished. Never before had he wit-
nessed such dignity. Notwithstanding the wild charges brought
against Him, Jesus in majestic silence ignored it all. Even after
Pilate further prompted Him about the charges made by His
antagonists, Jesus silently remained above it all.
15:6-8 Mark records, Now at that feast he released unto

them one prisoner, whomsoever they desired. The Romans
had developed a local custom of releasing a popular prisoner as
a political gesture at the Feast of Passover. Then, as now,
Passover was the highest holy day and national holiday in Israel.
Though the Romans ruled by overwhelming military strength, the
Roman procurators realized it was to their political advantage to
appease the local population. Therefore, each year at Passover, they
released someone in custody whom the Jews wanted freed.
7 And there was one named Barabbas, which lay bound
with them that had made insurrection with him, who had
committed murder in the insurrection. The Romans were
almost universally unpopular in Israel. There were continual
guerilla attacks against Roman soldiers by small bands of par-
tisans. Evidently, this Barabbas had participated and led in a
plot against Rome. To the local populace, he was a Jewish ver-
sion of Robin Hood. Though detested by the Romans, he was a
Jewish folk hero. In the course of events, he and his cohorts had
been arrested and incarcerated for their plot against Rome.
Knowing of the custom in this regard, 8 the multitude
crying aloud began to desire him to do as he had ever done
unto them. Early that morn, the assembling throngs at the
Temple complex and the adjacent Roman fortress began clam-
oring for Pilate to fulfill this custom once again.
15:9-10 But Pilate answered them, saying, Will ye that

I release unto you the King of the Jews? 10 For he knew that
the chief priests had delivered him for envy. No little sarcasm
laced his question. Pilate knew that Jesus was accused of being
the King of the Jews. He did not take that seriously but threw it
back into the face of the assembled Jewish leadership by calling
Jesus, King of the Jews. There was no love lost between the
Jewish and the Roman leadership. The Romans haughtily
displayed their authority knowing the local officials could do
nothing about it. Pilate knew the real reason the chief priests had
brought Jesus to him was motivated by religious jealousy. He
saw through their sham of alleged crimes against the state. He
thus rubbed their noses in the very charges they had brought
against Jesus by referring to Him as King of the Jews.
15:11 Undaunted, the chief priests moved the people,

that he should rather release Barabbas unto them. Being
thwarted in their initial attempt to convince Pilate, the Jewish
leadership quickly turned their attention to the assembled
throngs of common people and agitated them to seek the release
of Barabbas. Because of his popularity, the crowds were more
than happy to comply.
15:12-14 Therefore, Pilate answered and said again un-

to them, What will ye then that I shall do unto him whom ye
call the King of the Jews? 13 And they cried out again,
Crucify him. 14 Then Pilate said unto them, Why, what evil
hath he done? And they cried out the more exceedingly,
Crucify him! Pilate was being put on the spot and did not
appreciate it. He again asked what he should do about Jesus.
Pilate had the authority to have Jesus released on the spot, but
being the coward he was, he tried to find a way which would
cause him the least political damage. Again, he tweaked the
chief priests by calling Jesus, “the King of the Jews.”
To his query, the throngs parroted the party line passed on
by their leadership. They immediately and vehemently cried
out, “Crucify him!” Pilate knew Jesus was innocent of any
crime against Rome. He knew there was no cause of death in
Him. He thus protested to the crowds below his window, “Why,
what evil hath he done?” Pilate really did not care what hap-
pened to Jesus. But what little integrity the man possessed
caused him to hesitate at executing an innocent man. Not-
withstanding his reluctance, the crowds following the lead of
the religious leaders retorted even more vehemently, “Crucify
him!”
15:15 In the greatest travesty of justice and political
cowardliness of all time, Pilate, willing to content the people,
released Barabbas unto them, and delivered Jesus, when he
had scourged him, to be crucified. Pilate had the authority to
release Jesus and knew He was innocent. However, it was to his
political and professional benefit to pacify those over whom he
ruled. He was well aware that there were higher offices poten-
tially open to him than being the procurator of Judea. Rome
judged the performance of its rulers largely on how well they
kept the local population quiet.
The national interest of Rome was peace and political
tranquility in its subjugated provinces. Pilate was well aware of
that. He knew that if releasing Jesus stirred political upheaval,
it would look bad on his résumé. Unwilling to contend with any
political backlash from releasing Jesus, Pilate therefore
“delivered Jesus, when he had scourged him, to be crucified.”
To this day the name Pontius Pilate is synonymous with being
the penultimate moral coward. His only concern was himself.
The die had been set. The mold was cast. Jesus was on His way
to Calvary.
Apparently, before sending Him off to His fate, Pilate had
Him scourged on the spot. A Roman flagellum was an ordeal in
itself. Typically, the victim was stripped to the waist, or possi-
bly altogether. He then was flogged with a Roman cat ‘o nine
whip which had a number (as many as nine) fingers with sharp
objects embedded at each tip. The back of the man was literally
flayed and striped as the executioner ripped the fingers of the
whip down his back. If not careful, a man could be dispatched
from such a scourging. It was a typical beginning of the cruci-
fixion process which was intended to be as cruel and drawn out
as possible.
15:16 Immediately thereafter, the soldiers led him away

into the hall, called Praetorium; and they call together the
whole band. The Praetorium refers to the Roman headquarters
at Jerusalem which was located in the fortress Antonio adjacent
to the Temple. There was garrisoned the Roman band. The
latter word is translated from the Greek word (speira) speira
which in this context refers to the assigned Roman military unit.
Accordingly, the entire garrison turned out to witness the mal-
evolent proceedings being initiated against Jesus.
15:17-18 As far as the Romans were concerned, Jesus was

now a condemned criminal shortly to be executed. They there-
fore sought to make sport of Him and entertain themselves
before accomplishing their ultimate orders. Pilate had already
scourged him as noted in verse 15. Now the soldiers in mockery
clothed him with purple, and platted a crown of thorns, and
put it about his head, 18 And began to salute him, Hail, King
of the Jews! The Romans were fond of the color purple and
their leadership often so arrayed themselves. It was the garment
of royalty as far as Rome was concerned. In the Praetorium, no
doubt, such an old garment was available and having found it,
they placed it on Jesus in sardonic derision, mocking the
charges of Him being the King of the Jews.
The common Roman soldier had no love for the Jews and
if he could find some way to humiliate Jewry in general, he was
only too willing. To so mock one accused of being the King of
Israel was sport for them indeed. Little did they know they were
mocking their own Creator and Judge.
Another of them quickly gathered the bramble of a thorn
bush and fashioned it into a makeshift crown. They thus cruelly,
mashed it down upon Jesus, no doubt piercing His sacred head
with the thorns.
In mockery which must have been conceived in hell, they
jeered Him in with demonic ridicule, “Hail, King of the Jews!”
How little did they realize whom they were deriding. What a
fateful hour it will be when these same Roman soldiers
someday stand before Him at the Great White Throne Judg-
ment. He who they so viciously abused will sit as their Judge.
15:19 The soldiers accordingly smote him on the head

with a reed, and did spit upon him, and bowing their knees
worshipped him. Someone else found a reed, which could
have been as light as a bamboo rod to as stout as a walking stick.
They perhaps put it into His hand as a mock scepter only to take
it back and wack Him on the head with it driving the thorns in
deeper. Meanwhile, others spit on Him showing the ultimate of
disdain and disgust. Others bowed their knees in a farce and
worshipped Him. Utter was the contempt of these pagan Roman
soldiers. They abused Him in every way they could think before
consummating His crucifixion. The only mitigating mercy for
these may be that they knew not what they did.
15:20-21 Tiring of their evil sport and perhaps being

awestruck that He whom they so viciously abused had no
retaliatory spirit, they took off the purple from him, and put
his own clothes on him, and led him out to crucify him. (See
I Peter 1:22-23). ‘Tradition’ claims that Jesus was taken on a
course which has come to be known as the Via Dolorosa (the
way of sorrow). However, Jerusalem has been destroyed so
many times since that day, it is not likely these streets today
mark the actual route taken.
However, en route, 21 they compel one Simon a
Cyrenian, who passed by, coming out of the country, the
father of Alexander and Rufus, to bear his cross. It was
typical Roman custom to force the condemned to drag his own
cross to the place of crucifixion. Though unstated, it may be that
Jesus had been so abused that He collapsed beneath the weight
of the cross. As it happened, entering Jerusalem from the nearby
countryside, at that time and place, was a man named Simon. He
was a Jew from North Africa (Cyrene). Only Mark mentions the
names of his sons as “Alexander and Rufus.” Though both these
names are later mentioned in the New Testament (Acts 19:33
and Romans 16:13), it is unknown if they are the same.
Nevertheless, Mark’s mention of them seems to indicate they
were well known in Christian circles in the day in which he
wrote.
In any event, the Roman soldiers ordered this Simon to
carry the cross of Jesus to the place of crucifixion. Roman cruci-
fixions at times were performed upon prepared crosses made
explicitly for that purpose. At other times, they would impro-
vise and simply nail a timber crosswise upon an olive tree
nailing the victim thereon. Which method is not noted by Scrip-
ture. However, Jerusalem was where a major Roman presence
was located and thus a locale where crucifixions were not
unknown. It seems therefore that they had a site already used for
such executions and crosses prepared for such occasions. As the
story will unfold, others were crucified that same day with Jesus.
15:22 The soldiers thus brought Him outside the walls of

Jerusalem unto the place Golgotha, which is, being inter-
preted, The place of a skull. The word Golgotha is Aramaic
and simply means ‘a skull.’ The Greek word translated as
“Calvary” (kranion kranion) also means ‘a skull.’ To the north
and west of the old-city walls of Jerusalem to this day is a rock
outcropping which clearly resembles the features of a human
skull. It in all likelihood is where Jesus was taken to be
crucified. What a wretched procession that must have been that
fateful morn. A band of Roman soldiers roughly doing their
duty led the bedraggled, beaten, and abused Son of God. With
Him was a Jew named Simon whom they had impressed to
carry His cross. (Though what a privilege it must have been for
Simon.) No doubt, there was a straggling group of grief-stricken
believers following behind, apprehensive as to what would
happen next.
15:23 There on that rugged rock outcropping upon the
greater mount of Moriah, this pathetic group of believers
watched as the pagan Roman soldiers roughly prepared Jesus
for crucifixion. Perhaps in some small mercy, they gave him to
drink wine mingled with myrrh: but he received it not.
Though there are differing opinions as to the exact meaning of
this act, it is generally accepted that the wine mixed with myrrh
was intended to act as an intoxicant to stupefy the victim as to
what was about to take place. Rather than mercy, it may be,
however, that the Romans simply wished to temporarily sedate
their victim to make their grim work easier. As they mounted
Him on the cross and finished the grisly task of nailing Him
thereon, a sedated victim would make their job less difficult.
Thus, the focal point of the ages was well underway.
15:24 Having accomplished their nefarious preparations,

when they had crucified him, they parted his garments,
casting lots upon them, what every man should take. As had
been prophesied in Psalm 22:18, the soldiers divided up His
garments amongst themselves by a game of chance.
15:25 And it was the third hour, and they crucified him.
The third hour of the day was the equivalent to 9 a.m. It is sig-
nificant that all of the kangaroo proceedings had taken place
prior to that hour. That in itself is a travesty of all established
norms of human jurisprudence. The Jewish leadership had been
up all night. Pilate had been roused around 6 a.m. Meanwhile,
Jesus had been interrogated by Pilate, by Herod, back to Pilate,
and delivered to the Roman soldiers who at their leisure tor-
mented Him. Finally, He was led out of the city to Golgotha
where by 9 a.m. they crucified Him.
Moreover, this was the time of the daily morning sacrifice
at which the priests ought to have been and the time when the
Sanhedrin usually began to sit. Significant indeed is that our Lord
was offered at the time of the morning sacrifice. Under the Law, the
morning offering was a burnt offering. See Numbers 28:1-8.
15:26 As was Roman custom, the condemned was

identified along with His crime. Mark gives only an abbreviated
statement thereof, And the superscription of his accusation
was written over, THE KING OF THE JEWS. It was further
Roman custom for a placard with the name of the victim, his
city, and the charges against him to be carried as he was taken
for crucifixion. Though not otherwise noted, the superscription
so referred to here likely is the same placard carried before Jesus
and was then attached to His cross.
The accusation (or charges) written thereon in this case
were both a legal technicality as well as further mockery. To ful-
fill the Roman requirement of stating the cause of condem-
nation, Pilate had ordered the inscription to read, “THE KING
OF THE JEWS.” In so doing, he discharged Roman legal cus-
tom implying treason. However, Pilate knew very well that
Jesus laid no claim to being a contemporary king in Israel. Per-
haps more to mock the Jewish leadership than Jesus, he so
ordered this inscription. Little did he realize how accurate his
satire was. However, Pilate’s intention clearly was to show his
disdain for Israel in general and the Jewish leadership in
particular. He cared nothing for Jesus one way or the other.
15:27-28 Mark further records, And with him they cru-

cify two thieves; the one on his right hand, and the other on
his left. 28 And the scripture was fulfilled, which saith, And
he was numbered with the transgressors. Mark here
mentions two thieves. Luke calls them malefactors. Both were
clearly convicted criminals. It has been advanced that these two
may have been part of Barabbas’ band of insurrectionists,
though the Scripture makes no mention thereof. However, their
presence fulfilled Isaiah 53:9,12.
15:29-32 As that day dragged on endlessly, they that
passed by railed on him, wagging their heads, and saying,
Ah, thou that destroyest the temple, and buildest it in three
days, 30 Save thyself, and come down from the cross. 31
Likewise also the chief priests mocking said among them-
selves with the scribes, He saved others; himself he cannot
save. 32 Let Christ the King of Israel descend now from the
cross, that we may see and believe. And they that were
crucified with him reviled him.
The word translated as railed (blasfhmew blasphemeo)
literally means to speak evil against or to curse. That the English
word blasphemy derives therefrom should be evident. In a
word, they blasphemed Him. The word translated as wagging
(kinew kineo) may possibly allude to the practice of orthodox
Jews (to this day) of bobbing their heads as they pray. If that be
the case, it only added to their contempt as they in sacrilegious
mockery blasphemed Him. They in vitriolic bitterness twisted
what Jesus had once said in private to His disciples. They thus
threw it back into His face. “Ah, thou that destroyest the temple,
and buildest it in three days, Save thyself, and come down from
the cross.” What they had failed to do in physically torturing
Jesus prior to crucifixion, they now sought to accomplish by
lacerating Him with their wicked tongues. Lower profanity has
never been uttered.
Likewise, the top leadership of official Israel, the chief
priests and scribes, mocked Him. Standing in little clusters not
far off, they snickered and giggled, “He saved others; himself he
cannot save. Let Christ the King of Israel descend now from the
cross, that we may see and believe.” Significant is that they ac-
knowledged Him as the Christ, albeit sarcastically. Implicit is
that in their hearts, they actually knew who Jesus was. Yet, no
doubt with the empathy of the demons of hell, they snickered
and then broke out into horse laughs in utter irreverence,
disdain, and mockery. The travesty of the ages was taking place
and they could only snicker and laugh. Their behind-the-scenes
patrons in hell must have been doing the same. Satan had Jesus
right where he wanted Him. But not for long. They thus reviled
Him.
15:33 As the day wore on with agonizing slowness, when

the sixth hour was come, there was darkness over the whole
land until the ninth hour. A number of divine actions were in
process. It very well may be that God in mercy ordered the sun
to not shine, both out of respect to the Sun of Righteousness and
in mercy to Him. The middle-eastern sun is fierce at noon, even
in early Spring. The sixth hour, of course, was high noon. It may
also be that it was at this hour that God made Him to be sin for
us who knew no sin. At that moment, His holy Father in heaven
could no longer look upon His own beloved Son who had
become sin for us. He thus, perhaps with bitter tears, turned His
back upon Jesus, leaving Him stretched out between heaven
and earth. He was rejected by His own people and forsaken by
His own God. There, He hung alone for three interminable
hours. It must have seemed like eternity for Jesus. Evidently, at
the ninth hour or shortly thereafter, Jesus expired.
15:34 Mark further records, And at the ninth hour Jesus

cried with a loud voice, saying, Eloi, Eloi, lama sabach-
thani? which is, being interpreted, My God, my God, why
hast thou forsaken me? Though the darkness at midday had
spared Jesus the heat of the sun, He was in spiritual agony. He,
the holy Son of God, who had never known sin from eternity
past, now had the sin of the world in its entirety (past, present,
and future) laid upon Him. In fulfillment of Psalm 22:1, He, in
pathetic desperation, cried out to heaven, “Eloi, Eloi, lama
sabachthani?” That is the direct Hebrew quotation from Psalm
22:1 which being translated is, “My God, my God, why hast
thou forsaken me?” The desperation of His plea is only too
apparent. The spiritual suffering of what took place on the cross
that day far exceeded the torturous physical suffering. More-
over, those fateful six hours on the cross likely were the
equivalent of eternity in hell. Jesus in effect suffered thus for us.
15:35-36 Meanwhile, some of them that stood by, when

they heard it, said, Behold, he calleth Elias. 36 And one ran
and filled a spunge full of vinegar, and put it on a reed, and
gave him to drink, saying, Let alone; let us see whether Elias
will come to take him down. With His tongue swollen from
dehydration, Jesus may not have enunciated clearly. Some by-
standers thus thought He was calling for Elijah whom they mis-
took for ‘Eloi.’ Someone therefore fill a sponge with vinegar
and offered it to Jesus. They thus unwittingly fulfilled the
prophecy in Psalm 69:21. Others attempted to stop this would-
be helper. They cynically mocked, “let us see whether Elias will
come to take him down.”
15:37 At three o’clock in the afternoon or shortly there-

after, Jesus cried with a loud voice, and gave up the ghost.
The word translated as gave up the ghost (ekpnew ekpneo)
literally means to ‘breathe one’s last breath’ or to ‘expire.’ Thus
ended the day of infamy. The King of kings and Lord of lords
had been summarily crucified. The Creator of heaven and earth
had been killed. Yet, what Satan and his minions likely did not
realize is that on that old rugged cross, Jesus had atoned for the
sin of the world. Though the hour was dark, the dawn of the
resurrection was not afar off.
15:38 Meanwhile, the veil of the temple was rent in

twain from the top to the bottom. The magnificent, Jewish
Temple was not distant. It, as Golgotha, rested upon Mount
Moriah. Therein hung the veil setting apart the holy of holies.
Jewish tradition holds that the veil dated back to the time of
Ezra’s restoration Temple. As the blood of endless sacrificial
animals had been sprinkled upon that veil over the centuries,
periodically new outer coverings were re-woven upon its face
as it hung in place. By Jesus’ day, it had become a curtain
estimated to have been as much as four inches thick—a hand-
breadth. A team of horse’s pulling from each side, if that were
possible, could not have rent it. Yet, when Jesus died, it was torn
from top to bottom. It clearly was torn from heaven. It would
have been utterly impossible to do so from the top. It was sixty
feet in height.
God thus with a forceful object lesson demonstrated that
the function of the earthly Temple was complete. No longer was
the holy of holies set apart. No longer could the Shekinah glory
dwell therein. God no longer had respect thereto. The ultimate
sin-offering had been offered. No longer was the Day of Atone-
ment necessary. Moreover, it no longer could be scripturally
effected with the veil rent. The scriptural writer alludes thereto
in Hebrews 10:20.
15:39 On duty nearby was a Roman officer assigned to

oversee the proceedings. And when the centurion, which
stood over against him, saw that he so cried out, and gave up
the ghost, he said, Truly this man was the Son of God. As this
pagan, gentile, Roman officer witnessed Jesus’ final hours and
His desperate cry in verse 34, he could only conclude, “Truly
this man was the Son of God.” He quite possibly had no more
contact with Jesus than directing the crucifixion that day. He
was a pagan gentile. Yet in contrast to the ‘religious’ Jewish
leadership which had categorically rejected Him, this Roman
soldier, only doing His duty, came to the profound conclusion
that Jesus was indeed the Son of God. It did not take much to
open this man’s heart. Sadly, the Jewish leadership had so hard-
ened their hearts against Him they were blinded to Him al-
together.
15:40-41 Mark also recorded, There were also women
looking on afar off: among whom was Mary Magdalene,
and Mary the mother of James the less and of Joses, and
Salome; 41 (Who also, when he was in Galilee, followed him,
and ministered unto him;) and many other women which
came up with him unto Jerusalem. Though almost all of the
disciples fled in fear after Jesus’ arrest, several godly, faithful
women stood by Him to the bitter end. Mark mentions Mary
Magdalene, Jesus’ mother, Mary—“the mother of James the
less and of Joses,” and Salome.
With them were other women who had come with them
from Galilee. The former had ministered to His needs while in
Galilee. (This in the only place in Scripture where ‘James the
less’ is thus noted. It was to distinguish him from James the son
of Zebedee or Jesus’ half brother. It may refer to him being short
of stature.) These faithful women watched the spectacle of
Jesus’ death to its climactic conclusion. A legal point is being
established that Jesus truly died and that there were numerous
witnesses thereto who knew Him personally.
15:42-43 The Feast of Unleavened Bread had just begun.

The intervening days were all considered high holy days
(sabbaths). The Jews did not wish dying or dead bodies to be left
during such holy days.
Therefore, when the even was come, because it was the
preparation, that is, the day before the sabbath, 43 Joseph of
Arimathaea, an honourable counsellor, which also waited
for the kingdom of God, came, and went in boldly unto
Pilate, and craved the body of Jesus.
The Jewish day began at sundown or at about 6 o’clock in
the evening. This particular Sabbath was a high day as noted in
John 19:31. The Sabbath in question was not the normal Sat-
urday, but likely Friday of that week as a part of the celebration
of the Feast of Unleavened bread.
As the day waned, “Joseph of Arimathaea” made a formal
request to Pilate for Jesus’ body. To so request the body of a
condemned and crucified victim was audacious. Mark notes
that Joseph boldly petitioned Pilate thereto. This Joseph is
noted as having been originally from Arimathaea which likely
was a town in Mount Ephraim. He now evidently lived in Jeru-
salem for there he had a family tomb. The word translated as
honourable (euschmwv euschemon) has the sense of, among
other things, ‘influential, wealthy, or respectable.’ He also was
a counsellor which clearly implies he was a member of the
Sanhedrin. (He likely either dissented in their vote or was not
invited, knowing that He believed in Jesus.) Mark notes that he
“waited for the kingdom of God.” Clearly implicit is that this
man was truly godly and a believer in Jesus. He thus made for-
mal request of Pilate Himself to properly bury Jesus.
15:44-45 A Roman crucifixion typically took from twenty-

four to thirty-six hours before the victim died. It was a death
designed to extend the torture thereof over a long period of
hours. Knowing that, Pilate marvelled if he were already
dead: and calling unto him the centurion, he asked him
whether he had been any while dead. 45 And when he knew
it of the centurion, he gave the body to Joseph. John’s
account gives further details of this incident, which see in John
19:31-42.
15:46 Joseph of Arimathaea along with Nicodemus (John

19:39) therefore bought fine linen, and took him down, and
wrapped him in the linen, and laid him in a sepulchre which
was hewn out of a rock, and rolled a stone unto the door of
the sepulchre. It was Jewish custom to bury their dead by wrap-
ping them in virtual mummy fashion in linen strips. Joseph thus
clothed Jesus and laid Him in his own heretofore unused tomb.
It had been carved into the limestone cliff in a park-like garden
just adjacent to Golgotha. Such an elaborate tomb was the mark
of a wealthy man which Joseph evidently was. It was a custom,
typical of the day, to prepare out of the workable limestone a
round flat stone ranging from four to six feet in diameter to roll
in a track over the entrance of a tomb. Usually such tombs were
large enough for other family members and the stone could thus
with great effort be rolled back later to place other family
members therein. After laying Jesus in this heretofore unused
stone tomb, Joseph rolled the stone over the door thereof.
15:47 The Holy Spirit thus saw to it that there were two
verifiable witnesses to Jesus’ burial. And Mary Magdalene
and Mary the mother of Joses beheld where he was laid.
That statement is not coincidental. As soon as Jesus arose, fal-
lacious stories were immediately circulated to undercut the
message of the resurrection. Even in the twentieth century,
unbelieving Jews have advanced that Jesus did not really die but
was only unconscious. Mark via the inspiration of the Holy
Spirit makes clear there were eyewitnesses to both His death
and burial. Moreover, there were two of them for in the mouths
of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.
*****
Overview of Mark 16: This final chapter presents Mark’s

resurrection account along with his record of the Great Com-
mission. The book ends with a brief account of the ascension of
our Lord to glory.
16:1 Following the dark, forlorn note of the preceding

chapter, Mark 16 dawns with the resurrection account. And
when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary
the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices,
that they might come and anoint him. That momentous Sun-
day morn, three of the godly women who had witnessed the end
assembled to go to the tomb. They included the same noted in
Mark 15:40. Salome was the wife of Zebedee, the mother of
James and John. It was the custom of the Jews to anoint the body
of a deceased loved one with perfumed oils. This was both out
of respect to the dead as well as to mask the odor of death. These
women may or may not have been aware that Nicodemus had
already done so on the day of burial. It may be that they came
with their own fresh supply of perfumes.
16:2 Lest there be any question as to the time of their

arrival, Mark records, And very early in the morning the first
day of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising
of the sun. It was Spring and near the vernal equinox. Sunrise
at that time of year is around 6 o’clock in the morning. John’s
account notes it was still dark. Therefore, it may be presumed
that they arrived some considerable time before six. The day is
clearly noted as “the first day of the week.”
16:3-4 These women evidently were aware of the heavy

stone rolled in front of the door of the tomb. And they said
among themselves, Who shall roll us away the stone from the
door of the sepulchre? It was the custom of wealthy Jews to
carve tombs into the dolomite limestone hillsides of the region.
An inclined track was carved in the rock in front of the entry and
a large, round, flat stone was carved to fit therein. The stone was
set on edge and was rolled down the inclined track to cover the
doorway. These stones varied in size, but in any event, they
were massive enough to require substantial strength to be rolled
up their track. This was more than the women could do and they
knew that. They evidently hoped someone would so help them.
However, 4 when they looked, they saw that the stone
was rolled away: for it was very great. To their surprise, upon
arrival at the tomb, they found the heavy stone already rolled
away revealing the entry to the tomb.
16:5 And entering into the sepulchre, they saw a young

man sitting on the right side, clothed in a long white
garment; and they were affrighted. The garden tomb
adjacent to Golgotha has several chambers, but only one had a
place fully prepared to receive an adult body. The tomb is large
enough for several people to enter. To the right of the main bier,
they saw a young man seated. Mark notes their understandable
terror. In the grey light of pre-dawn, they did not know who sat
there. But they were in a newly occupied tomb which had been
mysteriously opened. Mark further describes how this messenger
was clothed in “a long white garment.” Insight is thus given into the
dress standards of heaven. Modesty therein prevails.
16:6-7 The angel saith unto them, Be not affrighted: Ye

seek Jesus of Nazareth, which was crucified: he is risen; he
is not here: behold the place where they laid him. In
addressing these godly, bereaved women, the angel accurately
noted, “Ye seek Jesus of Nazareth, which was crucified.” He
however then proceeded to make three momentous announce-
ments. (1) “He is risen.” (2) “He is not here.” Finally, lest there
be any doubt, the angel said, (3) “Behold the place where they
laid him.” He evidently thus pointed to the very place where
Jesus had been laid. They had witnessed the same on the eve of
His burial and thus were qualified witnesses thereof. See 15:47.
It likely is not coincident that God allowed these several
godly women to be the first witnesses to the resurrection of
Jesus Christ. They had not forsook Him as did most of the dis-
ciples. They had stayed near the cross to the bitter end. God
rewarded their faithfulness in allowing them to be the first
witnesses to the greatest event in history—the resurrection of
Jesus Christ.
The angel continued, 7 But go your way, tell his disciples
and Peter that he goeth before you into Galilee: there shall
ye see him, as he said unto you. It is of interest that the angel
specially named Peter. Of the eleven, he had denied Jesus in His
hour of need. Yet, our Lord graciously wanted Peter to know He
wanted to see him. The implication is not of anger but of
tenderness. Peter, in those intervening days, must have been
utterly tormented at how he had failed his Lord that fateful night
three nights earlier. In Mark 14:28, Jesus had clearly foretold
His disciples “after that I am risen, I will go before you into
Galilee.” Though He would appear to them later that night, they
eventually were to go to Galilee as directed and He would meet
with them there. That He did. See John 21.
16:8 The women therefore went out quickly, and fled

from the sepulchre; for they trembled and were amazed:
neither said they any thing to any man; for they were afraid.
After having been confronted by the angel in the tomb, they
turned on their heels “quickly, and fled.” They were a jumble of
emotions. On the one hand they trembled in fear at what they
had witnessed and heard. Yet at the same time, they were
amazed. The word so translated (ekstasiv ekstasis) is whence
the English word ecstatic derives. Implied is that they were ec-
static with joy. They also understood the political implications
of Jesus’ resurrection, therefore, they told no one as they fled
back to the disciples.
16:9 The modernist critical text deletes the remainder of

the chapter (and the book). However, the historic traditional text
received by Bible believers through nineteen centuries, the Receiv-
ed Text, certainly includes it. Only modernists in the nineteenth and
twentieth centuries have discounted it as the Word of God.
Notwithstanding that, Mark thus presents an epilogue of
events after the initial resurrection witness. Now when Jesus
was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to
Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils.
Luke 8:2 records that Jesus had earlier cast seven devils out of
Mary Magdalene. She thus followed Him to the bitter end and
was the first to whom Jesus appeared following His resur-
rection. See John 20:11-18 for further details. She had been
forgiven much and therefore her dedication to Him was great.
16:10-11 Mary Magdalene therefore went and told them

that had been with him, as they mourned and wept. 11 And
they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had been
seen of her, believed not. The them above were the disciples of
Jesus. See Matthew 28:8, Luke 24:10, and John 20:18. They
clearly were in a state of bereavement even three days after the
crucifixion. Precisely where they were staying, the Scripture
does not indicate. However, John’s account hints that it might
have been in the same upper room where the last supper was
held. In any event, when Mary Magdalene arrived with word of
His resurrection, their immediate response was unbelief. Not-
withstanding that Jesus had repeatedly foretold His resur-
rection, when the first eyewitness arrived with word thereof,
they would not believe it.
16:12-13 Mark then briefly records the incident of Jesus on

the road to Emmaus with the two disciples. See Luke 24:13-32.
After that he appeared in another form unto two of them, as
they walked, and went into the country. The reference to
“another form” may refer to another type of clothing to which
they were unaccustomed. In any event, Luke makes clear that
those two disciples initially did not recognize Him. It may be
that in His glorified body, He did not have a beard which He
quite apparently did prior to His death.
Mark thus records that these two disciples thence 13 went
and told it unto the residue: neither believed they them. It is
about seven miles from Emmaus to Jerusalem, all up hill.
Nevertheless, these two hustled back to the ten (or eleven) with
further word of the resurrection. Yet, they still would not
believe it.
16:14 Mark then records that afterward he appeared un-

to the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with
their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed
not them which had seen him after he was risen. This
apparently refers to Jesus’ first meeting with the disciples in the
closed-door room. John records that in that initial meeting, ten
were there with Thomas missing. However, Mark’s reference
to “the eleven” likely was generic referring to the total number
of the band now that Judas was no more. However, it is
conceivable that Mark’s comment may refer to the second
meeting Jesus had with them when all were present. See John
20:26-29.
In any event, Jesus “upbraided them with their unbelief and
hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had
seen him after he was risen.” The word translated as upbraided
(oneidizw oneidizo), in this context, essentially has the idea to
‘scold.’ The basis of their upbraiding was their unbelief in His
resurrection. Liberal critics have, from time to time, suggested
that the resurrection story was something that the disciples
cooked up or that they in wishful anticipation thereof imagined
that it happened. Some have even alleged that their sightings of
Jesus were hallucinations by minds desperately hoping to see
Him again.
However, the historic records indicates just the opposite.
The disciples were reluctant to believe, even when confronted
by several eyewitnesses. The women had come testifying
thereto. Peter and John had gone and at least John believed. See
John 20:8. The two other disciples had arrived from Emmaus
with the same witness. Certainly in the mouths of two or three
witnesses their testimony should have been believed. Jesus thus
scolded them for their hardness of heart. The latter indicates the
real problem. Unbelief is a byproduct of a hardened heart. It
may be that in their discouragement and emotional exhaustion,
they simply gave up and allowed their hearts to become
temporarily hardened.
16:15-16 Mark thus presents what evidently was the first

issuance of the Great Commission. The other gospel accounts
relate it to just prior to the ascension. Here, it may be that it was
first uttered when Jesus met the eleven (or ten) disciples directly
after His resurrection. However, verse 19 might indicate it was
just prior to the ascension.
He thus 15 said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and
preach the gospel to every creature. The church in embryo
form was present in the disciples. The mandate that Jesus gave
to them (and us by extension) was as simple as it is profound.
Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every
creature. Several comments are needful.
The word translated as go (poreuomai poreuomai) is not
an imperative as might be supposed. It rather is an aorist
participle. The thought is ‘having gone into all the world,’ etc.
However, the word translated as preach (khrussw kerusso) is
an imperative. The word translated as world (kosmov kosmos)
can refer to the earth as such. Additionally, its most common
sense in the New Testament refers to the culture and society of
the ungodly. We thus are commanded to preach the gospel to
the people of the world’s culture. As ungodly, they often are not
interested, nevertheless, our mandate is to do the same none-
theless. Of interest is that we are to so preach “to every crea-
ture.” The clear implication is that we are to witness to every
person with which we can come into contact. That implies all
races as well as all social and economic classes. It means every-
one.
Jesus thus commented further, 16 He that believeth and is
baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be
damned. Some have sought to teach from this verse that
baptism is a part of the requirements in being saved. However,
(1) the overwhelming body of New Testament evidence is that
salvation is by faith and faith alone. (2) The remainder of the
verse is clear in that only “he that believeth not shall be
damned.” Notwithstanding, the mention of baptism in the direct
context of salvation, it does indicate its importance and
chronological proximity thereto. Throughout the New Testa-
ment, faith is always the criteria of salvation. Baptism is the
subsequent picture thereof.
16:17-18 Jesus went on to foretell the disciples, And these

signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they
cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; 18 They
shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it
shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and
they shall recover.
This prophecy undoubtedly refers to (1) the special powers
given to the apostles in their ministries thereafter. Several of
these miraculous abilities were recorded in the later ministry of
the Apostle Paul. (2) Other portions of this prophecy were
fulfilled in the special, interim gifts of the Holy Spirit given to
the early church in the absence of the completed New
Testament. See notes for I Corinthians 13: 8-11.
16:19 In his characteristic summary fashion, Mark thus

records the ascension of our Lord. So then after the Lord had
spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat
on the right hand of God. The mention of “so then after” may
well place some distance chronologically between the preced-
ing and what is next recorded. The scene here clearly has shifted
from the days immediately after the resurrection to that forty
days thence when He ascended back to glory. The word trans-
lated as received (analambanw analambano) can also have
the sense to be ‘taken up’ or to be ‘raised.’ Implied is that Jesus
was taken up before them into heaven as it were on an invisible
heavenly elevator. He thence has been seated at “the right hand
of God.” The latter refers to the highest position in the universe
under the Father Himself. It bespeaks being the first assistant to
the Father. It thus is a term of rank and the highest authority.
16:20 Mark therefore summarizes the following ministry

of the apostles thereafter. And they went forth, and preached
every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming
the word with signs following. Amen. Indeed the early
church, led by the apostles, did go forth and preach everywhere.
The word translated as working with (sunergew sunergeo)
has the essence of what Paul later wrote about being fellow
laborers together with God.
One reason miracles were allowed in the early church was
to confirm the authenticity of their message. The word trans-
lated as signs (shmeion semeion) is also routinely rendered as
‘miracles.’ God gave the early church and its apostolic leader-
ship the privilege to work miracles to authenticate their work
and ministry. I Corinthians 13:8-10 indicates that with the
completion of the perfect Word of God, those special mir-
aculous powers were suspended. The book ends with the
ubiquitous yet ever appropriate, Amen. So be it!

41-Mark Commentary - Sorenson

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

41-Mark Commentary - Sorenson

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO

Overview of Mark 1: The first chapter of Mark presents a

1:1 Mark begins the book with the succinct introduction,

1:2 He thence quotes from both Isaiah 40:3 and Malachi

1:3 John Mark continues by quoting further from Isaiah

1:4 The gospel writer thus summarizes John’s ministry

1:6 Mark further records, And John was clothed with

1:7-8 In addition, His message was: There cometh one

1:10 And straightway coming up out of the water, he

1:11 As Jesus’ earthly ministry was about to commence,

1:12-13 After Jesus’ baptism, immediately the Spirit

1:14-15 Mark swiftly shifts the focus to the genesis of

1:16-18 Mark abruptly shifts the focus now to the western

1:19-20 Mark continues, And when he had gone a little

1:21 As Jesus began His earthly ministry in the region of

1:22 They were not only blessed, they were astonished at

1:23-24 More astonishment was about to follow. And

1:25-26 Jesus whereupon rebuked him, saying, Hold thy

1:27 The congregation of the synagogue at Capernaum was

1:28 Consequently, his fame spread abroad throughout

1:29 Thereafter, when they were come out of the

1:30 But Simon’s wife’s mother lay sick of a fever, and

1:32-34 That evening, after the close of the Sabbath when

1:35 The next day, in the morning, rising up a great

1:36-37 In due season thereafter, Simon and they that

1:38-39 Jesus therefore announced, Let us go into the next

1:40 At a time not disclosed, perhaps while on His

1:43-44 Jesus therefore straitly charged him, and forth-

1:45 Notwithstanding Jesus’ injunction to keep quiet, the

Overview of Mark 2: Jesus’ ministry is fully engaged by

2:1-2 Mark records the return of Jesus to Capernaum. And

2:3-4 As word spread through the region of Capernaum, a

2:5 However, Jesus was not irritated by the interruption. To

2:6-7 Found here is Mark’s first record of Jesus’ encounter

2:8 It is apparent these critics only harbored such critical

2:9-11 Continuing to confront them, Jesus said, Whether

2:12 The palsied man therefore immediately arose, took

2:14 Meanwhile, as he passed by, he saw Levi the son of

2:15 Luke records that Matthew whereupon invited Jesus

2:16 Once again the scribes and Pharisees reacted critic-

2:17 His disciples undoubtedly passed this question on to

2:18 In a new confrontation, Mark sets the scene by noting,

2:19 Jesus answered their question with one of His own.

2:20 However, Jesus went on to point out, the days will

2:22 Jesus uttered a second proverbial parable, parallel to

2:23 Shortly thereafter, it came to pass, that he went

2:24 Once again, the critical spirit of the self-righteous

2:25-26 Jesus therefore refuted them by pointing out an

2:27 He stopped them in their tracks with a powerful one-

2:28 His second blow was His conclusion, Therefore the

Overview of Mark 3: Mark continues to detail the early

3:1-2 At the end of the preceding chapter, Jesus and his

3:3-4 Jesus undoubtedly was aware of their critical hearts.

3:5 Jesus looked round about on them with anger, being

3:7-8 Jesus rather withdrew himself with his disciples to the

3:9 Jesus therefore spake to his disciples, that a small

3:10-11 For he had healed many; insomuch that they

3:12 Jesus therefore straitly charged them that they

3:13-15 And he goeth up into a mountain, and calleth

3:20-21 And the multitude cometh together again, so

3:22 However, it likely is not coincidence that Mark re-

3:23 Jesus quickly became aware of this blasphemy. He

3:27 Continuing, Jesus likewise charged, No man can en-