Mark

Tyndale New Testament Commentary

R Alan Cole

• Publisher: IVP
• Year: 2015
• eBook ISBN:
  9781783593118
• Topic: Theology & Religion
• Subtopic: Christianity

Who is Jesus? What is salvation? What is the good news? Our earliest written account of Jesus' ministry is widely acknowledged to be that of the Gospel of Mark. If so, it remains key in our answering these questions. Alan Cole treads a careful path between exclusively this-worldly or other-worldly interpretations of this landmark Gospel. His commentary provides a helpful starting point for all contemporary preaching and teaching from this Gospel. This classic commentary has been completely retypeset and presented in a fresh, vibrant new large paperback format, with new global branding.

2. His Own Did Not Receive Him: The Early Galilean Ministry (1:14–3:6)

A. The kingdom of God in Galilee (1:14–45)

i. The first Galilean preaching (1:14–15)

At this point, Mark merely refers in passing to the whole story of John’s denunciation of Herod for immorality, and John’s consequent imprisonment and death (for full account, see 6:14–29). The incident serves here only as a date-line, for from this moment began the preaching of the good news by Jesus. That the initial point of preaching was hard-pressed, stubbornly nationalistic Galilee, surrounded by Gentiles, always first target for any invader from the north, is seen by Matthew to be no accident (Matt. 4:12–16). As in the words of the prophet, so in the earthly ministry of Jesus, Galilee appropriately symbolizes God’s people in bondage, to whom the light of salvation would first come (Isa. 9:1–2).1 Nevertheless, this does not justify us in downgrading (with Marxsen) the geographic reality of the location of the mission in favour of theological symbolism.

14. The gospel of God: there is a variant reading ‘gospel of the kingdom’, which is certainly the sense of verse 15.

15. The news which Jesus now heralded in Galilee was that God’s hour had struck, the time to which all the Old Testament had looked forward. God’s reign upon earth, a concept familiar from the prophets, was about to begin (is at hand). All were therefore called to a change of heart (repent) and to a belief in this good news, for which John had already prepared the way. This is the only instance in Mark where pisteuo en, believe in, is used: see BAGD p. 660, where ‘put one’s trust in’ seems a better translation than ‘believe on the basis of the gospel’. What all had yet to learn, and what proved to be the hardest lesson for the disciples of Jesus to learn, was that the reign of God was not to be a cataclysmic external triumph in the here and now by an earthly Messiah, but a peaceful rule over the hearts of those who responded to the message, although no reader of the Old Testament could think of it as purely an internal matter. True, the gospel involves the kingdom: but it also alters all contemporary concepts of the kingdom (see Schweizer). Is at hand: this might possibly be translated, following the sense of the presumed Semitic original, ‘has come’. In one sense the kingdom had already come in the person of Jesus, who was fulfilling God’s will perfectly. In another sense, it was gradually coming, in lives surrendered to God. In a third sense, God would introduce it universally at the ‘last day’.

ii. The call of the disciples (1:16–20)

Jesus called Simon and Andrew to be fishers of men (17), and while the use of the metaphor in their particular case may have been suggested by their occupation at the time, yet this is a universal calling for every disciple of Jesus.2 Fisherman, farmer, builder, reaper, shepherd, steward, servant: all are examples of the homely metaphors used by Jesus in the gospels, each describing a different aspect of our common Christian obligations to our Lord and to our fellows.

Both pairs of brothers found that obedience to the call of Jesus was costly; it meant abandonment of all that they held dear, and all earthly security, in simple committal to Jesus. Nor can we say that those who left father and hired servants and boat left more than those who left their nets alone,3 since both left all that they had; that is always the minimum requirement for the Christian (8:34). Left and followed (18) correspond to the double call of Jesus in verse 15 ‘repent and believe’ (Minear).

It has been well pointed out by scholars that to the ancient world, unaccustomed to walking abreast on a wide path as modern pedestrians would naturally do, the word followed meant to ‘walk with’, in modern idiom. To walk with Jesus as Enoch had walked with God (Gen. 5:22), these fishermen gave up all earthly prospects. Nevertheless it is true that, by New Testament times, the verb ‘to follow’ had added to its meaning an ethical aspect, for it is always the teacher who walks ahead, and the student who follows: therefore, at the least, a rabbi-disciple relationship is implied.

iii. Jesus at Capernaum (1:21–28)

It was the consistent practice of Jesus to attend both temple and synagogue; but, unlike any other teacher whom his audience had heard hitherto, he neither quoted nor relied on any great rabbinic names as precedent for his teaching. His hearers were amazed, not only at the content of his teaching, but also at the assumption of personal authority 4 displayed in the manner of its presentation. This was in direct contrast to the caution and pettifogging of the scribes, to whom the new handling of law and tradition by Jesus must have seemed cavalier, to say the least. Anderson well points out the stress given in Mark to the teaching programme of Jesus, although the content of his teaching is not detailed.

23–26. The immediate result of the preaching of Jesus was not harmony, but division and strife, exactly as he later warned (Matt. 10:34). This strife might lie concealed in the minds of the congregation, but it was made plain in the outcry of the demoniac. He, at least, bears unwilling witness to the person and work of Jesus, though he recoils instinctively from his purity, realizing that here is a preacher with whom he had nothing in common, crying what have you to do with us? (24)5 Capernaum, the scene of the miracle, was a proud city of unbelief, compared with which Tyre and Sidon would fare better in the day of judgment (Matt. 11:23–24). It is a strange commentary on the spiritual situation in Capernaum that a demoniac could worship in the synagogue with no sense of incongruity, until confronted by Jesus, and indeed apparently with no initial desire to be delivered from his affliction. The instant response of Jesus was to muzzle this involuntary demon-testimony and free the man from the incubus. The Greek word phimōthē ti, be silent (25), is better translated as ‘be muzzled’: it is both strong and blunt, like ‘shut up’ in modern colloquial English. The main emphasis is on the silencing of the demon, to maintain the so-called ‘messianic secret’. See the Introduction (p. 88f.): Jesus will not accept compulsory witness to his god-head, when given by the powers of evil.

27–28. This exhibition of power only confirmed the impression left in the minds of his hearers, that here was one invested with authority. But, though it often led to wonder, a miracle did not lead necessarily to belief. This seems to be one of the reasons why Jesus performed healing miracles so sparingly and selectively, and seemingly only for those in whom faith already existed, no matter in how small a degree (9:24). Of course, in the case of a demoniac, it would be useless to seek for such faith before liberation. Faith, in any case, if produced merely by the spectacular and the abnormal would be inadequate (Minear and Schweizer).6

iv. Peter’s mother-in-law (1:29–31)

This ‘domestic miracle’ gives us one of the rare glimpses into the home lives of the apostles. Simon’s wife may even have accompanied her husband on his missionary travels later, as she is mentioned specifically by Paul in 1 Corinthians 9:5. 7 This incident is often claimed as a ‘Petrine touch’: certainly, of the apostles, only Peter, James and John were present (and Andrew?).

As so often in the gospel narrative, the touch of Jesus brought instant healing (31); and the consciousness of healing brought grateful devotion to him, expressed in the way in which she served or ‘waited at table’. It is incorrect, with Schweizer (quoted in Anderson), to compare 15:41, and to see this service as being the model of discipleship for a woman. Humble service like this is the model for every disciple of Jesus alike (10:43–45), but a strict rabbi would have forbidden a woman even to serve at table.

v. The evening healings (1:32–34)

The miracle in the synagogue and the miracle in the home are the natural preludes to the general healing described in these verses. The two isolated miracles had actually taken place on the sabbath; now, after sunset, with the sabbath over and the first day of the week begun, crowds assembled to seek healing. The evangelist may have intended us to see that it was appropriate for such general healing and blessing to be on what was to the church ‘the Lord’s day’. The question of healing by Jesus on the sabbath does not seem to have yet arisen as a controversial point. Presumably this was so because the healing of the demoniac was involuntary, and the healing of Peter’s mother-in-law took place inside a private house, and would therefore be unseen by and unknown to the orthodox. Orthodox Judaism permitted healing on the sabbath only when life was in danger, and there is no evidence that such was the case here. As the Pharisees do not appear on the scene till 2:16, however, their absence may have also been the reason for the absence of controversy as yet. For a rigid Jew, breach of the sabbath was punishable by death (Num. 15:35).

34. Once again, the Lord refuses to accept demoniac testimony to his Godhead. All such testimony is non-voluntary, an unwilling recognition by the powers of darkness of an empirical fact, and therefore it corresponds to no morally or spiritually transforming discovery. Jesus is prepared to await the revelation to be made by God himself that alone will enable every disciple to say with Peter, ‘You are the Christ’ (8:29). James 2:19 shows that such grudging acceptance of God by the demons as an unwelcome reality is far apart from true Christian faith: though demons may well admit, they do not trust,8 but only ‘shudder’. That is not the biblical ‘fear of the Lord’ (Ps. 19:9).

vi. From Capernaum to Galilee (1:35–39)

All the varied healings mentioned here must have taken a considerable time. We know that on some occasions at least, the miracle was accompanied by a conscious flow of healing power from Jesus (5:30). Healing may therefore have been an exhausting experience to him, although this is not actually stated in Scripture. If so, it would have been another reason for the frequent withdrawal of Jesus after such occasions, as now.

It was after a busy sabbath of worship and ministry in the synagogue, at a time when others might seek rest and relaxation, that Jesus sought God in private prayer (35). In this way he was accustomed to spend his ‘preacher’s Monday morning’. The earliness of the hour and the pains taken to secure a quiet place for uninterrupted prayer left a lasting impression on the disciples. Simon and the others seem to have thoroughly disapproved of this ‘unrealistic’ strategy in withdrawing from the bustle and opportunity of Capernaum to the silence of a lonely spot (37). They must have been still more puzzled when Jesus saw, in this heightened local interest roused by his healing work, the signal to move on, and to preach in other villages (38). This, he explains, was in fulfilment of his mission, which now became a general preaching and healing mission of a peripatetic nature, based on the synagogues of Galilee. Lightfoot notes that, in Mark, there are three specific references to Jesus at prayer (1:35; 6:46; 14:32). All are at night, and all at times of tension: but surely this early rising for prayer shows a general pattern.

vii. The cleansing of the leper (1:40–45)

This account of the healing of the leper is only one example of a type of incident that must have been repeated many times in the unrecorded ministry of Jesus, which obviously (3:8–12) was much more extensive than our scanty records show. In this miracle, told by Mark in his usual laconic way, there are only two characters involved. The first character is an untouchable, conscious of his own state, earnestly desiring to be cleansed, humble enough to ask for cleansing and believing that Jesus had the power to heal him. The other figure is the compassionate Jesus,9 who does not shrink from laying his hand even on the loathsomeness of leprosy. Wherever the compassionate Christ and the yearning sinner meet, there then comes instantaneous and complete cleansing. In the antiseptic cleanliness of modern hospitals, we lose sight of the wonder of the parable of Jesus in all his purity stooping to touch the ugliness and stench of our sin to bring healing and forgiveness. In the ancient world, the attitude towards leprosy was not unlike the popular attitude to suspected sufferers from AIDS today. To the pious Jew, conscious of the ritual uncleanness of the leper (Lev. 13:3), the wonder became even more staggering: Jesus was willing to incur defilement (as they saw it), so that the defiled leper might be made clean. The whole of the gospel is here in a nutshell: Christ redeems us from the curse by becoming under a curse for our sake (Gal. 3:13).

43–44. Once again, the commands of Jesus run counter to all natural human thought.10 To the healed leper, the most natural thing in the world, the spontaneous expression of gratitude, would have been to tell others. This, in his case, was forbidden in the most explicit terms, which was surely because Jesus never desired people to be drawn to follow him simply in hopes of material benefits to be obtained from him. Unwise publicity by witness to physical healing might attract others from wrong motives. This is one of the paradoxes of the ministry of Jesus. He sees the hungry crowd, has pity on them and feeds them; and yet he rebukes crowds who come to him solely for feeding (John 6:26), and disciples who fail to learn the lesson from it (8:17). He has compassion on the sick, and does not turn them away when they come for healing; but he makes no attempt to seek out the sick to heal them. Rather, he withdraws himself when the crowds seeking healing become too great, for this makes his teaching ministry, which is alone able to interpret his healing ministry, impossible (38). His primary purpose was ‘preaching the gospel of God’ (14). Jesus certainly performed miracles and healed the sick, but to say, with some, that he banished sickness and death from Israel for three years, goes far beyond Scripture, and ignores his purpose.

For the healed person to show himself to the priest, on the other hand, and to make the necessary offerings, was both a fitting expression of gratitude to God for his healing, and also an obligation to a law which was at once the medical and hygienic, as well as the ceremonial, code of Israel (cf. Deut. 24:8, reinforcing the injunctions of Lev. 14:2). It was a proof that he had been healed. It was also a proof to the priest of the healing power of Jesus (1:44): but no danger of wide publication was involved here.

45. Disobedience to the express command of Jesus, even if undertaken from the best possible motives, could lead only to a hampering and hindering of his work. Perhaps that was why Jesus had warned him so strongly against it in verse 43, but all in vain.

B. The beginning of conflict (2:1–3:6)

i. The healing of the paralysed man (2:1–12)11

Whenever Jesus entered a house, the verdict of the gospels is that the fact could not be concealed (7:24), so pervasive was his presence. Soon the crowds gathered again in Capernaum, which, after the move from Nazareth, now became his home (for the move, see Luke 4:31). But this time the crowds came, not merely to be healed of bodily illnesses or afflictions, but to hear the word of God (verse 2). The temporary withdrawal by Jesus in 1:38, and the Galilean preaching tour of 1:39, had served their purpose; the wheat had been separated from the chaff, among the hearers of Jesus.

Nevertheless, because the needs of those in Capernaum were many and varied, and because Jesus would meet all those needs, however diverse, there was still healing: and healing, after all, was another messianic sign (Luke 7:22). The crowds that milled about the door of the house, whether it was Mary’s new home or the house of Simon’s mother-in-law, or the house of some other unknown friend of Jesus, were hungry to hear the word of God; and so the poor had the gospel preached to them (Matt. 11:5), the last great messianic sign.

3–5. Their faith. The four who came in faith were anxious to obtain physical healing for their friend; it was granted. The paralysed man himself, to judge from Jesus’ dealing with him, was not so much conscious of his physical need as he was of his spiritual burden; so Jesus granted to him forgiveness as well as healing. Only the scribes, arrogantly self-satisfied, and therefore conscious of no need, received nothing. Verse 17 is the later comment by Jesus, not without wry humour, on this seeming anomaly.

As usual, Jesus healed in response to faith. Here Scripture does not make clear the attitude of the sick man himself. He, too, may well have had faith, but it may be that he was too conscious of his own sin to have any confidence in approaching Jesus. It is simplest to assume that Jesus worked the miracle in response to the active faith of the four others, who brought a helpless friend and laid him at Jesus’ feet. Their faith showed its reality by its obstinacy and stubbornness in refusing to give up hope. This could be a veritable sermon on the text of James 2:26, illustrating the truth that faith, unless it shows its reality by action, is unreal and self-deceptive, and therefore cannot be expected to achieve results.

6–7. These scribes (NIV ‘teachers of the law’, which is loose, but correctly defines their status) were men of theological acumen. They were not the local synagogue officials of provincial Capernaum, but a fact-finding commission of the type that had already minutely cross-questioned John the Baptist (John 1:19; Luke 5:17). They saw at once down to the theological roots of the matter. Of course, none but God could forgive sin; how dare a mere human like Jesus claim such authority? Again and again during the life of Jesus the same dilemma was to reappear. If he were not divine, then he was indeed a blasphemer: for he must be ‘either God, or mad, or bad’, as the old saying runs. There could be no other possible explanation. If the scribes did not accept him, then they must condemn him. At least some of them would see the logic of this (3:6) and so they would begin to plot his death in cold blood. Already, the path to the cross was determined.

8–9. Nevertheless, in the case of some of the scribes, the bewilderment may have been genuine enough, as it surely was in the case of the honest scribe of 12:34. To help such bewildered people to make the staggering equation between the human Jesus and Godhead, Jesus gave them an unasked sign of his divine power, by healing the paralytic before their eyes.

Of course it was equally easy to utter the two phrases in the text, and equally easy for divine power to vindicate the note of authority in either phrase. But there is no outward sign by which the inward reality of the forgiveness of sins can be tested, while it is at once clear to all whether a lame man actually walks or not. In other words, in this physical sphere it could most readily be seen whether the assumption of authority by Je...

Table of contents

• Tyndale New Testament Commentaries
• Mark
• Contents
• General Preface
• Author’s Preface to the First Edition
• Author’s Preface to the Second Edition
• Chief Abbreviations
• Select Bibliography
• Introduction
• Analysis
• Commentary
• 2. His Own Did Not Receive Him: The Early Galilean Ministry (1:14–3:6)
• 3. All Who Received Him: The Call and Training of the Disciples (3:7–8:26)
• 4. He Firmly Set His Face: The Road to Jerusalem (8:27–10:52)
• 5. Zeal for Your House: The Jerusalem Ministry (11:1–13:37)
• 6. The Passion Narrative (14:1–15:47)1
• 7. The Third Day: The Risen Lord (16:1–20)