Gospel of Mark Chapter 6:35-52 Antique Commentary Quotes

Catena Aurea
Mark 6:35-44
Theophylact: See now, how those who are disciples of Christ grow in love to man, for they pity the multitudes, and come to Christ to intercede for them. But the Lord tried them, to see whether they would know that His power was great enough to feed them. Wherefore it goes on: “He answered and said unto them, Give ye them to eat.”

Bede: By these words He calls on His Apostles, to break bread for the people, that they might be able to testify that they had no bread, and thus the greatness of the miracle might become more known.

Augustine, de Con. Evan., 2, 46: This in the Gospel of John is the answer to Philip, but Mark gives it as the answer of the disciples, wishing it to be understood that Philip made this answer as a mouthpiece of the others; although he might put the plural number for the singular, as is usual.

It goes on: “And He saith unto them, How many loaves have ye? go and see.” The other Evangelists pass over this being done by the Lord. It goes on: “And when they knew, they say, “Five, and two fishes.”

This, which was suggested by Andrew, as we learn from John, the other Evangelists, using the plural for the singular, have put into the mouth of the disciples.

But we need not be perplexed, though Luke says that they were ordered to sit down by fifties, and Mark by hundreds and fifties, for one has mentioned a part, the other the whole. Mark, who mentions the hundreds, fills up what the other has left out.

Chrys., Vict. Ant. e Cat. in Marc., see Hom. in Matt., 49: Now it was with fitness that He looked up to heaven, for the Jews, when receiving manna in the desert, presumed to say of God, “Can he give bread?” [Psa_78:20] To prevent this, therefore, before He performed the miracle, He referred to His Father when He was about to do.

Theophylact: He also looks up to heaven, that He may teach us to seek our food from God, and not from the devil, as they do who unjustly feed on other men’s labours. By this also He intimated to the crowd, that He could not be opposed to God, since He called upon God. And He gives the bread to His disciples to set before the multitude, that by handling the bread, they might see that it was an undoubted miracle. It goes on: “And they did all eat, and were filled: and they took up twelve baskets full of the fragments.”

Twelve baskets of fragments remained over and above, that each of the Apostles, carrying a basket on his shoulder, might recognise the unspeakable wonder of the miracle. For it was a proof of overflowing power not only to feed so many men, but also to leave such a superabundance of fragments. Even though Moses gave manna, yet what was given to each was measured by his necessity, and what was over and above was overrun with worms. Elias also fed the woman, but gave her just what was enough for her; but Jesus, being the Lord, makes His gifts with superabundant profusion.

Bede: Again, in a mystical sense, the Saviour refreshes the hungry crowds at the day’s decline, because, either now that the end of the world approaches, or now that the Son of justice has set in death for us, we are saved from wasting away in spiritual hunger. He calls the Apostles to Him at the breaking of bread, intimating that daily by them our hungry souls are fed, that is, by their letters and examples. By the five loaves are figured the Five Books of Moses, by the two fishes, the Psalms and Prophets.

John Calvin
6:35-36
The disciples had now lost their object, and they see that Christ is again absorbed in teaching, while the multitudes are so eager to receive instruction that they do not think of retiring. They therefore advise that for the sake of attending to their bodily wants, Christ should send them away into the neighboring villages.He had purposely delayed till now the miracle which he intended to perform; first, that his disciples might consider it more attentively, and might thus derive from it greater advantage; and next, that the very circumstance of the time might convince them that, though he does not prevent, and even does not immediately supply, the wants of his people, yet he never ceases to care for them, but has always at hand the assistance which he affords at the very time when it is required.

Matthew Poole
Mar 6:35
15-21, and shall again meet with it Joh_6:1-14. John relates it with some more particular circumstances, telling us it was Philip that moved our Saviour to dismiss them so seasonably, that they might provide themselves food, and making Christ to propound the questions to Philip, where they should buy bread enough for them. He also tells us that it was Andrew who told our Saviour that there was a lad there had five barley loaves and two fishes. But all three of the evangelists agree in the main, both as to the quantity of victuals, five loaves and two fishes; and the quantity of the people fed with them, five thousand; and the number of the baskets full of fragments taken up, which was twelve. John also addeth the effect of this miracle upon the multitude, Joh_6:14; they said, This is of a truth that prophet that should come into the world. For further explication of this piece of history,

Adam Clarke
Mark 6:35-36
The disciples of Christ are solicitous for the people’s temporal as well a spiritual welfare: and he is not worthy to be called a minister of Christ, who dues not endeavor to promote both to the uttermost of his power. The preaching of Christ must have been accompanied with uncommon power to these people’s souls, to have induced them to leave their homes to follow him from village to village, for they could never hear enough; and to neglect to make use of any means for the support of their lives, so that they might still have the privilege of hearing him. When a soul is either well replenished with the bread of life, or hungry after it, the necessities of the body are, for the time, little regarded.

Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown
Mar 6:36
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 — John tells us (Joh_6:5, Joh_6:6) that “Jesus said to Philip, Whence shall we buy bread, that these may eat? (And this He said to prove him: for He Himself knew what He would do).” The subject may have been introduced by some remark of the disciples; but the precise order and form of what was said by each can hardly be gathered with precision, nor is it of any importance.

John Calvin
Mark 6:36
Ver. 35-44. We meet with the relation of this miracle Mat_14:Give you to them something to eat.As a fuller exposition of this miracle will be found at the sixth chapter of John’s Gospel, instead of troubling my readers with a repetition of what I have said, I would rather send them to that exposition; but rather than pass over this passage entirely, I shall offer a brief recapitulation. Hitherto Christ had bestowed his whole attention on feeding souls, but now he includes within his duties as a shepherd the care even of their bodies. And in this way he confirms his own saying, that to those who seek the kingdom of God, and his righteousness, all other things will be added, (Mat_6:33.)

We have no right, indeed, to expect that Christ will always follow this method of supplying the hungry and thirsty with food; but it is certain that he will never permit his own people to want the necessaries of life, but will stretch out his hand from heaven, whenever he shall see it to be necessary to relieve their necessities. Those who wish to have Christ for their provider, must first learn not to long for refined luxuries, but to be satisfied with barley-bread.

Christ commanded that the people should sit down in companies; and he did so, first, that by this arrangement of the ranks the miracle might be more manifest; secondly, that the number of the men might be more easily ascertained, and that, while they looked at each other, they might in their turn bear testimony to this heavenly favor. Thirdly, perceiving that his disciples were anxious, he intended to make trial of their obedience by giving them an injunction which at first sight appeared to be absurd; for, as no provisions were at hand, there was reason to wonder why Christ was making arrangements that resembled a feast. To the same purpose is what follows, that he gave them the loaves, in order that in their hands the astonishing increase might take place, and that they might thus be the ministers of Christ’s divine power; for as if it had been of small importance that they should be eye-witnesses, Christ determined that his power should be handled by them. Two hundred pence, according to the computation of Budaeus, are worth about thirty-four French livres;and so when the disciples speak of what is sufficient for them, that every one of them may take a little,they calculate at the rate of a farthing for each individual. Forming so high an estimate of the sum of money that would be required to purchase bread barely sufficient for procuring a morsel to the people, they are entitled to no small praise for their obedience, when they implicitly comply with the command of Christ, and leave the result to his disposal.

John Gill
Mar 6:37 He answered and said unto them, give ye them to eat,…. This he said to try their faith, and make way for the following miracle:

and they say unto him, shall we go and buy two hundred pennyworth of bread, and give them to eat? This might be just the sum of money they now had in the bag, as Grotius, and others conjecture; and the sense be, shall we lay out the two hundred pence, which is all we have in hand, to buy bread for this multitude? is it proper we should? is it thy will that so it should be? and if we should do so, as Philip suggests, Joh_6:7, it would not be enough to give every one a little: wherefore they say this, as amazed that he should propose such a thing unto them: or the reason of mentioning such a sum, as Dr. Lightfoot observes, might be, because that this was a noted and celebrated sum among the Jews, and frequently mentioned by them. A virgin’s dowry, upon marriage, was “two hundred pence” (c); and so was a widow’s; and one that was divorced (d), if she insisted on it, and could make good her claim: this was the fine of an adult man, that lay with one under age; and of a male under age, that lay with a female adult (e); and of one man that gave another a slap of the face (f). This sum answered to six pounds and five shillings of our money.

(c) Misn. Cetubot, c. 1. sect. 2. & 4. 7. & 5. 1. (d) Ib. c. 2. sect. 1. & 11. 4. (e) Ib. c. 1. sect. 3. (f) Misn. Bava Kama, c. 6. sect. 8.

Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown
Mar 6:38
He saith unto them, How many loaves have ye? go and see. And when they knew, they say, Five, and two fishes — John is more precise and full: “One of His disciples, Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother, saith unto Him, There is a lad here which hath five barley loaves and two small fishes: but what are they among so many?” (Joh_6:8, Joh_6:9). Probably this was the whole stock of provisions then at the command of the disciples – no more than enough for one meal to them – and entrusted for the time to this lad. “He said, Bring them hither to me” (Mat_14:18).

John Wesley
Mar 6:40 They sat down in ranks – The word properly signifies a parterre or bed in a garden; by a metaphor, a company of men ranged in order, by hundreds and by fifties – That is, fifty in rank, and a hundred in file. So a hundred multiplied by fifty, make just five thousand.

Albert Barnes
Mar_6:40
In ranks – Literally, in the form of square beds in a garden. By regularly formed companies.

By hundreds and by fifties – Some companies had a hundred in them, and some groupings had fifty in them. We do not need to suppose that these were “exactly” formed or arranged, but that this was approximately the number. The expression indicates a “multitude.” There were so many that they sat down, by “hundreds” and by “fifties,” in separate companies, upon the green grass.

A.T. Robertson
Mar 6:40
They sat down in ranks (anepesan prasiai prasiai). They half-way reclined (anaklithenai, Mar_6:39). Fell up here (we have to say fell down), the word anepesan means. But they were arranged in groups by hundreds and by fifties and they looked like garden beds with their many-coloured clothes which even men wore in the Orient. Then again Mark repeats the word, prasiai prasiai, in the nominative absolute as in Mar_6:39 instead of using ana or kata with the accusative for the idea of distribution. Garden beds, garden beds. Peter saw and he never forgot the picture and so Mark caught it. There was colour as well as order in the grouping. There were orderly walks between the rows on rows of men reclining on the green grass. The grass is not green in Palestine much of the year, mainly at the passover time. So here the Synoptic Gospels have an indication of more than a one-year ministry of Jesus (Gould). It is still one year before the last passover when Jesus was crucified.

John Calvin
Mark 6:41
He blessed. In this passage, as in many others, blessing denotes thanksgiving. Now Christ has taught us, by his example, that we cannot partake of our food with holiness and purity, unless we express our gratitude to God, from whose hand it comes to us. Accordingly, Paul tells us, that every kind of food which God bestows upon us is sanctifed by the word of God and prayer, (1Ti_4:5;) by which he means, that brutal men, who do not regard by faith the blessing of God, and do not offer to him thanksgiving, corrupt and pollute by the filth of their unbelief all that is by nature pure; and, on the other hand, that they are corrupted and defiled by the food which they swallow, because to unbelievers nothing is clean. Christ has therefore laid down for his followers the proper manner of taking food, that they may not profane their own persons and the gifts of God by wicked sacrilege.

Raising his eyes towards heaven.This expresses warm and earnest supplication. Not that such an attitude is at all times necessary when we pray, but because the Son of God did not choose to disregard the outward forms which are fitted to aid human weakness. It ought also to be taken into account, that to raise the eyes upwards is an excitement well fitted to arouse us from sloth, when our minds are too strongly fixed on the earth.

Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown
Mar 6:41
And when he had taken the five loaves and the two fishes, he looked up to heaven — Thus would the most distant of them see distinctly what He was doing.

and blessed — John (Joh_6:11) says, “And when he had given thanks.” The sense is the same. This thanksgiving for the meal, and benediction of it as the food of thousands, was the crisis of the miracle.
and brake the loaves, and gave them to his disciples to set before them — thus virtually holding forth these men as His future ministers.

Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown
Mar 6:43
And they took up twelve baskets full of the fragments, and of the fishes — “Therefore (says Joh_6:13), they gathered them together, and filled twelve baskets with the fragments of the five barley loaves, which remained over and above unto them that had eaten.” The article here rendered “baskets” in all the four narratives was part of the luggage taken by Jews on a journey – to carry, it is said, both their provisions and hay to sleep on, that they might not have to depend on Gentiles, and so run the risk of ceremonial pollution. In this we have a striking corroboration of the truth of the four narratives. Internal evidence renders it clear, we think, that the first three Evangelists wrote independently of each other, though the fourth must have seen all the others. But here, each of the first three Evangelists uses the same word to express the apparently insignificant circumstance that the baskets employed to gather up the fragments were of the kind which even the Roman satirist, Juvenal, knew by the name of cophinus, while in both the narratives of the feeding of the Four Thousand the baskets used are expressly said to have been of the kind called spuris. (See Mar_8:19, Mar_8:20.)

A.T. Robertson
Mark 6:43
Broken pieces (ton klasmaton). Not the scraps upon the ground, but the pieces broken by Jesus and still in the “twelve baskets” (dodeka kophinous) and not eaten. Each of the twelve had a basketful left over (to perisseuon). One hopes that the boy (Joh_6:9) who had the five loaves and two fishes to start with got one of the basketsful, if not all of them. Each of the Gospels uses the same word here for baskets (kophinos), a wicker-basket, called “coffins” by Wycliff. Juvenal (Sat. iii. 14) says that the grove of Numa near the Capenian gate of Rome was “let out to Jews whose furniture is a basket (cophinus) and some hay” (for a bed). In the feeding of the Four Thousand (Matthew and Mark) the word sphuris is used which was a sort of hamper or large provisions basket.

Adam Clarke
Mar 6:44
Men (andres). Men as different from women as in Mat_14:21. This remarkable miracle is recorded by all Four Gospels, a nature miracle that only God can work. No talk about accelerating natural processes will explain this miracle. And three eyewitnesses report it: the Logia of Matthew, the eyes of Peter in Mark, the witness of John the Beloved Disciple (Gould). The evidence is overwhelming.

A.T. Robertson
Mar 6:44
Were about five thousand – ωσει, about, is omitted by a great majority of the best MSS. and by the principal versions. It is wanting in several editions: Bengel, Wetstein, and Griesbach, leave it out of the text. It is omitted by some in the parallel place, Mat_14:21, but it stands without any variation in Luk_9:14, and Joh_6:10. This miracle is mentioned by all the four evangelists. It is one of the most astonishing that Christ has wrought. It is a miracle which could not be counterfeited, and a full proof of the divinity of Christ.

Catena Aurea
Mark 6:45-52
Bede, in Marc., 2, 27: But it is with reason that we wonder how Mark says, that after the miracle of the loaves the disciples crossed the sea of Bethsaida, when Luke relates that the miracle was done in the parts of Bethsaida [Luk_9:10], unless we understand that Luke means by the desert which is Bethsaida not the country immediately around the town, but the desert places belonging to it. But when Mark says that they should “go before unto Bethsaida,” the town itself is meant.It goes on: “And when He had sent them away, He departed into a mountain to pray.”

Pseudo-Chrys., Vict. Ant. e Cat. in Marc.: This we must understand of Christ, in that He is man; He does it also to teach us to be constant in prayer.

Theophylact: But when He had dismissed the crowd, He goes up to pray, for prayer requires rest and silence.

Bede, in Marc., 2, 28: Not every man, however, who prays goes up into a mountain, but he alone prays well, who seeks God in prayer. But he who prays for riches or worldly labour, or for the death of his enemy, sends up from the lowest depths his vile prayers to God.

John says, “When Jesus therefore perceived that they would come and take Him by force and make Him a king, He departed against into a mountain Himself, alone.” [Joh_6:15] It goes on: “And when even was come, the ship was in the midst of the sea, and He alone on the land.”

Theophylact: Now the Lord permitted His disciples to be in danger, that they might learn patience; wherefore He did not immediately come to their aid, but allowed them to remain in danger all night, that He might teach them to wait patiently, and not to hope at once for help in tribulations.

For there follows: “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.”

Pseudo-Chrys., Vict. Ant. e Cat. in Marc.: Holy Scripture reckons four watches in the night, making each division three hours; wherefore by the fourth watch it means that which is after the ninth hour, that is, in the tenth or some following hour. There follows: “And would have passed them.”

Augustine, de Con. Evan., 2, 47: But how could they understand this, except from His going a different way, wishing to pass them as strangers; for they were so far from recognizing Him, as to take Him for a spirit. For it goes on: “But when they saw Him walking upon the sea, they supposed it had been a spirit, and cried out.”

Theophylact: See again how Christ, though He was about to put and end to their dangers, puts them in greater fear. But He immediately reassured them by His voice, for it continues, “And immediately He talked with them, and said unto them, It is I, be not afraid.”

Chrys., Hom. in Matt., 50: As soon then as they knew Him by His voice, their fear left them.

Augustine: How then could He wish to pass them, whose fears He so reassures, if it were not that His wish to pass them would wring from them that cry, which called for His help?

Bede: [ed. note: This opinion with which Theodorus is charged was one held by the Phantasiasts, a sect of the Monophysites. The denial of the human body to our Lord, was a natural consequence of denying Him a human soul, for how could a human body inclose, so to speak, His Divinity? Theodoras was Bishop of Pharan, in Arabia, and was condemned as the author of the Monothelite heresy in the Lateran Council under Pope Martin I, AD 649. The passage from Dionysius is quoted in Actio 3 of the Council, and occurs de Div. Nom, c. 1] But Theodorus, who was Bishop of Phanara, wrote that the Lord had no bodily weight in His flesh, and walked on the sea without weight; but the Catholic faith declares that He had weight according to the flesh. For Dionysius says, We know not how without plunging in His feet, which had bodily weight and the gravity of matter, He could walk on the wet and unstable substance.

Theophylact: Then by entering into the ship, the Lord restrained the tempest. For it continues, “And He went up unto them into the ship, and the wind ceased.” Great indeed is the miracle of our Lord’s walking on the sea, but the tempest and the contrary wind were there as well, to make the miracle greater. For the Apostles, not understanding from the miracle of the five loaves the power of Christ, now more fully knew it from the miracle of the sea. Wherefore it goes on, “And they were sore amazed in themselves.” For they understood not concerning the loaves.

Bede: The disciples indeed, who were still carnal, were amazed at the greatness of His virtue, they could not yet however recognise in Him the truth of the Divine Majesty. Wherefore it goes on, “For their hearts were hardened.”

But mystically, the toil of the disciples in rowing, and the contrary wind, mark out the labours of the Holy Church, who amidst the beating waves of the world, and the blasts of unclean spirits, strives to reach the repose of her celestial country. And well is it said that the ship was in the midst of the sea, and He alone on land, for sometimes the Church is afflicted by a pressure from the Gentiles so overwhelming, that her Redeemer seems to have entirely deserted her. But the Lord sees His own, toiling on the sea, for, lest they faint in tribulations, He strengthens them by the look of His love, and sometimes frees them by a visible assistance. Further, in the fourth watch He came to them as daylight approached, for when man lifts up his mind to the light of guidance from on high, the Lord will be with him, and the dangers of temptations will be laid asleep.

John Calvin
Mar 6:45
And immediately Jesus constrained his disciples They must have been constrained; for they would never, of their own accord, have left him, and gone to the other side. Now in this they testify their great veneration for him, when, contrary to their own opinions, they yield to his command and obey it. And, indeed, it had an appearance of absurdity, that he should remain alone in a desert place, when night was approaching. But so much the greater commendation is due to the submissiveness of those who set a higher value on the authority of their heavenly teacher than on all that could be pleaded on the other side. And, indeed, we do not truly and perfectly obey God, unless we implicitly follow whatever he commands, though our feelings may be opposed to it. There is always the best reason, no doubt, for every thing that God does; but he often conceals it from us for a time, in order to instruct us not to be wise in ourselves, but to depend entirely on the expression of his will. And thus Christ constrained his disciples to cross over, in order to train them to that rule of obedience which I have mentioned; though there cannot be a doubt that he intended to prepare the way for the miracle which will immediately come under our consideration.

Adam Clarke
Mar 6:45
To the other side before unto Bethsaida – John says, Joh_6:17, to Capernaum. It is probable our Lord ordered them to steer to one or other of these two places, which were about four miles distant, and on the same side of the sea of Galilee.

Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown
Mar 6:45
One very important particular given by John alone (Joh_6:15) introduces this portion: “When Jesus therefore perceived that they would take Him by force, to make Him a king, He departed again into a mountain Himself alone.”

And straightway he constrained his disciples to get into the ship, and to go to the other side before — Him.
unto Bethsaida — Bethsaida of Galilee (Joh_12:21). John (Joh_6:17) says they “went over the sea towards Capernaum” – the wind, probably, occasioning this slight deviation from the direction of Bethsaida.

while he sent away the people — “the multitude.” His object in this was to put an end to the misdirected excitement in His favor (Joh_6:15), into which the disciples themselves may have been somewhat drawn. The word “constrained” implies reluctance on their part, perhaps from unwillingness to part with their Master and embark at night, leaving Him alone on the mountain.

Albert Barnes
And straightway Jesus constrained … – See Mar_6:45-56; Joh_6:15-21. The word “straightway” means immediately; that is, as soon as the fragments were gathered up. To “constrain” usually means to compel. It here means to command. There was no need of compulsion. They were at this time on the east side of the Lake of Gennesareth. He directed them to get into a ship and cross over to the other side; that is, to Capernaum. Mark adds that he sent them to Bethsaida Mar_6:45. Bethsaida was situated at the place where the Jordan empties into the lake on the east side of the river. Compare the notes at Mat_11:21. It is probable that he directed them to go in a ship or boat to Bethsaida, and remain there till he should dismiss the people, and that he would meet them there, and with them cross the lake.

The effect of the miracle on the multitude was so great Joh_6:14 that they believed him to be that prophet which should come into the world; that is, the Messiah, the king that they had expected, and they were about to take him by force and make him a king, Joh_6:15. To avoid this, Jesus got away from them as privately as possible. He went into a solitary mountain alone. In view of the temptation – when human honors were offered to him and almost forced upon him – he retired for private prayer; an example for all who are tempted with human honors and applause. Nothing is better to keep the mind humble and unambitious than to seek some lonely place; to shut out the world with all its honors; to realize that the great God, before whom all creatures and all honors sink to nothing, is round about us; and to ask him to keep us from pride and vainglory.

A.T. Robertson
Constrained (enagkasen). Literally, “compelled” or “forced.” See this word also in Luk_14:23. The explanation for this strong word in Mar_6:45 and Mat_14:22 is given in Joh_6:15. It is the excited purpose of the crowd to take Jesus by force and to make him national king. This would be political revolution and would defeat all the plans of Jesus about his kingdom. Things have reached a climax. The disciples were evidently swept off their feet by the mob psychology for they still shared the Pharisaic hope of a political kingdom. With the disciples out of the way Jesus could handle the crowd more easily, till he should send the multitudes away (heos hou apolusei tous ochlous).

John Calvin
Mark 6:46
He went up into a mountain alone.It is probable that the Son of God, who was fully aware of the tempest that was coming on, did not neglect the safety of his disciples in his prayers; and yet we naturally wonder that he did not rather prevent the danger than employ himself in prayer. But in discharging all the parts of his office as Mediator, he showed himself to be God and man, and exhibited proofs of both natures, as opportunities occurred. Though he had all things at his disposal, he showed himself to be a man by praying; and this he did not hypocritically, but manifested sincere and human affection towards us. In this manner his divine majesty was for a time concealed, but was afterwards displayed at the proper time.

In going up into the mountain he consulted his convenience, that he might have more leisure for praying when removed from all noise. We know how easily the slightest interruptions destroy the ardor of prayer, or at least make it languish and cool. Though Christ was in no danger of this fault, yet he intended to warn us by his example, that we ought to be exceedingly careful to avail ourselves of every assistance for setting our minds free from all the snares of the world, that we may look direct towards heaven. Now in this respect solitude has a powerful influence, by disposing those who engage in prayer, when God is their only witness, to be more on their guard, to pour their heart into his bosom, to be more diligent in self-examination; and, in a word—remembering that they have to do with God—to rise above themselves. At the same time, it must be observed, that he did not lay down a fixed rule, as if we were never permitted to pray except in retirement; for Paul enjoins us to pray everywhere, lifting up clean hands, (1Ti_2:8;) and Christ himself sometimes prayed in presence of others, and even instructed his disciples to assemble together for offering social prayer. But that permission to pray in all places does not hinder them from engaging in secret prayer at proper seasons.

Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown
Mar 6:48
And he saw them toiling in rowing; for the wind was contrary unto them — putting forth all their strength to buffet the waves and bear on against a head wind, but to little effect. He “saw” this from His mountain top, and through the darkness of the night, for His heart was all with them: yet would He not go to their relief till His own time came.

and about the fourth watch of the night — The Jews, who used to divide the night into three watches, latterly adopted the Roman division into four watches, as here. So that, at the rate of three hours to each, the fourth watch, reckoning from six P.M., would be three o’clock in the morning. “So when they had rowed about five and twenty or thirty furlongs” (Joh_6:19) – rather more than halfway across. The lake is about seven miles broad at its widest part. So that in eight or nine hours they had only made some three and a half miles. By this time, therefore, they must have been in a state of exhaustion and despondency bordering on despair; and now at length, having tried them long enough.

he cometh unto them, walking upon the sea — “and draweth nigh unto the ship” (Joh_6:19).
and would have passed by them — but only in the sense of Luk_24:28; Gen_32:26; compare Gen_18:3, Gen_18:5; Gen_42:7.

A.T. Robertson
Mar 6:48-49
Seeing them distressed in rowing (idon autous basanizomenous en toi elaunein). See also Mat_8:29 for the word basanizo, to torture, torment (Mat_4:24) with a touch-stone, then to distress as here. Papyri have dia basanon used on slaves like our third degree for criminals. Elaunein is literally to drive as of ships or chariots. They drove the boat with oars. Common in Xenophon for marching.

About the fourth watch of the night (peri tetarten phulaken tes nuktos). That is, between three and six a.m.
The wind was contrary to them (enantios autois), that is in their faces and rowing was difficult, “a great wind” (Joh_6:18), and as a result the disciples had made little progress. They should have been over long before this.

And he would have passed by them (kai ethelen parelthein autous). Only in Mark. He wished to pass by them, praeterire eos (Vulgate). Imperfect tense ethelen.

They thought (edoxan). A natural conclusion.

And cried out (anekraxan). Cried up, literally, a shriek of terror, or scream.

Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown
Mar 6:51
And he went up unto them into the ship — John (Joh_6:21) says, “Then they willingly received him into the ship” – or rather, “Then were they willing to receive Him” (with reference to their previous terror); but implying also a glad welcome, their first fears now converted into wonder and delight. “And immediately,” adds the beloved disciple, “they were at the land whither they went,” or “were bound.” This additional miracle, for as such it is manifestly related, is recorded by the fourth Evangelist alone. As the storm was suddenly calmed, so the little bark – propelled by the secret power of the Lord of nature now sailing in it – glided through the now unruffled waters, and, while they were wrapt in wonder at what had happened, not heeding their rapid motion, was found at port, to their still further surprise.

Matthew (Mat_14:33) says, “Then they that were in the ship came [that is, ere they got to land] and worshipped him, saying, Of a truth Thou art the Son of God.” But our Evangelist is wonderfully striking.
and the wind ceased and they were sore amazed in themselves beyond measure, and wondered — The Evangelist seems hardly to find language strong enough to express their astonishment.

A.T. Robertson
Mar 6:51
They were sore amazed in themselves (lian en heautois existanto). Only in Mark. Imperfect tense picturing vividly the excited disciples. Mark does not give the incident of Peter’s walking on the water and beginning to sink. Perhaps Peter was not fond of telling that story.

John Gill
Mar 6:52 For they considered not the miracle of the loaves,…. Which they had seen but the day before; they did not attend to it, nor learn from it, as they might, the wonderful glory of Christ, and the greatness of his power; which was as much an act of omnipotence, as either his walking upon the water, or causing the wind to cease, or more so.

For their heart was hardened; or “blinded”; not by sin, or against Christ, much less in a judicial way: but there was a great deal of dulness and stupidity, and want of attention in them. The glory of Christ, which he manifested, and showed forth in his miracles, was not so clearly and fully discerned, attended to, and acknowledged by them, at it might reasonably be thought it would; for notwithstanding these miracles, which they daily saw, they stood in need of divine illuminations, that the darkness of their minds being removed, they might behold the glory of Christ, as the glory of the only begotten of the Father.

Albert Barnes
Mar_6:52
They considered not the miracle of the loaves – They did not remember or call to mind the “power” which Jesus had shown in feeding the five thousand by a miracle, and that, having done that, he had power also to save them from the storm.

Their heart was hardened – Their “mind” was dull to perceive it. This does not mean that they were “opposed” to Jesus, or that they had what we denominate “hardness of heart,” but simply that they were slow to perceive his power. They did not quickly learn, as they ought to have done, that he had all power, and could therefore allay the storm. The word “heart” is frequently used in this sense. See Eph_1:18, in Greek; Rom_1:21; Rom_2:15; 2Co_4:6.

A.T. Robertson
Mar 6:52
For they understood not (ou gar sunekan). Explanation of their excessive amazement, viz., their failure to grasp the full significance of the miracle of the loaves and fishes, a nature miracle. Here was another, Jesus walking on the water. Their reasoning process (kardia in the general sense for all the inner man) was hardened (en peporomene). See note on Mar_3:5 about porosis. Today some men have such intellectual hardness or denseness that they cannot believe that God can or would work miracles, least of all nature miracles.

Gospel of Mark Chapter 4:14-32 Antique Commentary Quotes

Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown
Mar 4:14
The sower soweth the word — or, as in Luke (Luk_8:11), “Now the parable is this: The seed is the word of God.” But who is “the sower?” This is not expressed here because if “the word of God” be the seed, every scatterer of that precious seed must be regarded as a sower. It is true that in the parable of the tares it is said, “He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man,” as “He that soweth the tares is the devil” (Mat_13:37, Mat_13:38). But these are only the great unseen parties, struggling in this world for the possession of man. Each of these has his agents among men themselves; and Christ’s agents in the sowing of the good seed are the preachers of the word. Thus, as in all the cases about to be described, the sower is the same, and the seed is the same; while the result is entirely different, the whole difference must lie in the soils, which mean the different states of the human heart. And so, the great general lesson held forth in this parable of the sower is, that however faithful the preacher, and how pure soever his message, the effect of the preaching of the word depends upon the state of the hearer’s heart. Now follow the cases. See on Mar_4:4.

A.T. Robertson
Mar 4:14
The sower soweth the word (ho speiron ton logon speirei). Not put thus clearly and simply in Mat_13:19 or Luk_8:11.

Adam Clarke
Mar 4:15
These are they – Probably our Lord here refers to the people to whom he had just now preached, and who, it is likely, did not profit by the word spoken.

Where the word is sown – Instead of this clause, four copies of the Itala read the place thus – They who are sown by the way side, are they Who Receive The Word Negligently. There are thousands of this stamp in the Christian world. Reader, art thou one of them?

Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown
Mar 4:15 And these are they by the wayside, where the word is sown; but, when they have heard, etc. — or, more fully (Mat_13:19), “When any one heareth the word of the kingdom, and understandeth it not, then cometh the wicked one, and catcheth away that which was sown in his heart.” The great truth here taught is, that hearts all unbroken and hard are no fit soil for saving truth. They apprehend it not (Mat_13:19) as God’s means of restoring them to Himself; it penetrates not, makes no impression, but lies loosely on the surface of the heart, till the wicked one – afraid of losing a victim by his “believing to salvation” (Luk_8:12) – finds some frivolous subject by whose greater attractions to draw off the attention, and straightway it is gone. Of how many hearers of the word is this the graphic but painful history!

A.T. Robertson
Mar 4:15
Where the word is sown (hopou speiretai ho logos). Explanatory detail only in Mark.

Satan (Satanas) where Mat_13:19 has the evil one (ho poneros) and Luk_8:12 the devil (ho diabolos).

Sown in them (esparmenon eis autous). Within them, not just among them, “in his heart” (Matt.).

Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown
Mar 4:16
And these are they likewise which are sown on stony ground, etc. — “Immediately” the seed in such a case “springs up” – all the quicker from the shallowness of the soil – “because it has no depth of earth.” But the sun, beating on it, as quickly scorches and withers it up, “because it has no root” (Mar_4:6), and “lacks moisture” (Luk_8:6). The great truth here taught is that hearts superficially impressed are apt to receive the truth with readiness, and even with joy (Luk_8:13); but the heat of tribulation or persecution because of the word, or the trials which their new profession brings upon them quickly dries up their relish for the truth, and withers all the hasty promise of fruit which they showed. Such disappointing issues of a faithful and awakening ministry – alas, how frequent are they!

Jerome: Note that which is said, “is straightway offended.” There is then some difference between him who, by many tribulations and torments, is driven to deny Christ, and him who at the first persecution is offended, and falls away, of which He proceeds to speak, “That which is sown among thorns.” To me He seems here to express figuratively that which was said literally to Adam; “Amidst briers and thorns thou shalt eat they bread,” [Gen_3:18] that he that has given himself up to the delights and the cares of this world, eats heavenly bread and the true food among thorns.

Adam Clarke
Mar 4:19
The deceitfulness of riches – This is variously expressed in different copies of the Itala: the errors – delights of the world – completely alienated (abolienati) by the pleasures of the world. The lusts of other things – which have not been included in the anxious cares of the world, and the deceitfulness of riches. All, all, choke the word!

Jerome: And it is elegantly added, “The deceitfulness of riches choke the word;” for riches are treacherous, promising one thing and doing another. The tenure of them is slippery as they are borne hither and thither, and with uncertain step forsake those that have them, or revive those that have them not. Whence the Lord asserts, that rich men hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven, because their riches choke the word of God, and relax the strength of their virtues.

Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown
Mar 4:19
And the cares of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches, and the lusts of other things entering in — or “the pleasures of this life” (Luk_8:14).

choke the word, and it becometh unfruitful — First, “The cares of this world” – anxious, unrelaxing attention to the business of this present life; second, “The deceitfulness of riches” – of those riches which are the fruit of this worldly “care”; third, “The pleasures of this life,” or “the lusts of other things entering in” – the enjoyments in themselves may be innocent, which worldly prosperity enables one to indulge. These “choke” or “smother” the word; drawing off so much of one’s attention, absorbing so much of one’s interest, and using up so much of one’s time, that only the dregs of these remain for spiritual things, and a fagged, hurried, and heartless formalism is at length all the religion of such persons. What a vivid picture is this of the mournful condition of many, especially in great commercial countries, who once promised much fruit! “They bring no fruit to perfection” (Luk_8:14); indicating how much growth there may be, in the early stages of such a case, and promise of fruit – which after all never ripens.

A.T. Robertson
Mar 4:19
The lusts of other things (hai peri ta loipa epithumiai). All the passions or longings, sensual, worldly, “pleasures of this life” (hedonon tou biou) as Luke has it (Luk_8:14), the world of sense drowning the world of spirit. The word epithumia is not evil in itself. One can yearn (this word) for what is high and holy (Luk_22:15; Phi_1:23).

A.T. Robertson
Mar 4:20
Bear fruit (karpophorousin). Same word in Mat_13:23 and Luk_8:15. Mark gives the order from thirty, sixty, to a hundred, while Mat_13:23 has it reversed.

Catena Aurea

Jerome: And it is to be noted, that as in the bad ground there were three degrees of difference, to wit, that by the way side, the stony and the thorny ground; so in the good soil there is a three-fold difference, the hundred-fold, the sixty-fold, and the thirty- fold. And in this as in that, not the substance but the will is changed, and the hearts as well of the unbelieving as the believing receive seed; as in the first case He said, “Then cometh the wicked one, and carrieth off that which is sown in the heart;” and in the second and third case of the bad soil He said, “This is he that heareth the word.” So also in the exposition of the good soil, “This is he that heareth the word.” Therefore we ought first to hear, then to understand, and after understanding to bring forth the fruits of teaching, either an hundred-fold, or sixty, or thirty.

Remig.: The thirty-fold then is borne of him who teaches faith in the Holy Trinity; the sixty-fold of him who enforces the perfection of good works; (for in the number six this world was completed with all its equipments;) [margin note: Gen_2:1] while he bears the hundred-fold who promises eternal life. For the number one hundred passes from the left hand to the right; and by the left hand the present life is denoted, by the right hand the life to come.

Otherwise, the seed of the word of God brings forth fruit thirty-fold when it begets good thoughts, sixty-fold when good speech, and an hundred-fold when it brings to the fruit of good works.

Aug., Quaest Ev., i, 9: Otherwise; There is fruit an hundred-fold of the martyrs because of their satiety of life or contempt of death; a sixty-fold fruit of virgins, because they rest not warring against the use of the flesh; for retirement is allowed to those of sixty years’ age after service in war or in public business; and there is a thirty-fold fruit of the wedded, because theirs is the age of warfare, and their struggle is the more arduous, that they should not be vanquished by their lusts.

Or otherwise; We must struggle with our love of temporal goods that reason may be master; it should either be so overcome and subject to us, that when it begins to rise it may be easily repressed, or so extinguished that it never arises in us at all. Whence it comes to pass, that death itself is despised for truth’s sake, by some with brave endurance, by others with content, and by others with gladness — which three degrees are the three degrees of fruits of the earth — thirty-fold, sixty-fold, and an hundred-fold.

And in one of these degrees must one be found at the time of his death, if any desires to depart well out of this life.

Jerome, vid. Cyp. Tr. iv. 12: The hundred-fold fruit is to be ascribed to virgins, the sixty-fold to widows and continent persons, the thirty-fold to chaste wedlock.

Adam Clarke
Mar 4:21
Is a candle – put under a bushel! – The design of my preaching is to enlighten men; my parables not being designed to hide the truth, but to make it more manifest.

Albert Barnes
Mar 4:21
Is a candle brought … – A candle is not lit up to be put immediately under a measure or a bed, where it can give no light. Its design is to give light. So my preaching by parables is not designed to obscure the truth, but to throw light on it. You should understand those parables, and, understanding them, should impart the truth to others also, as a candle throws its beams upon a dark world.

Bushel – The word here used in the original means a measure for grain containing about 12 quarts.

Bed – A couch, either to sleep on at night or to recline on at their meals. Probably the latter is here meant, and is equivalent to our saying a candle is not brought to be put “under” the table, but “on” it. See the notes at Mat_23:6.

A.T. Robertson
Mar 4:21
Not to be put on the stand? (ouch hina epi ten luchnian tethei). First aorist passive subjunctive of tithemi with hina (purpose). The lamp in the one-room house was a familiar object along with the bushel, the bed, the lampstand. Note article with each. Meti in the Greek expects the answer no. It is a curious instance of early textual corruption that both Aleph and B, the two oldest and best documents, have hupo ten luchnian (under the lampstand) instead of epi ten luchnian, making shipwreck of the sense. Westcott and Hort actually put it in the margin but that is sheer slavery to Aleph and B. Some of the crisp sayings were repeated by Jesus on other occasions as shown in Matthew and Luke. To put the lamp under the bushel (modion) would put it out besides giving no light. So as to the bed or table-couch (klinen) if it was raised above the floor and liable to be set on fire.

George Haydock
Mar 4:22 All my parables, doctrines, and actions, which appear now to you so full of mystery, shall not always be so: in due time they shall all be publicly expounded by you, my apostles, and by your successors. (Tirinus)

THEOPHYL; Having before said to His Apostles, To you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God, but to others in parables; He now shows that by them at length must the same mystery be revealed also to others, saying, No man when he has lighted a candle covers it with a vessel, or puts it under a bed.

Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown
Mar 4:22
For there is nothing hid which shall not be manifested, etc. — See on Mat_10:26, Mat_10:27; but the connection there and here is slightly different. Here the idea seems to be this – “I have privately expounded to you these great truths, but only that ye may proclaim them publicly; and if ye will not, others will. For these are not designed for secrecy. They are imparted to be diffused abroad, and they shall be so; yea, a time is coming when the most hidden things shall be brought to light.”

Marvin Vincent
Mar 4:22
Which shall not be manifested (εὰν μὴ ίνα φανερωθη) The A. V. makes Christ say that every hidden thing shall be revealed. This is wrong. He says that things are hidden in order that they may be manifested. Concealment is a means to revelation.

A.T. Robertson
Mar 4:22
Save that it should be manifested (ean me hina phanerothei). Note ean me and hina. Luk_8:17 has it that shall not be made manifest (ho ou phaneron genesetai). Here in Mark it is stated that the temporary concealment is for final manifestation and a means to that end. Those who are charged with the secret at this time are given the set responsibility of proclaiming it on the housetops after Ascension (Swete). The hidden (krupton) and the secret (apokruphon) are to be revealed in due time.

A.T. Robertson
Mar 4:23
Repeats Mar_4:9 with conditional form instead of a relative clause. Perhaps some inattention was noted.

Matthew Poole
Mar 4:24
Ver. 24,25. Whoso considereth the connection of these words,

with what measure ye mete, &c., with the first words in the verse,

Take heed what ye hear, and compares the former with the parallel texts, Mat_7:2 Luk_6:38, will wonder what the force should be of the argument. For in both the parallel texts the latter words in this verse seem to be used as an argument to persuade them to justice and charity towards men, from the punishments of the violations of the law concerning them, by way of retaliation. Nor are there any sins so ordinarily as those of that kind so punished. But they can have no such force here, following those words, Take heed what ye hear. But, as I said before, there is nothing more usual than diverse applications of the same common saying, or proverbial expression. The saying is true, whether it be understood of men or of God, As we deal with God, so will God deal with us.

Take heed what ye hear. Luke saith, how ye hear. Take heed what ye hear; as much as, Take heed to what you hear, that you may receive the word not as seed by the way side, or in thorny or stony ground, but as in good ground. This seemeth rather to be the sense of our Saviour, than to give a caution by these words to men to examine what they hear, searching the Scriptures whether what they hear doth agree with them, though that also be the duty of all conscientious persons, as appeareth from Act_17:11 For saith our Saviour, God will deal with you as to his providence as you deal with him. If you allow the word of God but a little hearing, you shall reap from it heard little profit and advantage; this appeareth to be the sense from the following words.

And unto you that hear shall more be given; that is, unto you that hear, so as you attend, understand, believe, hearken, and obey, God will give further knowledge of Divine mysteries.

THEOPHYL; But the Lord ceases not to teach us to hearken to His word, that we may be able both to constantly, meditate on it in our own minds, and to bring it forth for the instruction of others. Hence it follows, Take heed therefore how you hear; for whosoever has, to him shall be given. As if he says, Give heed with all your mind to the word which you hear, for to him who has a love of the word, shall be given also the sense of understanding what he loves; but whoso has no love of hearing the word, though he deems himself skillful either from natural genius, or the exercise of learning, will have no delight in the sweetness of wisdom; for oftentimes the slothful man is gifted with capacities, that if he neglect them he may be the more justly punished for his negligence, since that which he can obtain without labor he disdains to know, and sometimes the studious man is oppressed with slowness of apprehension, in order that the more he labors in his inquiries, the greater may be the recompense of his reward.

Albert Barnes
Mar 4:24
Take heed what ye hear – Or, consider well what you hear. Make a good improvement of it.

With what measure ye mete … – You shall be treated according to the use you make of your opportunities of learning. If you consider it well, and make a good improvement of what you hear, you shall be well rewarded. If not, your reward shall be small. This is a proverbial expression. See it explained in the notes at Mat_7:1-2.

Mete – Measure. With what measure ye measure.

Unto you that hear – To you who are “attentive,” and who improve what you hear.

John Calvin

Mar 4:26
So is the kingdom of God.Though this comparison has the same object with the two immediately preceding, yet Christ appears to direct his discourse purposely to the ministers of the word, that they may not grow indifferent about the discharge of their duty, because the fruit of their labor does not immediately appear. He holds out for their imitation the example of husbandmen, who throw seed into the ground with the expectation of reaping, and do not torment themselves with uneasiness and anxiety, but go to bed and rise again; or, in other words, pursue their ordinary and daily toil, till the corn arrive at maturity in due season. In like manner, though the seed of the word be concealed and choked for a time, Christ enjoins pious teachers to be of good courage, and not to allow their alacrity to be slackened through distrust.

Matthew Poole
Mar 4:26
Ver. 26-29. Our evangelist alone taketh notice of this parable, nor hath it any particular explication annexed. If we expound it with relation to what went before, the scope of it seemeth to be, to let us know that God will have an account of men for their hearing of his word, and therefore men had need to take heed what they hear, as Mark saith, and how they hear, as Luke phrases it: thus Mar_4:29 expounds the former, with the help of our Saviour’s exposition of the parable of the tares, on which he had told us, Mat_13:39, The harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels. There is another notion of God’s harvest, Mat_9:37 Joh_4:35, where God’s harvest signifies a people inclined and prepared to hear and to receive the gospel. But withal this parable of our Saviour’s may be of further use to us.

So is the kingdom of God, &c.; that is, Such is the providential dispensation of God, in gathering his church by the ministry of the word, as men’s casting of seed into the ground: when the husbandman hath cast his seed into the ground, he is no more solicitous about it, nor doth he expect to discern the motion of it; but having done what is his part, he sleepeth, and riseth again, leaving the issue to God’s providence.

The earth bringeth forth fruit of herself, yet not without the influence of heaven, both in the shining of the sun and the falling of the dew and of the rain; neither doth its fruit appear presently in its full ripeness and perfection, but gradually is made perfect; first there appears the blade, the herb, then the ear, then the grain, which by degrees groweth to its full magnitude, and then hardeneth, and then the husbandman putteth in his sickle: so the ministers of the gospel ought faithfully to do their parts in sowing the seed of the gospel, then not to be too solicitous, but to leave the issue unto God. Where the seed falls upon good ground, the word will not be unfruitful: the minister of the gospel doth not presently discern the fruit of his labour, he at first, it may be, seeth nothing of it, but is ready to cry out, I have laboured in vain; but though the seed lie under the clods, and seems choked with the corruption of man’s heart, yet if the soul be one to whom it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God, it shall spring out, the word will be found not to be lost; but first will spring the blade, then will appear the ear: the fruit of the word preached appears by degrees, sometimes at first only by creating good inclinations in the soul, and desires to learn the way of the Lord more perfectly, then in acts further tending to perfection, at last in confirmed habits of grace. It is not thus with all, in some the word brings forth nothing but the blade, a little outward profession, which dwindles away and dies; in some the profession holds longer, but they never come to confirmed habits of virtue and holiness. But there will come a harvest, when God will come with his sickle to reap the fruit of his seed sown; therefore men had need take heed what and how they hear. This I take to be the sense of this parable.

Adam Clarke
Mar 4:26
So is the kingdom of God – This parable is mentioned only by Mark, a proof that Mark did not abridge Matthew. Whitby supposes it to refer to the good ground spoken of before, and paraphrases is thus: – “What I have said of the seed sown upon good ground, may be illustrated by this parable. The doctrine of the kingdom, received in a good and honest heart, is like seed sown by a man in his ground, properly prepared to receive it; for when he hath sown it, he sleeps and wakes day after day, and, looking on it, he sees it spring and grow up through the virtue of the earth in which it is sown, though he knows not how it doth so; and when he finds it ripe, he reaps it, and so receives the benefit of the sown seed. So is it here: the seed sown in the good and honest heart brings forth fruit with patience; and this fruit daily increaseth, though we know not how the Word and Spirit work that increase; and then Christ the husbandman, at the time of the harvest, gathers in this good seed into the kingdom of heaven.” I see no necessity of inquiring how Christ may be said to sleep and rise night and day; Christ being like to this husbandman only in sowing and reaping the seed.

Albert Barnes
Mar 4:27
And should sleep, and rise night and day – Should sleep in the night and rise by day, for so the expression is to be understood. That is, should live in his usual way, without exerting any influence over the growing grain. By this we are not to infer that men are to use no diligence in the obtaining and in the growth of piety; but the illustration shows only that as we cannot tell how grain grows, so we cannot tell the mode in which piety increases in the heart.

He knoweth not how – This is still true. After all the researches of philosophers, no one has been able to tell the way in which grain grows. They can observe one fact after another; they can see the changes; they can see the necessity of rains and suns, of care and shelter, but beyond this they cannot go. So in religion. We can mark the change; we can see the need of prayer, and self-examination, and searching the Scriptures, and the ordinances of religion, but we cannot tell in what way the religious principle is developed and strengthened. As God unseen, yet by the use of proper means, makes the grass to flourish, so God unseen, but by proper means, nourishes the soul, and the plants of piety spring up, and bloom, and bear fruit. Compare the notes at Joh_3:8.

Adam Clarke
Mar 4:28
Bringeth forth – of herself – Αυτοματη. By its own energy, without either the influence or industry of man. All the endlessly varied herbage of the field is produced in this way.

The full corn – Πληρη σιτον, Full wheat; the perfect, full-grown, or ripe corn. Lucian uses κενος καρπος, Empty fruit, for imperfect, or unripe fruit. See Kypke.

The kingdom of God, which is generated in the soul by the word of life, under the influence of the Holy Spirit, is first very small; there is only a blade, but this is full of promise, for a good blade shows there is a good seed at bottom, and that the soil in which it is sown is good also. Then the ear – the strong stalk grows up, and the ear is formed at the top; the faith and love of the believing soul increase abundantly; it is justified freely through the redemption that is in Christ; it has the ear which is shortly to be filled with the ripe grain, the outlines of the whole image of God. Then the full corn. The soul is purified from all unrighteousness; and, having escaped the corruption that is in the world, it is made a partaker of the Divine nature, and is filled with all the fullness of God.

Albert Barnes
Mar 4:28
For the earth bringeth forth fruit of herself – That is, it is done without the power of man. It is done while man is engaged in other things. The scope of this passage does not require us to suppose that our Saviour meant to say that the earth had any productive power of itself, but only that it produced its fruits not by the “power of man.” God gives it its power. It has no power of its own. So religion in the heart is not by the power of man. It grows he cannot tell how, and of course he cannot without divine aid, control it. It is by the power of God. At the same time, as without industry man would have no harvest, so without active effort he would have no religion. Both are connected with his effort; both are to be measured commonly by his effort Phi_2:12; both grow he cannot tell how; both increase when the proper means are used, and both depend on God for increase.

First the blade – The green, tender shoot, that first starts out of the earth before the stalk is formed.

Then the ear – The original means the stalk or spire of wheat or barley, as well as the ear.

The full corn – The ripe wheat. The grain swollen to its proper size. By this is denoted, undoubtedly, that grace or religion in the heart is of gradual growth. It is at first tender, feeble, perhaps almost imperceptible, like the first shootings of the grain in the earth. Perhaps also, like grain, it often lies long in the earth before there are signs of life. Like the tender grain, also, it needs care, kindness, and culture. A frost, a cold storm, or a burning sun alike injure it. So tender piety in the heart needs care, kindness, culture. It needs shelter from the frosts and storms of a cold, unfeeling world. It needs the genial dews and mild suns of heaven; in other words, it needs instruction, prayer, and friendly counsel from parents, teachers, ministers, and experienced Christians, that it may grow, and bring forth the full fruits of holiness. Like the grain, also, in due time it will grow strong; it will produce its appropriate fruit – a full and rich harvest – to the praise of God.

Adam Clarke
Mar 4:29
He putteth in the sickle – ΑποϚελλει, he sendeth out the sickle, i.e. the reapers; the instrument, by a metonomy, being put for the persons who use it. This is a common figure. It has been supposed that our Lord intimates here that, as soon as a soul is made completely holy, it is taken into the kingdom of God. But certainly the parable does not say so. When the corn is ripe, it is reaped for the benefit of him who sowed it; for it can be of little or no use till it be ripe: so when a soul is saved from all sin, it is capable of being fully employed in the work of the Lord: it is then, and not till then, fully fitted for the Master’s use. God saves men to the uttermost, that they may here perfectly love him, and worthily magnify his name. To take them away the moment they are capable of doing this, would be, so far, to deprive the world and the Church of the manifestation of the glory of his grace. “But the text says, he immediately sendeth out the sickle; and this means that the person dies, and is taken into glory, as soon as he is fit for it.” No, for there may be millions of cases, where, though to die would be gain, yet to live may be far better for the Church, and for an increase of the life of Christ to the soul. See Phi_1:21, Phi_1:24. Besides, if we attempt to make the parable speak here what seems to be implied in the letter, then we may say, with equal propriety, that Christ sleeps and wakes alternately; and that his own grace grows, he knows not how, in the heart in which he has planted it.

On these two parables we may remark: -

1. That a preacher is a person employed by God, and sent out to sow the good seed of his kingdom in the souls of men.

2. That it is a sin against God to stay in the field and not sow.

3. That it is a sin to pretend to sow, when a man is not furnished by the keeper of the granary with any more seed.

4. That it is a high offense against God to change the Master’s seed, to mix it, or to sow bad seed in the place of it.

5. That he is not a seeds-man of God who desires to sow by the way side, etc., and not on the proper ground, i.e. he who loves to preach only to genteel congregations, to people of sense and fashion, and feels it a pain and a cross to labor among the poor and the ignorant.

6. That he who sows with a simple, upright heart, the seed of his Master, shall (though some may be unfruitful) see the seed take deep root; and, notwithstanding the unfaithfulness and sloth of many of his hearers, he shall doubtless come with rejoicing, bringing his sheaves with him. See Quesnel.

Albert Barnes
Mar 4:29
Immediately he putteth in the sickle – This is the way with the farmer. As soon as the grain is ripe it is cut down. So it is often with the Christian. As soon as he is prepared for heaven he is taken there. But we are not to press this part of the parable, as if it meant that all are removed as soon as they are fit for heaven. Every parable contains circumstances thrown in to fill up the story, which cannot be literally interpreted. In this, the circumstance of sleeping and rising cannot be applied to Christ; and in like manner, the harvest, I suppose, is not to be literally interpreted. Perhaps the whole parable may be differently interpreted. The seed sown may mean the gospel which he was preaching. In Judea its beginnings were small; yet he would leave it, commit it to his disciples, and return to his Father. The gospel, in the meantime, left by him, would take root, spring up, and produce an abundant harvest. In due time he would return, send forth the angels, and gather in the harvest, and save his people forever. Compare the notes at Mat_13:31-33.

Catena Aurea
Mar 4:30-32
Jerome: The man who sows is by most understood to be the Saviour, who sows the seed in the minds of believers; by others the man himself who sows in his field, that is, in his own heart. Who indeed is he that soweth, but our own mind and understanding, which receiving the grain of preaching, and nurturing it by the dew of faith, makes it to spring up in the field of our own breast?

“Which is the least of all seeds.” The Gospel preaching is the least of all the systems of the schools; at first view it has not even the appearance of truth, announcing a man as God, God put to death, and proclaiming the offence of the cross. Compare this teaching with the dogmas of the Philosophers, with their books, the splendour of their eloquence, the polish of their style, and you will see how the seed of the Gospel is the least of all seeds.

Chrys.: Or; The seed of the Gospel is the least of seeds, because the disciples were weaker than the whole of mankind; yet forasmuch as there was great might in them, their preaching spread throughout the whole world.

And therefore it follows, “But when it is grown it is the greatest among herbs,” that is among dogmas.

Aug.: Dogmas are the decisions of sects [margin note: placita sectarum], the points, that is, that they have determined.

Jerome: For the dogmas of Philosophers when they have grown up, shew nothing of life or strength, but watery and insipid they grow into grasses and other greens, which quickly dry up and wither away. But the Gospel preaching, though it seem small in its beginning, when sown in the mind of the hearer, or upon the world, comes up not a garden herb, but a tree, so that the birds of the air (which we must suppose to be either the souls of believers or the Powers of God set free from slavery) come and abide in its branches. The branches of the Gospel tree which have grown of the grain of mustard seed, I suppose to signify the various dogmas in which each of the birds (as explained above) takes his rest. [margin note: Psa_55:6]

Let us then take the wings of the dove, that flying aloft we may dwell in the branches of this tree, and may make ourselves nests of doctrines, and soaring above earthly things may hasten towards heavenly.

Hilary: Or; The Lord compares Himself to a grain of mustard seed, sharp to the taste, and the least of all seeds, whose strength is extracted by bruising.

Greg., Mor., xix, 1: Christ Himself is the grain of mustard seed, who, planted in the garden of the sepulchre, grew up a great tree; He was a grain of seed when He died, and a tree when He rose again; a grain of seed in the humiliation of the flesh, a tree in the power of His majesty.

Hilary: This grain then when sown in the field, that is, when seized by the people and delivered to death, and as it were buried in the ground by a sowing of the body, grew up beyond the size of all herbs, and exceeded all the glory of the Prophets. For the preaching of the Prophets was allowed as it were herbs to a sick man; but now the birds of the air lodge in the branches of the tree. By which we understand the Apostles, who put forth of Christ’s might, and overshadowing the world with their boughs, are a tree to which the Gentiles flee in hope of life, and having been long tossed by the winds, that is by the spirits of the Devil, may have rest in its branches.

Greg.: “The birds lodge in its branches,” when holy souls that raise themselves aloft from thoughts of earth on the wings of the virtues, breathe again from the troubles of this life in their words and comfortings.

Albert Barnes
Mar 4:30
Whereunto shall we liken … – This shows the great solicitude which Jesus had to adapt his instructions to the capacity of his disciples. He sought out the most plain and striking illustrations – an example which should be followed by all the ministers of the gospel. At the same time that the instructions of the pulpit should be dignified as our Saviour’s always were they should be adapted to the capacity of the audience and easily understood. To do this the following things are necessary in a minister:

1.“Humility.” A freedom from a desire to shine, and to astonish the world by the splendor of his talents, and by his learning and eloquence.

2. “Good sense.” A satisfaction in being understood.

3. Acquaintance with the habits of thought and manner of speaking among the people. To do this, frequent contact with them is necessary.

4. “A good sound education.” It is the people of ignorance, with some smattering of learning, and with a desire to confound and astonish people by the use of unintelligible words. and by the introduction of matter that is wholly unconnected with the subject, that most often shoot over the heads of the people. Preachers of humility, good sense, and education are content with being understood, and free from the affectation of saying things to amaze and confound their auditors.

Albert Barnes
Mar 4:31-32
The kingdom of heavens See the notes at Mat_3:2. It means here either piety in a renewed heart or the church. In either case the commencement is small. In the heart it is at first feeble, easily injured, and much exposed. In the church there were few at first, ignorant, unknown, and unhonored; yet soon it was to spread through the world.

Grain of mustard-seed – The plant here described was very different from that which is known among us. It was several years before it bore fruit and became properly a tree. Mustard, with us, is an annual plant: it is always small, and is properly an herb. The Hebrew writers speak of the mustard-tree as one on which they could “climb,” as on a fig-tree. Its size was much owing to the climate. All plants of that nature grow much larger in a warm climate, like that of Palestine, than in colder regions. The seeds of this tree were remarkably small, so that they, with the great size of the plant, were an apt illustration of the progress of the church and of the nature of faith, Mat_17:20.

Young converts often suppose they have much religion. It is not so. They are, indeed, in a new world. Their hearts glow with new affections. They have an elevation, an ecstasy of emotion, which they may not have afterward like a blind man suddenly restored to sight. The sensation is new and especially vivid, yet little is seen distinctly. His impressions are indeed more vivid and cheering than those of him who has long seen and to whom objects are familiar. In a little time, too, the young convert will see more distinctly, will judge more intelligently, will love more strongly, though not with so much “new emotion,” and will be prepared to make more sacrifices for the cause of Christ.

Marvin Vincent
Mar 4:32
Groweth up
Mark only.
Herbs (των λαχάνων)
Rev., rightly, the herbs; those which people are wont to plant in their gardens. The word denotes garden – or pot-herbs, as distinguished from wild herbs.

Shooteth out great branches (ποιει κλάδους μεγάλους)
Lit., maketh, etc. Rev., putteth out. Peculiar to Mark. Matthew has becometh a tree. On branches, see note on Mat_24:32. One of the Talmudists describes the mustard-plant as a tree, of which the wood was sufficient to cover a potter’s shed. Another says that he was wont to climb into it as men climb into a fig-tree. Professor Hackett says that on the plain of Akka, toward Carmel, he found a collection of mustard-plants from six to nine feet high, with branches from each side of a trunk an inch or more in thickness. Dr. Thomson relates that near the bank of the Jordan he found a mustard-tree more than twelve feet high.

Lodge (κατασκηνουν)
See on Mat_8:20. Lit., pitch their tents.

A.T. Robertson
Mar 4:32
Groweth up (anabainei). Mat_13:32 When it is grown (hotan auxethei).
Under the shadow thereof (hupo ten skian autou). A different picture from Matthew’s in the branches thereof (en tois kladois autou). But both use kataskenoin, to tent or camp down, make nests in the branches in the shade or hop on the ground under the shade just like a covey of birds. In Mat_8:20 the birds have nests (kataskenoseis). The use of the mustard seed for smallness seems to have been proverbial and Jesus employs it elsewhere (Mat_17:20; Luk_17:6).

Gospel of Luke Chapter 2:8-15, 25-35 Sunday School Notes

These are some of my notes for Sunday December 20, 2009 in the Lifeway Explore the Bible series.

Books referenced in these notes are:

1. Birth of the Messiah, Anchor Yale 1999, by Raymond Brown

2. Baker New Testament Commentary Series: Luke by William Hendriksen and Simon Kistemaker

3. NIV Application Commentary: Luke, Zondervan 1996 by Darrell Bock

4. New Testament Text and Translation Commentary by Philip Comfort

5.  NET Bible from Bible dot org, also available from CBD

6. IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament, by Craig Keener

Luke 2:8-15
Angelic host’s testimony to the shepherds of Jesus’ birth is significant in its scope. Angels were the most exalted and mysterious inhabitants of Heaven, while the shepherds represent the most lowly of earthly dwellers. Thus God’s action is shown to affect the entire created order, from top to bottom.(Bock)

The angelic announcement here is the third in Luke (Lk 1:5-25, 26-38). The pattern is the usual one: appearance (9a), fear (9b), “don’t fear” remark (10-11), and the giving of a verifying sign (12). That the announcement is called “good news” has its cultural place, since the birth of the emperor Augustus was termed “good news” and the arrival of a “savior”. Thus the announcement of Jesus indicates His own greatness, and perhaps a counter claim to that of the emperors.(Bock)

The titles the angel gives to Jesus are important:

1.Savior (soter) reflects Jesus’ call to deliver His people, as in Mary and Zechariah’s songs (Lk 1:46-55, 67-79). Savior in the OT is often used of God (Deu 20:4, Josh 12:22; Ps 24:5, 25:5; Is 25:9). Among the Greeks saviors included rulers, doctors and philosophers. (Bock)

2.Christ(christos), “anointed” shows Jesus as the promised Messiah (adaptation of Hebrew Mashiach). Messiah is a rare term in the OT, most prominent in Ps 2:2. Luke uses it often: (Lk 1:27, 31-35, 68-72, 79, 2:4).(Bock)

3.Lord (kurios) is the most ambiguous title, seemingly a simple “sir or lord”, but the rest of this Gospel and its sequel Acts will demonstrate that it is in fact a form of the divine LORD, and the extent of Jesus’ lordship. (Bock)

That the angels give the shepherds a sign shows it was meant for them to see for themselves. It also is the third given sign, fitting the angelic appearance pattern (1:19-20, 36)(Bock)

The notion of shepherds being a despised class is actually from Jewish legal code centuries later than the NT, which takes a positive view of them (Matt 18:12, Mark 6:34, Lk 15:4, Jn 10:2-5; Eph 4:11; Heb 13:2; 1 Pet 2:25)(Bock)

Glory to God in the highest” is a mixed saying, indicating:

1.God’s exalted nature

2.That the residents of highest heaven should praise God.(Bock)

Peace to them God favors, toward whom God has good will, shows that there is benefit in Christ’s coming, but only for those among His chosen.(Bock)

Luke 2:8
Region/country: Greek chora, open country. Now said to be Shepherd’s Fields, two miles from Bethlehem. Based on open country sheep tending, people have always claimed Jesus was born between March and November. As early as Clement of Alexandria (c.200 AD) it was suggested Jesus’ birthday was May 20 or April 20-21 (Stromata I 21) On the other hand, even today sheep are sometimes seen in Shepherds Field at Christmas time. Since ancient times Mal 4:2 has been used as a sort of allegorical justification for celebrating Jesus’ birth during a solar event.(Brown, Hendriksen)

The sheep would be let out in the field during the day to eat grass, but at night they were probably put into pens or sheepfolds to protect them from weather, predators, and thieves. The shepherds’ took shifts watching the sheep 24/7, some sleeping in huts of branches perhaps while the others watched.(Hendriksen)

Luke 2:9
Angel of the Lord: In OT, “angel of the LORD” is a way of describing God’s visible presence among men. It is in post exilic Judaism that angels become distinct personal agents of God, servant spirits. For earlier interchangeable God and angel passages, see Gen 16:7 and 13, Gen 22:11 and 14, Ex 3:2 and 4, Jud 6:12 and 14. (Brown)

Angelic host’s testimony to the shepherds of Jesus’ birth is significant in its scope. Angels were the most exalted and mysterious inhabitants of Heaven, while the shepherds represent the most lowly of earthly dwellers. Thus God’s action is shown to affect the entire created order, from top to bottom.(Bock)

Luke 2:10
All people: Some see Gentiles included here, citing Acts 15:14, 18:10. But the Davidic Savior is likely most related to the people of Israel, “all” presumably meaning all classes of Israelites. (Brown)

See Is 52:7 for cross reference(Brown)

Luke 2:11
This day/today: now. Implied sense of “time finally fulfilled”.(Brown)

City of David: This usually means Jerusalem (2 Sam 5:7,9), but the shepherd’s presumably being Bethlehemites, David’s family seat and birth city what would come to mind from “city of David”.(Brown)

Christ, Lord: Greek Christos Kurios. Also “Christ the Lord” or “the Anointed Lord”. This occurs in the Greek OT at Lam 4:20 as a mistranslation of the original Hebrew and also in the pseudepigrahia Ps of Solomon 17:36. Some suggest a mistranslation here of christos kuriou “the anointed of the LORD”, caused by the use of abbreviations called nomina sacra, which were used even in very early NT manuscripts to abbreviate what were considered divine names , such as “Jesus, lord, Christ, God”. (Brown)

Luke is unusual in using “lord” of Jesus fourteen times, when Matthew and Mark use it only one each for Jesus.(Brown)

See Is 9:5 for cross reference. (Brown)

Luke 2:12
Baby: Greek brephos, “foetus or newborn child”. Greek paidion “infant or young child” is first used of Jesus in Luke at 2:17. See Is 1:3 for cross reference.(Brown)

Luke 2:14
In the highest/highest heaven: Greek hupsistos, “highest, supreme, ultimate”. Nowadays often translated “highest heaven” to make clear “highest” relates to God, not the sort of glory/praise due Him. (Brown)

Textual variant:
anthropois eudokia goodwill toward/among men/human beings/people
S2 B2 L Theta Majority Eusebius
(N)KJV

anthropois eudokias
men/human beings/people of (God’s) pleasure/favor/goodwill
S A B D W Cop(sa)
(N)RSV ESV NASB (T)NIV (R)NEB NJB NAB NLT HCSB NET

The manuscript support for “men of His/God’s favor” is uncommonly strong. This is a Semitic expression confirmed by at least two quotes from the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Coptic Sahidic translation. It also explains the majority reading, because the particularist notion of God favoring some and gifting them with peace is a “hard saying” some scribes would likely change. See Eph. 1:4-9 for a classic text on goodwill and election.(Comfort)

Luke 2:22
Textual variant:
tou katharismou auton
the purification of them
S A B L W Theta f1,13 Majority
(N)RSV ESV NASB NIV (R)NEB NJB NAB NLT HCSB NET

tou katharismou
the purification
435 Cop(bo)
TNIV

tou katharismou autes
her purification
76
(N)KJV

The favored reading “their purification” is a problem because Lev. 12:6 only mentions the mother’s purification after childbirth, not the father or the child. This lead to variants of “his” “her” and “the”. The KJV got the very poorly attested “her” from Beza’s Greek NT, which got it from Erasmus, who likely looked at the Latin eius (which can be either masculine or feminine) and chose the feminine as most appropriate. Indeed the suspicion is that “her” in late Greek manuscripts came about by back- translating from the Latin.(Comfort, NET)

Their purification: Either includes Mary and Joseph (because Joseph ceremonially defiled himself aiding Mary during Jesus’ delivery, but there is no literature about men being defiled in childbirth. Or Luke considered the whole purification process a family affair) or as Origen long ago suggested, Mary and Jesus, Luke mixing Mary’s purification rite with Jesus’ rite of redemption as His family’s firstborn into one process.(Brown, Comfort)

Luke 2:24
Pair of doves or two young pigeons: These are the only birds termed acceptable in the Law for sacrifice. That a second bird was substituted for a lamb indicates that Mary and Joseph were not well-off financially. Mary would lay hands on the birds, and one would simply have it’s neck rung, the other killed then burnt as a whole offering.(Brown, Keener)

The presentation of Jesus as the firstborn is from Ex 13:1, 11. The law is changed with the creation of the Levite priestly class in Num 18:15-16, which allowed the firstborns of Israel to be freed from service to God for five sheckels or twenty denarius, equivalent to twenty days’ wages for a soldier or common laborer.(Brown)

Luke 2:25
Simeon’s readiness to die after seeing Jesus has always lead people to believe he was an old man at this point, as does his blessing of Mary and Joseph, since it is the greater person who usually gives the blessing.(Brown)

Righteous: Greek dikaios, also used to describe John the Baptist’s parents and Joseph.(Brown)

Devout: Greek eulabes, careful of religious duties. Often used secularly to describe worthy politicians in ancient Greece and Rome, rather like “Christian” or “religious” is used today.(Brown)

Israel’s consolation: See Is 40:1, 66:12-13, Is 52:9(Brown)

Luke 2:26
Revealed: Greek chrematizein, a divine oracle, such as Acts 10:22. (Brown)

Luke 2:27
Guided by the Spirit: Literally “in the Spirit”. (Brown)

Temple complex: Either the Court of the Gentiles or the Court of Women, those being where Mary was allowed to go within the Temple grounds.

Customary under the law: the firstborn child’s presentation and redemption, as discussed above in verse 24.(Brown)

Luke 2:29
Slave/servant: Greek doulos, used of mine slaves who were worked to death and household slaves who were virtual step-children and might inherit from their owners. Thus a hard term to translate, except to note it is different from the common notion of slavery in the American South.(Brown)

depart/dismiss- euphemism for die, Greek apolyein (Greek OT Num 20:39)(Brown)

Luke 2:31
All peoples: Is 52:10 says “all nations”. Some think this means “all classes of Jews”, but it is more commonly thought to include the two groups in 2:32: Gentiles and Jews, thus, all the world.(Brown)

Luke 2:32
Light and glory both speak of illumination and light, but the sense here are different for each group. “Light” to the Gentiles presupposing taken them from darkness so they see, a reference to the common notion of Gentiles as morally corrupt. “Glory” to Israel is bringing the people and especially their religion into a spotlight, honoring it and them.(Brown)

See Is 52:9-10, 49:6, 46:13, 42:6, 40:5 for cross reference(Brown)

Luke 2:33
Were astonished: Why still surprised after angels and shepherds’ visits? Simply because they were normal people, caught up in fantastic things.

Luke 2:34
Blessed them: This make some people think Simeon was a priest, but he is also apparently much the parents’ elder and a devout man, so blessing them would be a natural gesture even for a layman.(Brown)

Fall and rise: Rise is Greek anastasis, more usually used of “resurrection”, here opposed to fall’s connotation of “destruction”.(Brown)

Many: short of all, but still indicating a cross-section of the whole nation of Israel.(Brown)

Luke 2:35
Sword: Some manuscripts say “spear” here, taking a cue from John 19:34 and 19:25-27.(Brown)

The saying about a sword piercing Mary’s own soul has created a bushel of interpretations. Brown notes eight different ones which he rejects. He goes to Ezekiel for his interpretation, citing Ezk 14:17 as the nearest equivalent, and several others to show a sword is not only destructive, but discriminatory (Ezk 5:1-2, 6:8-9, 12:14-16). He then cites Matt 10:34-36 and the Lukan form in 12:51-53 to show Jesus’ application of a divisive sword. This is then related to Mark 3:31-35’s saying about Jesus’ true family being believers, which seems to put Mary and Jesus’ brothers outside the circle at the time. The Lukan version (Lk 8:19-21) is not so harsh, and of course Acts 1:13-15 reveals Mary and the brothers among the followers in the upper room after the Ascension, to say nothing of James’ role as head of the Jerusalem church and Jude’s traditional authorship of the epistle with his name. Thus the sword is a metaphor for the divisiveness Jesus will cause among people.(Brown)

Thoughts: Greek dialogismos, used thirteen times in NT, all negative: bad thoughts, vain thoughts, doubts. This relates back to v.34’s opposed/spoken against.(Brown)

The Danger of Overstuffed Book Shelves…

…is you think you don’t have something, only to look behind the first row of books and discover you have one of the more exhaustive volumes in print on a subject which you should have started studying days ago.

In this case, I’m glad the Good Lord had my better angel(s) keep me from ordering and Gospel of Luke commentaries, because it saved me a nice chunk of change. I just wish He’d pointed out my copy of  Raymond Brown’s Birth of the Messiah last Thursday, so I wouldn’t be so rushed trying to make notes this week.

Gospel of Luke Chapter 2:8-15, 25-35 Antique Commentary Quotes

Luke 2:8-12

CATENA AUREA

THEOPHYL; The infancy of the Savior was impressed upon us, both by frequent heraldings of Angels and testimonies of Evangelists, that we might be the more deeply penetrated in our hearts by what has been done for us. And we may observe, that the sign given us of the newborn Savior was, that He would be found not clothed in Tyrian purple, but wrapped in poor swaddling clothes, not laying on gilded couches, but in a manger.

MAXIMUS; But if perhaps the swaddling clothes are mean in your eyes, admire the Angels singing praises together If you despises” tile manger, raise your eyes a little, and behold the new star in heaven proclaiming to the world the Lord’s nativity. If you believe the mean things, believe also the mighty. If you dispute about those which betoken His lowliness, look with reverence on what is high and heavenly.

GREG. It was in a mystery that the angel appeared to the shepherds while they were watching, and the glory of the Lord shone round about them, implying that they are thought worthy above the rest to see sublime things who take a watchful care of their faithful flocks; and while they themselves are piously watching over them, the Divine grace shines widely round about them.

THEOPHYL; For in a mystery, those shepherds, and their flocks, signify all teachers and guides of faithful souls. The night in which they were keeping watch over their flocks, indicates the dangerous temptations from which they never cease to keep themselves, and those placed under their care. Well also at the birth of our Lord do shepherds watch over their flocks; for He was born who says, I am the good Shepherd: but the time also was at hand in which the same Shepherd was to recall His scattered sheep to the pastures of life.

ORIGEN; But if we would rise to a more hidden meaning, I should say, that there were certain shepherd angels, who direct the affairs of men, and while each one of them was keeping his watch, an angel came at the birth of the Lord, and announced to the shepherds that the true Shepherd had arisen. For Angels before the coming of the Savior could bring little help to those entrusted to them, for scarcely did one single Gentile believe in God. But now whole nations come to the faith of Jesus.

John Calvin
Luk 2:8
8.And there were shepherds It would have been to no purpose that Christ was born in Bethlehem, if it had not been made known to the world. But the method of doing so, which is described by Luke, appears to the view of men very unsuitable. First, Christ is revealed but to a few witnesses, and that too amidst the darkness of night. Again, though God had, at his command, many honorable and distinguished witnesses, he passed by them, and chose shepherds, persons of humble rank, and of no account among men. Here the reason and wisdom of the flesh must prove to be foolishness; and we must acknowledge, that “the foolishness of God” (1Co_1:25 ) excels all the wisdom that exists, or appears to exist, in the world. But this too was a part of the “emptying of himself,” (Phi_2:6 ) not that any part of Christ’s glory should be taken away by it, but that it should lie in concealment for a time. Again, as Paul reminds us, that the gospel is mean according to the flesh, “that our faith should stand” in the power of the Spirit, not in the “lofty words of human wisdom,” or in any worldly splendor, (1Co_2:4;) so this inestimable “treasure” has been deposited by God, from the beginning, “in earthen vessels,” (2Co_4:7,) that he might more fully try the obedience of our faith. If then we desire to come to Christ, let us not be ashamed to follow those whom the Lord, in order to cast down the pride of the world, has taken, from among the dung of cattle, to be our instructors.

Adam Clarke
Luk 2:8
There were – shepherds abiding in the field – There is no intimation here that these shepherds were exposed to the open air. They dwelt in the fields where they had their sheep penned up; but they undoubtedly had tents or booths under which they dwelt.

Keeping watch – by night – Or, as in the margin, keeping the watches of the night, i.e. each one keeping a watch (which ordinarily consisted of three hours) in his turn. The reason why they watched them in the field appears to have been, either to preserve the sheep from beasts of prey, such as wolves, foxes, etc., or from freebooting banditti, with which all the land of Judea was at that time much infested. It was a custom among the Jews to send out their sheep to the deserts, about the passover, and bring them home at the commencement of the first rain: during the time they were out, the shepherds watched them night and day. As the passover occurred in the spring, and the first rain began early in the month of Marchesvan, which answers to part of our October and November, we find that the sheep were kept out in the open country during the whole of the summer. And as these shepherds had not yet brought home their flocks, it is a presumptive argument that October had not yet commenced, and that, consequently, our Lord was not born on the 25th of December, when no flocks were out in the fields; nor could he have been born later than September, as the flocks were still in the fields by night. On this very ground the nativity in December should be given up. The feeding of the flocks by night in the fields is a chronological fact, which casts considerable light upon this disputed point. See the quotations from the Talmudists in Lightfoot.

The time in which Christ was born has been considered a subject of great importance among Christians. However, the matter has been considered of no moment by Him who inspired the evangelists; as not one hint is dropped on the subject, by which it might be possible even to guess nearly to the time, except the chronological fact mentioned above. A late writer makes the following remark: “The first Christians placed the baptism of Christ about the beginning of the fifteenth year of Tiberius; and thence reckoning back thirty years, they placed his birth in the forty-third year of the Julian period, the forty-second of Augustus, and the twenty-eighth after the victory at Actium. This opinion obtained till a.d. 527, when Dionysius Exiguus invented the vulgar account. Learned and pious men have trifled egregiously on this subject, making that of importance which the Holy Spirit, by his silence, has plainly informed them is of none. Fabricius gives a catalogue of no less than 136 different opinions concerning the Year of Christ’s birth: and as to his birth Day, that has been placed by Christian sects and learned men in every month in the year. The Egyptians placed it in January – Wagenseil, in February – Bochart, in March – some, mentioned by Clemens Alexandrinus, in April – others, in May – Epiphanius speaks of some who placed it in June – and of others who supposed it to have been in July – Wagenseil, who was not sure of February, fixed it probably in August – Lightfoot, on the 15th of September – Scaliger, Casaubon, and Calvisius, in October – others, in November – but the Latin Church, supreme in power, and infallible in judgment, placed it on the 25th of December, the very day on which the ancient Romans celebrated the feast of their goddess Bruma.” See more in Robinson’s Notes on Claude’s Essay, vol. i. p. 275, etc. Pope Julius I. was the person who made this alteration, and it appears to have been done for this reason: the sun now began his return towards the northern tropic, ending the winter, lengthening the short days, and introducing the spring. All this was probably deemed emblematical of the rising of the Sun of righteousness on the darkness of this world, and causing the day-spring from on high to visit mankind.

Albert Barnes
Luk 2:8
The same country – Round about Bethlehem.

Shepherds – Men who tended flocks of sheep.

Abiding in the field – Remaining out of doors, under the open sky, with their flocks. This was commonly done. The climate was mild, and, to keep their flocks from straying, they spent the night with them. It is also a fact that the Jews sent out their flocks into the mountainous and desert regions during the summer months, and took them up in the latter part of October or the first of November, when the cold weather commenced. While away in these deserts and mountainous regions, it was proper that there should be someone to attend them to keep them from straying, and from the ravages of wolves and other wild beasts. It is probable from this that our Saviour was born before the 25th of December, or before what we call “Christmas.” At that time it is cold, and especially in the high and mountainous regions about Bethlehem. But the exact time of his birth is unknown; there is no way to ascertain it. By different learned men it has been fixed at each month in the year. Nor is it of consequence to “know” the time; if it were, God would have preserved the record of it. Matters of moment are clearly revealed; those which “he” regards as of no importance are concealed.

Keeping watch … – More literally, “tending their flocks “by turns” through the night watches.”

John Calvin
Luk 2:9
9.And, lo, the angel of the Lord came upon themHe says, that the glory of the Lord shone aroundthe shepherds, by which they perceived him to be an angel. For it would have been of little avail to be told by an angel what is related by Luke, if God had not testified, by some outward sign, that what they heard proceeded from Him. The angel appeared, not in an ordinary form, or without majesty, but surrounded with the brightness of heavenly glory, to affect powerfully the minds of the shepherds, that they might receive the discourse which was addressed to them, as coming from the mouth of God himself. Hence the fear, of which Luke shortly afterwards speaks, by which God usually humbles the hearts of men, (as I have formerly explained,) and disposes them to receive his word with reverence.

Adam Clarke
Luk 2:9
The angel of the Lord came upon them – Or, stood over them, επεστη. It is likely that the angel appeared in the air at some little distance above them, and that from him the rays of the glory of the Lord shone round about them, as the rays of light are projected from the sun.

They were sore afraid – Terrified with the appearance of so glorious a being, and probably fearing that he was a messenger of justice, coming to denounce Divine judgments, or punish them immediately, for sins with which their consciences would not fail, on such an occasion, to reproach them.

Albert Barnes
Luk 2:9
The glory of the Lord – This is the same as a “great” glory – that is, a splendid appearance or “light.” The word “glory” is often the same as light, 1Co_15:41; Luk_9:31; Act_22:11. The words “Lord” and “God” are often used to denote “greatness” or “intensity.” Thus, “trees of God” mean great trees; “hills of God,” high or lofty hills, etc. So “the glory of the Lord” here means an exceedingly great or bright luminous appearance perhaps not unlike what Paul saw on the way to Damascus.

John Calvin
Luk 2:10
10.Fear not The design of this exhortation is to alleviate their fear. For, though it is profitable for the minds of men to be struck with awe, that they may learn to “give unto the Lord the glory due unto his name,” (Psa_29:2;) yet they have need, at the same time, of consolation, that they may not be altogether overwhelmed. For the majesty of God could not but swallow up the whole world, if there were not some mildness to mitigate the terror which it brings. And so the reprobate fall down lifeless at the sight of God, because he appears to them in no other character than that of a judge. But to revive the minds of the shepherds, the angel declares that he was sent to them for a different purpose, to announce to them the mercy of God. When men hear this single word, that God is reconciled to them, it not only raises up those who are fallen down, but restores those who were ruined, and recalls them from death to life.

The angel opens his discourse by saying, that he announces great joy; and next assigns the ground or matter of joy, that a Savior is born. These words show us, first, that, until men have peace with God, and are reconciled to him through the grace of Christ, all the joy that they experience is deceitful, and of short duration. Ungodly men frequently indulge in frantic and intoxicating mirth; but if there be none to make peace between them and God, the hidden stings of conscience must produce fearful torment. Besides, to whatever extent they may flatter themselves in luxurious indulgence, their own lusts are so many tormentors. The commencement of solid joy is, to perceive the fatherly love of God toward us, which alone gives tranquility to our minds. And this “joy,” in which, Paul tells us, “the kingdom of God” consists, is “in the Holy Spirit,” (Rom_14:17.) By calling it great joy, he shows us, not only that we ought, above all things, to rejoice in the salvation brought us by Christ, but that this blessing is so great and boundless, as fully to compensate for all the pains, distresses, and anxieties of the present life. Let us learn to be so delighted with Christ alone, that the perception of his grace may overcome, and at length remove from us, all the distresses of the flesh.

Which shall be to all the people. Though the angel addresses the shepherds alone, yet he plainly states, that the message of salvation which he brings is of wider extent, so that not only they, in their private capacity, may hear it, but that others may also hear. Now let it be understood, that this joy was common to all people, because, it was indiscriminately offered to all. For God had promised Christ, not to one person or to another, but to the whole seed of Abraham. If the Jews were deprived, for the most part, of the joy that was offered to them, it arose from their unbelief; just as, at the present day, God invites all indiscriminately to salvation through the Gospel, but the ingratitude of the world is the reason why this grace, which is equally offered to all, is enjoyed by few. Although this joy is confined to a few persons, yet, with respect to God, it is said to be common. When the angel says that this joy shall be to all the people, he speaks of the chosen people only; but now that, the middle wall of partition” (Eph_2:14 ) has been thrown down, the same message has reference to the whole human race. For Christ proclaims peace, not only, to them that are nigh, “but to them that are, far off,” (Eph_2:17,) to “strangers” (Eph_2:12 ) equally with citizens. But as the peculiar covenant with the Jews lasted till the resurrection of Christ, so the angel separates them from the rest of the nations.

Adam Clarke
Luk 2:10
Behold, I bring you good tidings – I am not come to declare the judgments of the Lord, but his merciful loving-kindness, the subject being a matter of great joy. He then declares his message. Unto you – to the Jews first, and then to the human race. Some modern MSS. with the utmost impropriety read ἡμιν, us, as if angels were included in this glorious work of redemption; but St. Paul says, he took not upon him the nature of angels, but the seed of Abraham, i.e. the nature of Abraham and his posterity, the human nature; therefore the good news is to you, – and not to yourselves exclusively, for it is to all people, to all the inhabitants of this land, and to the inhabitants of the whole earth.

A.T. Robertson
Luk 2:10
I bring you good tidings of great joy (euaggelizomai humin charan megalen). Wycliff, “I evangelize to you a great joy.” The active verb euaggelizo occurs only in late Greek writers, lxx, a few papyri examples, and the N.T. The middle (deponent) appears from Aristophanes on. Luke and Paul employ both substantive euaggelion and verb euaggelizo very frequently. It is to Paul’s influence that we owe their frequency and popularity in the language of Christendom (George Milligan, The Epistles to the Thessalonians, p. 143). The other Gospels do not have the verb save Mat_11:5 and that in a quotation (Isa_61:1).

John Calvin
Luk 2:11
11.This day is born to you Here, as we lately hinted, the angel expresses the cause of the joy. This day is born the Redeemer long ago promised, who was to restore the Church of God to its proper condition. The angel does not speak of it as a thing altogether unknown. He opens his embassy by referring to the Law and the Prophets; for had he been addressing heathens or irreligious persons, it would have been of no use to employ this mode of speaking: this day is born to you a Savior, who is Christ the Lord For the same reason, he mentions that he was born in the city of David, which could serve no purpose, but to recall the remembrance of those promises which were universally known among the Jews. Lastly, the angel adapted his discourse to hearers who were not altogether unacquainted with the promised redemption. With the doctrine of the Law and the Prophets he joined the Gospel, as emanating from the same source. Now, since the Greek word Greek, as Cicero assures us, has a more extensive meaning than the Latin word Servator, and as there is no Latin noun that corresponds to it, I thought it better to employ a barbarous term, than to take anything away from the power of Christ. And I have no doubt, that the author of the Vulgate, and the ancient doctors of the Church, had the same intention. Christ is called Savior, because he bestows a complete salvation. The pronoun to you is very emphatic; for it would have given no great delight to hear that the Author of salvation was born, unless each person believed that for himself he was born. In the same manner Isaiah says, “Unto us a child is born, unto us a Son is given,” (Isa_9:6;) and Zechariah, “Behold, thy King cometh unto thee lowly,” (Zec_9:9.)

Adam Clarke
Luk 2:11
A Savior, which is Christ the Lord – A Savior, σωτηρ, the same as Jesus from σωζειν, to make safe, to deliver, preserve, to make alive, thus used by the Septuagint for החיה hecheiah, to cause to escape; used by the same for פלט to confide in, to hope. See the extensive acceptations of the verb in Mintert, who adds under Σωτηρ: “The word properly denotes such a Savior as perfectly frees us from all evil and danger, and is the author of perpetual salvation.” On the word Jesus, see Joh_1:29 (note).

Which is Christ. Χριστος, the anointed, from χριω to anoint, the same as משיה Messiah, from משח mashach. This name points out the Savior of the world in his prophetic, regal, and sacerdotal offices: as in ancient times, prophets, kings, and priests were anointed with oil, when installed into their respective offices. Anointing was the same with them as consecration is with us. Oil is still used in the consecration of kings.

It appears from Isa_61:1, that anointing with oil, in consecrating a person to any important office, whether civil or religious, was considered as an emblem of the communication of the gifts and graces of the Holy Spirit. This ceremony was used on three occasions, viz. the installation of prophets, priests, and kings, into their respective offices. But why should such an anointing be deemed necessary? Because the common sense of men taught them that all good, whether spiritual or secular, must come from God, its origin and cause. Hence it was taken for granted,

1. That no man could foretell events, unless inspired by the Spirit of God. And therefore the prophet was anointed, to signify the communication of the Spirit of wisdom and knowledge.

2. That no person could offer an acceptable sacrifice to God for the sins of men, or profitably minister in holy things, unless enlightened, influenced, and directed by the Spirit of grace and holiness. Hence the priest was anointed, to signify his being divinely qualified for the due performance of his sacred functions.

3. That no man could enact just and equitable laws which should have the prosperity of the community and the welfare of the individual continually in view, or could use the power confided to him only for the suppression of vice and the encouragement of virtue, but that man who was ever under the inspiration of the Almighty.

Hence kings were inaugurated by anointing with oil. Two of these offices only exist in all civilized nations, the sacerdotal and regal; and in some countries the priest and king are still consecrated by anointing. In the Hebrew language, משח mashach signifies to anoint; and המשיח ha-mashiach, the anointed person. But as no man was ever dignified by holding the three offices, so no person ever had the title ha-mashiach, the anointed one, but Jesus the Christ. He alone is King of kings, and Lord of lords: the king who governs the universe, and rules in the hearts of his followers; the prophet to instruct men in the way wherein they should go; and the great high priest, to make atonement for their sins.

Hence he is called the Messias, a corruption of the word המשיח ha-mashiach, The anointed One, in Hebrew; which gave birth to ο Χριστος, ho Christos, which has precisely the same signification in Greek. Of him, Melchizedek, Abraham, Aaron, David, and others, were illustrious types; but none of these had the title of The Messiah, or the Anointed of God: This does, and ever will, belong exclusively to Jesus the Christ.

The Lord. Κυριος, the supreme, eternal Being, the ruler of the heavens and the earth. The Septuagint generally translate יהוה Yehovah by Κυριος. This Hebrew word, from היה hayah, he was, properly points out the eternity and self-existence of the Supreme Being; and if we may rely on the authority of Hesychius, which no scholar will call in question, Κυριος is a proper translation of יהוה Yehovah, as it comes from κυρω, – τυγχανω, I am, I exist. Others derive it from κυρος, authority, legislative power. It is certain that the lordship of Christ must be considered in a mere spiritual sense, as he never set up any secular government upon earth, nor commanded any to be established in his name; and there is certainly no spiritual government but that of God: and indeed the word Lord, in the text, appears to be properly understood, when applied to the deity of Christ. Jesus is a prophet, to reveal the will of God, and instruct men in it. He is a priest, to offer up sacrifice, and make atonement for the sin of the world. He is Lord, to rule over and rule in the souls of the children of men: in a word, he is Jesus the Savior, to deliver from the power, guilt, and pollution of sin; to enlarge and vivify, by the influence of his Spirit; to preserve in the possession of the salvation which he has communicated; to seal those who believe, heirs of glory; and at last to receive them into the fullness of beatitude in his eternal joy.

A.T. Robertson
Luk 2:11
Is born (etechthe). First aorist passive indicative from tikto. Was born.

Saviour (soter). This great word is common in Luke and Paul and seldom elsewhere in the N.T. (Bruce). The people under Rome’s rule came to call the emperor “Saviour” and Christians took the word and used it of Christ. See inscriptions (Deissmann, Light from the Ancient East, p. 344).

Christ the Lord (Christos Kurios). This combination occurs nowhere else in the N.T. and it is not clear what it really means. Luke is very fond of Kurios (Lord) where the other Gospels have Jesus. It may mean “Christ the Lord,” “Anointed Lord,” “Messiah, Lord,” “The Messiah, the Lord,” “An Anointed One, a Lord,” or “Lord Messiah.” It occurs once in the lxx (Lamentations 4:20) and is in Ps. of Sol. 17:36. Ragg suggests that our phrase “the Lord Jesus Christ” is really involved in “A Saviour (Jesus) which is Christ the Lord.” See note on Mat_1:1 for Christ and note on Mat_21:3 for Lord.

George Haydock
Luk 2:12 On the eastern side of the town of Bethlehem, say St. Justin, St. Jerome, &c. there was a cave cut in the side of a rock, in which was a manger used by the people of those environs; so that these shepherds easily understood the angel, who told them they should find him laid in a manger. Sts. Jerome, Gregory of Nazianzus, Cyril, say that they found the child between an ox and an ass, according to the version of the Septuagint. Habacuc iii. 2.: You shall find him laid between two beasts. In the place where this crib was, St. Helen built a magnificent church in honour of the blessed Virgin Mary. Ven. Bede says that she built another in honour of the three shepherds; whence St. Bernard concludes, that there were only three shepherds that came to adore the divine infant in the manger. (Tirinus)

John Calvin
Luk 2:12
12.And this shall be a sign to you The angel meets the prejudice which might naturally hinder the faith of the shepherds; for what a mockery is it, that he, whom God has sent to be the King, and the only Savior, is seen lying in a manger! That the mean and despicable condition in which Christ was might not deter the shepherds from believing in Christ, the angel tells them beforehand what they would see. This method of proceeding, which might appear, to the view of men, absurd and almost ridiculous, the Lord pursues toward us every day. Sending down to us from heaven the word of the Gospel, he enjoins us to embrace Christ crucified, and holds out to us signs in earthly and fading elements, which raise us to the glory of a blessed immortality. Having promised to us spiritual righteousness, he places before our eyes a little water: by a small portion of bread and wine, he seals, the eternal life of the soul. But if the stable gave no offense whatever to the shepherds, so as to prevent them from going to Christ to obtain salvation, or from yielding to his authority, while he was yet a child; no sign, however mean in itself, ought to hide his glory from our view, or prevent us from offering to him lowly adoration, now that he has ascended to heaven, and sits at the right hand of the Father.

CATENA AUREA
Luk 2:13-14
THEOPHYL; Lest the authority of a single Angel should appear small, as soon as one had revealed the sacrament of the new birth, straightway there was present a multitude of the heavenly host. Rightly has the attending Chorus of Angels received the name of heavenly host, seeing they both humbly bring their aid to that Leader mighty in battle, Who has appeared to put down the powers of the air, and also themselves by their celestial arms bravely vanquish those opposing powers lest they should prevail as they wish in tempting men. But because He is both God and man, rightly do they sing Peace to men and Glory to God.

As it follows, Praising God and saying, Glory to God in the highest. As soon as one Angel, one messenger, had brought the good tidings that God was born in the flesh, the multitude of the heavenly host broke forth in the praise of the Creator, in order both to fix their devotion on Christ, and to instruct us by their example, that as often as any of the brethren shall sound forth the word of sacred learning, or we ourselves shall have brought these holy things home to our minds, we should with our whole heart, our mouths and hands, return praise to God.CHRYS. Of old, indeed, Angels were sent to punish, as, for instance to the Israelites, to David, to the men of Sodom, to the valley of weeping. Now on the other hand they sing the song of thanksgiving to God: because He has revealed to them His coming down to men.

GREG. At the same time they also give praises because their voices of gladness accord well with our redemption, and while they behold our acceptance, they rejoice also that their number is completed.

THEOPHYL; They wish also peace to men, as they add, On earth peace to men, because those whom they had before despised as weak and abject, now that our Lord has come in the flesh they esteem as friends.

CYRIL; This peace has been made through Christ, for He has reconciled us by Himself to God and our Father, having taken away our guilt, which was the ground of offense also. He has united two nations in one man, and has joined the heavenly and the earthly in one flock.

THEOPHYL; For whom they ask peace is explained in the words, Of good will. For them, namely, who receive the new born Christ. For there is no peace to the ungodly, but much peace to them that love the name of God.

ORIGEN; But the attentive reader will ask, How then does the Savior say, I came not to send peace on the earth, whereas now the Angels’ song of His birth is, On earth peace to men? It is answered, that peace is said to be to men of goodwill. For the peace which the Lord does not give on the earth is not the peace of good will.

AUG. For righteousness belongs to good will.

CHRYS. Behold the wonderful fill working of God. He first brings Angels down to men, and then brings men up to heaven. The heaven became earth, when it was about to receive earthly things.

John Calvin
Luk 2:13
13.And suddenly there was present with the angel a multitude An exhibition of divine splendor had been already made in the person of a single angel. But God determined to adorn his own Son in a still more illustrious manner, This was done to confirm our faith as truly as that of the shepherds. Among men, the testimony of “two or three witnesses” (Mat_18:16 ) is sufficient to remove all doubt. But here is a heavenly host, with one consent and one voice bearing testimony to the Son of God. What then would be our obstinacy, if we refused to join with the choir of angels, in singing the praises of our salvation, which is in Christ? Hence we infer, how abominable in the sight of God must unbelief be, which disturbs this delightful harmony between heaven and earth. Again, we are convicted of more than brutal stupidity, if our faith and our zeal to praise God are not inflamed by the song which the angels, with the view of supplying us with the matter of our praise, sang in full harmony. Still farther, by this example of heavenly melody, the Lord intended to recommend to us the unity of faith, and to exhort us to join with one consent in singing his praises on earth.

Albert Barnes
Luk 2:14
Glory to God – Praise be to God, or honor be to God. That is, the praise of redeeming man is due to God. The plan of redemption will bring glory to God, and is designed to express his glory. This it does by evincing his love to people, his mercy, his condescension, and his regard to the honor of his law and the stability of his own government. It is the highest expression of his love and mercy. Nowhere, so far as we can see, could his glory be more strikingly exhibited than in giving his only-begotten Son to die for people.

In the highest – This is capable of several meanings:

1. In the highest “strains,” or in the highest possible manner.

2. “Among” the highest that is, among the angels of God; indicating that “they” felt a deep interest in this work, and were called on to praise God for the redemption of man.

3. In the highest heavens – indicating that the praise of redemption should not be confined to the “earth,” but should spread throughout the universe.

4. The words “God in the highest” may be equivalent to “the Most High God,” and be the same as saying, “Let the most high God be praised for his love and mercy to people.”

Which of these meanings is the true one it is difficult to determine; but in this they all agree, that high praise is to be given to God for his love in redeeming people. O that not only “angels,” but “men,” would join universally in this song of praise!

On earth peace – That is, the gospel will bring peace. The Saviour was predicted as the Prince of peace, Isa_9:6. The world is at war with God; sinners are at enmity against their Maker and against each other. There is no peace to the wicked. But Jesus came to make peace; and this he did,

1. By reconciling the world to God by His atonement.

2. By bringing the sinner to a state of peace with his Maker; inducing him to lay down the weapons of rebellion and to submit his soul to God, thus giving him the peace which passeth all understanding.

3. By diffusing in the heart universal good-will to people – “disposing,” people to lay aside their differences, to love one another, to seek each other’s welfare, and to banish envy, malice, pride, lust, passion, and covetousness – in all ages the most fruitful causes of difference among people. And,

4. By diffusing the principles of universal peace among nations. If the gospel of Jesus should universally prevail, there would be an end of war. In the days of the millennium there will be universal peace; all the causes of war will have ceased; people will love each other and do justly; all nations will be brought under the influence of the gospel. O how should each one toil and pray that the great object of the gospel should be universally accomplished, and the world be filled with peace!

Good will toward men – The gift of the Saviour is an expression of good-will or love to people, and therefore God is to be praised. The work of redemption is uniformly represented as the fruit of the love of God, Joh_3:16; Eph_5:2; 1Jo_4:10; Rev_1:5. No words can express the greatness of that love. It can only be measured by the “misery, helplessness,” and “danger” of man; by the extent of his sufferings here and in the world of woe if he had not been saved; by the condescension, sufferings, and death of Jesus; and by the eternal honor and happiness to which he will raise his people. All these are beyond our full comprehension. Yet how little does man feel it! and how many turn away from the highest love of God, and treat the expression of that love with contempt! Surely, if God so loved us “first,” we ought also to love him, 1Jo_4:19.

John Calvin
Luk 2:15
15.After that the angels departed Here is described to us the obedience of the shepherds. The Lord had made them the witnesses of his Son to the whole world. What he had spoken to them by his angels was efficacious, and was not suffered to pass away. They were not plainly and expressly commanded to come to Bethlehem; but, being sufficiently aware that such was the design of God, they hasten to see Christ. In the same manner, we know that Christ is held out to us, in order that our hearts may approach him by faith; and our delay in coming admits of no excuse.

But again, Luke informs us, that the shepherds resolved to set out, immediately after the angels had departed. This conveys an important lesson. Instead of allowing the word of God, as many do, to pass away with the sound, we must take care that it strike its roots deep in us, and manifest its power, as soon as the sound has died away upon our ears. It deserves our attention, also, that the shepherds exhort one another: for it is not enough that each of us is attentive to his own duty, if we do not give mutual exhortations. Their obedience is still farther commended by the statement of Luke, that they hastened, (ver. 16;) for we are required to show the readiness of faith.

Which the Lord hath revealed to us They had only heard it from the angel; but they intentionally and correctly say, that the Lord had revealed it to them; for they consider the messenger of God to possess the same authority as if the Lord himself had addressed them. For this reason, the Lord directs our attention to himself; that we may not fix our view on men, and undervalue the authority of his Word. We see also that they reckon themselves under obligation, not to neglect the treasure which the Lord had pointed out to them; for they conclude that, immediately after receiving this intelligence, they must go to Bethlehem to see it. In the same manner, every one of us, according to the measure of his faith and understanding, ought to be prepared to follow wheresoever God calls.

Catena Aurea
Lk 2:25-28
AMBROSE; Well is he called righteous who sought not his own good, but the good of his nation, as it follows, Waiting for the consolation of Israel.

GREG. NYSS. It was not surely worldly happiness that the prudent Simeon was waiting for as the consolation of Israel, but a real happiness, that is, a passing over to the beauty of truth from the shadow of the law. For he had learnt from the sacred oracles that he would see the Lord’s Christ before he should depart out of this present life. Hence it follows, And the Holy Spirit was in him, (by which indeed he was justified,) and he received an answer from the Holy Spirit.

AMBROSE; He desired indeed to be loosed from the chains of bodily infirmity, but he wails to see the promise, for he knew, Happy are those eyes which shall see it.

GREG. Hereby also we learn with what desire the holy men of Israel desired to see the mystery of His incarnation.

THEOPHYL; To see death means to undergo it, and happy will he be to see the death of the flesh who has first been enabled to see with the eyes of his heart the Lord Christ, having his conversation in the heavenly Jerusalem, and frequently entering the doors of God’s temple, that is, following the examples of the saints in whom God dwells as in His temple. By the same grace of the Spirit whereby he foreknew Christ would come, he now acknowledges Him come, as it follows, And he came by the Spirit into the temple.

ORIGEN; If you will touch Jesus and grasp Him in your hands, strive with all your strength to have the Spirit for your guide, and come to the temple of God. For it follows, And when his parents brought in the child Jesus, (i.e. Mary His mother, and Joseph His reputed father,) to do for him after the custom of the law, then took he him up in his arms.

THEOPHYL; Now the righteous man, according to the law, received the Child Jesus in his arms, that he might signify that the legal righteousness of works under the figure of the hands and arms was to be changed for the lowly indeed but saving grace of Gospel faith The old man received the infant Christ, to convey thereby that this world, now worn out as it were with old age, should return to the childlike innocence of the Christian life.

John Calvin
Luk 2:25
25.And, lo, there was a man in Jerusalem The design of this narrative is to inform us that, though nearly the whole nation was profane and irreligious, and despised God, yet that a few worshippers of God remained, and that Christ was known to such persons from his earliest infancy. These were “the remnant” of whom Paul says, that they were preserved “according to the election of grace,” (Rom_11:5.) Within this small band lay the Church of God; though the priests and scribes, with as much pride as falsehood, claimed for themselves the title of the Church. The Evangelist mentions no more than two, who recognised Christ at Jerusalem, when he was brought into the temple. These were Simeon and Anna. We must speak first of Simeon.

As to his condition in life we are not informed: he may have been a person of humble rank and of no reputation. Luke bestows on him the commendation of being just and devout; and adds, that he had the gift of prophecy: for the Holy Spirit was upon him. Devotion and Righteousness related to the two tables of the law, and are the two parts of which an upright life consists. It was a proof of his being a devout man, that he waited for the consolation of Israel: for no true worship of God can exist without the hope of salvation, which depends on the faith of his promises, and particularly on the restoration promised through Christ. Now, since an expectation of this sort is commended in Simeon as an uncommon attainment, we may conclude, that there were few in that age, who actually cherished in their hearts the hope of redemption. All had on their lips the name of the Messiah, and of prosperity under the reign of David: but hardly any one was to be found, who patiently endured present afflictions, relying on the consolatory assurance, that the redemption of the Church was at hand. As the eminence of Simeon’s piety was manifested by its supporting his mind in the hope of the promised salvation, so those who wish to prove themselves the children of God, will breathe out unceasing prayers for the promised redemption. For we, “have need of patience” (Heb_10:36 ) till the last coming of Christ.

And the Holy Spirit was upon him The Evangelist does not speak of “the Spirit of adoptions” (Rom_8:15,) which is common to all the children of God, though not in an equal degree, but of the peculiar gift of prophecy. This appears more clearly from the next verse and the following one, in which it is said, that he received a revelation from the Holy Spirit, and that, by the guidance of the same Spirit, he came into the temple Though Simeon had no distinction of public office, he was adorned with eminent gifts, — with piety, with a blameless life, with faith and prophecy. Nor can it be doubted, that this divine intimation, which he received in his individual and private capacity, was intended generally for the confirmation of all the godly. Jesus is called the Lord’s Christ, because he was anointed by the Father, and, at the same time that he received the Spirit, received also the title, of King and Priest. Simeon is said to have come into the temple by the Spirit; that is, by a secret movement and undoubted revelation, that he might meet Christ.

John Gill
Luk 2:25 And behold there was a man in Jerusalem,…. Not in Nazareth, or Bethlehem, but in Jerusalem, the metropolis of the nation: one that lived there, was an inhabitant of that city, and a person of fame and note. So Joseph ben Jochanan is called (z) איש ירושלם a man of Jerusalem, an inhabitant of that place:

whose name was Simeon;

and the same man was just and devout; he was a holy good man in his life and conversation; he was one that feared God, and avoided evil; he was righteous before men, and devout towards God, and exercised a conscience void, of offence to both:

waiting for the consolation of Israel; that is, the Messiah; for this was one of his names with the Jews, who sometimes style him, מנחם, “the comforter”: for so they report (e) that “there are some that say his name is Menachen the comforter; as it is said, “because the comforter that should relieve my soul is far from me”. Lam_1:16.

And again (f), It is observed, that “the name of the Messiah is Menachem, the comforter; and Menachem, by “gematry”, or numerically, is the same with Tzemach, the branch, Zec_3:8.

And so they often call him by the name of the “consolation”: אראה בגחמה, which Dr. Lightfoot renders, “so let me see the consolation”, but should be rendered, “may I never see the consolation”, was a common form of swearing among them; and used much by R. Simeon ben Shetach, who lived before the times of Christ, of which there are several instances (g):

“says R. Juda ben Tabai, אראה בנחמה “may I never see the consolation”, if I have not slain a false witness. Says R. Simeon ben Shetach, to him, “may I never see the consolation”, if thou hast not shed innocent blood.

The gloss (h) on it is,

“it is a light word, (the form) of an oath, in short language; as if it was said, may I never see the consolations of Zion, if he has not done this.

Again (i),

“says R. Simeon Ben Shetach, אראה בנחמה “may I never see the consolation”, if I did not see one run after his companion, into a desolate place, &c.

Now they might easily collect this name of the Messiah, from several passages of Scripture, which speak of God’s comforting his people, at the time of redemption by the Messiah; and particularly, from its being part of his work and office, to comfort them that mourn, for which he was anointed by the Spirit of the Lord, Isa_61:1. And when he is called here, “the consolation of Israel”, it is not to be understood of the whole Jewish nation; for he was so far from being a comfort to them, as such, that through their corruption and wickedness, he came not to send peace, but a sword; and to set at variance the nearest relations and friends among themselves; and through their unbelief and rejection of him, wrath came upon them to the uttermost: but of the true and spiritual Israel of God, whom he has chosen, redeemed, and calls, whether of Jews or Gentiles; his own special and peculiar people, the heirs of promise; and who are often mourners in Zion, and being frequently disconsolate on account of sin, the temptations of Satan, and the hidings of God’s face, stand in need of consolation from him: and in him there is what is always matter and ground of consolation; as in his person, he being the mighty God, and so able to save to the uttermost; in his blood, which speaks peace and pardon, and cleanses from all sin; in his righteousness, which is pure and perfect, and justifies from all iniquity, in his sacrifice, which expiates all the transgressions of his people; in his fulness, which is sufficient to supply all their wants; and in his power, by which he is able to keep them from falling, and to present them faultless before God. And he does often comfort them by his Spirit, by his word, and ordinances, by the promises of his Gospel, by the discoveries of pardoning grace, through his blood, and by his gracious presence: nor are his consolations small, but large and abundant, strong, solid, and everlasting. Now for the Messiah under this character, Simeon was waiting, hoping in a little time to see him; since he knew, both by the prophecies of the Old Testament, particularly by Daniel’s weeks, and, by divine revelation, that the time was just at hand for his coming,

and the Holy Ghost was upon him; not in a common and ordinary way, as he is upon all that are called by grace, as a Spirit of regeneration and sanctification: and as he was upon many others, who at this time were waiting and looking for the Messiah, as well as he; but in an extraordinary way, as a spirit of prophecy: for though prophecy had ceased among the Jews, from the times of Malachi, yet upon the conception and birth of Christ, it now returned; as to Zacharias, Elisabeth, and the virgin Mary, and here to Simeon, as is clear from what follows,

(z) Pirke Abot. sect 4. 5. (a) Pirke Abot, sect. 2. T. Bab. Yoma, fol, 69. 1. T. Hieros. Yoma, 3. & 43. 3. (b) Ganz. Tzemach David, par. 1. fol. 25. 1. (c) Ib. par. 2. fol. 14. (d) Juchasin, fol. 66. 2. (e) T. Bab. Sanhedrin, fol. 98. 2. Echa Rabbati, fol. 50. 1. T. Hieros. Beracot, fol. 5. 1. (f) Kimchi in Zech. iii. 8. (g) T. Bab. Chagiga, fol. 16. 2. & Maccot, fol. 5. 2. (h) Tosaphot in Chagiga ib. (i) T. Bab. Sanhedrin, fol. 37. 2. & Shebout, fol. 34. 1. Vid. & Cetubot, fol. 67. 1. & Echa Rabbati, fol. 49. 2.

Albert Barnes
Luk 2:25
Whose name was Simeon – Some have supposed that this Simeon was a son of the famous “Hillel,” a distinguished teacher in Jerusalem, and president of the Sanhedrin; but nothing is certainly known of him but what is here related. He was an aged man, of distinguished piety and reputation, and was anxiously expecting the coming of the Messiah. Such an “old age” is especially honorable. No spectacle is more sublime than an old man of piety and high character looking for the appearing of the Lord, and patiently waiting for the time to come when he may be blessed with the sight of his Redeemer.

Just – Righteous before God and man; approved by God as a righteous man, and discharging faithfully his duty to man.

Devout – This word means “a religious man,” or a “pious” man. The original expresses the idea of “good reputation, well received,” or of high standing among the people.

Waiting for the consolation of Israel – That is, waiting for the “Messiah,” who is called “the consolation of Israel” because he would give comfort to them by his appearing. This term was often applied to the Messiah before he actually appeared. It was common to swear, also, by “the consolation of Israel” – that is, by the Messiah about to come. See Lightfoot on this place.

The Holy Ghost … – He was a holy man, and was “divinely inspired” respecting the Messiah about to appear.

A.T. Robertson
Luk 2:25
Devout (eulabes). Used only by Luke (Act_2:5; Act_8:2; Act_22:12) in the N.T. Common in ancient Greek from Plato on. It means taking hold well or carefully (eu and labein) and so reverently, circumspectly.

Looking for the consolation of Israel (prosdechomenos paraklesin tou Israel). Old Greek verb to admit to one’s presence (Luk_15:2) and then to expect as here and of Anna in Luk_2:38. Paraklesin here means the Messianic hope (Isa_11:10; Isa_40:1), calling to one’s side for cheer.

Upon him (ep’ auton). This is the explanation of his lively Messianic hope. It was due to the Holy Spirit. Simeon and Anna are representatives of real piety in this time of spiritual dearth and deadness.

Adam Clarke
Luk 2:26
It was revealed unto him – He was divinely informed, κεχρηματισμενον – he had an express communication from God concerning the subject. The secret of the Lord is with them that fear him. The soul of a righteous and devout man is a proper habitation for the Holy Spirit.

He should not see death – They that seek shall find: it is impossible that a man who is earnestly seeking the salvation of God, should be permitted to die without finding it.

The Lord’s Christ – Rather, the Lord’s anointed. That prophet, priest, and king, who was typified by so many anointed persons under the old covenant; and who was appointed to come in the fullness of time, to accomplish all that was written in the law, in the prophets, and in the Psalms, concerning him. See the note on Luk_2:11.

Adam Clarke
Luk 2:27
He came by the Spirit into the temple – Probably he had in view the prophecy of Malachi, Mal_3:1, The Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple. In this messenger of the covenant, the soul of Simeon delighted. Now the prophecy was just going to be fulfilled; and the Holy Spirit, who dwelt in the soul of this righteous man, directed him to go and see its accomplishment. Those who come, under the influence of God’s Spirit, to places of public worship, will undoubtedly meet with him who is the comfort and salvation of Israel.

After the custom of the law – To present him to the Lord, and then redeem him by paying five shekels, Num_18:15, Num_18:16, and to offer those sacrifices appointed by the law. See Luk_2:24.

Catena Aurea
Luk 2:28-32
GREEK EX. Simeon blessed God also, because the promises made to him had received their true fulfillment. For He was reckoned worthy to see with his eyes, and to carry in his arms the consolation of Israel. And therefore he says, According to your word, i.e. since I have obtained the completion of your promises. And now that I have seen with my eyes what was my desire to see, now let you your servant depart, neither dismayed at the taste of death, nor harassed with doubting thoughts: as he adds, in peace.

ATHAN. That is to say, the salvation wrought by Christ for the whole world. How then was it said above that he was watching for the consolation of Israel, but because he truly perceived in the spirit that consolation would be to Israel at that time when salvation was prepared for all people.

John Calvin
Luk 2:29
29.Thou now sendest thy servant away From this song it is sufficiently evident, that Simeon looked at the Son of God with different eyes from the eyes of flesh. For the outward beholding of Christ could have produced no feeling but contempt, or, at least, would never have imparted such satisfaction to the mind of the holy man, as to make him joyful and desirous to die, from having reached the summit of his wishes. The Spirit of God enlightened his eyes by faith, to perceive, under a mean and poor dress, the glory of the Son of God. He says, that he would be sent away in peace; which means, that he would die with composure of mind, having obtained all that he desired.

But here a question arises. If he chose rather to depart from life, was it amidst distress of mind and murmuring, as is usually the case with those who die unwillingly, that Simeon was hurried away? I answer: we must attend to the circumstance which is added, according to thy word God had promised that Simeon would behold his Son. He had good reason for continuing in a state of suspense, and must have lived in some anxiety, till he obtained his expectation. This ought to be carefully observed; for there are many who falsely and improperly plead the example of Simeon, and boast that they would willingly die, if this or the other thing were previously granted to them; while they allow themselves to entertain rash wishes at their own pleasure, or to form vain expectations without the authority of the Word of God. If Simeon had said exactly, “Now I shall die with a composed and easy mind, because I have seen the Son of God,” this expression would have indicated the weakness of his faith; but, as he had the word, he might have refused to die until the coming of Christ.

A.T. Robertson
Luk 2:29
Now lettest thou (nun apolueis). Present active indicative, Thou art letting. The Nunc Dimittis, adoration and praise. It is full of rapture and vivid intensity (Plummer) like the best of the Psalms. The verb apoluo was common for the manumission of slaves and Simeon here calls himself “thy slave (doulon sou), Lord (Despota, our despot).” See 2Pe_2:1.

John Calvin

Luk 2:30
30.For my eyes have seen This mode of expression is very common in Scripture; but Simeon appears to denote expressly the bodily appearance of Christ, as if he had said, that he now has the Son of God present in the flesh, on whom the eyes of his mind had been previously fixed. By saving I understand the matter of salvation: for in Christ are hid all the parts of salvation and of a happy life. Now if the sight of Christ, while he was yet a child, had so powerful an effect on Simeon, that he approached death with cheerfulness and composure; how much more abundant materials of lasting peace are now furnished to us, who have the opportunity of beholding our salvation altogether completed in Christ? True, Christ no longer dwells on earth, nor do we carry him in our arms: but his divine majesty shines openly and brightly in the gospel, and there do “we all,” as Paul says, “behold as in a glass the glory of the Lord,” — not as formerly amidst the weakness of flesh, but in the glorious power of the Spirit, which he displayed in his miracles, in the sacrifice of his death, and in his resurrection. In a word, his absence from us in body is of such a nature, that we are permitted to behold him sitting at the right hand of the Father. If such a sight does not bring peace to our minds, and make us go cheerfully to death, we are highly ungrateful to God, and hold the honor, which he has bestowed upon us, in little estimation.

John Calvin
Luk 2:31
31.Which thou hast prepared By these words Simeon intimates, that Christ had been divinely appointed, that all nations might enjoy his grace; and that he would shortly afterwards be placed in an elevated situation, and would draw upon him the eyes of all. Under this term he includes all the predictions which relate: to the spread of Christ’s kingdom. But if Simeon, when holding a little child in his arms, could stretch his mind to the utmost boundaries of the world, and acknowledge the power of Christ to be everywhere present, how much more magnificent ought our conceptions regarding him to be now that he has been set up as a, “standard to the people,” (Isa_49:22,) and has revealed himself to the whole world.

Adam Clarke
Luk 2:31
Which thou hast prepared – Ο ητοιμασας, which thou hast Made Ready before the face, in the presence, of all people. Here salvation is represented under the notion of a feast, which God himself has provided for the whole world; and to partake of which he has invited all the nations of the earth. There seems a direct allusion here to Isa_25:6, etc. “In this mountain shall the Lord of hosts make unto all people a feast of fat things,” etc. Salvation is properly the food of the soul, by which it is nourished unto eternal life; he that receiveth not this, must perish for ever.

A.T. Robertson
Luk 2:31
Of all the peoples (panton ton laon). Not merely Jews. Another illustration of the universality of Luke’s Gospel seen already in Luk_1:70 in the hymn of Zacharias. The second strophe of the song according to Plummer showing what the Messiah will be to the world after having shown what the Messiah is to Simeon.

John Calvin
Luk 2:32
32.A light for the revelation of the Gentiles Simeon now points out the purpose for which Christ was to be exhibited by the Father before all nations. It was that he might enlighten the Gentiles, who had been formerly in darkness, and might be the glory of his people Israel There is propriety in the distinction here made between the people Israel and the Gentiles: for by the right of adoption the children of Abraham “were nigh” (Eph_2:17 ) to God, while the Gentiles, with whom God had made no “covenants of promise,” were “strangers” to the Church, (Eph_2:12.) For this reason, Israel is called, in other passages, not only the son of God, but his first-born,(Jer_31:9;) and Paul informs us, that “Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made unto the fathers” (Rom_15:8.) The preference given to Israel above the Gentiles is, that all without distinction may obtain salvation in Christ.

A light for revelation means for enlightening the Gentiles Hence we infer, that men are by nature destitute of light, till Christ, “the Sun of Righteousness,” (Mal_4:2,) shine upon them. With regard to Israel, though God had bestowed upon him distinguished honor, yet all his glory rests on this single article, that a Redeemer had been promised to him.

Adam Clarke
Luk 2:32
A light to lighten the Gentiles – Φως εις αποκαλυψιν εθνων – A light of the Gentiles, for revelation. By Moses and the prophets, a light of revelation was given to the Jews, in the blessedness of which the Gentiles did not partake. By Christ and his apostles, a luminous revelation is about to be given unto the Gentiles, from the blessedness of which the Jews in general, by their obstinacy and unbelief, shall be long excluded. But to all true Israelites it shall be a glory, an evident fulfillment of all the predictions of the prophets, relative to the salvation of a lost world; and the first offers of it shall be made to the Jewish people, who may see in it the truth of their own Scriptures indisputably evinced.

Albert Barnes
Luk 2:32
A light to lighten the Gentiles – This is in accordance with the prophecies in the Old Testament, Isa. 49; Isa_9:6-7; Psa_98:3; Mal_4:2. The Gentiles are represented as sitting in darkness that is, in ignorance and sin. Christ is a “light” to them, as by him they will be made acquainted with the character of the true God, his law, and the plan of redemption. As the darkness rolls away when the sun arises, so ignorance and error flee away when Jesus gives light to the mind. Nations shall come to his light, and kings to the brightness of his rising, Isa_60:3.

And the glory … – The first offer of salvation was made to the Jews, Joh_4:22; Luk_24:47. Jesus was born among the Jews; to them had been given the prophecies respecting him, and his first ministry was among them. Hence, he was their glory, their honor, their light. But it is a subject of special gratitude to us that the Saviour was given also for the Gentiles; for:

1. We are Gentiles, and if he had not come we should have been shut out from the blessings of redemption.

2. It is he only that now.
“Can make our dying bed.
Feel soft as downy pillows are,
While on his breast we lean our head,
And breathe our life out sweetly there.”

Thus our departure may be like that of Simeon. Thus we may die in peace. Thus it will be a blessing to die. But,

3. In order to do this, our life must be like that of Simeon. We must wait for the consolation of Israel. We must look for his coming. We must be holy, harmless, undefiled, “loving” the Saviour. Then death to us, like death to Simeon, will have no terror; we shall depart in peace, and in heaven see the salvation of God, 2Pe_3:11-12. But,

4. Children, as well as the hoary-headed Simeon, may look for the coming of Christ. They too must die; and “their” death will be happy only as they depend on the Lord Jesus, and are prepared to meet him.

Marvin Vincent
Luk 2:32
A light (φως)
The light itself as distinguished from λύχνος, a lamp, which the A. V. often unfortunately renders light. See on Mar_14:54.

To lighten (εις αποκάλυψιν)
Wrong. Rev., correctly, for revelation. Wyc., to the shewing. It may be rendered the unveiling of the Gentiles.

Gentiles (εθνων)
Assigned to the same root as έθω, to be accustomed, and hence of a people bound together by like habits or customs. According to biblical usage the term is understood of people who are not of Israel, and who therefore occupy a different position with reference to the plan of salvation. Hence the extension of the gospel salvation to them is treated as a remarkable fact. See Mat_12:18, Mat_12:21; Mat_24:14; Mat_28:19; Act_10:45; Act_11:18; Act_18:6. Paul is called distinctively an apostle and teacher of the Gentiles, and a chosen vessel to bear Christ’s name among them. In Act_15:9; Eph_2:11, Eph_2:18; Eph_3:6, we see this difference annihilated, and the expression at last is merely historical designation of the non-Israelitish nations which, as such, were formerly without God and salvation. See Act_15:23; Rom_16:4; Eph_3:1. Sometimes the word is used in a purely moral sense, to denote the heathen in opposition to Christians. See 1Co_5:1; 1Co_10:20; 1Pe_2:12. Light is promised here to the Gentiles and glory to Israel. The Gentiles are regarded as in darkness and ignorance. Some render the words εις αποκάλυψιν, above, for the unveiling of the Gentiles, instead of for revelation. Compare Isa_25:7. Israel, however, has already received light by the revelation of God through the law and the prophets, and that light will expand into glory through Christ. Through the Messiah, Israel will attain its true and highest glory.

Catena Aurea Luk 2:33-35
ORIGEN; They who explain this simply, may say that He came for the fall of unbelievers, and the rising again of believers.

CHRYS. As the light though it may annoy weak eyes, is still light; in like manner the Savior endures, though many fall away, for His office is not to destroy; but their way is madness. Wherefore not only by the salvation of the good but by the scattering of the wicked, is His power shown. For the sun the brighter it shines, is the more trying to the weak sight.

AMBROSE; That is, to distinguish the merits of the just and the unjust, and according to the quality of our deeds, as a true and just Judge, to decree punishment or rewards.

BASIL; The sign which is spoken against is called in Scripture, the cross. For Moses, it says, made a brazen serpent, and placed it for a sign.

GREG. NYSS. He has joined together honor and dishonor. For to us Christians this sign is a token of honor, but it is a sign of contradiction, inasmuch by some indeed it is received as absurd and monstrous, by others with the greatest veneration. Or perhaps Christ Himself is termed a sign, as having a supernatural existence, and as the author of signs.

AUG. Or by this is signified that Mary also, through whom was performed the mystery of the incarnation, looked with doubt and astonishment at the death of her Lord, seeing the Son of God so humbled as to come down even to death. And as a sword passing close by a man causes fear, though it does not strike him; so doubt also causes sorrow, yet does not kill; for it is not fastened to the mind, but passes through it as through a shadow.

THEOPHYL; But now even down to the close of the present time, the sword of the severest tribulation ceases not to go through the soul of the Church, when with bitter sorrow she experiences the evil speaking against the sign of faith, when hearing the word of God that many are raised with Christ, she finds still more falling from the faith, when at the revealing of the thoughts of many hearts, in which the good seed of the Gospel has been sown, she beholds the tares of vice overshooting it, spreading beyond it, or growing alone.

John Calvin
Luk 2:33
33.And his father and mother were wondering Luke does not say, that they were astonished at it as a new thing, but that they contemplated with reverence, and embraced with becoming admiration, this prediction of the Spirit uttered by the lips of Simeon, so that they continued to make progress in the knowledge of Christ. We learn from this example that, when we have once come to possess a right faith, we ought to collect, on every hand, whatever may aid in giving to it additional strength. That man has made great proficiency in the word of God, who does not fail to admire whatever he reads or hears every day, that contributes to his unceasing progress in faith.

A.T. Robertson
Luk 2:33
His father and his mother (ho pater autou kai he meter). Luke had already used “parents” in Luk_2:27. He by no means intends to deny the Virgin Birth of Jesus so plainly stated in Luk_1:34-38. He merely employs here the language of ordinary custom. The late MSS. wrongly read “and Joseph” instead of “his father.”

Were marvelling (en thaumazontes). The masculine gender includes the feminine when both are referred to. But en is singular, not esan, the normal imperfect plural in this periphrastic imperfect. This is due to the wide space between copula and participle. The copula en agrees in number with ho pater while the participle coming last agrees with both ho pater kai he meter (cf. Mat_17:3; Mat_22:40). If one wonders why they marvelled at Simeon’s words after what they had heard from Gabriel, Elisabeth, and the Shepherds, he should bear in mind that every parent is astonished and pleased at the fine things others see in the child. It is a mark of unusual insight for others to see so much that is obvious to the parent. Simeon’s prophecy had gone beyond the angel’s outline and it was surprising that he should know anything about the child’s destiny.

John Calvin

Luk 2:34
34.And Simeon blessed them If you confine this to Joseph and Mary, there will be no difficulty. But, as Luke appears to include Christ at the same time, it might be asked, What right had Simeon to take upon him the office of blessing Christ? “Without all contradiction,” says Paul, “the less is blessed of the greater,” (Heb_7:7.) Besides, it has the appearance of absurdity, that any mortal man should offer prayers in behalf of the Son of God. I answer: The Apostle does not speak there of every kind of blessing, but only of the priestly blessing: for, in other respects, it is highly proper in men to pray for each other. Now, it is more probable that Simeon blessed them, as a private man and as one of the people, than that he did so in a public character: for, as we have already said, we nowhere read that he was a priest. But there would be no absurdity in saying, that he prayed for the prosperity and advancement of Christ’s kingdom: for in the book of Psalms the Spirit prescribes such a εὐλογία,—a blessingof this nature to all the godly.

“Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord; we have blessed you in the name of the Lords” (Psa_118:26.)

Lo, this has been set This discourse was, no doubt, directly addressed by Simeon to Mary; but it has a general reference to all the godly. The holy virgin needed this admonition, that she might not (as usually happens) be lifted up by prosperous beginnings, so as to be less prepared for enduring afflictive events. But she needed it on another account, that she might not expect Christ to be received by the people with universal applause, but that her mind, on the contrary, might be fortified by unshaken courage against all hostile attacks. It was the design, at the same time, of the Spirit of God, to lay down a general instruction for all the godly. When they see the world opposing Christ with wicked obstinacy, they must be prepared to meet that opposition, and to contend against it undismayed. The unbelief of the world is—we know it—a great and serious hinderance; but it must be conquered, if we wish to believe in Christ. There never was a state of human society so happily constituted, that the greater part followed Christ. Those who will enlist in the cause of Christ must learn this as one of their earliest lessons, and must “put on” this “armor,” (Eph_6:11,) that they may be steadfast in believing on him.

It was by far the heaviest temptation, that Christ was not acknowledged by his own countrymen, and was even ignominiously rejected by that nation, which boasted that it was the Church of God; and, particularly, that the priests and scribes, who held in their hands the government of the Church, were his most determined enemies. For who would have thought, that he was the King of those, who not only rejected him, but treated him with such contempt and outrage?

We see, then, that a good purpose was served by Simeon’s prediction, that Christ was set for the ruin of many in Israel The meaning is, that he was divinely appointed to cast down and destroy many. But it must be observed, that the ruin of unbelievers results from their striking against him. This is immediately afterwards expressed, when Simeon says that Christ is a sign, which is spoken against Because unbelievers are rebels against Christ, they clash themselves against him, and hence comes their ruin This metaphor is taken from a mark shot at by archers, as if Simeon had said, Hence we perceive the malice of men, and even the depravity of the whole human race, that all, as if they had made a conspiracy, rise in murmurs and rebellion against the Son of God. The world would not display such harmony in opposing the Gospel, if there were not a natural enmity between the Son of God and those men. The ambition or fury of the enemies of the Gospel carries them in various directions, faction splits them into various sects, and a wide variety of superstitions distinguishes idolaters from each other. But while they thus differ among themselves, they all agree in this, to oppose the Son of God. It has been justly observed, that the opposition everywhere made to Christ is too plain an evidence of human depravity. That the world should thus rise against its Creator is a monstrous sight. But Scripture predicted that this would happen, and the reason is very apparent, that men who have once been alienated from God by sin, always fly from him. Instances of this kind, therefore, ought not to take us by surprise; but, on the contrary, our faith, provided with this armor, ought to be prepared to fight with the contradiction of the world.

As God has now gathered an Israel to himself from the whole world, and there is no longer a distinction between the Jew and the Greek, the same thing must now happen as, we learn, happened before. Isaiah had said of his own age, “The Lord will be for a stone of stumbling, and for a rock of offense, to both the houses of Israel,” (Isa_8:14.)

From that time, the Jews hardly ever ceased to dash themselves against God, but the rudest shock was against Christ. The same madness is now imitated by those who call themselves Christians; and even those, who lay haughty claims to the first rank in the Church, frequently employ all the power which they possess in oppressing Christ. But let us remember, all that they gain is, to be at length crushed and “broken in pieces,” (Isa_8:9.)

Under the word ruin the Spirit denounces the punishment of unbelievers, and thus warns us to keep at the greatest possible distance from them; lest, by associating with them, we become involved in the same destruction. And Christ is not the less worthy of esteem, because, when he appears, many are ruined: for the “savor” of the Gospel is not less “sweet” and delightful to God, (2Co_2:15,) though it is destructive to the ungodly world. Does any one inquire, how Christ occasions the ruinof unbelievers, who without him were already lost? The reply is easy. Those who voluntarily deprive themselves of the salvation which God has offered to them, perish twice. Ruin implies the double punishment which awaits all unbelievers, after that they have knowingly and wilfully opposed the Son of God.

And for the resurrection This consolation is presented as a contrast with the former clause, to make it less painful to our feelings: for, if nothing else were added, it would be melancholy to hear, that Christ is “a stone of stumbling,” which will break and crush, by its hardness, a great part of men. Scripture therefore reminds us of his office, which is entirely different: for the salvation of men, which is founded on it, is secure; as Isaiah also says, “Sanctify the Lord of hosts himself; and let him be your fear, and let him be your dread; and he shall be for a sanctuary,” or fortress of defense, (Isa_8:13.) And Peter speaks more clearly: “To whom coming, as unto a living stone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God and precious, ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house. Wherefore also it is contained in Scripture, Behold, I lay in Zion the head-stone of the corner, elect, precious, and he that believeth in him shall not be confounded. Unto you, therefore, which believe, he is precious: but unto them who are disobedient, the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner,” (1Pe_2:4; Isa_28:16.)

That we may not be terrified by the designation bestowed on Christ, “a stone of stumbling,” let it be instantly recollected, on the other hand, that he is likewise called the “corner-stone,” on which rests the salvation of all the godly. Let it be also taken into account, that the former is accidental, while the latter is properly and strictly his office. Besides, it deserves our notice, that Christ is not only called the support, but the resurrection of the godly: for the condition of men is not one in which it is safe for them to remain. They must rise from death, before they begin to live.

Adam Clarke
Luk 2:34
This child is set for the fall – This seems an allusion to Isa_8:14, Isa_8:15 : Jehovah, God of hosts, shall be – for a stone of stumbling and rock of offense to both houses of Israel; and many among them shall stumble and fall, etc. As Christ did not come as a temporal deliverer, in which character alone the Jews expected him, the consequence should be, they would reject him, and so fall by the Romans. See Rom_11:11, Rom_11:12, and Matthew 24. But in the fullness of time there shall be a rising again of many in Israel. See Rom_11:26.

And for a sign – A mark or butt to shoot at – a metaphor taken from archers. Or perhaps Simeon refers to Isa_11:10-12. There shall be a root of Jesse, which shall stand for an Ensign of the people; to it shall the Gentiles seek: – intimating that the Jews would reject it, while the Gentiles should flock to it as their ensign of honor, under which they were to enjoy a glorious rest.

That the thoughts (or reasonings) of many hearts may be revealed – I have transposed this clause to the place to which I believe it belongs. The meaning appears to me to be this: The rejection of the Messiah by the Jewish rulers will sufficiently prove that they sought the honor which comes from the world, and not that honor which comes from God: because they rejected Jesus, merely for the reason that he did not bring them a temporal deliverance. So the very Pharisees, who were loud in their professions of sanctity and devotedness to God, rejected Jesus, and got him crucified, because his kingdom was not of this world. Thus the reasonings of many hearts were revealed.

Albert Barnes
Luk 2:34
Simeon blessed them – Joseph and Mary. On them he sought the blessing of God.

Is set – Is appointed or constituted for that, or such will be the effect of his coming.

The fall – The word “fall” here denotes “misery, suffering, disappointment,” or “ruin.” There is a plain reference to the passage where it is said that he should be “a stone of stumbling and a rock of offence,” Isa_8:14-15. Many expected a temporal prince, and in this they were disappointed. They loved darkness rather than light, and rejected him, and fell unto destruction. Many that were proud were brought low by his preaching. They fell from the vain and giddy height of their own self-righteousness, and were humbled before God, and then, through him, rose again to a better righteousness and to better hopes. The nation also rejected him and put him to death, and, as a judgment, “fell” into the hands of the Romans. Thousands were led into captivity, and thousands perished. The nation rushed into ruin, the temple was destroyed, and the people were scattered into all the nations. See Rom_9:32-33; 1Pe_2:8; 1Co_1:23-24.

And rising again – The word “again” is not expressed in the Greek. It seems to be supposed, in our translation, that the “same persons would fall and rise again; but this is not the meaning of the passage. It denotes that many would be ruined by his coming, and that many “others” would be made happy or be saved. Many of the poor and humble, that were willing to receive him, would obtain pardon of sin

and peace – would “rise” from their sins and sorrows here, and finally ascend to eternal life.

And for a sign … – The word “sign” here denotes a conspicuous or distinguished object, and the Lord Jesus was such an object of contempt and rejection by all the people. He was despised, and his religion has been the common “mark” or “sign” for all the wicked, the profligate, and the profane, to curse, and ridicule, and oppose. Compare Isa_8:18, and Act_28:22. Never was a prophecy more exactly fulfilled than this. Thousands have rejected the gospel and fallen into ruin; thousands are still falling of those who are ashamed of Jesus; thousands blaspheme him, deny him, speak all manner of evil against him, and would crucify him again if he were in their hands; but thousands also “by” him are renewed, justified, and raised up to life and peace.

A.T. Robertson
Luk 2:34
Is set for the falling and the rising up of many in Israel (Keitai eis ptōsin kai anastasin pollōn en tōi Israēl). Present indicative of the old defective verb appearing only in present and imperfect in the N.T. Sometimes it is used as the passive of tithēmi as here. The falling of some and the rising up of others is what is meant. He will be a stumbling-block to some (Isa_8:14; Mat_21:42, Mat_21:44; Rom_9:33; 1Pe_2:16.) who love darkness rather than light (Joh_3:19), he will be the cause of rising for others (Rom_6:4, Rom_6:9; Eph_2:6). “Judas despairs, Peter repents: one robber blasphemes, the other confesses” (Plummer). Jesus is the magnet of the ages. He draws some, he repels others. This is true of all epoch-making men to some extent.

Spoken against (antilegomenon). Present passive participle, continuous action. It is going on today. Nietzsche regarded Jesus Christ as the curse of the race because he spared the weak.

John Calvin
Luk 2:35
35. But also a sword shall pierce thy own soul This warning must have contributed greatly to fortify the mind of the holy virgin, and to prevent her from being overwhelmed with grief, when she came to those distressing struggles, which she had to undergo. Though her faith was agitated and tormented by various temptations, yet her sorest battle was with the cross: for Christ might appear to be utterly destroyed. She was not overwhelmed with grief; but it would have required a heart of stone not to be deeply wounded: for the patience of the saints differs widely from stupidity.

That the thoughts of many hearts may be revealed There are some who connect this clause with a part of the former verse, that Christ is set for the ruin and for the resurrection of many in Israel; and who include in a parenthesis what we have just now explained about the sword: but it is better, I think, to refer it to the whole passage. The particle that, ὅπως ἄν, in this passage, does not strictly denote a cause, but merely a consequence. When the light of the Gospel arises, and persecutions immediately spring up, there is, at the same time, a disclosure of affections of the heart, which had been hitherto concealed: for the lurking-places of human dissimulation are so deep, that they easily remain hidden till Christ comes. ) But Christ, by his light, discloses every artifice, and unmasks hypocrisy; and to him is properly ascribed the office of laying open the secrets of the heart. But when the cross is added to doctrine it tries the hearts more to the quick. For those who have embraced Christ by outward profession, often shrink from bearing the cross, and, when they see the Church exposed to numerous calamities, easily desert their post.

Albert Barnes
Luk 2:35
Yea, a sword … – The sufferings and death of thy Son shall deeply afflict thy soul. And if Mary had not been thus forewarned and sustained by strong faith, she could not have borne the trials which came upon her Son; but God prepared her for it, and the holy mother of the dying Saviour was sustained.

That the thoughts … – This is connected with the preceding verse: “He shall be a sign, a conspicuous object to be spoken against, that the thoughts of many hearts may be made manifest – that is, that they “might show” how much they hated holiness. Nothing so “brings out” the feelings of sinners as to tell them of Jesus Christ. Many treat him with silent contempt; many are ready to gnash their teeth; many curse him; all show how much by nature the heart is opposed to religion, and thus are really, in spite of themselves, fulfilling the scriptures and the prophecies. So true it that “none can say that Jesus is Lord but by the Holy Ghost,” 1Co_12:3.

A.T. Robertson
Luk 2:35
A sword (rhomphaia). A large sword, properly a long Thracian javelin. It occurs in the lxx of Goliath’s sword (1 Samuel 17:51). How little Mary understood the meaning of Simeon’s words that seemed so out of place in the midst of the glorious things already spoken, a sharp thorn in their roses, a veritable bitter-sweet. But one day Mary will stand by the Cross of Christ with this Thracian javelin clean through her soul, stabat Mater Dolorosa (Joh_19:25). It is only a parenthesis here, and a passing cloud perhaps passed over Mary’s heart already puzzled with rapture and ecstasy.

May be revealed (apokaluphthosin). Unveiled. First aorist passive subjunctive after hopos an and expresses God’s purpose in the mission of the Messiah. He is to test men’s thoughts (dialogismoi) and purposes. They will be compelled to take a stand for Christ or against him. That is true today.

Gospel of Mark Chapter 2:15-28 Sunday School Notes

These are some of my notes for Sunday December 13, 2009 in the Lifeway Explore the Bible Series.

Books referenced in these notes are:

1. Gospel of Mark: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary by Ben Witherington III

2. Gospel of Mark: New International Greek Testament Commentary by R.T. France

3. New Testament Text and Translation Commentary by Philip Comfort

4.  NET Bible from Bible dot org, also available from CBD

Levi: Traditionally said to be the same as Matthew, especially since Matt 9:9-13 tells the same story of Matthew as Mark 2:13-14 of Levi. Matthew’s Gospel lists Matthew next to James son of Alphaeus (Matt 10:3), as does Acts 1:13; Luke separates the two with Thomas. Witherington suggests that because Levi is a son of Alphaeus also, Levi/Matthew and James of Alphaeus are actually brothers, and that perhaps Jesus chose brothers as disciples in order to bind the Twelve together better, or even to more resemble the original Twelve patriarchs. (Witherington)

Levi is working in a telonion, a “tax booth” when Jesus finds him. This means Levi is not an income or poll tax collector or a census worker. He is definitely not a “publican”, a rich tax farmer (usually a foreigner) who bought the right to collect taxes for a government, and then employed people like Levi to actually gather the money, the tax amount plus however much the publican could add on for his expenses and profits without causing a riot. Or Levi was a municipal customs official placed at strategic points like bridges, canals and state roads, charging two or three percent tax on trade items that passed through the city. The money would actually go to the city, but the municipal tax workers were also disdained just like those working for the Romans directly, because the city officials backed Rome against the Jewish populace.(Witherington, Keener)

Mark 2:15
And it came to pass: Greek kai gentai, which alerts the reader/listener to a new phase in the story.(France)

“Recline at table” indicates a meal in the Greco-Roman style, lying on one’s side on the floor or a couch around a central table where the food and drink were placed. Jews normally sat at table, but three hundred years of Greek influence made many adopt the Greco-Roman style, especially for formal or festive meals.(Witherington, France)

The Greek text says “in his house”, but Mark never refers to the Capernaum house as belonging to Jesus, thus this takes place at Levi’s house, as the HCSB and the Lukan parallel inform us.(France)

Tax collectors are named with sinners here, implying the two might be different groups. They are routinely mentioned together in the gospels (Luke 15:2; Matt 11:19). “Sinners” (Greek hamartoloi) is ambiguous. It might mean the common people who had practical problems keeping the strict ceremonial law as the Pharisees wanted. Some however have argued that tax booth workers would not have been forced to enter unclean homes to collect taxes, unlike poll tax collectors, and thus wouldn’t be ritually unclean. But they still would be a class respectable Pharisee types would avoid. “Sinners” might also be the wicked (Hebrew resaim), the willful, unrepentant sinners. These are considered worse than the poor and the downtrodden; they are the actively bad.(Ps 10:15, 141:5; Pro 2:22,10:30, 14:9) Likely the reference is to the notoriously immoral, not those negligent of ritual. “Sinners” was used of Gentiles not so much because they didn’t obey the Law (much of which isn’t meant for Gentiles, thus the Noahide code) but because Gentiles were considered routinely immoral. (Witherington, France)

Disciples, Greek mathetai, doesn’t necessarily mean the Twelve (Mark 3:13-19), but those routinely accompanying Jesus.(France)

Mark 2:16-17
Textual Variant:
Scribes of the Pharisees HCSB
Manuscripts P88 S B L W 33

Scribes and the Pharisees (N)KJV
Manuscripts A C D Majority

“Scribes of the Pharisees” is the more difficult reading, “scribes and pharisees” being a common phrase of the gospels, and thus explaining why the copyists of the majority of manuscripts would adjust the reading to “and”. Also the manuscripts with “of” are a better set than those backing “and”. Mark is indicating here scribes who were members of the Pharisaic party, not two groups. (Comfort)

Scribes of the Pharisees: A subgroup within the Pharisees who specialized in writing and knowing the Law, and who were the real sticklers for observing the exact rules among the Pharisees. They protest Jesus’ eating with sinners to the disciples, some of whom presumably told Jesus.(Witherington)

Textual Variant:
Eats with sinners and tax collectors. HCSB
Manuscripts: B D W

Eats and drinks with sinners and tax collectors (N)KJV
Manuscripts: P88 A f1 33 Majority

While it is possible that the shorter first reading is an assimilation of Matt 9:11, most feel the longer version in the Majority manuscripts and the KJV is secondary, taken from the longer parallel text in Luke 5:30.(Comfort)

The Pharisees’ problem with Jesus might be:

1.Ceremonial defilment by sharing food with groups considered unclean.

2.Eating with someone is a primal way to identify with and/or approve them. Thus Jesus’ meal was approving groups the Pharisees rejected. (France)

The Greek of the Pharisees’ statement might be interpeted as a bald statement or a question. Either way it is translated it is surely delivered with a note of outrage and shock.(France)

Mark 2:17
Jesus responds with a routine proverb: “the sick need a doctor, not the well”. It’s an interesting take on Jesus’ self-perception, that of a doctor treating the sick, and thus necessarily being around the sick. Necessity makes any attempt to maintain strict ritual purity impossible, and priority must be given to those most in need..(Witherington, France)

Textual Variant
But sinners (HCSB)
Manuscripts S A B C L Majority

But sinners to repentance (N)KJV
Manuscripts 1’s margin 33

This ended up in the KJV and NKJV because Erasmus, who edited the early Greek New Testament behind the KJV NT, used miniscule 1. “To repentance” is plainly a scribal addition, either expansion for explanation and/or to match Luke 5:32.(Comfort)

The second part of v.17 is a mission statement by Jesus. Determining where simple statement ends and irony begins is difficult in this saying. “Righteous” might be a stab at the Pharisees, but Jesus could speak well of them (Matt 5:20) as well as poorly (Matt 23:1-7; Mark 12:38-40). But plainly Jesus is defining His mission in terms of necessity, like medical triage: the worst first, then on to the least injured. Witherington describes Jesus’ worst off as “least, last, and lost”. “Sinners” here is not all fallen people here (unlike Luke 13:1-3) but more “immoral people” (Luke 24:7)(Witherington, France)

What does calling sinners mean? Presumably inviting them to become disciples and repent, morally. Indeed, the Lukan parallel (Luke 5:32) says “call… sinners to repentance”. But unlike most, Jesus doesn’t require proof of repentance before associating with sinners.(Witherington, France)

Mark 2:18
This controversy can be seen as a sort of “I’m holier than thou” competition, which Jesus refuses to play by changing the discussion.

While some of John the Baptist followers joined Jesus (John 1:35-42), others stayed John’s disciples long after John’s execution (Acts 18:25, 19:1-7).(France)

Only the Day of Atonement fast is specified in the Law (Lev 16:29; Acts 27:9), but Zech 8:19 adds four more fasts, and Esther 9:31 makes six. Standard Pharisaic fast days were Monday and Thursday (Luke 18:12, Did 8:1). John the Baptist was an ascetic himself, so it is no wonder his followers adopted the Pharisaic fasts . (Witherington, France)

The Greek doesn’t actually identify the questioners with fast-keepers, and while it is often taken that way and considered a hostile interrogation, it might be a simple inquiry by outsiders about the differences between the Pharisees, John the Baptist’s disciples, and Jesus’ group.(France)

The point in asking Jesus is that as the teacher he is responsible for His students.(Witherington)

Parables: Hebrew maskal, which can include riddles, aphorisms, proverbs, extended analogies, narratives and full or partial allegories. Jesus’ frequent use of parables is typical of sages and rabbis of His day, for the form was growing in popularity in the first century among Jews. Jesus’ parables were not like those of the OT sages, but rather a prophetic version of Wisdom sayings (2 Sam 12:1-4; Ezk 17:3-10; Is 5:1-6)(Witherington)

Parables in early Judaism frequently had explanations with them. Forty-two of the seventy-nine parables in the Synoptic Gospels have explanations. Thus it is unlikely the explanations of the gospels come from from the early church and not Jesus.(Witherington)

Jesus’ parables differ from His fellows’ in several ways:

1.They are counter-cultural, challenging normal wisdom in an individual way.

2.They are almost never used to interpret scripture or clarify laws or rules.

3.They are not concerned with the normal wisdom topic (how to live a better life) but about world-changing matters that necessarily overthrow conventional wisdom.(Witherington)

Mark 2:19
Verse 20 assumes Christians will fast (Matt 6:16-18; Acts 13:2-3, 14:23), but says the appropriate time to do so is after Jesus is gone.(France)

Wedding feasts were normally a week long, during which fasting and hard labor were forbidden. (Keener)

Jesus answers by drawing an analogy with a wedding, where Jesus is the groom and the disciples His groomsmen, espcially those responsible for guarding the bridal chamber. Ancient Jewish weddings were long, joyous, partying affairs. Jesus ruins the image of merrymaking by declaring the groom (Himself) will be taken away, and then the groomsmen will fast.(Witherington)

The wedding metaphor is about a new covenant with new rules of behavior. There is no evidence that bridegroom metaphors were used in Judaism about the Messiah, therefore the assumption is the metaphor must have come from Jesus or the early church (Matt 22:1-4, 25:1-13, Eph 5:22-32; 2 Cor 11:2, Rev 19:7,9, 22:17). Typically Jesus doesn;t directly identify Himself as the groom, which the NT letters are more explicit in doing. Nevertheless the focus here is on Jesus as the bridegroom, and the reference can be seen as a veiled messianic claim. (Witherington, France)

Mark 2:20
Traditionally seen as a hint of the cross, but v.19 has hints of Jesus’ separation from His followers, and since this incident takes place after John the Baptist’s arrest in 1:14, it is not necessarily supernaturally prescient of Jesus to predict His removal by force.(France)

That Jesus made no plans for His community after He was gone is not the necessary interpretation of the gospels, nor does it credit Him with much common sense.(France)

Mark 2:21-22
Textual variants: Two subtle ones found in verse 22. The first is the addition of the word “spilled” and the shift of “ruined/lost” to the wineskins in the (N)KJV, as opposed to the “ruined/lost” wine and wineskins in HCSB. This is a more technical variant, as the support for “spilled…ruined” is seemingly excellent: Manuscripts S A C D L (W Theta) f1,13 33 Majority, while “ruined/lost” has only P88 B 892 for support. The reasons text critics favor “ruined/lost” are:

1.P88 is earliest manuscript

2.B, Codex Vaticanus, is generally the single most reliable Greek NT manuscript.

3.The rule is shorter readings are normally preferred over longer ones.

4.Longer readings are normally explained as expansions of shorter ones, often to conform the shorter reading to a similar longer one elsewhere, or to explain something unclear in the short reading.

The second set of variants are “new wine for fresh wineskins” HCSB and “new wine is put into fresh wineskins”(N)KJV. There is another variant as well, but the longer two seem plain grammatical improvements in the short original “new wine for fresh wineskins”.(Comfort)

Wine and new clothes are common at weddings, which might connect the sayings. The point plainly is that the new kingdom of God inaugurated by Jesus requires new ideas and actions, not a joining of old ways and new, which will not work. (Witherington)

Unshrunk/new cloth is material which has not been cleaned and combed to remove oil and gum, as well as bleached, which pre-shrinks the material. Thus unshrunk cloth would shrink when it was washed, and if combined with shrunk material would create a tear, or or larger tear if used as a patch.(France)

Wineskins were made of leather, which at first was pliable, but over time became stiff and brittle with use and exposure to the wine inside. New wine was normally fermented in a vat first, then in a second final stage was put in jars or wineskins to finish fermentation.

Mark 2:23-28
The controversy here is not about the disciples taking grain from a field owned by someone else, for the Law allowed that (Deu 23:25; Lev 23:22). All Jews agreed on the importance of the day of rest, but differed on how practically to observe it. The OT gave some examples of prohibited actions, “work” to avoid on the Sabbath,(Ex 16:22-30, 34:21, 35:2-3; Num 15:32-36; Neh 10:31, 13:15-22; Jer 17:21-22). The Book of Jubilees and the Damascus Document of the Dead Sea Scrolls made longer lists of prohibitions for the Sabbath, but these still were hardly a comprehensive list. It wasn’t until about 200 AD that the Jewish legal scholars compiled the Misnah, which was a legal code, including long sections about Sabbath-keeping. But some parts of this code were doubtless in effect in Jesus’ day.(Witherington, France)

The issue is the act of reaping, a form of work on the Sabbath disallowed in Ex 34:21 and explicitly condemned in the collection of Jewish legal opinion the Mishnah. Maurice Casey is quoted by Witherington as explaining the dispute as stemming from the different viewpoints of the Pharisees, who saw themselves as guardians of the Law and promoters of stricter legal observance, and the prophetic viewpoint of Jesus, which focused on God and one’s fellow, not piety expressed in ritual. Jesus saw healing on the Sabbath and here, reaping food when hungry and poor, even on the Sabbath, as perfectly in line with the true intent of the Law.(Witherington)

The season was likely early summer, the place (judging by the mention of the synagogue and the lakeshore) near Capernaum.(France)

Interestingly, Jesus’ appeal to the story of David and the showbread is not proper legal argument in traditional rabbinic debate, apparently, and may be interpreted as a way of annoying the Pharisees. On the other hand, Keener opines that having cited a precedent from the Bible, Jesus has blocked the Pharisees’ ability to drag He and His disciples before the local priests for trial. Jesus mentions those with David (1 Sam 21:2) because He is defending the disciples. (France, Keener)

The 1 Sam 21 account doesn’t say the incident occurred on the sabbath, but it is a fair inference from 1 Sam 21:6’s mention of replacing the showbread, required on the sabbath(Lv 24:8).(France)

The argument seems to be a claim by Jesus to authority like David’s, who is approved by scripture for violating the Law. (France)

Mark 2:26
Abiathar was not high priest at the time of David’s showbread incident, but his father Ahimelech (1 Sam 21:1-7). Abiathar is mentioned first in 1 Sam 22:20, and isn’t high priest then. But there was a practice of calling anyone in the high priestly family with administrative authority “high priest” in Jesus’ day. It might also be that either Jesus, Peter, or Mark were wrong or using vague “in Abiathar’s day” or “in the portion of scripture with Abiathar” language. Interestingly, in 1 Sam 22:20 Abiathar is Ahimelech’s son, while 2 Sam 8:17 and 1 Chr 24:6 call Ahimelech Abiathar’s son, leading some to speculate both had both names, or there was a line of Ahimelechs and Abiathars in that family, father, son, and grandson(?). It gets to remain a puzzle.(Comfort, NET)

Mark 2:27-28

Verses 27-28 combine to make many scholars see “Son of man” in v.28 as a generic “human being” reference. Sabbath made for man, thus man rules the sabbath. This is a standard Jewish viewpoint found in various intertestamental literature like Jubilees, 2 Baruch, and 2 Esdras. However the use of David and the notorious ambiguity of “son of man” in Jesus’ mouth leaves one to suspect a double sense here, as in other occurrences of “son of man”. Man rules the Sabbath, and Jesus, the Man God, rules the Sabbath even more so. The phrase is an implicit authority claim.(France, Witherington)

Gospel of Mark Chapter 2:15-28 Antique Commentary Quotes

Catena Aurea
Mar 2:13-17
Chrys.: Now this is the same publican who is named by all the Evangelists; Matthew by Matthew; simply Levi by Luke; and Levi, the son of Alphaeus, by Mark; for he was the son of Alphaeus. And you may find persons with two names in other parts of Scripture; as Moses’ father in law is sometimes called Jethro, sometimes Raguel.

Bede, in Marc., 11: So also the same person is called Levi and Matthew; but Luke and Mark, on account of their reverence and the honour of the Evangelist, are unwilling to put the common name, while Matthew is a just accuser of himself, and calls himself Matthew and publican. He wishes to shew to his hearers that no one who is converted should despair of his salvation, since he himself was suddenly changed from a publican into an Apostle. but he says that he was sitting at the ‘teloneum,’ that is, the place where the customs are looked after and administered. For ‘telos’ in Greek is the same as ‘vectigal,’ customs, in Latin.

Theophylact: For he sat at the receipt of custom, either, as is often done, exacting from some, or making up accounts, or doing some actions of that sort, which publicans are wont to do in their abodes, yea this man, who was raised on high from this state of life that he might leave all things and follow Christ. Wherefore it goes on, “And He saith to him, Follow Me, &c.”

Bede: Now to follow is to imitate, and therefore in order to imitate the poverty of Christ, in the feeling of his soul even more than in outward condition, he who used to rob his neighbour’s wealth, now leaves his own. And not only did he quit the gain of the customs, but he also despised the peril, which might come from the princes of this world, because he left the accounts of the customs imperfect and unsettled. For the Lord Himself, Who externally, by human language, called Him to follow, inflamed him inwardly by divine inspiration to follow Him the moment that He called him.

Pseudo-Jerome: Thus then Levi, which means Appointed, followed from the custom-house of human affairs, the Word, Who says, “He who doth not quit all that he has, cannot be My disciple.”

Theophylact: But he who used to plot against others becomes so benevolent, that he invites many persons to eat with him.Wherefore it goes on: “And it came to pass, that as Jesus sat at meat in his house.”

Bede, in Marc. i, 12: The persons here called publicans are those who exact the public customs, or men who farm the customs of the exchequer or of republics; moreover, those also, who follow after the gain of this world by business, are called by the same name. They who had seen that the publican, converted from his sins to better things, had found a place of pardon, even for this reason themselves also do not despair of salvation.

And they come to Jesus, not remaining in their former sins, as the Pharisees and Scribes complain, but in penitence, as the following words of the Evangelist shew, saying, “For there were many who followed Him.”

For the Lord went to the feasts of sinners, that He might have an opportunity of teaching them, and might set before His entertainers spiritual meats, which also is carried on in mystical figures. For he who receives Christ into his inward habitation is fed with the highest delights of overflowing pleasures.

Therefore the Lord enters willingly, and takes up His abode in the affection of him who hath believed on Him; and this is the spiritual banquet of good works, which the rich cannot have, and on which the poor feast.

Bede: If by the election of Matthew and calling of the publicans, the faith of the Gentiles is expressed, who formerly were intent on the gains of this world; certainly the haughtiness of the Scribes and Pharisees intimates the envy of the Jewish people, who are vexed at the salvation of the Gentiles. It goes on: “When Jesus heard it, He saith unto them, They that are whole need not the physician, but they that are sick.”

He aims at the Scribes and Pharisees, who, thinking themselves righteous, refused to keep company with sinners. He calls Himself the physician, Who, by a strange mode of healing, was wounded on account of our iniquities, and by His wound we are healed. And He calls those whole and righteous, who, wishing to establish their own righteousness, are not subject to the righteousness of God. Moreover He calls those rich and sinners, who, overcome by the consciousness of their own frailty, and seeing that they cannot be justified by the Law, submit their necks to the grace of Christ by repentance. Wherefore it is added, “For I came not to call the righteous, but sinners, &c.”

John Gill
Mar 2:15 And it came to pass, that as Jesus sat at meat in his house,…. In the house of Levi; not in the custom house, or toll booth, for that he left; but in his house in the city of Capernaum, where he had him, and made an entertainment for him, in token of gratitude, for the high favour bestowed on him:

many publicans and sinners sat also together, with Jesus, and his disciples; being invited by Levi, and not objected to by Christ; See Gill on Mat_9:10.

for there were many, and they followed him; either Christ whom they had observed to have called Matthew, and had heard preach by the sea side; or else Matthew; and so the Persic version renders it, “for many followed Matthew”. The Ethiopic version reads the words, “and they were many”, that is, publicans and sinners, “and the Scribes and Pharisees followed him”; mentioned in the next verse, from whence it seems to be taken; though true it is, that not only a large number of publicans and sinners followed Christ, but also many of the Scribes and Pharisees; yet with a different view from the former, not to get any advantage to themselves, but, if they could, an advantage against Christ.

John Wesley
Mar 2:15 Many publicans and notorious sinners sat with Jesus – Some of them doubtless invited by Matthew, moved with compassion for his old companions in sin. But the next words, For there were many, and they followed him, seem to imply, that the greater part, encouraged by his gracious words and the tenderness of his behaviour, and impatient to hear more, stayed for no invitation, but pressed in after him, and kept as close to him as they could.

Albert Barnes
Mar 2:15
Sat at meat in the house – The words “at meat” are not in the original. The phrase means “as he reclined at his meal,” or “as he was eating.” This feast was made by Matthew in honor of the Saviour. See Luk_5:29.

Publicans – See the notes at Mat_5:47.

Sinners – Sinners of abandoned character – of the same character that publicans commonly sustained – fit companions of publicans – great sinners.

There were many – That is, many “disciples.” Their following him, leaving their homes, and going with him from place to place, was proof of their attachment to him. There is no doubt that our Saviour, in the early part of his ministry, was extremely popular. Multitudes of the common people attended him, and gave conclusive evidence that they were his real disciples, and it was only after much opposition from the rich and the great that he ever became unpopular among the people. Perhaps no preacher has ever attracted so universal attention, and produced so decisive effects upon mankind, as did our Lord in his personal ministry.

Adam Clarke
Mar 2:16
Sinners – By αμαρτωλοι, the Gentiles or heathens are generally to be understood in the Gospels, for this was a term the Jews never applied to any of themselves, See the note on Mat_9:10.

How is it that he eateth – Some very good MSS., several versions, with Chrysostom and Augustin, read, Why doth Your Master eat?

A.T. Robertson
Mar 2:16
The scribes of the Pharisees (hoi grammateis ton Pharisaion). This is the correct text. Cf. “their scribes” in Luk_5:30. Matthew gave a great reception (dochen, Luk_5:29) in his house (Mar_2:15). These publicans and sinners not simply accepted Levi’s invitation, but they imitated his example “and were following Jesus” (kai ekolouthoun autoi). It was a motly crew from the standpoint of these young theologues, scribes of the Pharisees, who were on hand, being invited to pick flaws if they could. It was probably in the long hall of the house where the scribes stood and ridiculed Jesus and the disciples, unless they stood outside, feeling too pious to go into the house of a publican. It was an offence for a Jew to eat with Gentiles as even many of the early Jewish Christians felt (Act_11:3) and publicans and sinners were regarded like Gentiles (1Co_5:11).

John Calvin
Mar 2:17
Not they who are in health need a physician It is evident from Christ’s reply that the scribes erred in two ways: they did not take into account the office of Christ; and, while they spared their own vices, they proudly despised all others. This deserves our particular attention, for it is a disease which has been always very general. Hypocrites, being satisfied and intoxicated with a foolish confidence in their own righteousness, do not consider the purpose for which Christ was sent into the world, and do not acknowledge the depth of evils in which the human race is plunged, or the dreadful wrath and curse of God which lies on all, or the accumulated load of vices which weighs them down.

The consequence is, that they are too stupid to feel the miseries of men, or to think of a remedy. While they flatter themselves, they cannot endure to be placed in their own rank, and think that injustice is done them, when they are classed with transgressors. Our Lord glances at this second error by replying, that they who are in health have no need of a physicianIt is an ironical admission, and is intended to show that they are offended when they see sinners, because they claim righteousness for themselves. Because you are in health, (he says,) you despise the sick, are offended at them, and cannot endure the sight of them: but a physician ought to be affected in a very different manner. He afterwards points out that he must discharge the duties of a physician, because he has been sent by the Father to call sinners

Though Christ begins with reproof, yet if we desire to make progress in his doctrine, what he has put in the second place must receive our first consideration. He came to quicken the dead, to justify the guilty and condemned, to wash those who were polluted and full of uncleanness, to rescue the lost from hell, to clothe with his glory those who were covered with shame, to renew to a blessed immortality those who were debased by disgusting vices. If we consider that this was his office and the end of his coming, — if we remember that this was the reason why he took upon him our flesh, why he shed his blood, why he offered the sacrifice of his death, why he descended even to hell, we will never think it strange that he should gather to salvation those who have been the worst of men, and who have been covered with a mass of crimes.

He whom you detest appears to you to be unworthy of the grace of Christ. Why then was Christ himself made a sacrifice and a curse, but that he might stretch out his hand to accursed sinners? Now, if we feel disgust at being associated by Baptism and the Lord’s Supper with vile men, and regard our connection with them as a sort of stain upon us, we ought immediately to descend into ourselves, and to search without flattery our own evils. Such an examination will make us willingly allow ourselves to be washed in the same fountain with the most impure, and will hinder us from rejecting the righteousness which he offers indiscriminately to all the ungodly, the life which he offers to the dead, and the salvation which he offers to the lost.

Adam Clarke
Mar 2:17
To repentance – This is omitted by ABDKL, twenty-seven others; both the Syriac, Persic, Coptic, Ethiopic, Armenian, Gothic, Vulgate; six copies of the Itala; Euthymius and Augustin. Griesbach has left it out of the text; Grotius, Mill, and Bengel approve of the omission. See on Mat_9:13 (note). I leave it as in the parallel place above quoted. Properly speaking, the righteous cannot be called to repentance. They have already forsaken sin, mourned for it, and turned to God. In the other parallel place, Luk_5:32, all the MSS. and versions retain μετανοιαν, repentance.

Catena Aurea
Mar 2:18-22
Gloss.: As above, the Master was accused to the disciples for keeping company with sinners in their feasts, so now, on the other hand, the disciples are complained of to the Master for their omission of fasts, that so matter for dissension might arise amongst them. Wherefore it is said, “And the disciples of John and the Pharisees used to fast.”

Chrys.: The disciples of John, therefore, and of the Pharisees, being jealous of Christ, ask Him, whether He alone of all men with His disciples could, without abstinence and toil, conquer in the fight of the passions.

Bede: But John did not drink wine and strong drink, because he who has no power by nature, obtains more merit by abstinence. But why should the Lord, to whom it naturally belonged to forgive sins, shun those whom he could make more pure, than those who fast? But Christ also fasted, lest He should break the precept, “He ate with sinners,” that thou mightest see His grace, and acknowledge His power. It goes on; “And Jesus said unto them, Can the children, &c.”

Theophylact: We must also understand that every man whose works are good is the son of the Bridegroom; he has the Bridegroom with him, even Christ, and fasts not, that is, does no works of repentance, because he does not sin: but when the Bridegroom is taken away by the man’s falling into sin, then he fasts and is penitent, that he may cure his sin.

Bede: But in a mystical sense, it may thus be expressed; that the disciples of John and the Pharisees fast, because every man who boasts of the works of the law without faith, who follows the traditions of men, and receives the preaching of Christ with his bodily ear, and not by the faith of the heart, keeps aloof from spiritual goods, and wastes away with a fasting soul. But he who is incorporated into the members of Christ by a faithful love cannot fast, because he feasts upon His Body and Blood.

It goes on, “No one seweth a piece of” rough, that is, “new, cloth on an old garment: else the new piece that filleth it up taketh away from the old, and the rent is made worse.”

Bede: For He compares His disciples to old bottles, who would burst at spiritual precepts, rather than be held in restraint by them. But they will be new bottles, when after the ascension of the Lord, they are renewed by desiring His consolation, and then new wine will come to the new bottles, that is, the fervour of the Holy Ghost will fill the hearts of spiritual men. A teacher must also take heed not to commit the hidden things of the new mysteries to a soul, hardened in old wickedness.

Theophylact: Or else the disciples are likened to old garments on account of the infirmity of their minds, on which it was not fitting to impose the heavy command of fasting.

Bede: Neither was it fitting to sew on a new piece; that is, a portion of doctrine which teaches a general fast from all the joy of temporal delights; for if this be done, the teaching is rent, and agrees not with the old part. But by a new garment is intended good works, which are done externally, and by the new wine, is expressed the fervour of faith, hope, and charity, by which we are reformed in our minds.

John Calvin
Mar 2:18
Then come to him the disciples of John.Luke represents the Pharisees as speaking: Mark appears to connect both. And, indeed, there is no room to doubt that the Pharisees maliciously endeavored, by this stratagem, to draw the disciples of John to their party, and to produce a quarrel between them and the disciples of Christ. A resemblance in prayers and fastings was a plausible pretext for associating at this time: while the different manner in which Christ acted was an occasion of enmity and dislike to men whose temper was unamiable, and who were excessively devoted to themselves.

This example reminds us, that prudence and caution are necessary to prevent wicked and cunning men from sowing divisions among us on any slight grounds. Satan has a wonderful dexterity, no doubt, in laying those snares; and it is an easy matter to distress us about a trifle. But we ought especially to beware lest the unity of faith be destroyed, or the bond of charity broken, on account of outward ceremonies. Almost all labor under the disease of attaching undue importance to the ceremonies and elements of the world, as Paul calls them, (Gal_4:3; Col_2:8;) and accordingly they do not hesitate, for the most part, to prefer the merest rudiments to the highest perfection. This is followed by another evil arising out of fastidiousness and pride, when every man would willingly compel the whole world to copy his example. If any thing pleases us, we forthwith desire to make it a law, that others may live according to our pleasure.

When we read that the disciples of John were caught by these snares of Satan, let us first learn not to place holiness in outward and indifferent matters, and at the same time to restrain ourselves by moderation and equity, that we may not desire to restrict others to what we approve, but may allow every one to retain his freedom. As to fasting and prayers, it ought to be understood, that John gave his disciples a particular training, and that for this purpose they had stated days for fastings, a settled form, and fixed hours of prayer. Now, I reckon those prayers among outward observances. For, though calling on God holds the first rank in spiritual worship, yet that method of doing it was adapted to the unskilfulness of men, and is justly reckoned among ceremonies and indifferent matters, the observance of which ought not to be too strictly enjoined. Of the reason why John’s discipline was more severe than that of Christ we have already spoken, and a more convenient opportunity for treating of it will again occur.

John Gill

Mark 2:18

saying, why do we, and the Pharisees, fast oft, but thy disciples fast not? Not that they wanted to know the reason why they and the Pharisees fasted; that they could account for themselves, but why Christ’s disciples did not: and this is said not so much by way of inquiry, as reproof; and their sense is; that Christ’s disciples ought to fast, as well as they and the Pharisees, and not eat, and drink, and feast in the manner they did. The fastings here referred to are not the public fasts enjoined by the law of Moses, or in any writings of the Old Testament; but private fasts, which were enjoined by John to his disciples, and by the Pharisees to their’s; or which were, according to the traditions of the elders, or of their own appointing, and which were very “often” indeed: for besides their fasting twice a week, on Monday and Thursday, Luk_18:12 they had a multitude of fasts upon divers occasions, particularly for rain (c). If the 17th of Marchesvan, or October, came, and there was no rain, private persons kept three days of fasting, viz. Monday, Thursday, and Monday again: and if the month of Cisleu, or November, came, and there was no rain, then the sanhedrim appointed three fast days, which were on the same days as before, for the congregation; and if still there was no rain came, they added three more; and if yet there were none, they enjoined seven more, in all thirteen, which R. Acha and R. Barachiah kept themselves (d). Fasts were kept also on account of many other evils, as pestilence, famine, war, sieges, inundations, or any other calamity; sometimes for trifling things, as for dreams (e), that they might have good ones, or know how to interpret them, or avoid any ill omen by them; and it is almost incredible what frequent fastings some of the Rabbins exercised themselves with, on very insignificant occasions. They (f) say,

“R. Jose צם תמניי צומין, “fasted fourscore fasts” to see R. Chiyah Rubba; at last he saw, and his hands trembled, and his eyes grew dim: –R. Simeon Ben Lakish צם תלת מאוון צומין, “fasted three hundred fastings” to see R. Chiyah Rubba, and did not see him.”

Elsewhere it is said, that R. Ase fasted “thirty days” to see the same person, and saw him not (g). Again (h),

“R. Jonathan fasted every eve of the new year, R. Abin fasted every eve of the feast of tabernacles, R. Zeura fasted “three hundred fasts”, and there are that say “nine hundred fasts”.”

This may serve to illustrate and prove the frequency of the Jewish fastings. Luke represents this question as put by the Pharisees, which is here put by the disciples of John: it was doubtless put by both agreeing in this matter; and which shows that John’s disciples were instigated to it by the Pharisees, who sought to sow discord between them, and to bring Christ and his disciples into contempt with them.

(c) Misn. Taanith, c. 1. sect. 4. 5, 6. & c. 3. sect. 4, 5, 6, 7, 8. Maimon. & Bartenora in ib. (d) T. Hieros. Taanlot, fol. 65. 2. & 66. 4. (e) T. Bab. Sabbat. fol. 10. 1. Maimon Taaniot, c. 1. sect. 12-14. (f) T. Hieros. Cilaim, fol. 32. 2. & Cetubot, fol. 35. 1. (g) Midrash Kohelet, fol. 79. 1. (h) lb. Nedarim, fol. 40. 4. & Taanioth, fol. 66. 1.

A.T. Robertson
Mar 2:18
John’s disciples and the Pharisees were fasting (esan hoi mathetai Ioanou kai hoi Pharisaioi nesteuontes). The periphrastic imperfect, so common in Mark’s vivid description. Probably Levi’s feast happened on one of the weekly fast-days (second and fifth days of the week for the stricter Jews). So there was a clash of standpoints. The disciples of John sided with the Pharisees in the Jewish ceremonial ritualistic observances. John was still a prisoner in Machaerus. John was more of an ascetic than Jesus (Mat_18:1.; Luk_7:33-35), but neither one pleased all the popular critics. These learners (mathetai) or disciples of John had missed the spirit of their leader when they here lined up with the Pharisees against Jesus. But there was no real congeniality between the formalism of the Pharisees and the asceticism of John the Baptist. The Pharisees hated John who had denounced them as broods of vipers. Here the disciples of John and the disciples of the Pharisees (hoi mathetai Ioanou kai hoi mathetai ton Pharisaion) join in criticizing Jesus and his disciples. Later we shall see Pharisees, Sadducees, and Herodians, who bitterly detested each other, making com- mon cause against Jesus Christ. So today we find various hostile groups combining against our Lord and Saviour. See notes on Mat_9:14-17 for comments. Matthew has here followed Mark closely.

John Calvin
Mar 2:19
15. Can the children of the bridegroom mourn?Christ apologizes for his disciples on the score of the season, alleging that God was still pleased to indulge them in joyous feelings, as if they were present at a marriage: for he compares himself to the bridegroom, who enlivens his friends by his presence. Chrysostomthinks that this comparison was taken from the testimony of John the Baptist, He that hath the bride is the bridegroom,(Joh_3:29.) I have no objection to that view, though I do not think that it rests on solid grounds. Let us be satisfied with Christ’s declaration, that he spares his disciples, and treats them with gentleness, so long as he is with them. That none may envy them advantages which are of short duration, he gives warning that they will very soon be treated with greater harshness and severity.

The apology rests on this consideration, that fasting and prayers are adapted to sorrow and adversity: extraordinary prayers I mean, such as are here mentioned. Christ certainly intended to accustom them, by degrees, to greater patience, and not to lay on them a heavy burden, till they gained more strength. Hence we ought to learn a twofold instruction. When the Lord sometimes endures the weakness of our brethren, and acts towards them with gentleness, while he treats us with greater severity, we have no right to murmur. Again, when we sometimes obtain relief from sorrow and from vexations, let us beware of giving ourselves up to enjoyments; but let us, on the contrary, remember that the nuptials will not always last. The children of the bridegroom, or of the nuptial bed, is a Hebrew phrase, which denotes the guests at a marriage.

Adam Clarke
Mar 2:19
Can the children of the bride-chamber – Νυμφωνος. Or, νυμφιου, bridegroom, as the Cod. Bezae and several versions have it. These persons were the companions of the bridegroom, who accompanied him to the house of his father-in-law when he went to bring the bride to his own home. The marriage-feast among the Jews lasted seven days; but the new married woman was considered to be a bride for thirty days. Marriage feasts were times of extraordinary festivity, and even of riot, among several people of the east.

When the bridegroom shall be taken from them, etc. – There was one annual fast observed in the primitive Church, called by our ancestors the spring fast, and, by us, Lent; by the Greeks τεσσερακοϚη, and by the Latins, Quadrigessima. This fast is pretended to be kept by many, in the present day, in commemoration of our Lord’s forty days’ fast in the wilderness; but it does not appear that, in the purest ages of the primitive Church, genuine Christians ever pretended that their quadrigessimal fast was kept for the above purpose. Their fast was kept merely to commemorate the time during which Jesus Christ lay under the power of death, which was about Forty Hours; and it was in this sense they understood the words of this text: the days will come, etc. With them, the bridegroom meant Christ: the time in which he was taken away, his crucifixion, death, and the time he lay in the grave. Suppose him dying about twelve o’clock on what is called Friday, and that he rose about four on the morning of his own day, (St. John says, Early, while it was yet dark, Mat_20:1), the interim makes forty hours, which was the true primitive Lent, or quadrigessimal fast. It is true that many in the primitive Church were not agreed on this subject, as Socrates, in his Church History, book v. chap. 22, says, “Some thought they should fast one day; others two; others more.” Different Churches also were divided concerning the length of the time, some keeping it three, others five, and others seven weeks; and the historian himself is puzzled to know why they all agreed in calling these fasts, differing so much in their duration, by the name of Quadrigessima, or forty days’ fast: the plain obvious reason appears to me to have been simply this: They put Days in the place of Hours; and this absurdity continues in some Christian Churches to the present day. For more on fasting, see Mat_6:16.

A.T. Robertson
Mar 2:19
The sons of the bridechamber (hoi huioi tou numphonos). Not merely the groomsmen, but the guests also, the paranymphs (paranumphoi of the old Greek). Jesus here adopts the Baptist’s own metaphor (Joh_3:29), changing the friend of the bridegroom (ho philos tou numphiou) to sons of the bridechamber. Jesus identifies himself with the bridegroom of the O.T. (Hos_2:21), God in his covenant relation with Israel (Swete). Mourning does not suit the wedding feast. Mark, Matthew, and Luke all give the three parables (bridegroom, unfulled cloth, new wineskins) illustrating and defending the conduct of Jesus in feasting with Levi on a Jewish fast-day. Luk_5:36 calls these parables. Jesus here seems iconoclastic to the ecclesiastics and revolutionary in emphasis on the spiritual instead of the ritualistic and ceremonial.

John Calvin
Mar 2:21
21. And no man putteth a piece of fresh cloth.He supports the preceding statement by two comparisons, one of which is taken from garments, and the other from vessels of wine. Those who think that he compares worn-out garments and decayed bottles to the Pharisees, and new wine and fresh cloth to the doctrine of the gospel, have no probability on their side. The comparison is beautifully adapted to the matter in hand, if we explain it as referring to the weak and tender disciples of Christ, and to a discipline more strict than they were able to bear. Nor is it of any consequence that the idea of being old does not agree with scholars who were only commencing: for, when Christ compares his disciples to old bottles and torn garments, he does not mean that they were wasted by long use, but that they were weak and wanted strength. The amount of the statement is, that all must not be compelled indiscriminately to live in the same manner, for there is a diversity of natural character, and all things are not suitable to all; and particularly, we ought to spare the weak, that they may not be broken by violence, or crushed by the weight of the burden. Our Lord speaks according to the custom of the country, when he uses the word bottles instead of tuns or casks.

John Gill
Mar 2:22 Neither do men put new wine into old bottles,…. As in the former parable, our Lord exposes the folly of the Scribes and Pharisees, in their zealous attachment to the traditions of the elders; so in this, he gives a reason why he did not call these persons by his Gospel, who were settled upon the old principle of self-righteousness, but sinners, whom he renews by his Spirit and grace: for by “old bottles” are meant, the Scribes and Pharisees. The allusion is to bottles, made of the skins of beasts, which in time decayed, waxed old, and became unfit for use: such were the wine bottles, old and rent, the Gibeonites brought with them, and showed to Joshua, Jos_9:4 and to which the Psalmist compares himself, Psa_119:83 and which the Misnic doctors call חמתות, and their commentators (o) say, were נודת של עור, “bottles made of skin”, or “leather”, and so might be rent. Of the use of new and old bottles, take the following hint out of the “Talmud” (p).

“The bottles of the Gentiles, if scraped and חדשים, “new”, they are free for use; if ישנים, “old”, they are forbidden.”

Now the Scribes and Pharisees may be signified by these old bottles, being natural men, no other than as they were born; having never been regenerated, and renewed in the spirit of their minds; in whom the old man was predominant, were mere formal professors of religion, and self-righteous persons: and by “new wine” is meant, either the love and favour of God compared to wine, that is neat and clean, because free from hypocrisy in him, or motives in the creature; to generous wine, for its cheering and reviving effects; and to new wine, not but that it is very ancient, even from everlasting, but, because newly manifested, in the effectual calling and conversion: or the Gospel is signified by wine, for its purity, good flavour, and pleasant taste; for its generous effects, in reviving drooping spirits, refreshing weary persons, and comforting distressed minds; and by new wine, not that it is a new doctrine, an upstart notion, for it is an ancient Gospel, but because newly and more clearly revealed by Christ and his apostles: or the blessings of grace which spring from the love of God, and are manifested in the Gospel, such as pardon of sin, reconciliation and atonement, justifying and sanctifying grace, spiritual joy and peace, and the like. Now as the new wine is not put into old bottles,

else the bottles break, and the wine runneth out, and the bottles perish: so the love of God, the Gospel of the grace of God, and the blessings of it, are not received and retained, nor can they be, by natural men, by self-righteous persons: they do not suit and agree with their old carnal hearts and principles; they slight and reject them, and let them run out, which proves their greater condemnation.

But they put new wine into new bottles, and both are preserved. By “new bottles” are meant sinners, whom Christ calls by his grace, and the Spirit regenerates and renews, who are made new creatures in Christ; who have new hearts, and new spirits, and new principles of light, life, love, faith, and holiness, implanted in them; who have new eyes to see with, new ears to hear with, new feet to walk with, to and in Christ, new hands to work and handle with, and who live a new life and conversation. Now to such as these, the love of God is manifested and shed abroad in their hearts; by these, the Gospel of Christ is truly received and valued, and these enjoy the spiritual blessings of it; and so both the doctrine of the Gospel, and the grace of God, are preserved entire, and these persons saved in the day of Christ.

(o) Jarchi & Bartenora in Misn. Celim, c. 24. sect. 11. & Negaim, c. 11. sect. 11. (p) T. Bab. Avoda Zara, fol. 33. 1.

Adam Clarke
Mar 2:22
New wine into old bottles – It is still the custom, in the eastern countries, to make their bottles of goat skins: if these happened to be old, and new wine were put into them, the violence of the fermentation must necessarily burst them; and therefore newly made bottles were employed for the purpose of putting that wine in which had not yet gone through its state of fermentation. The institutes of Christ, and those of the Pharisees, could never be brought to accord: an attempt to combine the two systems would be as absurd as it would be destructive. The old covenant made way for the new, which was its completion and its end; but with that old covenant the new cannot be incorporated.

Christian prudence requires that the weak, and newly converted, should be managed with care and tenderness. To impose such duties and mortifications as are not absolutely necessary to salvation, before God has properly prepared the heart by his grace for them, is a conduct as absurd and ruinous as putting a piece of raw, unscoured cloth on an old garment; it is, in a word, requiring the person to do the work of a man, while as yet he is but a little child. Preachers of the Gospel, and especially those who are instruments in God’s hand of many conversions, have need of much heavenly wisdom, that they may know to watch over, guide, and advise those who are brought to a sense of their sin and danger. How many auspicious beginnings have been ruined by men’s proceeding too hastily, endeavoring to make their own designs take place, and to have the honor of that success themselves which is due only to God.

Catena Aurea
Mar 2:23-28
Theophylact: For David, when flying from the face of Saul [1 Sam 21] went to the Chief Priest, and ate the shew-bread, and took away the sword of Goliath, which things had been offered to the Lord. But a question has been raised how the Evangelist called Abiathar at this time High Priest, when the Book of Kings calls him Abimelech.

Bede: There is, however, no discrepancy, for both were there, when David came to ask for bread, and received it: that is to say, Abimelech, the High Priest, and Abiathar his son; but Abimelech having been slain by Saul, Abiathar fled to David, and became the companion of all his exile afterwards. When he came to the throne, he himself also received the rank of High Priest, and the son became of much greater excellence than the father, and therefore was worthy to be mentioned as the High Priest, even during his father’s life-time. It goes on: “And He said to them, The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath.”

For greater is the care to be taken of the health and life of a man, than the keeping of the sabbath. Therefore the sabbath was ordered to be observed in such a way, that, if there were a neccesity, he should not be guilty, who broke the sabbath-day; therefore it was not forbidden to circumcise on the sabbath, because that was a necessary work. And the Maccabees, when necessity pressed on them, fought on the sabbath-day.

Wherefore, His disciples being hungry, what was not allowed in the law became lawful through their necessity of hunger; as now, if a sick man break a fast, he is not held guilty in any way. It goes on: “Therefore the Son of man is Lord, &c.” As if He said, David the king is to be excused for feeding on the food of the Priests, how much more the Son of man, the true King and Priest, and Lord of the sabbath, is free from fault, for pulling ears of corn on the sabbath-day.

Bede: But in a mystical sense the disciples pass through the corn fields, when the holy doctors look with the care of a pious solicitude upon those whom they have initiated in the faith, and who, it is implied, are hungering for the best of all things, the salvation of men.

But to pluck the ears of corn means to snatch men away from the eager desire of earthly things. And to rub with the hands is by example of virtue to put from the purity of their minds the concupiscence of the flesh, as men do husks. To eat the grains is when a man, cleansed from the filth of vice by the mouths of preachers, is incorporated amongst the members of the Church.

Again, fitly are the disciples related to have done this, walking before the face of the Lord, for it is necessary that the discourse of the doctor should come first, although the grace of visitation from on high, following it, must enlighten the heart of the hearer. As well, on the sabbath-day, for the doctors themselves in [p. 53] preaching labour for the hope of future rest, and teach their hearers to toil over their tasks for the sake of eternal repose.

Theophylact: Or else, because when they have rest from their passions, then are they made doctors to lead others to virtue, plucking away from them earthly things.

Bede: Again, they walk through the corn fields with the Lord, who rejoice in meditating upon His sacred words. They hunger, when they desire to find in them the bread of life; and they hunger on sabbath days, as soon as their minds are in a soothing rest, and they rejoice in freedom from troubled thoughts; they pluck the ears of corn, and by rubbing, cleanse them, till they come to what is fit to eat, when by meditation they take to themselves the witness of the Scriptures, to which they arrive by reading, and discuss them continually, until they find in them the marrow of love; this refreshment of the mind is truly unpleasing to fools, but is approved by the Lord.

John Calvin

Mar 2:23
Jesus was walking on the Sabbath It was the design of the Evangelists, in this history, to show partly what a malicious disposition the Pharisees had, and partly how superstitiously they were attached to outward and slight matters, so as to make holiness to consist in them entirely. They blame the disciples of Christ for plucking the ears of corn on the Sabbath, during their journey, when they were pressed with hunger, as if, by so doing, they were violating the Sabbath. The keeping of the Sabbath was, indeed, a holy thing, but not such a manner of keeping it as they imagined, so that one could scarcely move a finger without making the conscience to tremble. It was hypocrisy, therefore, that made them so exact in trifling matters, while they spared themselves in gross superstitions; as Christ elsewhere upbraids them with paying tithe of mint and anise, and neglecting the important matters of the Law, (Mat_23:23.)

It is the invariable practice of hypocrites to allow themselves liberty in matters of the greatest consequence, and to pay close attention to ceremonial observances. Another reason why they demand that outward rites should be more rigorously observed is, that they wish to make their duty toward God to consist only in carnal worship. But it was malevolence and envy, still more than superstition, that led them to this act of censure; for towards others they would not have been equally stern. It is proper for us to observe the feelings by which they were animated, lest any one should be distressed by the fact, that the very Doctors of the Law were so hostile to Christ.

Adam Clarke
Mar 2:23
At that time Jesus went on the Sabbath-day through the corn – “The time is determined by Luke in these words, εν σαββατω δευτεροπρωτω, that is, on the Sabbath from the second-first.

“Provision was made by the Divine law that the sheaf of first-fruits should be offered on the second day of the pass-over week, Lev_23:10, Lev_23:11. On the morrow after the Sabbath, the priest shall shake (or wave) it. Not on the morrow after the ordinary Sabbath of the week, but the morrow after the first of the pass-over week, which was a Sabbatic day, Exo_12:16; Lev_23:7. Hence the seventy, επαυριον της πρωτης, the morrow of the first day; the Chaldee, the morrow after the holy day. The rabbins, Solomon and Menachen, have it, On the morrow after the first day of the pass-over feast; of which mention had been made in the verses foregoing.

“But now, from the second day of the pass-over solemnity, wherein the sheaf was offered, were numbered seven weeks to pentecost: for the day of the sheaf, and the day of pentecost did mutually respect each other; for on this second day of the pass-over, the offering of the sheaf was supplicatory, and by way of prayer, beseeching a blessing upon the new corn, and leave to eat it, and to pot in the sickle into the standing corn. Now, the offering of the first-fruit loaves on the day of pentecost, (Lev_23:15-17), did respect the giving of thanks for the finishing and housing of the barley-harvest. Therefore, in regard of this relation, these two solemnities were linked together, that both might respect the harvest; that, the harvest beginning; this, the harvest ended: this depended on that, and was numbered seven weeks after it. Therefore, the computation of the time coming between could not but carry with it the memory of that second day of the pass-over week; and hence pentecost is called the feast of weeks, Deu_16:10. The true calculation of the time between could not otherwise be retained, as to Sabbaths, but by numbering thus: this is σαββατον δευτεροπρωτον, the first Sabbath after the second day of the pass-over. This is δευτεροδευρερον, the second Sabbath after that second day. And so of the rest. In the Jerusalem Talmud, the word שבת פרוטוגמייא shebeth protogamiya, the Sabbath, πρωτογαμιας, of the first marriage, is a composition not very unlike.” Lightfoot.

His disciples were an hungered – Were hungry. The former is a mode of expression totally obsolete. How near does the translation of this verse come to our ancient mother-tongue, the Anglo-Saxon! – The Healer went on rest-day over acres: truly his learning knights hungred, and they began to pluck the ear and eaten – We may well wonder at the extreme poverty of Christ and his disciples. He was himself present with them, and yet permitted them to lack bread! A man, therefore, is not forsaken of God because he is in want. It is more honorable to suffer the want of all temporal things in fellowship with Christ and his followers, than to have all things in abundance in connection with the world.

Albert Barnes
Mar 2:23
At that time – Luke Luk_6:1 fixes the time more particularly. He says that it was “the second Sabbath after the first.” To understand this, it is proper to remark that the “Passover” was observed during the month “Abib,” or Nisan, answering to the latter part of March and the first of April. The feast was held seven days, commencing on the fourteenth day of the month Exo. 12:1-28; Exo_23:15, on the “second” day of the paschal week. The law required that a sheaf of “barley” should be offered up as the first-fruits of the harvest, Lev_23:10-11. From this day was reckoned seven weeks to the feast of “Pentecost” Lev_23:15-16, called also the feast of weeks Deu_16:10, and the feast of the harvest, Exo_23:16. This second day in the feast of the Passover, or of unleavened bread, was the beginning, therefore, from which they reckoned toward the Pentecost. The Sabbath in the week following would be the “second Sabbath” after this first one in the reckoning, and this was doubtless the time mentioned when Christ went through the fields. It should be further mentioned, that in Judea the barley harvest commences about the beginning of May, and both that and the wheat harvest are over by the twentieth. Barley is in full ear in the beginning of April. There is no improbability, therefore, in this narrative on account of the season of the year. This feast was always held at Jerusalem.

Through the corn – Through the “barley,” or “wheat.” The word “corn,” as used in our translation of the Bible, has no reference to “maize,” or “Indian corn,” as it has with us. Indian corn was unknown until the discovery of America, and it is scarcely probable that the translators knew anything about it. The word “corn” was applied, as it is still in England, to wheat, rye, oats, and barley. This explains the circumstance that they “rubbed it in their hands” Luk_6:1 to separate the grain from the chaff.

To pluck the ears of corn – They were hungry, Mat_12:1. They therefore gathered the wheat or barley as they walked and rubbed it in their hands to shell it, and thus to satisfy their appetite. Though our Lord was with them, and though he had all things at his control, yet he suffered them to resort to this method of supplying their wants. When Jesus, thus “with” his disciples, suffered them to be “poor,” we may learn that poverty is not disgraceful; that God often suffers it for the good of his people; and that he will take care, in some way, that their wants shall be supplied. It was “lawful” for them thus to supply their needs. Though the property belonged to another, yet the law of Moses allowed the poor to satisfy their desires when hungry. See Deu_23:25.

John Calvin
Mar 2:24
Mar_2:24.Why do they on the Sabbath what is not lawful? The Pharisees do not blame the disciples of Christ for plucking ears of corn from a field that was not their own, but for violating the Sabbath; as if there had been a precept to this effect, that famishing men ought rather to die than to satisfy their hunger. Now the only reason for keeping the Sabbath was, that the people, by sanctifying themselves to God, might be employed in true and spiritual worship; and next, that, being free from all worldly occupations, they might be more at liberty to attend the holy assemblies. The lawful observation of it, therefore, must have a reference to this object; for the Law ought to be interpreted according to the design of the Legislator. But this shows clearly the malicious and implacable nature of superstition, and particularly the proud and cruel dispositions of hypocrites, when ambition is joined to hatred of the person. It was not the mere affectation of pretended holiness, as I have said, that made the Pharisees so stern and rigorous; but as they expressly wished to carp at every thing that Christ said or did, they could not do otherwise than put a wrong meaning in cases where there was nothing to blame, as usually happens with prejudiced interpreters. The accusation was brought—according to Matthew and Mark—against our Lord, and—according to Luke—against his disciples. But there is no inconsistency here; for the disciples were in all probability so harassed, that the charge was directed chiefly against the Master himself. It is even possible that the Pharisees first wrangled with the disciples, and afterwards with Christ, and that, in the rage of their malice, they blamed him for remaining silent, and permitting his disciples to break the Sabbath.

John Gill
Mar 2:24 But when the Pharisees saw it,…. Who went along with him, or followed him, being employed to make observation on his words and actions,

they said unto him; Luke says, “unto them”, the disciples: it seems, they took notice of this action both to Christ and his disciples, and first spoke of it to the one, and then to the other, or to both together:

behold thy disciples do that which it is not lawful to do upon the sabbath day! they mention it with astonishment, and indignation. What they refer to, is not their walking on the sabbath day: this they might do, according to their canons, provided they did not exceed two thousand cubits, which were a sabbath day’s journey (f) nor was it their passing through the corn fields; though, according to them (g),

“it was not lawful for a man to visit his gardens, ושדותיו, “or his fields”, on the sabbath day, to see what they want, or how the fruits grow; for such walking is to do his own pleasure.”

But this they knew was not the case of Christ, and his disciples, who were not proprietors of these fields: nor was it merely their plucking the ears of corn, and rubbing and eating them, which were not their own, but another man’s; for this, according to the law, in Deu_23:25 was lawful to be done: but what offended the Pharisees was, that it was done on a sabbath day, it being, as they interpret it, a servile work, and all one as reaping; though, in the law just mentioned, it is manifestly distinguished from it. Their rule is (h).

“he that reaps (on the sabbath day) ever so little, is guilty (of stoning), ותולש תולדה קוצר הוא, and “plucking of ears of corn is a derivative of reaping”;”

and is all one as its primitive, and punishable with the same kind of death, if done presumptuously: so Philo the Jew observes (i), that the rest of the sabbath not only reached to men, bond and free, and to beasts, but even to trees, and plants; and that ου ερνος ου κλαδον, αλλ’ ουδε πεταλον εφειται τεμειν, “it was not lawful to cut a plant, or branch, or so much as a leaf”, on a sabbath day: and it may be what might make this offence of the disciples the more heinous was, that they plucked these ears, and ate them, and so broke their fast before morning prayer; for a man might not eat any thing on a sabbath day until morning prayers were ended in the synagogue, nor indeed on any other day; for they used not to eat bread till after they had offered the daily sacrifice, which was about the third hour of the day, or nine o’clock in the morning; nor did they eat till the fourth hour, or ten o’clock (k).

(f) Ib. c. 27. sect. 1. (g) R. Moses Kotzensis Mitzvot Tora prec. neg. 65. (h) Maimon. Hilch. Sabbat, c. 8. sect. 3. & 7. 1. (i) De Vita Mosis, 1. 2. p. 657. (k) Vid. Targum in Eccl. x. 17. Maimon. Hilch. Tephilla, c. 6. sect. 4

Albert Barnes
Mar 2:24
Upon the Sabbath day – The Pharisees, doubtless desirous of finding fault with Christ, said that in plucking the grain on the “Sabbath day” they had violated the commandment. Moses had commanded the Hebrews to abstain from all servile work on the Sabbath, Exo_20:10; Exo_35:2-3; Num_15:32-36. On any other day this would have been clearly lawful, for it was permitted, Deu_23:25.

John Calvin
Mar 2:25
Have you not read what David did? Christ employs five arguments to refute their calumny. First, he apologizes for his disciples by pleading the example of David, (1Sa_21:6.) While David was fleeing from the rage of Saul, he applied for provisions to the high-priest Ahimelech; and there being no ordinary food at hand, he succeeded in obtaining a part of the holy bread. If David’s necessity excused him, the same argument ought to be admitted in the case of others. Hence it follows, that the ceremonies of the Law are not violated where there is no infringement of godliness. Now Christ takes for granted, that David was free from blame, because the Holy Spirit bestows commendation on the priest who allowed him to partake of the holy bread. When he says, that it was not lawful to eat that bread but for the priests alone, we must understand him to refer to the ordinary law: they shall eat those things wherewith the atonement was made, to consecrate and to sanctify them; but a stranger shall not eat thereof, because they are holy, (Exo_29:33.)

If David had attempted to do what was contrary to law, it would have been in vain for Christ to plead his example; for what had been prohibited for a particular end no necessity could make lawful.

Adam Clarke
Mar 2:25
Have ye not read what David did – The original history is in 1Sa_21:1-6.

When he was an hungered – Here hearken to Kimchi, producing the opinion of the ancients concerning this story in these words: “Our rabbins of blessed memory say, that he gave him the shew-bread, etc. The interpretation also of the clause, Yea, though it were sanctified this day in the vessel, is this: It is a small thing to say, that it is lawful for us to eat These Loaves, taken from before the Lord, when we are hungry; for it would be lawful to eat this very loaf which is now set on, which is also sanctified in the vessel, (for the table sanctifieth), it would be lawful to eat even this, when another loaf is not present with you to give us, and we are so hunger-bitten. And a little after, There is nothing which may hinder taking care of life, beside idolatry, adultery, and murder. That is, a man, according to them, should do any thing but these in order to preserve life.” See Lightfoot.

He entered into the house of God – Viz. the house of Ahimelech the priest, who dwelt at Nob, with whom the tabernacle then was, in which the Divine presence was manifested.

And did eat the shew – bread – Τους αρτους της προθεσεως – in Hebrew, לחם פנים lechem panim – bread of the presence, or faces, because this bread was to be set continually, לפני יהוה lipney Yehovah, before the face of Jehovah. See the notes on Exo_25:23, Exo_25:30.

John Gill
Mar 2:26 How he went into the house of God,…. The tabernacle; for the temple was not yet built: thither David went to get bread for himself and his men, being hungry: so in a spiritual sense, where should such go, who are hungering and thirsting after righteousness, but into the house of God? Here is bread enough, and to spare; here is a table furnished with excellent provisions; here the Gospel is dispensed, which is milk for babes, and meat for strong men; here Christ, the bread of life, is set forth, whose flesh is meat indeed, and whose blood is drink indeed; here the ordinances are administered, which are breasts of consolation to the children of God; here is a feast of fat things, all things are ready, and souls are welcome, and therefore it must be right to attend here. And this was on the sabbath day that David went into the house of God: when the showbread loaves were removed, and divided, among the priests, and new ones were placed in their room: and so under the Gospel dispensation, on the Lord’s day, the day set apart for public worship, it becomes the saints to go up to the house of the Lord, and feed upon the provisions of it: they are a royal priesthood, they are priests, as well as kings to God; and their business is in the house of the Lord, to offer up spiritual sacrifices to him; and as the goodness and fulness of his house appertains to them, they do well to attend and partake thereof.

In the days or Abiathar the high priest: and yet from the history it is clear, that it was in the days of Ahimelech the high priest, the father of Abiathar; wherefore the Jew charges (k) Mark with an error, and Matthew and Luke too: whereas the two last make no mention of the name of any high priest; and it might be observed, that in the Persic version of Mark it is rendered, “under Abimelech the high priest”; and in an ancient copy of Beza’s, the whole clause is omitted; though it must be owned, that so it is read in other Greek copies, and in the ancient versions, the Vulgate Latin, Syriac, Arabic, and others: wherefore let it be further observed, that the fact referred to was done in the days of Abiathar, though it was before he was an high priest; and the particle επι may be so rendered, about, or “before Abiathar was high priest”, as it is in Mat_1:11. Besides, Abiathar was the son of an high priest, and succeeded his father in the office: and might be at this time his deputy, who acted for him, or he by has advice; and according to a rule the Jews (l) themselves give,

“the son of an high priest, who is deputed by his father in his stead, הרי כהן גדול אמור, “lo! he is called an high priest”.”

So that Abiathar might at this time be called the high priest; and is the rather mentioned, because he was the more eminent and famous man; and whom the Jews call (m) Urim and Thummim, because there was much inquiry made by them; in his and his father’s days, and very little after: to which may be added, that the names of the father and the son are sometimes changed; Ahimelech is called Abiathar, and this Abiathar is called Ahimelech, the son of Abiathar, 2Sa_8:17, and Abimelech the son of Abiathar, 1Ch_18:16. And it seems as if both father and son had two names, and were sometimes called by the one, and sometimes by the other: for as the father is sometimes called Abiathar, the son is called Ahimelech, or Abimelech, as in the places mentioned; and which refer to the times when David was king of Israel, and long after the death of Saul, and consequently long after Ahimelech, and the rest of the priests at Nob, were killed by the order of Saul: wherefore Ahimelech, or Abimelech, in the said places, must be the son of Abiathar; and who afterwards was thrust out of the priesthood by Solomon, for joining with Adonijah in his usurpation, 1Ki_1:25. And from whence it appears, that his father was called Abiathar also, and which some take to be their family name; and if so, then there is no difficulty, and the evangelist rightly says, that this affair was in the days of Abiathar: but be it that he intends the son, what has been before observed is a sufficient solution of this difficulty; for the evangelist does not say that Abiathar was high priest, when David came and eat the showbread; he only says, “it was in the days of Abiathar the high priest”: for certain it is, that this happened in his days; and as certain, that he was an high priest; and Mark might with great propriety call him so, though he was not strictly one, till after this business was over: besides, he was not only the son of an high priest, and it may be his deputy, and some have thought officiated at this time, his father being sick or infirm through old age; but inasmuch as his father was directly killed by the order of Saul, he narrowly escaping, immediately succeeded him in the office of the high priesthood; and therefore his being an high priest so very near the time of this action, without any impropriety and impertinence, and especially without incurring the charge of falsehood, the evangelist might express himself as he does.

And did eat the showbread, which is not lawful to eat, but for the priests, and gave also to them which were with him? Who not only ate the showbread, which was set before the Lord, and was sacred, and which none but the priests might eat of, after it was removed from the table; but he did this on the sabbath day; and he not only eat of it himself, but the soldiers that were with him: and all this with the knowledge and leave of the high priest: for the Jews (n) have no reason to charge this evangelist and the others with an error, that others besides David ate of the showbread, urging that he came alone to Ahimelech; since it is evident from 1Sa_21:2,

that David had servants in company with him when he fled, though they did not attend him when he went to the high priest; and that he asked bread, and it was given him, not only for himself, but for the young men that he had appointed to be at such a place: and therefore, if this was allowed to David and his men, when hungry, it ought not to be charged as an evil upon the disciples, for plucking and rubbing a few ears of corn to satisfy their hunger, though on a sabbath day; and especially when he, who was Lord of the sabbath, was present, and admitted of it; See Gill on Mat_12:4.

(k) R. Isaac Chizzuk Emuna, par. 9. c. 28. p. 419. (l) Siphra, fol. 17. 2. apud Kidder’s Demonstration of the Messiah, par. 2. p. 73. (m) Bab. Sanhedrin, fol. 16. 2. (n) R. Isaac Chizzuk Emuna, par. 2. c. 28. p. 420. Jacob Aben Amrara apud Kidder, Demonstr. of the Messiah, par. 3. p. 48.

and did eat the shewbread; for that this is meant by the hallowed bread, in 1Sa_21:6 is certain; though R. Joseph Kimchi (n) thinks it was the bread of the thank offering; to which R. Levi ben Getsom (o) seems to incline: but the general sense of the Jewish doctors (p) is, that it was the showbread; and which is very clear from that text, and is rightly affirmed by Christ;

which was not lawful for him to eat, neither for them which were with him, but only for the priests: see Lev_24:5 and so the Jews say that this bread אסור לזרים, “is forbidden to strangers” (q); that is, to any but the priests, which, after the burning of the frankincense, was divided equally among them: that course of priests that came into the service had six cakes, and that which went out six; though the high priest had a right to half himself, but he did not use to take it, it being judged not to his honour to do so (r). No hint is here given, nor in the history, in 1Sa_21:1 that it was on the sabbath day that David came to Ahimelech, and ate the showbread; but this is observed, and disputed, by the Jewish writers. Some indeed are in a doubt about it; but others (s) readily give into it, that it was on the sabbath day, which he chose to flee in, for the greater safety and preservation of his life: and indeed it seems reasonable it should be on that day; since on that day only the showbread was removed from the table, and other loaves put in the room. One of their writers (t) says,

“that showbread was not to be eaten, but on the day, and night of the sabbath day; and on the going out of the sabbath day; and on the going out of the sabbath David came there.”

Now our Lord’s argument stands thus, that if David, a holy, good man, and, the men that were with him, who were men of religion and conscience, when in great distress, through hunger, ate of the showbread, which was unlawful for any to eat of but priests, the high priest himself assenting to it; then it could not be criminal in his disciples, when an hungred, to pluck, rub, and eat a few ears of corn, which were lawful for any man to eat, even though it was on the sabbath day: and for the further vindication of them, he adds,

(n) Apud R. David Kimchi in 1 Sam. xxi. 6. (o) In ib. (p) T. Bab. Menachot, fol. 95. 2. R. David Kimchi, Abarbinel & Laniado in 1 Sam. xxi. 6. (q) Laniado & Abarbinel in ib. (r) Maimon. Hilch. Tamidin, c. 4. sect. 12. 14. (s) Bemidbar Rabba Parash. 23. fol. 231. 9. Laniado Cli Jaker, fol. 226. 4. & 227. 2, 3, 4. & Jelammedenu in ib. (t) R. Isaiah in 1 Sam. xxi. 5.

Marvin Vincent
Mar 2:26
The shewbread (τοὺς άρτους της προθέσεως): Lit., the loaves of proposition, i.e., the loaves which were set forth before the Lord. The Jews called them the loaves of the face, i.e., of the presence of God. The bread was made of the finest wheaten flour that had been passed through eleven sieves. There were twelve loaves, or cakes, according to the number of tribes, ranged in two piles of six each. Each cake was made of about five pints of wheat. They were anointed in the middle with oil, in the form of a cross. According to tradition, each cake was five hand-breadths broad and ten long, but turned up at either end, two hand-breadths on each side, to resemble in outline the ark of the covenant. The shewbread was prepared on Friday, unless that day happened to be a feast-day that required sabbatical rest; in which case it was prepared on Thursday afternoon. The renewal of the shewbread was the first of the priestly functions on the commencement of the Sabbath. The bread which was taken off was deposited on the golden table in the porch of the sanctuary, and distributed among the outgoing and incoming courses of priests (compare save for the priests). It was eaten during the Sabbath, and in the temple itself, but only by such priests as were Levitically pure. This old bread, removed on the Sabbath morning, was that which David ate.

John Gill
Mar 2:27 And he said unto them,…. Continuing his answer to them, and adding, in confirmation of what he had said, and for the further vindication of his disciples,

the sabbath was made for man; for his good, and not for his hurt; both for the good of his soul, that he might have an opportunity of attending divine worship, both in public and private; and for the good of his body, that he might have rest from his labour; and this was the end of the original institution and appointment of it; and therefore works of necessity are not forbidden on this day; such as are for the necessary comfort, support, and preservation of life; or otherwise it would be apparent, that the sabbath was not appointed for the good, but for the hurt of men. By “man”, is not meant all mankind; for the sabbath was never appointed for all mankind, nor binding upon all; only the Jews, who are emphatically called “man”, or “men”; see Eze_34:30, upon which the Jewish writers remark (o), that

“they are called, אדם, “man”; but the idolatrous Gentiles, and nations of the World, are not called “men”;”

but dogs, beasts, &c. Our Lord may here be thought to speak in their language, as he does in Mat_. 15:26; see Gill on Mat_15:26. And that the observation of the seventh day, was only designed for the children of Israel, seems manifest from Exo_31:16, “wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the sabbath, to observe the sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual covenant; it is a sign between me and the children of Israel”; and not between him and the rest of the world: and in Exo_31:14, “ye shall keep the sabbath, for it is holy unto you”: on which the Jews (p) make this remark, עממין לכם ולא לשאר, “to you, and not to the rest of the nations”: nor did they ever think that the Gentiles were obliged to observe their sabbath, only such who became proselytes to their religion; even those who were proselytes of righteousness: for a proselyte of the gate, was not bound to observe it; for so says (q) Maimonides,

“those who take upon them the seven commandments of Noah only, lo! they are as a proselyte of the gate, and they are free to do work on the sabbath day for themselves, openly, as an Israelite on a common day.”

Yea, they not only say, they were not obliged to keep the sabbath, but that it was not lawful for them to observe it; and that it was even punishable with death them to regard it; for so they say (r),

“a Gentile that keeps the sabbath before he is circumcised, is guilty of death, because it is not commanded him.”

They judged them unworthy of having this precept enjoined them, as being not men, but beasts, and worse than they, and had not the privilege the ass has: hence one of their commentators (s) says,

“concerning the rest of an ass, thou (O Israelite!) art commanded; but concerning the rest of a Gentile, thou art not commanded.”

And not man for the sabbath; who was in being long before that was appointed and enjoined.

(o) T. Bab. Bava Metzia, fol. 114. 2. Zohar in Exod. fol. 35. 4. (p) Zohar in Exod. fol. 26. 4. (q) Hilchot Sabbat, c. 20. sect. 14. (r) Debarim Rabba, sect. 1. fol. 234. 4. (s) Bartenora in Misn. Sabbat, c. 24. sect. 1.

Albert Barnes
Mar 2:27
The sabbath was made for man – For his rest from toil, his rest from the cares and anxieties of the world, to give him an opportunity to call off his attention from earthly concerns and to direct it to the affairs of eternity. It was a kind provision for man that he might refresh his body by relaxing his labors; that he might have undisturbed time to seek the consolations of religion to cheer him in the anxieties and sorrows of a troubled world; and that he might render to God that homage which is most justly due to him as the Creator, Preserver, Benefactor, and Redeemer of the world. And it is easily capable of proof that no institution has been more signally blessed to man’s welfare than the Sabbath. To that we owe, more than to anything else, the peace and order of a civilized community. Where there is no Sabbath there is ignorance, vice, disorder, and crime. On that holy day the poor and the ignorant, as well as the learned, have undisturbed time to learn the requirements of religion, the nature of morals, the law of God, and the way of salvation. On that day man may offer his praises to the Great Giver of all good, and in the sanctuary seek the blessing of him whose favor is life. Where that day is observed in any manner as it should be, order prevails, morals are promoted, the poor are elevated in their condition, vice flies away, and the community puts on the appearance of neatness, industry, morality, and religion. The Sabbath was therefore pre-eminently intended for man’s welfare, and the best interests of mankind demand that it should be sacredly regarded as an appointment of merciful heaven intended for our best good, and, where improved aright, infallibly resulting in our temporal and eternal peace.

Not man for the sabbath – Man was made “first,” and then the Sabbath was appointed for his welfare, Gen_2:1-3. The Sabbath was not “first” made or contemplated, and then the man made with reference to that. Since, therefore, the Sabbath was intended for man’s “good,” the law respecting it must not be interpreted so as to oppose his real welfare. It must be explained in consistency with a proper attention to the duties of mercy to the poor and the sick, and to those in peril. It must be, however, in accordance with man’s “real good on the whole,” and with the law of God. The law of God contemplates man’s “real good on the whole;” and we have no right, under the plea that the Sabbath was made for man, to do anything contrary to what the law of God admits. It would not be for our “real good,” but for our real and eternal injury, to devote the Sabbath to vice, to labor, or to amusement.

Matthew Poole
Mar 2:28
And he said unto them, The sabbath was made for man, and not man the sabbath: therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath. Some interpreters make these two arguments:

1. The Son of man is Lord of the sabbath; therefore it is in my power to dispense with this action of my disciples, though it had been contrary to the letter of the law: or rather, therefore it is in my power to interpret the law, which I myself made.

2. The sabbath is made for man, not man for the sabbath. A law made for the good of another bindeth not, in such cases where the observation of it would be evidently for his harm and ruin. The law of the sabbath was made for the good of man, that he might have a solemn time, in which he should be under an obligation to pay his homage unto God; this must not be so interpreted as would tend to the destruction of a man.

I find interpreters divided about that term the Son of man. Some think that it is not to be interpreted, as usually in the gospel, concerning Christ; but of ordinary men, and that man’s lordship over the sabbath is proved by the subserviency of it to his good, to which end also it was ordained. But certainly that is both a dangerous and unscriptural interpretation: dangerous to give man a lordship over a moral law, for it is very improper to call any lord of a thing, because he hath the use of it, and it is for his advantage: I cannot see but we may as well make man lord of the whole ten commandments as of one of them. Unscriptural, for though our Saviour useth this term more than threescore times in the gospel, yet he always useth it with relation to himself, never with reference to any mere man; neither is there any necessity to understand it otherwise here. Christ affirming himself Lord of the sabbath, spake properly enough to the Pharisees’ quarrel; for it must needs then follow, that he had power to dispense with the observation of it at particular times, and much more to give a true and right interpretation of the law concerning it.

John Gill
Mar 2:28 For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day. By “the Son of man” is meant, not any man, as some have thought; for no mere man is lord of any law, moral or ritual, natural or positive; or has a power of disposing of it, and dispensing with it at pleasure; but Christ himself; which is the constant sense of this phrase in the New Testament, and is a character of the Messiah in the old, Dan_7:13 who, as he was the institutor of the sabbath among the Jews, that being a ritual, and of mere positive institution, could dispense with it, and even abrogate it at his pleasure. The Jews so far agree to this, that he that commanded the law of the sabbath, could dispense with it; they say (z), that

“the day on which Jericho was taken was the sabbath day; and that though they slew and burnt on the sabbath day, מי שצוה על השבת צוה לחלל שבת, “he that commanded the observation of the sabbath, commanded the profanation of it”.”

And since Christ is greater than the temple, and has all the perfections of the divine nature in him, is equal to the Father in power and glory; and even as mediator, has all power in heaven and earth given him; so as he is Lord of all other things, he is of the sabbath, and has a power of dispensing with it, and even of abolishing it; see Col_2:16 and since the Lord of the sabbath had a power of dispensing with it, and made use of it in the cases of David and his men, and of the priests in the temple formerly; the Pharisees ought not to think it strange, that the Son of man, who is equally Lord of the sabbath, dispensed with it in his disciples now.

(z) R. David Kimchi in Josh. vi. 11.

Adam Clarke
Mar 2:28
The Son of man is Lord – See on Mat_12:7, Mat_12:8 (note). Some have understood this as applying to men in general, and not to Christ. The Son of man, any man is Lord of the Sabbath; i.e. it was made for him, for his ease, comfort, and use, and to these purposes he is to apply it. But this is a very harsh, and at the same time a very lax, mode of interpretation; for it seems to say that a man may make what use he pleases of the Sabbath; and, were this true, the moral obligation of the Sabbath would soon be annihilated.

God ordained the Sabbath not only to be a type of that rest which remains for the people of God, but to be also a mean of promoting the welfare of men in general.

The ordinances of religion should be regulated according to their end, which is the honor of God, and the salvation of men. It is the property of the true religion to contain nothing in it but what is beneficial to man. Hereby God plainly shows that it is neither out of indigence or interest that he requires men to worship and obey him; but only out of goodness, and to make them happy. God prohibited work on the Sabbath day, lest servants should be oppressed by their masters, that the laboring beasts might have necessary rest, and that men might have a proper opportunity to attend upon his ordinances, and get their souls saved. To the Sabbath, under God, we owe much of what is requisite and necessary as well for the body as the soul.

Acts 15:20 Textual Variants

Yes there are some, but the fact is the vast part of bibles in English have taken the same reading forever:

Act 15:20 Wycliffe to be not disesid, but to write to hem, that thei absteyne hem fro defoulingis of maumetis, and fro fornicacioun, and stranglid thingis, and blood.

Act 15:20 Tyndale Rogers Coverdale but that we write unto them, that they abstain themselves from filthiness of images, from fornication, from strangled, and from blood.

Act 15:20 KJVA But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.

Act 15:20 Douay Rheims But that we write unto them, that they refrain themselves from the pollutions of idols and from fornication and from things strangled and from blood.

Act 15:20 RV but that we write unto them, that they abstain from the pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from what is strangled, and from blood.

Act 15:20 NJB we should send them a letter telling them merely to abstain from anything polluted by idols, from illicit marriages, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood.(takes many expanded readings from the Western manuscript tradition)

Act 15:20 ALT _but_ to write instructions to them to be abstaining from the pollutions of the idols and from sexual sin and from the strangled [animal] and from blood.(modern Majority text)

Act 15:20 NET. but that we should write them a letter telling them to abstain from things defiled by idols and from sexual immorality and from what has been strangled and from blood.(known to go its own way, textually)

The textual support for this reading is early and diverse ( p74 S A B C E P Psi 33 81 614 1241 2495 Byz two lat vg syr cop), and thus when doing notes on this chapter back when, I didn’t bother with the textual variants because they were not likely to come up, nor make a serious contribution to understanding the text.

Gospel of Mark Chapter 1:14-31 Sunday School Notes

These are some of my notes for Sunday, December 6, 2009 in the Lifeway Explore the Bible Sunday School Series.

Books referenced in these notes are:

1. Gospel of Mark: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary by Ben Witherington III

2. Gospel of Mark: New International Greek Testament Commentary by R.T. France

3. Rabbinic Commentary on the New Testament: Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke by Samuel T. Lachs

4. New Testament Text and Translation Commentary by Philip Comfort

5. The Source New Testament by Ann Nyland

6. Wycliffe Historical Geography of Bible Lands by Howard Vos

7. Nelson’s New Illustrated Bible Manners and Customs by Howard Vos

8. IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament, by Craig Keener

9. NET Bible from Bible dot org, also available from CBD

Mark 1:14-15
Summary of Jesus’ early preaching. Time fulfilled suggests:

1.God has a plan for human history with times and seasons (Is 60:22)

2.Jesus is seen here as a prophetic herald of OT style (Is 56:1, Ezk 7:3, 12)(Witherington)

These summary verses imply three things:

1.Nearness of God’s rule needs to be announced, it isn’t obvious to everyone.

2.To relate to this divine rule, one must change direction, repent.

3.To participate in this divine rule requires faith, trust to live in a new and seemingly foolish way to the rest of the world.(Witherington)

Mark 1:14
Jesus spent some time in Judea before this point in Mark, as recounted in John’s Gospel. The move to Galilee was most likely a common sense way to make Himself noticed among people of His native region, who would accept Him more readily than the Judeans, who like thought of Him as “that upstart country bumpkin”.(France)

Galilee was an administrative district of the Roman empire, ruled by Herod Antipas (6-39 AD) as a tetrarch (“ruler of a quarter”). The Romans divided Herod the Great’s kingdom among his sons at his death, Archelaus ruling half their father’s kingdom, Phillip and Antipas splitting the other half between them.) The capital had been at Sepphoris, very near Nazareth, but Antipas built Tiberias about ten miles south of Capernaum on the Sea of Galilee and moved his capital there about 19 AD. (Vos)

Sea of Galilee: Inland lake about twelve miles long and six miles wide. It supported several cities with a fishing industry: Capernaum, Bethsaida, and Magdala(Vos)

Textual variant:
gospel of God (HCSB) vs gospel of the kingdom of God (KJV)

Manuscript evidence: of God: S B L Theta, f1/13 33 Origen
of the kingdom of God: A D W Majority Latin

Gospel of the kingdom of God is found in Matthew (4:23, 9:35, 24:14) and “kingdom of God” over fifty times throughout the NT. “Gospel of God” is found only here in the gospels. “Kingdom” might have been omitted to match Rom 1:1, 15:16; 2 Cor 11:7; 1 Th 2:2,8,9; 1 Pet 4:17.

On the other hand, the reason all the recent translations use “of God” are :

1.The best manuscripts lack kingdom

2.Commonality of “kingdom of God” means scribes would likely add it in if missing in source text

3.Scribal harmonization to v. 15’s kingdom, or Matt 4:17(Comfort, NET)

“Gospel of God” is of course ambiguous. It might mean “gospel from God” or “gospel about God”. The ambiguity is perhaps intended, to imply both possible meanings.(NET)

Mark 1:15
Time: Greek kairos seems to imply more “the moment has come near” rather than just “the time”, which would more likley have used Greek chronos.(France)

Kingdom of God: Greek Basileia tou theou. Presumably corresponding with the Aramaic malkuth, “kingship, kingly reign, rule”, denotes everything under a king’s rule. Jesus speaks of God’s rule being associated with himself and his minstry, of it being present and not just future or heavenly. But it is a category error to consider God’s rule as tied to a specific time or place entirely, because God’s rule is both eternal and eschatological, present and yet to come, partly realized but also incomplete. In the present sense “the kingdom of God” means God controlling a person or event so His intentions are fulfilled. In the future sense, it apparently means a actual place or realm where God’s control is active (Mk 9:47, 10:15, 14:25)(Nyland, Witherington, France)

eggiken: come near/ at hand. This normally refers to something coming near in space and/or time. In the Greek OT this verb is used of the nearness of God or His judgment (Dan 4:7; Is 41:21, 48:16, 51:5, 56:1; Jer 23:23). “Have come near” seems a likely translation based on Rom 13:12, James 5:8, and 1 Pet 4:7. Jesus plainly felt that what actually drew the kingdom near was Himself, his mission, and that as he created a group around Himself a realm was created.(Witherington)

Repent: Greek metanoeo, meaning something more like “convert”.(France)

Believe: Greek pisteuo, means more “trust” than “believe”, having a willful, active sense as well as simple intellectual assent.(France)

Mark 1:16-20

What exactly did the “immediately they went” mean? Did they just quit fishing that day, or did they become dedicated disciples that day as well? The decision wasn’t necessarily as abrupt as Mark portrays it, for John 3 and 4 suggest themen knew something of Jesus before this.(Witherington)

Fishers of men might connect with the Jewish idea of water as chaos and evil. Thus the disciples are rescuers of those seemingly doomed to chaos. On the other hand, Greek culture used fishing as an analogy for all sorts of intellectual discussion and persuasion, “catching” people with ideas.(Witherington)

Mark 1:16
Jesus calls two pairs of brothers for His first disciples, all fishermen. Though traditionally we think of Galilean fishermen as poor, a closer look at the text suggests otherwise. The Zebedees owned a boat and employed hired workers. Fishermen were also standard targets of tax collectors, because their fish were perishable and thus were usually sold for cash, rather than barter. (Witherington)

Simon and Andrew: Greek forms of Hebrew names, suggesting Hellenistic influences, but you can’t push that too far, because it has become plain all Israel had become Hellenized to some extent by the first century.(France)

Fishing was different than we think in ancient Galilee. The local ruler (Herod Antipas here) controlled commerce, including fishing rights. The ruler would sell fishing rights to brokers, the “tax collectors” or “publicans” of the NT, like Matthew, who then contracted out with fishermen like the Zebedees and Peter and Andrew. (Vos)

Fishermen fell in between the usual economic extremes of the day. They weren’t the day to day working poor, but neither were they the very wealthy patrons, either. Fishing involved using castnets from boats or the shore, and larger dragnets from boats.(Vos)

Mark 1:17
“Follow me” Greek opiso mou, is almost a technical term for discipleship in the gospels (Mark 1:20, 8:34, Matt 10:38, Luk 21:8, John 21:19). But the style of the call is oppostie that of a rabbi and his students, for rabbinic students selected their teachers, usually after some time of consideration due to the standard separation from family and gainful employment involved. Jesus chooses His own students, which is more prophet-like, resembling Elijah and Elisha (1 Kgs 19:19-21). This is but the beginning of Jesus’ many acts that recall the prophets rather than the religious teachers and saints of His day.(France)

“Fishers of men” might be standard ancient language for skilled speakers, but a second apocalyptic meaning is possible, based on Jer 16:16, Amos 4:2, Hab 1:14-17. The gospel use is reversed from the OT ones though, for the OT fishing is to catch people for judgment. In the NT fishing for people might might connect with the Jewish idea of water as chaos and evil. Thus the disciples are rescuers of those seemingly doomed to chaos. But again, Greek culture used fishing as an analogy for all sorts of intellectual discussion and persuasion, “catching” people with ideas.(Witherington, France)

Mark 1:18-20
That James and/or John are termed “sons of Zebedee” here and in the disciple list (3:17) as well as their only specific appearance in Mark (10:35) suggests they were known by that title in early Christianity, as well as separating James from the other Jameses.(France)

Mark 1:20
Hired men: Luke 5:10 says John and James were partners with Peter in a fishing business. Corporate fishermen could be quite wealthy, for the high price of fish was proverbial enough to get airing in ancient comedies. The “hired hands” in this verse should be an indicator that James and John were not scraping by on barely enough to live, though they might be rented slaves if not free workers. Jesus’ disciples were not only drawn from the poorest class of people, judging by Zebedee’s sons. Add in Joanna the royal steward’s wife and the plainly affluent Lazarus and his sisters, and clearly Jesus drew followers from all economic classes. (Nyland, Vos, France)

For James and and John to leave their father behind was unusual, to say the least. Family businesses were the rule, due to the poverty of most people, and to leave parents to fend for themselves was completely against the culture “honor your father and mother…”.(Keener)

Mark 1:21
Capernaum “Village of Nahum”: lay on the NW shore of the Sea of Galilee, about two and a half miles from where the Jordan River flows into the sea. It was a village of about ten acres. The city was a good place for Herod Antipas to collect taxes on goods crossing over the sea and coming along the nearby imperial road from Damascus.(Vos)

Capernaum was important enough a city (the population may have gotten as high as ten thousand) to hae a detachment of Roman troops (Matt 8:5-13), a customs post (Mark 2:15) and a royal official (Greek basilikos)(John 4:46).(France)

There have been excavations of a synagogue at Capernaum, dating several centuries after Jesus’ day. It has an older floor beneath it that likely was the synagogue of Jesus’ time. The interior of the building measures seventy feet by fifty feet.(Vos)

Some are a bit skeptical of synagogues as set aside religious buildings in the first century AD. This seems a bit over skeptical, as remarks by second century rabbis indicate buildings set aside for religious purposes. There are remains suggesting religious buildings at Masada, the Herodium, and Gamala. Add these to the NT accounts and it seems clear there was a strong religious element to life in Galilee in the first century, including synagogues.(Witherington)

Teach: Greek didasko. This word covers a broad range of meanings under the general range of “teach, instruct”, including “skilled training, teaching, coaching” etc. Mark uses teach, teaching, and teacher more than the other gospels, which reserve teacher or rabbi for use by outsiders. That the messianic role is to teach the true meaning of the Law is a common idea in later rabbinic Judaism, but how popular the idea was in the frist century is more difficult to say. Mark, however, clearly indicates teaching as a messianic task.(Nyland, France)

Mark 1:22
Jesus displayed a personal authority on religious matters unlike the derived authority of the scribes, who quoted their predecessors. The scribes are apparently a symbol of authority throughout Mark’s Gospel (1:22; 2:6,10; 3:15, 22; 11:27-29, 33)(Witherington)

Mark often uses language to describe onlookers’ and even the disciples’ astonishment at Jesus’ actions and sayings. His “authority” (Greek exousia) mentioned hints at one cause of the amazed onlookers, in that he likely already contradicted established ideas and cited legal judgment in His own name, rather than citing previous authorities.(France)

Mark 1:23
A man with an unclean spirit appears in the synagogue, where he isn’t suppose to be. The spirit within him interrupts Jesus’ teaching, forcing Jesus to deal with it. Mark uses unclean spirit and demon alternately, as synonyms (Mark 6:7 and 13; 7:25 and 26), while separating terminology for exorcism and healing (3:10-11; 6:13)(Witherington, France)

Mark 1:24
What do you have to do with us: Literally, What to you and what to me? It’s a Semitic expression in the OT (2 Sam 16:10, 19:22; Judges 11:12; 1 Kgs 17:18) carried over into the Greek, with two possible meanings:

1.Why are you unjustly bothering me?

2.Why involve me in what is your affair, not mine?(NET, France)

The name and repeated titles spoken by the demon seem a classic ritual magic attack attempting to control someone or something by naming it.(Witherington)

“You have come to destroy us” is traditionally read as a question, but it might be a declarative statement as well. Mark has a famous secrecy motif concerning Jesus’ true identity which plays out throughout the Gospel, and it seems part of this story as well, having a supernatural being knowing Jesus’ complete nature. In Mark ordinary people call Jesus “teacher”(9:17), son of David(10:47-48), master(10:51), or sir/lord. Demons call Jesus Holy One, son of God (3:11), or son of the Most High (5:7). This ability of the possessed separates possession from mental illness, for the merely sick in Mark show no sign of special knowledge of Jesus.(Witherington)

Mark 1:25
Rebuked: Greek epitimao. This is deemed a technical term used for commanding hostile powers in early NT Greek commentaries like Moulton. The same word is used of Jesus’ commanding Peter’s mother-in-law’s fever in Luke 4:41 and the storm in Mark 4:39. On the other hand, France cites a Howard Clark Kee study in which Kee found the Greek word hardly used in non-NT magical texts. (Nyland, France)

Be quiet: Greek phimoo. This is a term used in Greek pagan magical texts for binding hostile powers, usually translated “be bound” or “be muzzled”. Again France rejects the esoteric connection (despite admitting the use of the word in Greek pagan magical texts) and sees it as a colloquialism for “shut up”(Nyland, France)

Jesus commands the demon to silence, perhaps because, as several church fathers say, Jesus and the apostles have no use for demonic testimony, even to the truth. It also seems that a command to be silent and/or bound was a normal part of exorcism in the ancient world. And logically Jesus also simply wanted the shouting of the demon stopped. France also accepts that it is part of Mark’s messianic secret theme (1:44, 5:43, 7:36, 8:26, 8:30, 9:9). Jesus had to be wary of being seen as the messiah, because:

1.Jesus’ version of messiahship was very different from popular expectation.

2.The Romans had a habit of killing “messiahs” and their followers as soon as the following crowds around them looked large enough to be dangerous. This is also a reason you see Jesus dispersing large crowds or even abandoning them. Any large crowd was a potential revolt to the authorities.(France)

Jesus’ method is unusual in that he employs nothing like a spell or any form of ritual, but simply gives orders which are obeyed. The “authority” of Jesus give both his teaching and his healings weight. (Witherington)

Mark 1:26
Exorcism is Jesus’ most common miracle in Mark (1:32-34, 3:7-12, 6:53-56, 8:14-21). Miracles occur mostly in the first half of Mark, and about half of the first half (that’s a quarter last time I had fractions) are miracle accounts. (Witherington)

The loud scream made by the departing demon seems a last resistance, the spasm or convulsion hard to interpret but might actually be the image of the person vomiting up the demon from within them.(France)

Mark 1:27
Textual Variant

“Authority” has given the ancient scribes and modern translators difficulties, trying to decide where to put it from the ambiguous Greek. Does “authority” go with “teaching” or “commands”?

NRSV ESV TNIV HCSB NET NJB: authoritative teaching
(N)KJV RSV NASB NIV (R)NEB NAB: authoritative command

The best manuscripts (S B L 33 f1 28 565) go with “teaching authority”. The Majority manuscripts (behind KJV and NKJV) have “authoritative commands”.(Comfort)

The crowd’s astonishment is more than mere surprise. It seems an unease, almost fear at the apparent disruption of normal reality when Jesus is present. The onlookers might have seen someone who spoke on his own authority before, and seen exorcisms before (though typically much more protracted affairs than this one, one imagines), but this is their first experience with someone who combines legal and spiritual authority.(Witherington, France)

Mark 1:28
Everyone hears about Jesus, but miracle stories are not completely good things:

1.They cause the Pharisees and Herodians to oppose Jesus (3:6)

2.They lead scribes to claim Jesus Himself is possessed (3:22)

3.They don’t make the disciples grasp who and what Jesus is any faster (6:52, 8:17-21)(Witherington)

Mark 1:29
Textual variant: they went into the house (HCSB, KJV) vs he went into the house (RSV, ESV, NJB, NAB)

Manuscript evidence: they went:S A C L 33 Majority
he went: B (D W Theta) f1/13 565, 700

The problem here is each variant is found in best manuscripts. “They” is considered the superior reading because it is awkward. “They” should mean Jesus and all four disciples of the time. To add “with James and John” seems a gaff in the narrative logic. “He” then becomes an attempt to cover up the problem, and also likely a decision to match this text to Matt 8:14 and Luke 4:38. (Comfort)

House of Simon and Andrew: Home dwellings then as now split along economic lines. Peter and Andrew likely had a mid-sized multi-generational family home, because that seems the pattern and because indications are in the gospels that it was fairly large (Jesus and disciples live there with Peter, his wife, and mother-in-law, Jesus taught crowds there, etc). Black basalt walls held wooden cross beams that held the flat roof up. The plan was a paved courtyard surrounded by small rooms (though Peter’s home must have had at least one large room for the gatherings listening to Jesus). Ovens were in the courtyard, which had a staircase(s) to the flat roof, which served as another story, where people would sleep in the summer, and do chores. Furniture was limited, though even poor people tried to have at least a low table to eat at while sitting on the floor, and some stools or even backed chairs. The poor slept on mats, various sorts of beds were used by the wealthier classes.(Vos)

Mark 1:30
Peter’s wife is only mentioned/implied here and in 1 Cor 9:5.

“Fever” is very general, and might be more or less serious. The Lukan version uses “great” fever, making it sound more serious.

That the men tell Jesus about her illness at once might be just being proper hosts, but given the immediately preceding exorcism, it seems much more likely they expected Jesus was capable and willing to heal her.(France)

Mark 1:31
She began to serve them: There are rabbinic traditions prohibiting women from serving non-relative men at table, but they are later than the gospels (200-300 years later) and if this was a tradition of Jesus’ time, we would expect the scribes and Pharisees to bring it up in their objections to Jesus. (Lachs)

There are two standout points in this story of Peter’s mother-in-law:

1.Jesus heals during the Sabbath. It’s in private, but the furor doing this causes will be displayed in public Sabbath healings. (Mark 3:1-6) The Pharisees saw the Sabbath as a day of rest from work; Jesus seemed to see it as a day of rest or relief from the current state of the world, which causes sickness. The new world brought by the Messiah is a world free of sickness, so to heal the sick on the sabbath can be seen as ushering in a true sabbath in the eschatological sense.

2.Jesus touches a woman not of His immediate family. Later rabbinic sources sometimes speak of “saintly” men all but ignoring non-related women in public. (Others I believe have the old story of the rabbi who carried a woman across a river, and when ask how he could do such a shocking thing, the rabbi says “I put her down back there. Why are you still carrying her?” Or is that a Buddhist monk story? Or both?) This sort of “illegitimate” physical intimacy was highly unusual. Jesus continues this trend in His willingness to touch the sick to heal them, right in public in front of everyone. (1:41, 5:41, 6:5, 7:32-33, 8:23-25, 9:27) or being touched by the sick (3:10, 5:27, 6:56)(Witherington, France)

Gospel of Mark Chapter 1:14-31 Antique Commentary Quotes

Catena Aurea
Mar 1:14-15

Bede: John being put in prison, fitly does the Lord begin to preach: wherefore there follows, “Preaching the Gospel, &c.” For when the Law ceases, the Gospel arises in its steps.

Bede: Let no one, however, suppose that the putting of John in prison took place immediately after the forty days’ temptation and the fast of the Lord; for whosoever reads the Gospel of John will find, that the Lord taught many things before the putting of John in prison, and also did many miracles; for you have in his Gospel, “This beginning of miracles did Jesus;” [Joh_2:11] and afterwards, “for John was not yet cast into prison.” [Joh_3:24]

Now it is said that when John read the books of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he approved indeed the text of the history, and affirmed that they had spoken truth, but said that they had composed the history of only one year after John was cast into prison, in which year also he suffered. Passing over then the year of which the transactions had been published by the three others, he related the events of the former period, before John was cast into prison.

Theophylact: Or else, the Lord means that the time of the Law is complete; as if He said, Up to this time the Law was at work; from this time the kingdom of God will work, that is, a conversation according to the Gospel, which is with reason likened to the kingdom of heaven. For when you see a man clothed in flesh living according to the Gospel, do you not say that he has the kingdom of heaven, which “is not meat and drink, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Ghost?” [Rom_14:17] The next word is, “Repent.”

Pseudo-Jerome: For he must repent, who would keep close to eternal good, that is, to the kingdom of God. For he who would have the kernel, breaks the shell; the sweetness of the apple makes up for the bitterness of its root; the hope of gain makes the dangers of the sea pleasant; the hope of health takes away from the painfulness of medicine.

They are able worthily to proclaim the preaching of Christ who have deserved to attain to the reward of forgiveness; and therefore after He has said, “Repent,” He subjoins, “and believe the Gospel.” For unless ye have believed, ye shall not understand.

Bede: “Repent,” therefore, “and believe;” that is, renounce dead works; for of what use is believing without good works? The merit of good works does not, however, bring to faith, but faith begins, that good works may follow.

John Calvin
Mar_1:14.Preaching the Gospel of the kingdom of God.Matthew appears to differ a little from the other two: for, after mentioning that Jesus left his own city Nazareth, and departed to Capernaum, he says: from that time Jesus began to preach.Luke and Mark, again, relate, that he taught publicly in his own country. But the solution is easy; for the words which Matthew employs, ἀπὸ τότε, from that time, ought to be viewed as referring, not to what immediately precedes, but to the whole course of the narrative. Christ, therefore, entered into the exercise of his office, when he arrived at Galilee. The summary of doctrine which is given by Matthew is not at all different from what, we have lately seen, was taught by John: for it consists of two parts, — repentance, and the announcement of grace and salvation. He exhorts the Jews to conversion, because the kingdom of God is at hand: that is, because God undertakes to govern his people, which is true and perfect happiness. The language of Mark is a little different, The kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the Gospel. But the meaning is the same: for, having first spoken of the restoration of the kingdom of God among the Jews, he exhorts them to repentance and faith.

But it may be asked, since repentance depends on the Gospel, why does Mark separate it from the doctrine of the Gospel? Two reasons may be assigned. God sometimes invites us to repentance, when nothing more is meant, than that we ought to change our life for the better. He afterwards shows, that conversion and “newness of life” (Rom_6:4 ) are the gift of God. This is intended to inform us, that not only is our duty enjoined on us, but the grace and power of obedience are, at the same time, offered. If we understand in this way the preaching of John about repentance, the meaning will be:” The Lord commands you to turn to himself; but as you cannot accomplish this by your own endeavors, he promises the Spirit of regeneration, and therefore you must receive this grace by faith.” At the same time, the faith, which he enjoins men to give to the Gospel, ought not, by any means, to be confined to the gift of renewal, but relates chiefly to the forgiveness of sins. For John connects repentance with faith, because God reconciles us to himself in such a manner, that we serve him as a Father in holiness and righteousness.

Besides, there is no absurdity in saying, that to believe the Gospel is the same thing as to embrace a free righteousness: for that special relation, between faith and the forgiveness of sins, is often mentioned in Scripture; as, for example, when it teaches, that we are justified by faith,(Rom_5:1.) In which soever of these two ways you choose to explain this passage, it still remains a settled principle, that God offers to us a free salvation, in order that we may turn to him, and live to righteousness. Accordingly, when he promises to us mercy, he calls us to deny the flesh. We must observe the designation which Paul gives to the Gospel, the kingdom of God: for hence we learn, that by the preaching of the Gospel the kingdom of God is set up and established among men, and that in no other way does God reign among men. Hence it is also evident, how wretched the condition of men is without the Gospel.

Adam Clarke
Mar 1:14
Repent – Μετανοειτε. This was the matter of the preaching. The verb μετανοεω is either compounded of μετα, after, and νοειν to understand, which signifies that, after hearing such preaching, the sinner is led to understand, that the way he has walked in was the way of misery, death, and hell. Or the word may be derived from μετα after, and ανοια, madness, which intimates that the whole life of a sinner is no other than a continued course of madness and folly: and if to live in a constant opposition to all the dictates of true wisdom; to wage war with his own best interests in time and eternity; to provoke and insult the living God; and, by habitual sin, to prepare himself only for a state of misery, be evidences of insanity, every sinner exhibits them plentifully. It was from this notion of the word, that the Latins termed repentance resipiscentia, a growing wise again, from re and sapere; or, according to Tertullian, Resipiscentia, quasi receptio mentis ad se, restoring the mind to itself: Contra Marcion, lib. ii. Repentance, then, implies that a measure of Divine wisdom is communicated to the sinner, and that he thereby becomes wise to salvation. That his mind, purposes, opinions, and inclinations, are changed; and that, in consequence, there is a total change in his conduct. It need scarcely be remarked, that, in this state, a man feels deep anguish of soul, because he has sinned against God, unfitted himself for heaven, and exposed his soul to hell. Hence, a true penitent has that sorrow, whereby he forsakes sin, not only because it has been ruinous to his own soul, but because it has been offensive to God.

The kingdom of heaven is at hand – Referring to the prophecy of Daniel, Dan_7:13,Dan_7:14, where the reign of Christ among men is expressly foretold. This phrase, and the kingdom of God, mean the same thing, viz. the dispensation of infinite mercy, and manifestation of eternal truth, by Christ Jesus, producing the true knowledge of God, accompanied with that worship which is pure and holy, worthy of that God who is its institutor and its object. But why is this called a kingdom? Because it has its laws, all the moral precepts of the Gospel: its subjects, all who believe in Christ Jesus: and its king, the Sovereign of heaven and earth. N. B. Jesus Christ never saved a soul which he did not govern; nor is this Christ precious or estimable to any man who does not feel a spirit of subjection to the Divine will.

But why is it called the kingdom of Heaven? Because God designed that his kingdom of grace here should resemble the kingdom of glory above. And hence our Lord teaches us to pray, Thy will be done on earth, as it is in heaven. The kingdom of heaven is not meat and drink, says St. Paul, Rom_14:17; does not consist in the gratification of sensual passions, or worldly ambition; but is righteousness, peace, and joy, in the Holy Ghost. Now what can there be more than this in glory? Righteousness, without mixture of sin; peace, without strife or contention; joy, in the Holy Ghost, spiritual joy, without mixture of misery! And all this, it is possible, by the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, to enjoy here below. How then does heaven itself differ from this state? Answer. It makes the righteousness eternal, the peace eternal, and the joy eternal. This is the heaven of heavens! The phrase, kingdom of heaven, מלכות שמים malcuth shamayim, is frequently used by the rabbinical writers, and always means, the purity of the Divine worship, and the blessedness which a righteous man feels when employed in it.

It is farther added, This kingdom is at hand. The dispensation of the glorious Gospel was now about to be fully opened, and the Jews were to have the first offers of salvation. This kingdom is also at hand to us; and wherever Christ crucified is preached, there is salvation to be found. Jesus is proclaimed to thee, O man! as infinitely able and willing to save. Believe in his name – cast thy soul upon his atonement, and enter into rest!

A.T. Robertson
Mar 1:14
Jesus came into Galilee (elthen ho Iesous eis ten Galilaian). Here Mark begins the narrative of the active ministry of Jesus and he is followed by Matthew and Luke. Mark undoubtedly follows the preaching of Peter. But for the Fourth Gospel we should not know of the year of work in various parts of the land (Perea, Galilee, Judea, Samaria) preceding the Galilean ministry. John supplements the Synoptic Gospels at this point as often. The arrest of John had much to do with the departure of Jesus from Judea to Galilee (Joh_4:1-4).

Preaching the gospel of God (kerusson to euaggelion tou theou). It is the subjective genitive, the gospel that comes from God. Swete observes that repentance (metanoia) is the keynote in the message of the Baptist as gospel (euaggelion) is with Jesus. But Jesus took the same line as John and proclaimed both repentance and the arrival of the kingdom of God. Mark adds to Matthew’s report the words “the time is fulfilled” (peplerotai ho kairos). It is a significant fact that John looks backward to the promise of the coming of the Messiah and signalizes the fulfilment as near at hand (perfect passive indicative). It is like Paul’s fulness of time (pleroma tou chronou) in Gal_4:4 and fulness of the times (pleroma ton kairon) in Eph_1:10 when he employs the word kairos, opportunity or crisis as here in Mark rather than the more general term chronos. Mark adds here also: “and believe in the gospel” (kai pisteuete en toi euaggelioi). Both repent and believe in the gospel. Usually faith in Jesus (or God) is expected as in Joh_14:1. But this crisis called for faith in the message of Jesus that the Messiah had come. He did not use here the term Messiah, for it had come to have political connotations that made its use at present unwise. But the kingdom of God had arrived with the presence of the King. It does make a difference what one believes. Belief or disbelief in the message of Jesus made a sharp cleavage in those who heard him. “Faith in the message was the first step; a creed of some kind lies at the basis of confidence in the Person of Christ, and the occurrence of the phrase pistuete en toi euaggelioi in the oldest record of the teaching of our Lord is a valuable witness to this fact” (Swete).

Adam Clarke
Mar 1:15
The time is fulfilled – That is, the time appointed for sending the Messiah; and particularly the time specified by Daniel, Dan_9:24-27. Here are four points worthy of deep attention, in the preaching of the Son of God.

1. Every thing that is done is according to a plan laid by the Divine wisdom, and never performed till the time appointed was filled up.

2. That the kingdom and reign of sin are to be destroyed, and the kingdom of grace and heaven established in their place.

3. That the kingdom of God, and his reign by grace, begins with repentance for past sins.

4. That this reign of grace is at hand; and that nothing but an obstinate perseverance in sin and impenitence can keep any soul out of it; and that now is the accepted time to enter in.

Albert Barnes
Mar 1:15
Repent ye – Repentance implies sorrow for past offences 2Co_7:10; a deep sense of the evil of sin as committed against God Psa_51:4; and a full purpose to turn from transgression and to lead a holy life. A true penitent has sorrow for sin, not only because it is ruinous to his soul, but chiefly because it is an offence against God, and is that abominable thing which he hates, Jer_44:4. It is produced by seeing the great danger and misery to which it exposes us; by seeing the justice and holiness of God Job_42:6; and by seeing that our sins have been committed against Christ, and were the cause of his death, Zec_12:10; Luk_22:61-62. There are two words in the New Testament translated “repentance,” one of which denotes a change of mind, or a reformation of life; and the other, sorrow or regret that sin has been committed. The word used here is the former, calling the Jews to a change of life, or a reformation of conduct. In the time of John, the nation had become extremely wicked and corrupt, perhaps more so than at any preceding period. Hence, both he and Christ began their ministry by calling the nation to repentance.

The kingdom of heaven is at hand – The phrases kingdom of heaven, kingdom of Christ, kingdom of God, are of frequent occurrence in the Bible. They all refer to the same thing. The expectation of such a kingdom was taken from the Old Testament, and especially from Daniel, Dan_7:13-14. The prophets had told of a successor to David that should sit on his throne 1Ki_2:4; 1Ki_8:25; Jer_33:17. The Jews expected a great national deliverer. They supposed that when the Messiah should appear, all the dead would be raised; that the judgment would take place; and that the enemies of the Jews would be destroyed, and that they themselves would be advanced to great national dignity and honor.

The language in which they were accustomed to describe this event was retained by our Saviour and his apostles. Yet they early attempted to correct the common notions respecting his reign. This was one design, doubtless, of John in preaching repentance. Instead of summoning them to military exercises, and collecting an army, which would have been in accordance with the expectations of the nation, he called them to a change of life; to the doctrine of repentance – a state of things far more accordant with the approach of a kingdom of purity.

The phrases “kingdom of God” and “kingdom of heaven” have been supposed to have a considerable variety of meaning. Some have supposed that they refer to the state of things in heaven; others, to the personal reign of Christ on earth; others, that they mean the church, or the reign of Christ in the hearts of his people. There can be no doubt that there is reference in the words to the condition of things in heaven after this life. But the church of God is a preparatory state to that beyond the grave – a state in which Christ pre-eminently rules and reigns and there is no doubt that the phrases sometimes refer to the state of things in the church; and that they may refer, therefore, to the state of things which the Messiah was to set up his spiritual reign begun in the church on earth and completed in heaven.

The expression “the kingdom of heaven is at hand” would be best translated, “the reign of God draws near.” We do not say commonly of a kingdom that it is movable, or that it approaches. A reign may be said to be at hand; and it may be said with propriety that the time when Christ would reign was at hand. In this sense it is meant that the time when Christ should reign, or set up his kingdom, or begin his dominion on earth, under the Christian economy, was about to commence. The phrase, then, should not be confined to any period of that reign, but includes his whole dominion over his people on earth and in heaven.

In the passage here it clearly means that the coming of the Messiah was near, or that the time of the reign of God which the Jews had expected was coming.

The word “heaven,” or “heavens,” as it is in the original, means sometimes the place so called; and sometimes it is, by a figure of speech, put for the Great Being whose residence is there, as in Dan_4:26; “the Heavens do rule.” See also Mar_11:30; Luk_15:18. As that kingdom was one of purity, it was proper that the people should prepare themselves for it by turning from their sins, and by bringing their hearts into a state suitable to his reign.

Catena Aurea
Mar 1:16-20
Theophylact: As the Evangelist John relates, Peter and Andrew were disciples of the Forerunner, but seeing that John had borne witness to Jesus, they joined themselves to him; afterwards, grieving that John had been cast into prison, they returned to their trade. Wherefore there follows, “casting nets into the sea, for they were fishers.”

Look then upon them, living on their own labours, not on the fruits of iniquity; for such men were worthy to become the first disciples of Christ; whence it is subjoined, “And Jesus said unto them, Come ye after Me.”

Now He calls them for the second time; for this is the second calling in respect of that, of which we read in John. But it is shewn to what they were called, when it is added, “I will make you become fishers of men.”

Bede, in Marc., 1, 6: Now fishers and unlettered men are sent to preach, that the faith of believers might be thought to lie in the power of God, not in eloquence or in learning. It goes on to say, “and immediately they left their nets, and followed Him.”

Theophylact: For we must not allow any time to lapse, but at once follow the Lord. After these again, He catches James and John, because they also, though poor, supported the old age of their father.

Wherefore there follows, “And when He had gone a little farther thence, He saw James, the son of Zebedee, &c.”

But they left their father, because he would have hindered them in following Christ. Do thou, also, when thou art hindered by thy parents, leave them, and come to God. It is shewn by this that Zebedee was not a believer; but the mother of the Apostles believed, for she followed Christ, when Zebedee was dead.

Bede: It may be asked, how he could call two fishers from each of the boats, (first, Peter and Andrew, then having gone a little further, the two others, sons of Zebedee,) when Luke says that James and John were called to help Peter and Andrew, and that it was to Peter only that Christ said, “Fear not, from this time thou shalt catch men;” [Luke 5:!0] he also says, that “at the same time, when they had brought their ships to land, they followed Him.”

We must therefore understand that the transaction which Luke intimates happened first, and afterwards that they, as their custom was, had returned to their fishing. So that what Mark here relates happened afterwards; for in this case they followed the Lord, without drawing their boats ashore, (which they would have done had they meant to return,) and followed Him, as one calling them, and ordering them to follow.

Theophylact: We must know also, that action is first called, then contemplation; for Peter is the type of the active life, for he was more ardent than the others, just as the active life is the more bustling; but John is the type of the contemplative life, for he speaks more fully of divine things.

Adam Clarke
Mar 1:16
Andrew his brother – Instead of the common reading, αδελφον αυτου, his brother, the best MSS. and versions have αδελφου του Σιμωνος, the brother of Simon, which should be received into the text. The most eminent critics approve of this reading.

Simon called Peter, and Andrew his brother – Why did not Jesus Christ call some of the eminent Scribes or Pharisees to publish his Gospel, and not poor unlearned fishermen, without credit or authority? Because it was the kingdom of heaven they were to preach, and their teaching must come from above: besides, the conversion of sinners, though it be effected instrumentally by the preaching of the Gospel, yet the grand agent in it is the Spirit of God. As the instruments were comparatively mean, and, the work which was accomplished by them was grand and glorious, the excellency of the power at once appeared to be of God, and not of man; and thus the glory, due alone to his name, was secured, and the great Operator of all good had the deserved praise. Seminaries of learning, in the order of God’s providence and grace, have great and important uses; and, in reference to such uses, they should be treated with great respect: but to make preachers of the Gospel is a matter to which they are utterly inadequate; it is a, prerogative that God never did, and never will, delegate to man.
Where the seed of the kingdom of God is sowed, and a dispensation of the Gospel is committed to a man, a good education may be of great and general use: but it no more follows, because a man has had a good education, that therefore he is qualified to preach the Gospel, than it does, that because he has not had that, therefore he is unqualified; for there may be much ignorance of Divine things where there is much human learning; and a man may be well taught in the things of God, and be able to teach others, who has not had the advantages of a liberal education.

Men-made ministers have almost ruined the heritage of God. To prevent this, our Church requires that a man be inwardly moved to take upon himself this ministry, before he can be ordained to it. And he who cannot say, that he trusts (has rational and Scriptural conviction) that he is moved by the Holy Ghost to take upon himself this office, is an intruder into the heritage of God, and his ordination, ipso facto, vitiated and of none effect. See the truly apostolic Ordination Service of the Church of England.

Fishers – Persons employed in a lawful and profitable avocation, and faithfully discharging their duty in it. It was a tradition of the elders, that one of Joshua’s ten precepts was, that all men should have an equal right to spread their nets and fish in the sea of Tiberias, or Galilee. The persons mentioned here were doubtless men of pure morals; for the minister of God should have a good report from them that are without.

Albert Barnes
Mar 1:16
Sea of Galilee – This was also called the Sea of Tiberias and the Lake of Gennesareth, and also the Sea of Chinnereth, Num_34:11; Deu_3:17; Jos_12:3. Its form is an irregular oval, with the large end to the north. It is about 14 miles in length, and from 6 miles to 9 miles in width. It is about 600 feet lower than the Mediterranean, and this great depression accounts for some of its special phenomena. There is no part of Palestine, it is said, which can be compared in beauty with the environs of this lake. Many populous cities once stood on its shores, such as Tiberias, Bethsaida, Capernaum, Chorazin, Hippo, etc. The shores are described by Josephus as a perfect paradise, producing every luxury under heaven at all seasons of the year, and its remarkable beauty is still noticed by the traveler. “Seen from any point of the surrounding heights, it is a fine sheet of water a burnished mirror set in a framework of surrounding hills and rugged mountains, which rise and roll backward and upward to where hoary Hermon hangs the picture on the blue vault of heaven.” The lake is fed mainly by the Jordan; but besides this there are several great fountains and streams emptying into it during the rainy seasons, which pour an immense amount of water into it, raising its level several feet above the ordinary mark. See The Land and the Book (Thomson), vol. ii. p. 77. Lieutenant Lynch reports its greatest ascertained depth at 165 feet. The waters of the lake are sweet and pleasant to the taste, and clear. The lake still abounds with fish, and gives employment, as it did in the time of our Saviour, to those who live on its shores. It is, however, stormy, probably due to the high hills by which it is surrounded.

Simon called Peter – The name “Peter” means a rock, and is the same as “Cephas.” See the Mat_16:18 note; also Joh_1:42 note; 1Co_15:5 note.

Albert Barnes
Mar 1:20
With the hired servants (meta ton misthoton). One hired for wages (misthos), a very old Greek word. Zebedee and his two sons evidently had an extensive business in co-operation with Andrew and Simon (Luk_5:7, Luk_5:10). Mark alone has this detail of the hired servants left with Zebedee. They left the boat and their father (Mat_4:22) with the hired servants. The business would go on while they left all (Luk_5:11) and became permanent followers of Jesus. Many a young man has faced precisely this problem when he entered the ministry. Could he leave father and mother, brothers and sisters, while he went forth to college and seminary to become a fisher of men? Not the least of the sacrifices made in the education of young preachers is that made by the home folks who have additional burdens to bear because the young preacher is no longer a bread-winner at home. Most young preachers joyfully carry on such burdens after entering the ministry.

Catena Aurea
Mar 1:21-22
Theophylact: For this end the Law commanded them to give themselves up to rest on the sabbath day, that they might meet together to attend to sacred reading. Again, Christ taught them by rebuke, not by flattery as did the Pharisees; wherefore it says, “And they were astonished at His doctrine; for He taught them as one having power, and not as the Scribes.”

He taught them also in power, transforming men to good, and He threatened punishment to those who did not believe on Him.

Bede: The Scribes themselves taught the people what was written in Moses and the Prophets; but Jesus as the God and Lord of Moses, himself, by the freedom of His own will, either added those things which appeared wanting in the Law, or altered things as He preached to the people; as we read in Matthew, “It was said to them of old time, but I say unto you.” [Mat_5:27]

A.T. Robertson
Mar 1:21
And taught (edidasken). Inchoative imperfect, began to teach as soon as he entered the synagogue in Capernaum on the sabbath. The synagogue in Capernaum afforded the best opening for the teaching of Jesus. He had now made Capernaum (Tell Hum) his headquarters after the rejection in Nazareth as explained in Luke 4:16-31 and Mat_4:13-16. The ruins of this synagogue have been discovered and there is even talk of restoring the building since the stones are in a good state of preservation. Jesus both taught (didasko) and preached (kerusso) in the Jewish synagogues as opportunity was offered by the chief or leader of the synagogue (archisunagogos). The service consisted of prayer, praise, reading of scripture, and exposition by any rabbi or other competent person. Often Paul was invited to speak at such meetings. In Luk_4:20 Jesus gave back the roll of Isaiah to the attendant or beadle (toi huperetei) whose business it was to bring out the precious manuscript and return it to its place. Jesus was a preacher of over a year when he began to teach in the Capernaum synagogue. His reputation had preceded him (Luk_4:14).

John Calvin
Mar 1:22
And they were astonished at his doctrine. The meaning of the Evangelists is, that the power of the Spirit shone in the preaching of Christ with such brightness, as to extort admiration even from irreligious and cold hearers. Luke says, that his discourse was accompanied with power, that is, full of majesty. Mark expresses it more fully, by adding a contrast, that it was unlike the manner of teaching of the Scribes. As they were false expounders of Scripture, their doctrine was literal and dead, breathed nothing of the power of the Spirit, and was utterly destitute of majesty. The same kind of coldness may be now observed in the speculative theology of Popery. Those masters do indeed thunder out whatever they think proper in a sufficiently magisterial style; but as their manner of discoursing about divine things is so profane, that their controversies exhibit no traces of religion, what they bring forward is all affectation and mere drivelling: for the declaration of the Apostle Paul holds true, that the kingdom of God is not in word, but in power, (1Co_4:20.) In short, the Evangelists mean that, while the manner of teaching, which then prevailed, was so greatly degenerated and so extremely corrupted, that it did not impress the minds of men with any reverence for God, the preaching of Christ was eminently distinguished by the divine power of the Spirit, which procured for him the respect of his hearers. This is the power, or rather the majesty and authority, at which the people were astonished.

John Gill
Mar 1:22 And they were astonished at his doctrine,…. The nature and importance of it, it being what they had not been used to hear; only at best the doctrine of the law, and sometimes only the traditions of the elders, or an allegorical and traditional sense of the Scriptures, and things very trifling and unedifying: and also they were amazed at the manner of his preaching, which was with so much gracefulness, gravity, and majesty, and was attended with so much evidence and power:

for he taught them as one having authority, and not as the Scribes; or “their Scribes”, as the Syriac, Persic, and Ethiopic versions read. He did not go about to establish what he said by the authority of the Rabbins, as the Scribes did; saying, Hillell says so, or Shammai says thus, or such a doctor says thus and thus; but he spoke as from himself, as one sent of God, that had an authority from him, and was independent of man; and this was what they had not observed in others, and wonder at it; See Gill on Mat_7:28. See Gill on Mat_7:29.

Albert Barnes
His doctrine – His teaching.

As one having authority, and not as the scribes – The scribes were the learned people and teachers of the Jewish nation, and were principally Pharisees. They taught chiefly the sentiments of their Rabbis, and the traditions which had been delivered; they consumed much of their time in useless disputes and “vain jangling.” Jesus was open, plain, grave, useful, delivering truth as “became” the oracles of God; not spending his time in trifling disputes and debating questions of no importance, but confirming his doctrine by miracles and argument; teaching “as having power,” as it is in the original, and not in the vain and foolish manner of the Jewish doctors. He showed that he had authority to explain, to enforce, and to “change” the ceremonial laws of the Jews. He came with authority such as no “man” could have, and it is not remarkable that his explanations astonished them.

A.T. Robertson
Mar 1:22
They were astonished (exeplessonto). Pictorial imperfect as in Luk_4:32 describing the amazement of the audience, “meaning strictly to strike a person out of his senses by some strong feeling, such as fear, wonder, or even joy” (Gould).

And not as their scribes (kai ouch hos hoi grammateis). Luk_4:32 has only “with authority” (en exousiai). Mark has it “as having authority” (hos echon exousian). He struck a note not found by the rabbi. They quoted other rabbis and felt their function to be expounders of the traditions which they made a millstone around the necks of the people. By so doing they set aside the word and will of God by their traditions and petty legalism (Mar_7:9, Mar_7:13). They were casuists and made false interpretations to prove their punctilious points of external etiquette to the utter neglect of the spiritual reality. The people noticed at once that here was a personality who got his power (authority) direct from God, not from the current scribes. “Mark omits much, and is in many ways a meagre Gospel, but it makes a distinctive contribution to the evangelic history in showing by a few realistic touches (this one of them) the remarkable personality of Jesus” (Bruce). See note on Mat_7:29 for the like impression made by the Sermon on the Mount where the same language occurs. The chief controversy in Christ’s life was with these scribes, the professional teachers of the oral law and mainly Pharisees. At once the people see that Jesus stands apart from the old group. He made a sensation in the best sense of that word. There was a buzz of excitement at the new teacher that was increased by the miracle that followed the sermon.

Catena Aurea
Mar 1:23-28
Bede, in Marc., 1, 7: Since by the envy of the devil death first entered into the world, it was right that the medicine of healing should first work against the author of death; and therefore it is said, “And there was in their synagogue a man, &c.”

Pseudo-Chrys., Vict. Ant. e Cat. in Marc.: The word, Spirit, is applied to an Angel, the air, the soul, and even the Holy Ghost. Lest therefore by the sameness of the name we should fall into error, he adds, “unclean.” And he is called unclean on account of his impiousness and far removal from God, and because he employs himself in all unclean and wicked works.

Augustine, City of God, 21: Moreover, how great is the power which the lowliness of God, appearing in the form of a servant, has over the pride of devils, the devils themselves know so well, that they express it to the same Lord clothed in the weakness of flesh. For there follows, “And he cried out, saying, What have we to do we Thee, Jesus of Nazareth, &c.”

For it is evident in these words that there was in them knowledge, but there was not charity; and the reason was, that they feared their punishment from Him, and loved not the righteousness in Him.

Bede: For the devils, seeing the Lord on the earth, thought that they were immediately to be judged.

Pseudo-Chrys., Vict. Ant. e Cat. in Marc.: Or else the devil so speaks, as if he said, ‘by taking away uncleanness, and giving to the souls of men divine knowledge, Thou allowest us no place in men.’

Pseudo-Chrys., Vict. Ant. e Cat. in Marc.: As if he said, Methinks that Thou art come; for he had not a firm and certain knowledge of the coming of God. But he calls Him “holy” not as one of many, for every prophet was also holy, but he proclaims that the was the One holy; by the article in Greek he shews Him to be the One, but by his fear he shews Him to be Lord of all.
Augustine: For He was known to them in that degree in which He wished to be known; and He wished as much as was fitting. He was not known to them as to the holy Angels, who enjoy Him by partaking of His eternity according as He is the Word of God; but as He was to be made known in terror, to those beings from whose tyrannical power He was about to free the predestinate.He was known therefore to the devils, not in that He is eternal Life, [see 1Jo_5:20, Joh_17:3] but by some temporal effects of His Power, which might be more clear to the angelic senses of even bad spirits than to the weakness of men.

Pseudo-Chrys., Vict. Ant. e Cat. in Marc.: Further, the Truth did not wish to have the witness of unclean spirits.

Wherefore there follows, “And Jesus threatened him, saying, &c.” Whence a healthful precept is given to us; let us not believe devils, howsoever they may proclaim the truth. It goes on, “And the unclean spirit tearing him, &c.”

For because the man spoke as one in his senses and uttered his words with discretion, lest it should be thought that he put together his words not from the devil but out of his own heart, He permitted the man to be torn by the devil, that He might shew that it was the devil who spoke.

Theophylact: That they might know, when they saw it, from how great an evil the man was freed, and on account of the miracle might believe.

Bede: But it may appear to be a discrepancy, that he should have gone out of him, tearing him, or, as some copies have it, vexing him, when, according to Luke, he did not hurt him. But Luke himself says, “When He had cast him into the midst, he came out of him, without hurting him.” [Luk_4:35] Wherefore it is inferred that Mark meant by vexing or tearing him, what Luke expresses in the words, “When He had cast him into the midst;” so that what he goes on to say, “And did not hurt him,” may be understood to mean that the tossing of his limbs and vexing did not weaken him, as devils are wont to come out even with the cutting off and tearing away of limbs. But seeing the power of the miracle, they wonder at the newness of our Lord’s doctrine, and are roused to search into what they had heard by what they had seen. Wherefore there follows, “And they all wondered, &c.”

For miracles were done that they might more firmly believe the Gospel of the kingdom of God, which was being preached, since those who were promising heavenly joys to men on earth, were shewing forth heavenly things and divine works even on earth. For before (as the Evangelist says) “He was teaching them as one who had power,” and now, as the crowd witnesses, “with power He commands the evil spirits, and they obey Him.” It goes on, “And immediately His fame spread abroad, &c.”

Adam Clarke
Mar 1:23
A man with an unclean spirit – This demoniac is only mentioned by Mark and Luke, Luk_4:33. It seems the man had lucid intervals; else he could not have been admitted into the synagogue. Unclean or impure spirit – a common epithet for those fallen spirits: but here it may mean, one who filled the heart of him he possessed with Lascivious thoughts, images, desires, and propensities. By giving way to the first attacks of such a spirit, he may soon get in, and take full possession of the whole soul.

Albert Barnes
Much difficulty exists, and much has been written respecting those in the New Testament said to be possessed with the devil. It has been maintained by many that the sacred writers only meant by this expression to denote those who were melancholy or epileptic, or afflicted with some other grievous disease. This opinion has been supported by arguments too long to be repeated here. On the other hand, it has been supposed that the persons so described were under the influence of evil spirits, who had complete possession of the faculties, and who produced many symptoms of disease not unlike melancholy, madness, and epilepsy. That such was the fact will appear from the following considerations:

1. Christ and the apostles spoke to them and of them as such; they addressed them, and managed them, precisely as if they were so possessed, leaving their hearers to infer beyond a doubt that such was their real opinion.

2. Those who were thus possessed spake, conversed, asked questions, gave answers, and expressed their knowledge of Christ, and their fear of him things that certainly could not be said of diseases, Mat_8:28; Luk_8:27.

3.The devils, or evil spirits, are represented as going out of the persons possessed, and entering the bodies of others, Mat_8:32.

4. Jesus spake to them, and asked their name, and they answered him. He threatened them, commanded them to be silent, to depart, and not to return, Mar_1:25; Mar_5:8; Mar_9:25.

5. Those possessed are said “to know Christ; to be acquainted with the Son of God,” Luk_4:34; Mar_1:24. This could not be said of diseases.

6. The early fathers of the Church interpreted these passages in the same way. They derived their opinions probably from the apostles themselves, and their opinions are a fair interpretation of the apostles’ sentiments.

7. If it is denied that Christ believed in such possessions, it does not appear why any other clearly-expressed sentiment of his may not in the same way be disputed. There is, perhaps, no subject on which he expressed himself more clearly, or acted more uniformly, or which he left more clearly impressed on the minds of his disciples.

Nor is there any absurdity in the opinion that those persons were really under the influence of devils. For:

1. It is no more absurd to suppose that an angel, or many angels, should have fallen and become wicked than that so many people should.

2. It is no more absurd that Satan should have possession of the human faculties, or inflict diseases, than that people should do it a thing which is done every day. What is more common than for a wicked man to corrupt the morals of others, or, by inducing them to become intemperate, to produce a state of body and mind quite as bad as to be possessed with the devil?

3. We still see a multitude of cases that no man can prove not to be produced by the presence of an evil spirit. Who would attempt to say that some evil being may not have much to do in the case of madmen?

4. It afforded an opportunity for Christ to show his power over the enemies of himself and of man, and thus to evince himself qualified to meet every enemy of the race, and triumphantly to redeem his people. He came to destroy the power of Satan, Act_26:18; Rom_16:20-21.

A.T. Robertson
Mar 1:23
With an unclean spirit (en pneumati akathartoi). This use of en “with” is common in the Septuagint like the Hebrew be, but it occurs also in the papyri. It is the same idiom as “in Christ,” “in the Lord” so common with Paul. In English we speak of our being in love, in drink, in his cups, etc. The unclean spirit was in the man and the man in the unclean spirit, a man in the power of the unclean spirit. Luke has “having,” the usual construction. See Mat_22:43. Unclean spirit is used as synonymous with

demon (daimonion). It is the idea of estrangement from God (Zec_13:2). The whole subject of demonology is difficult, but no more so than the problem of the devil. Jesus distinguishes between the man and the unclean spirit. Usually physical or mental disease accompanied the possession by demons. One wonders today if the degenerates and confirmed criminals so common now are not under the power of demons. The only cure for confirmed criminals seems to be conversion (a new heart).

Adam Clarke
Mar 1:24
What have we to do with thee – Or, What is it to us and to thee? or, What business hast thou with us? That this is the meaning of the original, τι ημιν και σοι, Kypke has sufficiently shown. There is a phrase exactly like it in 2Sa_16:10. What have I to do with you, ye sons of Zeruiah? מה לי ולכם בני צרויה ma li v’lacem beney Tseruiah, What business have ye with me, or, Why do ye trouble me, ye sons of Tseruiah? The Septuagint translate the Hebrew just as the evangelist does here, τι εμοι και υμιν; it is the same idiom in both places, as there can be no doubt that the demoniac spoke in Hebrew, or in the Chaldeo-Syriac dialect of that language, which was then common in Judea. See on Mat_8:29 (note).

Art thou come to destroy us? – We may suppose this spirit to have felt and spoken thus: “Is this the time of which it hath been predicted, that in it the Messiah should destroy all that power which we have usurped and exercised over the bodies and souls of men? Alas! it is so. I now plainly see who thou art – the Holy One of God, who art come to destroy unholiness, in which we have our residence, and through which we have our reign in the souls of men.” An unholy spirit is the only place where Satan can have his full operation, and show forth the plenitude of his destroying power.

Albert Barnes
Mark 1:24
Let us alone – Though only one impure spirit is mentioned as possessing this man, yet that spirit speaks also in the name of others.

They were leagued together in the work of evil, and this one knew that if he was punished, others would also share the same fate.

What have we to do with thee? – See the notes at Mat_8:29. By this the spirit meant to say that, if Jesus cast him out, he would use an improper interference. But this was untrue. The possession of the man was a direct assault upon God and his works. Jesus came to destroy the works of the devil, and Jesus had a right, therefore, to liberate the captive, and to punish him who had possessed him. So Satan still considers it an infringement of his rights when God frees a “sinner” from bondage and destroys his influence over the soul. So he still asks to be let alone, and to be suffered to lead people captive at his will.

Art thou come to destroy us? – Implying that this could not be the intention of the “benevolent” Messiah; that to be cast out of that man would, in fact, be his destruction, and that therefore he might be suffered still to remain. Or it may imply, as in Mat_8:29, that the time of their destruction had not come, and that he ought not to destroy them before that.

I know thee who thou art – Evil spirits seem to have been acquainted at once with the Messiah. Besides, they had learned from his miracles that he was the Messiah, and had power over them.

The Holy One of God – The Messiah. See Dan_9:24. Jesus is called “the Holy One of God” because:

1. Jesus was eminently pure.

2. Because Jesus was the only begotten Son of God – equal with the Father. And,

3. Because Jesus was anointed (set apart) to the work of the Messiah, the mediator between God and man.

George Haydock
Mar 1:25 Christ would not suffer the devils to be produced as witnesses of his divinity; the author of truth could not bear the father of lies to bear testimony of him. Hence Jesus threatened him, in order to teach us never to believe or put our trust in demons, whatever they may foretell. (St. John Chrysostom)

Matthew Poole
Mar 1:25
Ver. 25,26. It is both here and in many other places observable, that when the devils made a confession of Christ, yet neither Christ nor his apostles would ever take any notice of it. Truth is never advantaged from the confession of known liars, as the devil was from the beginning. Christ needed not the devil’s testimony, either to his holiness, or his being the Son of God, nor would he have people allow the least faith to the devil’s words. Nor was he to be imposed upon by the devil’s good words; he was to make no truce with him, but to destroy him and his works, he therefore charges him to hold his peace, and to come out.

Albert Barnes
Mar 1:25
And Jesus rebuked him – Chided him, or commanded him, with a threatening.

This was not the man that Jesus rebuked, but the spirit, for he instantly commanded the same being to come out of the man. In all this, Jesus did not once address the man. His conversation was with the evil spirit, proving conclusively that it was not a mere disease or mental derangement – for how could the Son of God hold converse with “disease” or “insanity?” – but that he conversed with a “being” who also conversed, reasoned, cavilled, felt, resisted, and knew him. There are, therefore, evil spirits, and those spirits have taken possession of human beings.

Hold thy peace – Greek, “Be muzzled.” “Restrain thyself.” “Cease from complaints, and come out of the man.” This was a very signal proof of the power of Jesus, to be able by a word to silence an evil angel, and, against his will, to compel him to leave a man whom he delighted to torment.

A.T. Robertson
Mar 1:25
Hold thy peace (phimotheti). First aorist passive imperative of phimoo. “Be quiet,” Moffatt translates it. But it is a more vigorous word, “Be muzzled” like an ox. So literally in Deu_25:4, 1Co_9:9; 1Ti_5:18. It is common in Josephus, Lucian, and the lxx. See Mat_22:12, Mat_22:34. Gould renders it “Shut up.” “Shut your mouth” would be too colloquial. Vincent suggests “gagged,” but that is more the idea of epistomazein in Tit_1:11, to stop the mouth.

Albert Barnes
Mar 1:26
And when the unclean spirit … – Still malignant, though doomed to obey – submitting because he was obliged to, not because he chose – he exerted his last power, inflicted all the pain he could, and then bowed to the Son of God and came out.

This is the nature of an evil disposition. Though compelled to obey, though prevented by the command and providence of God from doing what it “would,” yet, in seeming to obey, it does all the ill it can, and makes even the appearance of obedience the occasion for increased crime and mischief.

A.T. Robertson
Mar 1:26
Tearing him (sparaxan auton). Margin, convulsing him like a spasm. Medical writers use the word for the rotating of the stomach. Luk_4:35 adds “when the demon had thrown him down in the midst.” Mark mentions the “loud voice” (phonei megalei), a screech, in fact. It was a moment of intense excitement.

A.T. Robertson
Mar 1:27
They questioned among themselves (sunzetein autous). By look and word.

A new teaching (didache kaine). One surprise had followed another this day. The teaching was fresh (kaine), original as the dew of the morning on the blossoms just blown. That was a novelty in that synagogue where only staid and stilted rabbinical rules had been heretofore droned out. This new teaching charmed the people, but soon will be rated as heresy by the rabbis. And it was with authority (kat’ exousian). It is not certain whether the phrase is to be taken with “new teaching,” “It’s new teaching with authority behind it,” as Moffatt has it, or with the verb; “with authority commandeth even the unclean spirits” (kai tois pneumasin tois akathartois epitassei). The position is equivocal and may be due to the fact that “Mark gives the incoherent and excited remarks of the crowd in this natural form” (Swete). But the most astonishing thing of all is that the demons “obey him” (hupakouousin autoi). The people were accustomed to the use of magical formulae by the Jewish exorcists (Mat_12:27; Act_19:13), but here was something utterly different. Simon Magus could not understand how Simon Peter could do his miracles without some secret trick and even offered to buy it (Act_8:19).

Adam Clarke
Mar 1:28
And immediately his fame spread abroad – The miracle which he had performed was -

1. great;

2. evidenced much benevolence in the worker of it; and

3. was very public, being wrought in the synagogue.

The many who saw it published it wherever they went; and thus the fame of Christ, as an incomparable teacher, and unparalleled worker of miracles, became soon spread abroad through the land.

The word, ευθεως, immediately, occurs more frequently in this evangelist than in any other writer of the new covenant: it is very often superfluous, and may often be omitted in the translation, without any prejudice to the sense of the passage in which it is found. It seems to be used by St. Mark, as our ancient writers used forsooth, and such like words.

Catena Aurea
Mar 1:29-31
Bede, in Marc., 1, 7: First, it was right that the serpent’s tongue should be shut up, that it might not spread any more venom; then that the woman, who was first seduced, should be healed from the fever of carnal concupiscence. Wherefore it is said, “And forthwith, when they were come out of the synagogue, &c.”

Theophylact: He retired then as the custom was on the sabbath-day about evening to eat in His disciples’ house. But she who ought to have ministered was prevented by a fever. Wherefore it goes on, “But Simon’s wife’s mother was lying sick of a fever.”

Pseudo-Chrys., Vict. Ant. e Cat. in Marc., 1, 32: But the disciples, knowing that they were to receive a benefit by that means, without waiting for the evening prayed that Peter’s mother should be healed. Wherefore there follows, “who immediately tell Him of her.”

Bede: But in the Gospel of Luke it is written that “they besought Him for her.” [Luk_4:38] For the Saviour sometimes after being asked, sometimes of His own accord, heals the sick, shewing that He always assents to the prayers of the faithful, when they pray also against bad passions, and sometimes gives them to understand things which they do not understand at all, or else, when they pray unto Him dutifully, forgives their want of understanding; as the Psalmist begs of God, “Cleanse me, O Lord, from my secret faults.” [Psa_19:12] Wherefore He heals her at their request; for there follows, “And He came and took her by the hand, and lifted her up.”

Theophylact: By this it is signified, that God will heal a sick man, if he ministers to the Saints, through love to Christ.

Bede, in Marc., 1, 6: But in that He gives most profusely His gifts of healing and doctrine on the sabbath day, He teaches, that He is not under the Law, but above the Law, and does not choose the Jewish sabbath, but the true sabbath, and our rest is pleasing to the Lord, if, in order to attend to the health of our souls, we abstain from slavish work, that is, from all unlawful things. It goes on, “And immediately the fever left her, &c.”

Bede, in Marc., 1, 8: The health which is conferred at the command of the Lord, returns at once entire, accompanied with such strength that she is able to minister to those of whose help she had before stood in need.

Again, if we suppose that the man delivered from the devil means, in the moral way of interpretation, the soul purged from unclean thoughts, fitly does the woman cured of a fever by the command of God mean the flesh, restrained from the heat of it concupiscence by the precepts of continence.

John Calvin
Mar 1:29
They came, with James and John, into the house of Simon and Andrew.There is reason to conjecture, that Matthew does not relate this history in its proper order: for Mark expressly states, that there were only four disciples who attended Christ. Besides, when he left the synagogue, he went straight to Peter’s house; which also shows clearly, that Matthew did not observe, with exactness, the order of time. The Evangelists appear to have taken particular notice of this miracle; not that, in itself, it was more remarkable, or more worthy of being recorded, than other miracles, — but because, by means of it, Christ gave to his disciples a private and familiar illustration of his grace. Another reason was, that the healing of one woman gave occasion to many miracles, so that they came to him in great numbers, from every direction, to implore his assistance. A single word, in Luke’s narrative, presents to us more strikingly the power which Christ displayed; for he says, that Simon’s mother-in-law was held by a GREAT fever. It was a clearer and more affecting proof of divine power, that, in a moment, and by a single touch, he removed a strong and violent disease. He might have done it by the slightest expression of his will; but he touched her hand,(Mat_8:15 ,)either to mark his affection, or because he was aware that this sign was, at that time, advantageous: for we know, that he freely used outward signs, when the time required them.

George Haydock
Mar 1:30 It appears from St. Mark and St. Luke, that the cure of Peter’s mother-in-law and the other sick, here mentioned, happened after the preceding narrative, and probably on the same day. But St. Matthew does not observe this order; for having related that Jesus, after the sermon on the mount, entered Capharnaum, and healed the centurion’s servant, he hence takes occasion to mention this and the other miracles, which he had omitted, and which Jesus had wrought at his first coming to Capharnaum. (Rutter)