The MacArthur Study Bible, NKJV, page 479
Matthew: 14:25
Mark: 6:48
John: 6:19
Miracle: 16. Healing the Gentile Woman’s Daughter
Matthew: 15:21
Mark: 7:24
Miracle: 17. Feeding the Four Thousand
Matthew: 15:32
Mark: 8:1
Miracle: 18. Healing the Epileptic Boy
Matthew: 17:14
Mark: 9:17
Luke: 9:38
Miracle: 19. Temple Tax in the Fish’s Mouth
Matthew: 17:24
Miracle: 20. Healing Two Blind Men
Matthew: 20:30
Mark: 10:46
Luke: 18:35
Miracle: 21. Withering the Fig Tree
Matthew: 21:18
Mark: 11:12
Miracle: 22. Casting Out an Unclean Spirit
Mark: 1:23
Luke: 4:33
Miracle: 23. Healing a Deaf-Mute
Mark: 7:31
Miracle: 24. Healing a Blind Man at Bethsaida
Mark: 8:22
Miracle: 25. Escape from the Hostile Multitude
Luke: 4:30
Miracle: 26. Catch of Fish
Luke: 5:1
Miracle: 27. Raising of a Widow’s Son at Nain
Luke: 7:11
Miracle: 28. Healing the Infirm, Bent Woman
Luke: 13:11
Miracle: 29. Healing the Man with Dropsy
Luke: 14:1
Miracle: 30. Cleansing the Ten Lepers
Luke: 17:11
Miracle: 31. Restoring a Servant’s Ear
Luke: 22:51
Miracle: 32. Turning Water into Wine
John: 2:1
Miracle: 33. Healing the Nobleman’s Son (of fever)
John: 4:46
Miracle: 34. Healing an Infirm Man at Bethesda
John: 5:1
Miracle: 35. Healing the Man Born Blind
John: 9:1
Miracle: 36. Raising of Lazarus
John: 11:43
Miracle: 37. Second Catch of Fish
John: 21:1
1:29 the house of Simon and Andrew. Originally from Bethsaida (John 1:44), the two brothers had moved to Capernaum when Jesus established his headquarters there (see note on v. 21). James and John. Only Mark mentions their presence at the healing of Peter’s mother-in-law.
1:30 Simon’s wife’s mother. Paul also affirmed that Peter was married (1 Cor. 9:5). That his mother-in-law was living with Peter and his wife may indicate that her husband was dead. a fever. That she was too ill to get out of bed, coupled with Luke’s description of her fever as a “high fever” (Luke 4:38), suggests her illness was serious, even life-threatening.
1:32 when the sun had set. Marking the close of the Sabbath and the easing of the restrictions associated with it. Specifically, rabbinic law prohibited carrying any burdens (such as stretchers) on the Sabbath. they brought. The report of Jesus’ healing of the demon-possessed man in the synagogue and Peter’s mother-in-law created a sensation in Capernaum and aroused the hopes of other sufferers.
1:34 did not allow the demons to speak. See notes on v. 25; 3:11, 12. they knew Him. The demons’ theology is absolutely orthodox (James 2:19); but though they know the truth, they reject it and God, who is its source.
1:36 Simon and those who were with Him. The first instance in the gospels of Peter’s assuming of leadership. Those with Peter are not revealed, though Andrew, James, and John were likely among them.
1:37 Finding Jesus after a diligent search (v. 36), Peter and the others excitedly implored Him to return to Capernaum and capitalize on the excitement generated by the previous night’s healings.
1:39 throughout all Galilee. Mark’s terse statement summarizes a preaching tour that must have lasted for weeks, or even months (cf. Matt. 4:23, 24).
1:40–45 Mark relates one of Jesus’ many healings during the Galilean ministry summarized in v. 39. The leper’s healing emphasizes Jesus’ miraculous power over disease, since leprosy was one of the most dreaded diseases of antiquity.
1:40 leper. Lepers were considered ceremonially unclean, and were outcasts from society (Lev. 13:11). While the OT term for leprosy included other skin diseases (see note on Lev. 13:2), this man may have actually had true leprosy (Hansen’s Disease), or else his cure would not have created such a sensation (v. 45).
1:41 compassion. Only Mark records Jesus’ emotional reaction to the leper’s desperate plight. The Gr. word appears only in the synoptic gospels and (apart from parables) is used only in reference to Jesus. touched him. Unlike rabbis, who avoided lepers lest they become ceremonially defiled, Jesus expressed His compassion with a physical gesture.
1:44 say nothing to anyone. The ensuing publicity would hinder Jesus’ ability to minister (as in fact happened, cf. v. 45) and divert attention away from His message. Cf. 3:12; 5:43; 7:36; see note on Matt. 8:4. go your way, show yourself to the priest. The “priest” was the one on duty at the temple. Jesus commanded the healed leper to observe the OT regulations concerning cleansed lepers (Lev. 14:1–32). Until the required offerings had been made, the man remained ceremonially unclean. a testimony to them. The priest’s acceptance of the man’s offering would be public affirmation of his cure and cleansing.
1:45 proclaim it freely. Only Mark records the cleansed leper’s disobedience, although Luke hints at it (Luke 5:15). no longer openly enter the city. The result of the leper’s disobedience was that Jesus could no longer enter a city without being mobbed by those seeking to be cured of diseases. Jesus’ ministry of teaching in that area thus came to a halt. deserted places. Jesus kept to the relatively uninhabited regions to allow the excitement over His cure of the leper to die down. Luke also notes that He used His time in the wilderness for prayer (Luke 5:16).
Mark 1:45
The Plan of Herod’s Temple
Mark 2
2:1 He was in the house. This is better translated, “He was at home.” This was likely Peter’s home, where Jesus had taken up temporary residence (cf. Matt. 4:13).
2:2 the word. The good news of the gospel, that salvation is by grace alone, through faith alone, for the forgiveness of sins.
2:3 a paralytic. Since he was lying on a bed, the man’s paralysis was severe—perhaps he was a quadriplegic.
2:4 they uncovered the roof. Most homes in Israel had flat roofs used for relaxation in the cool of the day and for sleeping on hot nights. And there was usually an external stairway that extended to the roof. Often, as here, the roof was made of slabs of burnt or dried clay that were placed on supporting beams which stretched from wall to wall. The builder then spread a uniform coat of fresh, wet clay over those slabs of hardened clay to serve as a seal against the rain. The paralytic’s friends took him up to the top of such a house and dug out the top coat of clay, removing several of the slabs until they made enough room to lower him down into Jesus’ presence. the paralytic. See note on v. 3.
2:5 When Jesus saw their faith. The aggressive, persistent effort of the paralytic’s friends was visible evidence of their faith in Christ to heal. “Son, your sins are forgiven you.” Many Jews in that day believed that all disease and affliction was a direct result of one’s sins. This paralytic may have believed that as well; thus he would have welcomed forgiveness of his sins before healing. The Gr. verb for “are forgiven” refers to sending or driving away (cf. Ps. 103:12; Jer. 31:34; Mic. 7:19). Thus Jesus dismissed the man’s sin and freed him from the guilt of it (see note on Matt. 9:2).
2:6 the scribes. See note on Matt. 2:4; cf. 1:22.
2:7 this Man…blasphemies. The scribes were correct in saying that only God can forgive sins (cf. Is. 43:25), but incorrect in saying Jesus blasphemed. They refused to recognize Jesus’ power as coming from God, much less that He Himself was God.
2:8 in His spirit. This can also be translated, “by His spirit.” This is not the Holy Spirit, but the omniscient mind of the Savior.
2:9 Which is easier. It is much easier to say, “Your sins are forgiven you.” No human can prove that such a thing actually occurred since it is invisible. Commanding a paralytic to walk would be more difficult to say convincingly, however, because the actions of the paralytic would immediately verify the effect of the command (see note on Matt. 9:5).
2:10 But that you may know. Jesus’ power to heal the paralytic’s physical infirmities proved the veracity of His claim and power to forgive sins. Son of Man. Jesus used this term for Himself to emphasize His humiliation (see notes on 14:62; Matt. 8:20). It appears 14 times in Mark (v. 10, 28; 8:31, 38; 9:9, 12, 31; 10:33, 45; 13:26; 14:21, 41, 62).
2:14 Levi the son of Alphaeus. One of the 12, more commonly known as Matthew (see Introduction to Matthew: Title). tax office. Matthew was a publican, a tax collector, a despised profession in Palestine because such men were viewed as traitors. Publicans were Jews who had bought tax franchises from the Roman government. Any amount they collected over what Rome required they were allowed to keep. Thus many publicans became wealthy at the expense of their own people (see notes on Matt. 5:46; 9:9). he arose and followed Him. This simple action of Matthew signified his conversion. Because his response was so immediate, it is likely Matthew was already convicted of his sin and recognized his need of forgiveness.
2:15 dining. This can also be translated, “reclining at table,” a common posture for eating when guests were present. According to Luke 5:29, this was a feast that Matthew gave in Jesus’ honor. tax collectors. There were two categories of tax collectors: 1) gabbai collected general taxes on land and property, and on income, referred to as poll or registration taxes; 2) mokhes collected a wide variety of use taxes, similar to our import duties, business license fees, and toll fees. There were two categories of mokhes: great mokhes hired others to collect taxes for them; small mokhes did their own assessing and collecting. Matthew was a small mokhe. It is likely representatives of both classes attended Matthew’s feast. All of them were considered both religious and social outcasts. sinners. A term the Jews used to describe people who had no respect for the Mosaic law or rabbinic traditions, and were therefore the most vile and worthless of people. sat together. Lit. “were reclining with.” Jesus’ willingness to associate with tax collectors and sinners by sharing in the feast with them deeply offended the scribes and Pharisees.
2:16 scribes and Pharisees. Lit. “the scribes of the Pharisees.” This phrase indicates that not all scribes were Pharisees (regarding scribes, see note on Matt. 2:4). Pharisees were a legalistic sect of Jews known for their strict devotion to the ceremonial law (see note on Matt. 3:7).
2:17 I did not come to call the righteous. The words “to repentance” do not appear in the better manuscripts. They do appear, however, in Luke 5:32, a parallel passage. The repentant person—the one who recognizes he is a sinner and who turns from his sin—is the object of Jesus’ call. The person who is sinful but thinks he is righteous refuses to acknowledge his need to repent of his sin. See notes on Matt. 9:12, 13; John 9:39–41.
2:18 disciples of John. Those followers of John the Baptist who did not transfer their allegiance to Jesus (cf. John 3:30; Acts 19:1–7). At this time John was in prison (Matt. 4:12). Their question indicates they were observing the Pharisaic traditions (cf. Matt. 9:14). the Pharisees. See note on v. 16. The association of John’s disciples with the Pharisees indicates that both groups were disturbed about the problem raised by Jesus’ association with tax collectors and sinners (cf. v. 15). fasting. The twice-a-week fast was a major expression of orthodox Judaism during Jesus’ day (cf. Luke 18:9–14). Yet, the OT prescribed only one fast, and that on the Day of Atonement (Lev. 16:29, 31).
2:19 friends of the bridegroom fast. In Jesus’ illustration, the “friends of the bridegroom” were the attendants the bridegroom selected to carry out the festivities. That certainly was not a time to fast, which was usually associated with mourning or times of great spiritual need. Jesus’ point was that the ritual practiced by John’s disciples and the Pharisees was out of touch with reality. There was no reason for Jesus’ followers to mourn and fast while enjoying the unique reality that He was with them.
2:20 taken away from them. This refers to a sudden removal or being snatched away violently—an obvious reference to Jesus’ capture and crucifixion. then they will fast. An appropriate time for mourning was to be at the crucifixion of Jesus.
2:21, 22 Jesus offered two parables to illustrate that His new and internal gospel of repentance from and forgiveness of sin could not be connected to or contained in the old and external traditions of self-righteousness and ritual (see note on Matt. 9:17).
2:22 new wineskins. Newly made and unused wineskins provided the necessary strength and elasticity to hold up as wine fermented.
2:23 grainfields. The roads in first-century Israel were primarily major arteries; so once travelers left those main roads they walked along wide paths that bordered and traversed pastures and grainfields. on the Sabbath. “Sabbath” transliterates a Heb. word that refers to a ceasing of activity or rest. In honor of the day when God rested from His creation of the world (Gen. 2:3), the Lord declared the seventh day of the week to be a special time of rest and remembrance for His people, which He incorporated into the Ten Commandments (see note on Ex. 20:8). But hundreds of years of rabbinical teaching had added numerous unbearable and arbitrary restrictions to God’s original requirement, one of which forbade any travel beyond 3,000 ft. of one’s home (cf. Num. 35:5; Josh. 3:4). pluck the heads of grain. Travelers who did not take enough food for their journey were permitted by Mosaic law to pick enough grain to satisfy their hunger (Deut. 23:24, 25; see note on Matt. 12:2).
2:24 what is not lawful on the Sabbath. Rabbinical tradition had interpreted the rubbing of grain in the hands (cf. Luke 6:1) as a form of threshing and had forbidden it. Reaping for profit on the Sabbath was forbidden by Mosaic law (Ex. 34:21), but that was obviously not the situation here (see note on Matt. 12:2). Actually the Pharisees’ charge was itself sinful since they were holding their tradition on a par with God’s Word (see notes on Matt. 15:2–9).
2:25 He said to them, “Have you never read…?” Jesus’ sarcasm pointed out the main fault of the Pharisees, who claimed to be experts and guardians of Scripture, yet were ignorant of what it actually taught (cf. Rom. 2:17–24). what David did. David and his companions were fleeing for their lives from Saul when they arrived at Nob, where the tabernacle was located at that time. Because they were hungry, they asked for food (cf. 1 Sam. 21:1–6).
2:26 in the days of Abiathar the high priest. The phrase “in the days” can mean “during the lifetime.” According to 1 Sam. 21:1, Ahimelech was the priest who gave the bread to David. Abiathar was Ahimelech’s son, who later was the High-Priest during David’s reign. Since Ahimelech died shortly after this incident (cf. 1 Sam. 22:19, 20), it is likely that Mark simply added this designation to identify the well known companion of David who later became the High-Priest, along with Zadok (2 Sam. 15:35). the showbread. Twelve loaves of unleavened bread (representing the 12 tribes of Israel) were placed on the table in the sanctuary and at the end of the week replaced with fresh ones. The old loaves were to be eaten only by the priests. While it was not normally lawful for David and his companions to eat this showbread, neither did God want them to starve, so nowhere does Scripture condemn them for eating (see note on Matt. 12:4).
2:27 The Sabbath was made for man. God instituted the Sabbath to benefit man by giving him a day to rest from his labors and to be a blessing to him. The Pharisees turned it into a burden and made man a slave to their myriad of man-made regulations.
2:28 also Lord of the Sabbath. Jesus claimed He was greater than the Sabbath, and thus was God. Based on that authority, Jesus could in fact reject the Pharisaic regulations concerning the Sabbath and restore God’s original intention for Sabbath observance to be a blessing not a burden.
Mark 3
3:1–6 This is the last of the 5 conflict episodes which began in 2:1 (2:1–11; 13–17; 18–22; 23–28), and as such it gives a sense of climax to the growing antagonism between Jesus and the Jewish leaders. In this encounter, Jesus gave the Pharisees a living illustration of scriptural Sabbath observance and His sovereign authority over both man and the Sabbath.
3:1 synagogue. The Jews’ local places of assembly and worship (see note on 1:21). withered hand. This describes a condition of paralysis or deformity from an accident, a disease, or a congenital defect.
3:2 accuse. The Pharisees were not open to learning from Jesus, but only looked for an opportunity to charge Him with a violation of the Sabbath, an accusation they could bring before the Sanhedrin.
3:4 Jesus countered the Pharisees with a question that elevated the issue at hand from a legal to a moral problem. Is it lawful. A reference to the Mosaic law. Jesus was forcing the Pharisees to examine their tradition regarding the Sabbath to see if it was consistent with God’s OT law. to do good…evil, to save…kill. Christ used a device common in the Middle East—He framed the issue in terms of clear-cut extremes. The obvious implication is that failure to do good or save a life was wrong and not in keeping with God’s original intention for the Sabbath (see notes on 2:27; Matt. 12:10). But they kept silent. The Pharisees refused to answer Jesus’ question, and by so doing implied that their Sabbath views and practices were false.
3:5 anger. Definite displeasure with human sin reveals a healthy, moral nature. Jesus’ reaction was consistent with His divine nature and proved that He is the righteous Son of God. This kind of holy indignation with sinful attitudes and practices was to be more fully demonstrated when Jesus cleansed the temple (cf. 11:15–18; Matt. 21:12, 13; Luke 19:45–48). hardness of their hearts. This phrase refers to an inability to understand because of a rebellious attitude (Ps. 95:8; Heb. 3:8, 15). The Pharisees’ hearts were becoming more and more obstinate and unresponsive to the truth (cf. 16:14; Rom. 9:18).
3:6 the Pharisees…plotted. They absolutely refused to be persuaded by anything Jesus said and did (cf. John 3:19), but were instead determined to kill Him. The Gr. word for “plotted” (lit. “counseled together”) includes the notion of carrying out a decision already made—the Pharisees were simply discussing how to implement theirs. Herodians. This secular political party, which took its name from Herod Antipas and was strong in its support for Rome, opposed the Pharisees on nearly every issue, but were willing to join forces with them because both desperately wanted to destroy Jesus. See note on Matt. 22:16.
