Mark 3 - My Thoughts

 

I want to start tonight by talking just a little bit about the chapter divisions of the Bible, because I think they raise a question about the 3^rd Chapter of Mark (and, for that matter, the 2^nd as well.) Chapter divisions in the Bible are not original. Obviously when Paul was writing letters to churches he wasn’t dividing his letters into chapters; neither was Mark when he wrote his account of Jesus’ life. There’s been a long tradition in Judaism dating back at least a thousand years and possibly more of dividing the Tanakh (what we call the Old Testament) into chapters. Those chapters aren’t identical to the chapters of the Old Testament in the Christian Bible, but they certainly had influence. The chapter divisions in the Christian Bible that we know today were basically developed in the early 13^th century by a man named Stephen Langton, who was the Archbishop of Canterbury from 1207 to 1228. The purpose of Chapters (and, by the 1400s, verses within chapters) was basically to provide easy reference points for people. But for whatever reason the chapter divisions are often arbitrary and don’t make a great deal of sense. For example, the story of Genesis 1 really stretches to Genesis 2:4 – so why the decision was made to separate Chapter 1 and 2 before the story was completed is a mystery. In some ways, the beginning of Mark 3 also seems to be something of an artificial divide from Mark 2. Essentially the opening story of Mark 3 is what you might call a summary of everything that’s happened in Mark 2. Jesus heals someone, and the healing becomes the opportunity for Jesus to teach about the Sabbath. It sounds like a condensed version of Mark 2. Jesus does add something to his previous teaching about the Sabbath – he now makes the point that there’s no law against doing good on the Sabbath. (Even doing good works would have been considered work by the Pharisees, and so would have been forbidden.) Jesus’ point seems to be that as long as what you’re doing is consistent with God’s will, it’s allowable to do it on the Sabbath. That actually does help to clarify the ambiguity that was left in Chapter 2 about what was allowable on the Sabbath. But what’s more important in this opening section of Mark 3 is the sudden appearance of a group called the Herodians, who begin to conspire with the Pharisees against Jesus. Who are the Herodians and why are they conspiring against Jesus?

 

Basically, the Herodians are supporters of King Herod, who is the Roman puppet-king of Judea, for lack of a better way to put it. It’s an interesting alliance. We saw in the last Chapter that the Pharisees were very much against collaborators (the story of Levi) and yet both Herod and his followers would also have been collaborators. Herod reigns only with Rome’s approval. He’s been placed on the throne by Rome. He has no legitimacy. He’s not a descendant of David; he’s not a part of Israel’s “royal” family. (Nor has Mark to this point identified Jesus as a descendant of David by the way – unlike Matthew and Luke who use their Christmas stories to make that connection.) The Pharisees should not be aligned with Herod and his followers. And, generally, they weren’t. Herod was never really seen as a legitimate king over Judea. But what you have here is an interesting illustration of the old saying that “the enemy of my enemy is my friend.” The Pharisees might have been bitterly opposed to the Herodians most of the time, but in this case they find common cause. Both the Pharisees and the Herodians have power in Judea. For the Pharisees their power rests on their acceptance by the people as those who can interpret the religious law, and for the Herodians their power rests on the understanding of the people that they can enforce Roman civil law with Roman backing. If Jesus is a threat to the established order, which we already noted last week, then he is as much of a threat to the Herodians as he is to the Pharisees. The two groups (along with the scribes) can set aside their contempt for each other because each are facing what they perceive to be a greater threat. The Herodians and the Pharisees can deal with each other at some later point, but right now they both have to deal with Jesus to safeguard their own interests, and so they make a deal to conspire against him. The introduction of the Herodians to the narrative might be a reason for why this particular story is separated from the stories of Mark 2.

 

     Mark goes on to immediately make it clear why they saw Jesus as a threat. “Jesus departed with his disciples to the sea, and a great multitude from Galilee followed him; hearing all that he was doing, they came to him in great numbers from Judea, Jerusalem, Idumea, beyond the Jordan, and the region around Tyre and Sidon.” That is a huge geographic area that Jesus is now drawing crowds from. His fame is spreading; people are hearing the stories of the miracles and healings and exorcisms he’s performing. Jesus is doing more to help the people than either the Pharisees or the Herodians. Jesus is starting to claim their allegiance. His teachings and actions have been primarily religious; he hasn’t acted strictly politically in a way that would threaten Herod – but on the other hand there was a link between Jesus and John the Baptist and Herod clearly saw John the Baptist as a threat because he had executed John. So Herod is unnerved; the Pharisees are unnerved; the whole social, political and religious structure that they’ve built up seems threatened. It’s a fascinating image I get of Jesus in this passage. “He told his disciples to have a boat ready for him because of the crowd, so that they would not crush him …” Jesus seems almost like a rock star surrounded by crazed fans who has to hire security just to get in and out of concerts. And yet, still, for all his fame, the only ones who actually recognize Jesus for who and what he is are the evil spirits, who keep crying out “You are the Son of God!” And then again, Jesus forbids them from making his identity known. Again, the reason for the so-called “Messianic secret” (the desire of Jesus to keep that part of his nature and mission from being known) remains largely a mystery, but it is very prominent in Mark’s Gospel.

 

     Eventually by v.12 we see Jesus finally escaping the crowds by going up a mountain and calling his disciples to be with him. The disciples were a separate group from those who had crowded into Jesus. The crowds had come to either to see Jesus (out of curiosity) or to get something from Jesus (out of need.) Either way their interest in Jesus was temporary. Once their curiosity was satisfied or their diseases were healed they’d be gone. The disciples on the other hand were those who were more committed to him and who presumably travelled with him; they were the ones who saw him not merely as a miracle worker but as a teacher, a rabbi or a prophet. Thus far Mark has only named 5 individuals as followers of Jesus (Simon, Andrew, James, John and Levi) but we find out here that many more have made that “deeper commitment” to Jesus. There was a large enough number of disciples that went up the mountain with him (the suggestion is that it was not an easy journey, so only those truly committed to Jesus would have made it) that Jesus could choose twelve from among them and appoint them to a special leadership position not as disciples but as apostles. The apostles were more than just followers of Jesus at this point; they were given greater authority. They were “sent out to proclaim the message” (to teach others) “and to have authority to cast out demons” (so they possessed spiritual authority.) It was the first suggestion of some sort of hierarchy within the “Jesus movement,” although the text doesn’t suggest that the apostles were more important than the other disciples or that they were more loved by Jesus. The most logical way to explain the division of Jesus’ followers into two groups is to suggest that the twelve were more spiritually mature; more capable of handling a position of leadership. Although the United Church doesn’t, some churches today continue to designate some individuals as “apostles,” but most mainline denominations take the position that the position of apostle required a person holding the office to have known Jesus during his earthly ministry, and so it therefore died out once the original group was gone. Matthew’s Gospel contains the same list of the “twelve,” while Luke substitutes Judas, son of James for Thaddeus. The number “twelve” is a significant number in Jewish numerology. It represents totality, wholeness and the completion of God’s purpose. There are twelve tribes of Israel; the high priest’s breastplate contained 12 precious stones. By choosing a group of 12 to be the leaders of the movement, Jesus is again identifying his mission with God’s purpose.

 

     In v.21 there’s the first reference in Mark’s Gospel to Jesus’ family. His family (it’s not defined who exactly these family members are at this point) appear on the scene because they’ve heard about Jesus’ ministry and actions. Although there’s a temptation to say that Jesus’ family thought he was out of his mind, that’s actually not what the text says. The text says that they appeared because others were saying that Jesus was out of his mind. It’s interesting that Mark doesn’t define who the “people” were who were saying that, but it seems obvious that they wouldn’t have been his own disciples, so we have to assume that whoever it was who was saying that Jesus was out of his mind was in sympathy with Jesus’ opponents – the scribes, the Pharisees and the Herodians. Whether Jesus’ family agreed that he was “out of his mind” isn’t stated by Mark, but he does make clear that Jesus’ family wanted to “restrain him.” Jesus’ own family wanted to prevent Jesus from continuing on with his ministry. Jesus now does have powerful enemies. It’s possible that his family were concerned about what those enemies might do to him; it’s equally possible that they were worried about what consequences they might suffer. Would they be targeted by the authorities simply because they were Jesus’ family? To me, that seems more plausible than that they believed themselves that Jesus was mad, but both are possibilities. We do know that there’s a more and more concerted effort going on to discredit Jesus. Since they couldn’t best him in debate and they couldn’t deny the miracles he was performing, his opponents (now represented by the scribes – note how Mark keeps shifting back and forth between the various groups who oppose Jesus, probably just to keep his readers mindful that Jesus had a lot of powerful opponents) now decide to question the source of Jesus’ power – in essence, they say that he’s not working for God, he’s working for Beelzebul

 

     Now, Beelzebul wasn’t actually Satan. Beelzebul is a composite word. The first part of the word comes from “Ba’al”. “Ba’al” was the chief god of the Philistines and is often referred to in the Old Testament. The second part of the word describes Ba’al’s function. “Ze-bul” literally means “high place” – for the ancient Philistines, “Ba’al-Zebul” would have meant something like “God of the High Place” or “God of the Heavens.” Ba’al was often contrasted with the Jewish God – “Yah-weh” (“I am.”) Both believed their god to be THE God, but from a Christian perspective, as inheritors of the Jewish tradition, we would argue that Yah-weh is the true God; the God worshipped and embodied by Jesus. The scribes use “Beelzebul” contemptuously – so they describe Ba’al not as the god of the heavens, but as the ruler of demons. So they say that Ba’al may have a spiritual kingdom, but it’s a demonic one rather than a heavenly one. In 2 Kings (and in the King James Version of Mark) the word “Beelzebul” is corrupted into “Beelzebub.” It’s a play on words and it’s an insult to Ba’al. If Beelzebul literally means “God of the heavens, “Beelezebub” literally means “God of the flies.” The point being that Ba’al is only good to rule over flies, while Yahweh rules the universe. Some have suggested that the play on words is intended more crudely to draw the readers’ attention to the idea that flies like to land on poop – which is what Ba’al is worth. Maybe. It’s significant that even if this is intended as an insult to Jesus it does mark a change for the scribes, who now at least implicitly recognize Jesus as having spiritual power – even if they consider it an evil spiritual power.

 

Jesus’ response is to point out that he is obviously and actively opposing Satan – so how can he be under Satan’s power? “A kingdom divided against itself cannot stand” is one of those biblical phrases that’s entered the English language culture. And Jesus uses this exchange to introduce the idea of an unforgivable sin – blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. Jesus never explicitly defines what he means by “blasphemy against the Holy Spirit” and it’s been the source of speculation (and even sometimes fear) over the centuries. The closest we can come to understanding what he means is derived from verse 30 – “for they said, ‘he has an unclean spirit.’” Perhaps blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is attributing to an evil spirit the work of the Holy Spirit? If a person is so spiritually warped that they see evil in the work of God then that person is beyond even the ability of God to forgive?

 

     Finally, the Beelzebul portion of the story comes full circle. It began with Jesus’ family showing up to restrain him because they were disturbed by what they were hearing about his teaching. It ends with Jesus re-defining the very idea of family. In the light of their opposition to what he’s teaching and preaching and doing, Jesus now seems to suggest that his blood family is no longer his family – his family is now “whoever does the will of God.”