Mark 2
DODDMark 2:1-14
Parallels: Matthew 9
Christ returning to Capernaum heals a man quit palsy; vindicates his power of forgiving sins; a the publican to attend him. Mark II. 1—14 28; Mat. IX. 2—9.
MARK II. 1.
AND after Jesus had spent [some] daysᵃ in devout retirement, he appeared again in public, and entered into Capernaum; and it was quickly taken notice of, and great numbers of people soon heard that he was in the house where he formerly dwelt; and as he had been some time abroad, and greatly increased his reputation both by his miracles and preaching, they flocked around him with the greatest eagerness.
And it happened on a certain day, while he continued here, that, as he was teaching the people, [several] of the Pharisees and doctors of the law were sitting by; who were come out of every town of Galilee, and even of Judea, and particularly [from] Jerusalem,ᵇ and by appointment met
ᵃ And after Jesus had spent some days.] Matthew has recorded so many events between the cure of the leper and the paralytic, that I should not have connected them, had not Mark so expressly asserted, that some of those events, especially the dispossession of the legion happened long af-
(see Mark iv. 35; noteᵃ sect. lxix, and Mark v. 1, sect. lxx;) and Luke strongly intimates the same concerning the other story of the centurion’s servant. (See Luke vii. 1, 2, et seq. sect. lv.) Now I think the honour of the New Testament requires, that when one of the evangelists does expressly assert the order in which he places facts in question, and the other does not so expressly assert it (which is the case with Matthew here,) the order of the latter, though an apostle and eye witness, should be changed out of regard to the former. As likewise, that if none of the three assert their order, that in which any two agree to place a fact in question, should be chosen rather than that of the third. And on these two rules I have proceeded in many instances. But that the order of Matthew should be changed for that of Luke, when neither of them assert any thing concerning that order, is what I think no inference from Luke i. 3, can justify. (See noteᵃ on that text, p. 22.) Much less can it be allowable expressly to contradict Matthew, for the sake of keeping to the order of
Luke; which yet most harmonizers seem to have done, even when he was relating what passed in his own house and presence. (See noteᵃ on Mat. ix. 18, sect. lxxii.) Could I have persuaded myself to take such liberties with any of the sacred writers, I should not have doubted to follow Matthew and John in their order universally, as Sir Isaac Newton doth, and to transpose Mark and Luke wherever they disagree with either of them; for I cannot observe that those two do in any instance disagree with each other in any of the facts in question. As to the story of the paralytic here before us, Mark strongly connects it with that of the leper, as happening some days after it; though Matthew does not mention it till the next chapter, and places several events between them; while Luke, according to his frequent custom, mentions it only as happening on a certain day. This therefore seems to be the proper place to introduce it, and Matthew’s order may be changed for the reasons given above.
ᵇ From Jerusalem.] If this happened, as most commentators suppose, a little before Christ’s second passover (John v. 1,) some of these might be sent from the sanhedrim with a view of gaining some information concerning Jesus, to guide their resolves concerning him at the ensuing feast, in which they persecuted him, and sought to slay
rowd prevent their ringing in a para ytic.
here to attend his doctrine and observe his miracles; at which the governors of the Jewish church began now to be greatly alarmed. But notwithstanding the malicious views with which they came, Jesus went on as usual in his work, and the miraculous power of the Lord was [present] to heal them who then applied to him for the cure of their diseases.
And immediately so many of the neighbouring inhabitants were assembled that there was not room to receive [them] in the house, or even about the door; so desirous were they to hear how Jesus would acquit himself in the presence of such curious, critical, and prejudiced, inquirers as those that were then sitting around him. And he preached the word of the gospel to them with his usual plainness, seriousness, and authority, and confirmed it by various miracles.
And behold, among many others in most deplorable circumstances who were cured by him, they came unto him, bringing a man seized with the palsy, and quite disabled by it, so that he was obliged, in order to his being presented to Jesus, to be laid on a bed, or couch, and carried by four men. And they endeavoured to bring him in and lay him down before him, hoping that so melancholy a sight would affect his compassionate temper, and engage his assistance.
And when they could not find any way to bring him in, and could not so much as come near enough to speak to Jesus, because of the crowd, and feared a delay might lose so precious an
him. John v. 16. It is very probable that the scribes at Jerusalem, hearing how expressly he had attacked their interpretation of the law, some days before, in his celebrated sermon on the mount, (which, so far as we can learn, was the first time he did it) might summon their brethren in the neighbouring country to meet them at Capernaum, in order to attend on the next of Christ’s public discourses, wherever it might happen to be.
c The power of the Lord was present to heal them.] According to the common method of construction this may seem to intimate that the healing power of Christ was exerted on some of the Pharisees: but as they came from distant parts to attend
Christ as spies, it is not probable they were diseased persons; or that, if any of them being advanced in years might labour under some infirmities, they were so great an visible that a cure would be immediately remarked; and least of all can we suppose they had that faith in Christ which he required in those whom he intended to heal; (see Mark vi. 5; and compare John vii. 48.) It is more reasonable therefore to conclude, on all these accounts, that this is one of those few places where the relativity them is referred to a remoter antecedent that that which is immediately before it. Compare in the original, Mat. xi. 1; xii. 9; Luke v. 30; John viii. 44; Acts viii. 26; and Heb. xii. 17. See Glass. Philolog. Sacr. p. 513—515.
They let him down to Jesus from the house
opportunity, they carried him round to a back passage, by which they went up to the top of the house (compare Mark xiii. 15,) which, according to the Jewish custom, was made flat (Deut. xxii. 8) and uncovered the roof of the apartment where [Jesus] was (which was a room that had no chamber over it,) opening a way into the house by lifting up a kind of lattice or trapdoor (compare 2 Kings i. 2,) and when they had pulled [it] up, or had removed the frame of it to make the passage wider, they let down [the paralytic,] with his couch, through the tiles, with which the other part of the roof was paved, into the midst of the company assembled, and so laid him before Jesus. And Jesus seeing their faith, and graciously excusing the inconveniencies into which their affection had transported them, said to the man that had the palsy, Take courage, son, for thy sins are forgiven thee; and in
d When they had pulled it up, or had removed the frame, [etc.] Ezequitas, which we render broken up, plainly signifies pulling out (Gal. iv. 15.) And no man in his senses can suppose the evangelist meant to say that they tore up the beams and rafters of the house upon this occasion; and yet this has been made the foundation of great objections against this story. We have a right to suppose this removal of the frame was done with care; because the circumstances plainly require such care, and common sense would suggest it. Woolston’s perverse attack on this miracle is as plausible as any thing he has written against Christianity; but I have endeavoured, in as few words as possible, to suggest an answer to the chief of his objections; and it may be considered as a specimen of the manner in which I shall proceed in other cases of the like nature: for it would be very improper to enter on the controversy at large here, especially after all the convincing and unanswerable treatises which have lately been written in defence of the evangelists; among which I apprehend none more valuable than that called The Miracles of Christ Vindicated, in four parts; to which I with great pleasure refer for a larger account of this story, and the others handled by the excellent author of it.
e They let down the paralytic—into the midst.] What is suggested in the parabase is the most probable account of the
matter, if we suppose our Lord to have been in any covered room of the house. But Dr. Shaw’s hypothesis, which goes on principles which were quite unknown to me till I had the pleasure (since the first edition of this work) of reading his excellent travels, seems to me yet more natural. From considering what is now the form of the houses in Barbary and the Levant, he supposes that no man signifies the courtyard, round about which the house was built; and that our Lord was there. He thinks that, crowded as this area was, the bearers of the paralytic might get in at the gateway (where perhaps Christ could neither be seen nor heard,) and might carry him up the stairs, which commonly go up from thence; and being got to the flat roof might take down inwards a part of the balustrade or parapetwall, and so let down the bed with cords by the side of the glazed and perhaps painted tiles which might beautify the walls of the house towards this court. Many of his quotations from the ancients do, in a very agreeable manner, at once illustrate this account, and receive new light from it. See Dr. Shaw’s Travels, p. 373—380.
f Take courage, son.] Few can need to be told that son is a title of condescension and tenderness by which superiors addressed inferiors that were not properly their children (compare Josh. vii. 19; Eccles. xii. 12; and 2 Tim. ii. 1,) as father was a correspondent title of respect, (com-
Offences taken at his saying, His sins are orgiven.
token of it, I assure thee thy distemper shall be removed.
But behold, such was the perverseness of some of the scribes and Pharisees who were then sitting there, that on his saying to the man in such an absolute and sovereign way, Thy sins are forgiven thee, they took offence at the expression; and reasoning in their hearts upon it, they said within themselves, maliciously reflecting on him, This man most certainly blasphemeth: Who is this that pretends to such an authority? [and] why does this arrogant man thus allow himself to speak such blasphemies as these? Such a speech as this surely deserves the name; for who can undertake to forgive sins, but God alone, the awful Majesty of heaven, who is affronted and dishonoured by committing them?
And immediately, when Jesus, who perfectly well knew the secret workings of their thoughts, perceiving in his own mind that they reasoned thus in themselves, though they did not openly declare their dissatisfaction and censure, he said to them, Why do you reason thus in your hearts, and so maliciously reflect upon me? [and] wherefore do you think [such] evil things of what I have now been saying? I shall be at no loss to vindicate the reasonableness of it: for which is easier to say to this paralytic, Thy sins are forgiven thee; or to say to him, Arise, and take up thy couch, and walk away with it? May it not justly be concluded that if I have a power efficaciously to say the one, I may without any usurpation say the other likewise; and declare the sin forgiven, when I can thus miraculously remove the punishment of it? But that you may know the case I put is not a vain presumptuous boast, but that the Son of man here on earth, though appearing in so humble and obscure a form, has yet a Divine authority to forgive men’s sins, (he turns about, and says to the paralytic,) O man, I say unto thee, Arise immediately; and to shew thou art perfectly
pare 2 Kings v. 13; vi. 21; xiii. 14.) Yet word man on the occasion; and Chris it seems probable, from the use of it here, might possibly use both: as the apostle that the patient was a young man, considering that Christ himself was but a little and brethren, or, literally, men, brethren above thirty; and if it were so it made the Acts i. 16; ii. 29; xv. 7, 13; xxiii. 1; case the more pitiable. Luke uses the and xxviii. 17.
He proves his power of forgiving sins by curi
healed at once, take up the couch on which thou liest, and, bearing it on thy shoulders, go thy way to thine own house, for at this instant I will enable thee to do it.
And immediately he was so strengthened by a secret power which went along with the word, that, believing the virtue and efficacy of it, he rose up before them all; and taking up the couch on which he lay, though before he was utterly weak and helpless, he went forth, vigorous and cheerful, to his own house, humbly glorifying and adoring God for that extraordinary cure which he had now received.
And when the multitude saw [it,] they were all amazed, and with united acclamations glorified God, who had given such mighty and beneficent power to men, and raised up so eminent a Prophet to his people. And they were filled with such a reverential kind of fear and dread, under the apprehension of so marvellous a proof of the Divine presence among them, that they could not forbear saying one to another, We have indeed seen most extraordinary strange things today; and after all the wonders we have known, We never before saw any thing like it, nor have we heard of any such event as this in the days of our fathers.
And when the evening advanced, and the day grew cooler, he went forth again by the sea shore; and all the multitude who had before attended in or about the house, and many more who could not get near enough to see and hear what passed there, resorted to him; and he cheerfully went on with his work, and taught them here, after all the former labours of the day.
And after these things, as Jesus passed out from thence (that is, from the house in which the paralytic had been cured,) and was going down to the sea side, he saw a man (who was indeed a publican,⁸ that collected the customs there) whose name was Matthew, [or] as he was
⁸ A publican.] This was a very odious name among the Jews, and their employment was attended with so much corruption and temptation, that there were few among them that were honest men; but they were generally persons of so infamous and vile a character, that publicans and sinners are often joined together as synonymous terms, (Mat. ix. 11; xi. 19; and elsewhere.) See the paraphrase on Luke iii. 12, p. 105.
Reflections on the cure of the paralytic,
Levi, the son of Alpheus,] sitting at the receipt of custom: and he saith unto him, Follow me. And he arose, [LUKE, and left all,] and followed him. [MARK II. 14. LUKE V. 27, 28.] otherwise called Levi, the son of Alpheus, the brother of James (compare Mark iii. 18; Luke vi. 15; Acts i. 13,) and he was then sitting at the custom house:^h and calling him to be one of his disciples, he said unto him, Follow me. And immediately consigning his books and cash to some careful hand, he arose, and left all the care and profits of his employment, and followed him, with most grateful acknowledgments of his condescension in admitting a person of his station of life into the number of his stated attendants.
IMPROVEMENT.
IT is a pleasure to reflect upon it that Christ was attended by such vast numbers of people, and that they who were teachers of others should themselves sit down to hear him. But it is melancholy to reflect on the perverse purposes with which many of them came; and how few did, on the whole, receive his word into their hearts, so as to bring forth fruit unto perfection. Curiosity led some, and interest others; and some came to find occasion of hurting him whose whole business in life was to do good. Yet these low, these vile purposes did not prevent his preaching and working miracles before them, and being ready to exert his power for their benefit. Thus courageous and resolute let us be in the discharge of our duty; thus solicitous, that we may not be overcome of evil, but may (which, on the whole, is always in some degree practicable) overcome evil with good. (Rom. xii. 21.)
How industrious were the attendants and friends of this poor paralytic to obtain a cure for him! What contrivance, what labour did they use to find a proper opportunity to bring him in, and lay him before Jesus! Ought we not to be as tender and zealous in all the offices of the truest friendship; and to imitate, so far as suits the difference of circumstances, their importunate application, and their lively faith?
Theirs had its praise and its reward. Our Lord said to this distempered person, Thy sins are forgiven thee. He pardoned all his iniquities, while he healed all his diseases (Psal. ciii. 3.) This was a blessing that would render the cure yet incomparably more valuable; and this reviving declaration had the Son of God a power to add and to pronounce. The scribes and Pharisees, ignorant and prejudiced as they were, considered such a declaration as
^h At the custom house.] So the prop- and I not apprehended that the word might have suggested some modern idea, for which there is in the original no foundation.
and on the call of Matthew.
blasphemy. Their principle indeed was right, that God alone has XLV. power to forgive sins, and it is impious for men to claim it; but ver. 10 their application was evidently wrong. The miraculous effect 11, 12 plainly shewed the Divine authority of the blessed Jesus. And he has still the key of David: he openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth (Rev. iii. 7.) Almighty Saviour, may we each of us receive from thee forgiveness of our sins; and we will not complain though our sicknesses should not immediately be removed! Let us glorify God who has given this power Luke to his Son; and thankfully acknowledge that we are ourselves, V. 26 in many respects, the monuments both of his pardoning and healing mercy. Mat. To conclude; let us view with humble wonder and pleasure IX. 9 this farther instance of the condescension and grace of the Redeemer in the call of Matthew: his condescension in calling to so near an attendance, and so intimate a friendship, a man who was a publican, infamous as that employment was; and his grace, which could immediately inspire him with so firm a resolution of quitting all the profits of it, that he might reduce himself to circumstances of life as precarious as those of his Divine Master. Many, no doubt, censured him as a rash enthusiast, or a lunatic, rather than a sober convert; but he is even now reaping the abundant reward; his loss is gain, and his contempt glory.