Mark 9

Verse 1 The transfiguration (Mark 9:2-8), teachings concerning Elijah (Mark 9:9-13), the cure of the lunatic boy (Mark 9:14-29), another prophecy of the Passion (Mark 9:30-32), discussion of who was the greatest (Mark 9:33-37), the unknown wonder-worker (Mark 9:38-42), and a collection of independent maxims uttered by our Lord (Mark 9:43-50), form the subject matter of Mark 9. Mark 9:1 was discussed in Mark 8, but a little further attention is directed to it here. And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, There are some here of them that stand by, who shall in no wise taste of death, till they see the kingdom of God come with power. (Mark 9:1) The final five verses of Mark 8 and Mark 9:1 are a collection of independent sayings of our Lord which Mark grouped together. This grouping on the part of the inspired evangelist, however, does not require that any connection be established in every case between two adjoining statements. Another such grouping of independent maxims is found at the end of this chapter (Mark 9:43-50). Regarding those verses, especially Mark 9:49-50, Barclay said: We often get a series of quite disconnected sayings of Jesus set together because they stuck in the writer’s mind in that order. … We must not try to find some remote connection between these sayings; we must take them individually, one by one, and interpret each one as it comes.[1]What Barclay affirmed of Mar 9:49-50 is likewise true of Mar 8:38 and Mark 9:1; and, although they occur side by side in this gospel, the two verses are independent, having reference to two distinct and utterly different events which were both in the future. Mark 8:38 has reference to the final judgment of humanity, an event which is still future; but Mark 9:1 has reference to an event which occurred in that generation, now nineteen centuries in the past. The efforts of some commentators to construe these verses as a reference in both cases to the final judgment, or any other event still in the future, has the effect of a charge of ignorance against the Saviour of the world. Interpreting Mark 9:1 as a reference to the final and glorious phase of the kingdom of God as ushered in by the second coming of Christ and the appearance of his holy angels leads to such conclusions as those of Grant who stated that “This expectation (the coming of Jesus in the glory of the Father) was universal in the early days of Christianity, and must go back to Jesus himself."[2] Of course, such a view makes the Lord Jesus Christ to have been mistaken and incorrect in such a statement as Mark 9:1. This is ground enough for rejecting all such interpretations. There is no need whatever to construe Mark 9:1 as a reference to the second coming of Christ or the beginning of the glorious phase of the kingdom. The great preachers of the Restoration have long held Mark 9:1 to be a prophecy of the establishment of the church on the first Pentecost after the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Dorris stated that argument as follows: The kingdom was to come with power, and the power was to come with the Spirit (Acts 1:8). The Spirit came on the first Pentecost after the resurrection of Christ (Acts 2:1-4). As the kingdom was to come with power and as the power was to come with the Spirit, and as the Spirit and the power came on Pentecost, therefore, the kingdom came on that day.[3]In order to deny the thesis so logically advocated by Dorris, one must hold the Lord of Life to have been in error in his alleged meaning in Mark 9:1. Therefore, it is mandatory to reject the application of Mar 9:1 to the subject matter of Mar 8:38. There is no connection between them, except in the matter of their lying alongside each other within the matrix of the sacred text. It is impossible to interpret certain paragraphs in Mark without regard to his occasionally grouping of disconnected saying of our Lord. See the final verses in this chapter. [1] William Barclay, The Gospel of Mark (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1956), p. 240. [2] Frederick C. Grant, Interpreter’s Bible (New York: Abingdon Press, 1951, en loco. [3] C. E. W. Dorris, The Gospel according to Mark (Nashville: The Gospel Advocate Company, 1970), p. 202.

Verse 2 And after six days Jesus taketh with him Peter, and James, and John, and bringeth them up into a high mountain apart by themselves: and he was transfigured before them.THE And after six days … Luke placed this event as “eight days” afterward; but, as Barclay said, “There is no discrepancy here. They both mean what we would express by saying, About a week afterward.'"[4]In counting up a week, Sunday to Sunday, one gets eight days if he counts the Sundays and six days if he counts between the Sundays. Both styles of time reckoning were in vogue in those days. Outside of particular times noted in Mark's account of the Passion, this "is the only precise note of time given by Mark."[5] This fact, however, is no basis whatever for designating the transfiguration as a fulfillment of <a href="/bible/parallel/MRK/9/1" class="green-link">Mar 9:1</a>. Peter, and James, and John ... This is an example of Mark's stringing words, phrases, clauses, and episodes together by means of this simple connective. He also used "for" in the same manner, as in <a href="/bible/parallel/MRK/8/35" class="green-link">Mark 8:35-38</a>. These three apostles formed somewhat of an "inner three" within the company of the Twelve, as also at the raising of Jairus' daughter, and in the Garden of Gethsemane. The special preferment given by the Lord to these three was doubtless prompted by the key roles that they would have in the church. James was the first to seal his testimony with his blood; Peter preached the first sermon; and John remained on earth the longest and delivered the final prophecy. High mountain apart ... This was doubtless Mount Hermon, or one of its adjacent spurs. Only these mountains qualify as being in the vicinity where Jesus was placed in the sacred text and also as being "high." Mount Tabor, the traditional site, was not high, being only about 1,500 feet in elevation. Moreover, it was inhabited on top in the time of Christ, and it would not have been taking the apostles "apart" for the Lord to have led them up Mount Tabor. Mount Hermon is a snow-capped peak 9,200 in altitude. Transfigured before them ... This word is found only in the New Testament records of this event and in <a href="/bible/parallel/ROM/12/2" class="green-link">Romans 12:2</a>,<a href="/bible/parallel/2CO/3/18" class="green-link">2 Corinthians 3:18</a>. "It means a change of form, an effulgence from within, not a mere flood of glory’ from without."[6] Both Matthew and Luke give fuller accounts of this wonder than does Mark. The parallel references are Matthew 17:1-8 and Luke 9:28-36. Each gospel writer added the priceless ingredient of some detail omitted by the others. Matthew mentioned the Saviour’s coming and touching the apostles; Mark threw in that homely detail that “no fuller on earth” could have made Jesus’ garments so white; and Luke provided the pertinent conversation between the Lord and Moses and Elijah. [4] William Barclay, op. cit.. p. 215: [5] Henry E. Turlington, The Broadman Bible Commentary (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1946), p. 338. [6] Frederick C. Grant, op. cit., en loco.

Verse 3 And his garments became glistening, exceeding white so as no fuller on earth can whiten them.This event should be understood as a factual, objective, historical event, in which Christ deliberately permitted three of his apostles to glimpse the Lord in this manifestation of his glorious heavenly nature. Speculation as to why this was done is fruitless. Christ himself evidently received strength and encouragement from the approving words of Moses and Elijah; and certainly, the apostles received in this event an experience they never forgot.

Verse 4 And there appeared unto them Elijah and Moses: and they were talking with Jesus.The independence of the gospel narratives is further emphasized by the reversal of the names Elijah and Moses, and by Mark’s mention of the conversation without naming the subject matter, and Luke’s giving the content of it. Elijah as a representative of the prophets, and Moses as the great lawgiver of Israel both appeared before the Son of God in this event and, in a sense, laid their authority at the Master’s feet, resigning their commission in the presence of Christ. The theological implications of this are profound. When the bright cloud, symbolical of the presence of God himself, caught away the great prophet and the great lawgiver, leaving only Jesus visible, it was God’s way of saying, “There is only one authority now, and that is Christ!” “This is my beloved Son; hear ye him!”

Verse 5 And Peter answereth and saith to Jesus, Rabbi, it is good for us to be here: and let us make three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elijah.Of course, Peter was wrong in this suggestion, and yet it is easy to understand his feelings. It was a glorious thing they had just seen, and how natural it was that he should have desired to prolong such a glorious fellowship. As Erdman said: Peter is not to be ridiculed; he realized the blessedness of the experience; however clumsily expressed; (and) in spite of his fear, he wished to continue in such blissful companionship.[7]Peter’s desire was like that of many in all generations who experience some glorious achievement or magnificent event and thereafter seek to perpetuate endlessly the glory of that moment. Such a desire, even if it were possible of fulfillment, should not prevail. Life is not designed to freeze some glorious moment like the figures on a Grecian urn. Whatever sweet and precious moments may be provided by life on earth, they can never be permanent; there is always the journey down the mountain; and so it was for the blessed three who participated in the transfiguration. Peter’s failure here was in the supposition that Jesus AND Moses AND Elijah were in some manner a greater authority or more desirable fellowship than that of Jesus alone, a notion that was quickly corrected by the event of the cloud and the voice out of heaven, after which they saw “Jesus only.” In our own times, the human temptation to mix the word and teachings of Christ with some other system exhibits the same error that Peter made here. It is not Christianity with something else that blesses people; it is Christianity alone. Tabernacles … This word was the one used to describe the arbors or booths in which the people of Israel dwelt briefly during the annual feast of Tabernacles; but the exact nature of what Peter here had in mind is unknown. ENDNOTE: [7] Charles R. Erdman. The Gospel of Mark (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1966), p. 138.

Verse 6 For he knew not what to answer; for they became sore afraid.This is a classical example of Mark’s use of “for” as a connective device for his narrative; and it should be noted that these two examples of it come right in the midst of a similar string of “ands” in the same paragraph. This is warning enough that these characteristic connectives in Mark cannot be made the basis of construing independent maxims as necessarily having any connection in thought or meaning.

Verse 7 And there came a cloud overshadowing them: and there came a voice out of the cloud, This is my beloved Son: hear ye him.What is meant by the overshadowing cloud? Did it envelop all of the group or only Jesus, Moses, and Elijah? From the fact of God’s presence in the Old Testament having been indicated by the pillar of a cloud by day (Exodus 13:21), as well as from other associations of clouds with the presence of God (Psalms 79:14; 1 Thessalonians 4:17, etc.), there is a strong inclination to make the same association here; but a comparison with the baptismal scene (Matthew 3:16-17) in which Christ as the Son of God, the Spirit as a dove, and the voice from the Father indicate the presence of the Trinity, suggests that the same is in view here. If so, Christ as the beloved Son and the voice from the Father would leave the overshadowing of the cloud as a symbol or manifestation of the Holy Spirit. This is not indicated absolutely, however, because the voice was said to have come “out of the cloud.” In Luke 1:35, the coming of the Holy Spirit upon Mary was linked with the statement that the power of the Most High would “overshadow” her. Regarding the question of who was overshadowed, Cranfield, arguing from the premise that the disciples seemed to have been addressed outside the cloud, concluded that the enveloping included only Jesus, Moses, and Elijah.[8] Cranfield is wrong, for Luke records that “they feared as they entered into the cloud” (Luke 9:34). Hear ye him … These words indicate far more than a mere admonition to pay attention. As in Deuteronomy 18:15, they carry a very strong meaning, “Hear and obey."[9]In context, they also have the equivalent meaning of “Do not hear Moses or Elijah, but hear Jesus only.” Thus, Christians are released from any necessity of obeying Mosaic or prophetic requirements found in the Old Testament. [8] C. E. B. Cranfield, The Gospel according to Saint Mark (Cambridge: University Press, 1966), p. 292. [9] Ibid.

Verse 8 And suddenly looking round about, they saw no one any more, save Jesus only with themselves.See under preceding verses and also further comment on this episode in my Commentary on Matthew, Matthew 17:1 ff. Jesus only … Christ is all and in all. Necessary as Moses and Elijah were in the pre-Christian ages, humanity is no more required to heed the systems which those ancient worthies represent. They remain pertinent to Christian thought only in the sense of pointing the way to Christ. That pertinence, of course, is of vast significance and contains the most vivid and overwhelming evidence unfolding the purpose of God in Christ; but, despite this, the law and the prophets have given place to the Christ of the ages.

Verse 9 And as they were coming down from the mountain, he charged them that they should tell no man what things they had seen, save when the Son of man should have risen again from the dead. ELIJAHThe necessity for secrecy on the part of the apostles who had witnessed this wonder was inherent in the purpose of avoiding any further aggravation of jealousies among the Twelve (Mark 9:33-34) and in the Lord’s determination not to precipitate an untimely confrontation with the Pharisees. The transfiguration had left no doubt whatever that Jesus was indeed the Christ of glory (not merely Elijah, Jeremiah. John the Baptist, or some great one, as in Mark 8:28); and, if all of the Twelve had been given this overwhelming proof at that time, they might have blazed it abroad with such rashness as to upset the divine schedule. It should be remembered that Judas was yet with the Twelve. And as they were coming down from the mountain … A great deal of Christian experience is suggested by this. It is not given that followers of the Lord should dwell perpetually in the glory of some mountain-top experience. Their pathway of service leads down into the valley where human need cries for relief, doubts and frustrations are acute, and enemies lie in wait to destroy. As Grant said, “Jesus spent his whole life going downhill from the high and lonely places where he held communion with God, to the level, crowded places of human need."[10]ENDNOTE: [10] Fredrick C. Grant, op. cit., p. 779.

Verse 10 And they kept the saying, questioning among themselves what the rising again from the dead should mean.And they kept the saying … means that the three apostles obeyed the Saviour’s injunction of secrecy. Questioning … The resurrection of Christ was an event utterly beyond the comprehension of the apostles because: (1) of the inherent preconditioning of the human race not to expect any such thing; (2) of the false idea they had concerning the Messiah and what he would do on earth; and (3) of their failure, at first, to believe Jesus’ prophecies of his impending death. Commentators who themselves will not even believe the resurrection of Christ after the event are in a very sorry role when they criticize the apostles for their failure to believe it before the fact.

Verse 11 And they asked him, saying. How is it that the scribes say that Elijah must first come?Several things of great importance surface in this verse: (1) The three were now fully and completely convinced that Jesus is the Christ, a fact that the scribes had been diligently trying to contradict. (2) The opposition of the scribes had made some headway in the minds of the apostles who were unable to answer their arguments. (3) The apostles here sought the answer that would refute the scribes. (4) The argument of the scribes was based on the final verses of the Old Testament which prophesied that Elijah would come and restore all things before the Messiah arrived. (5) The argument of the scribes was false in that they had interpreted the prophecy to mean that Elijah would literally rise from the dead before Messiah came, the same being a false view which thy should have known to be false because of the prophecy that attended the birth of John the Baptist (Luke 1:17), which prophecy had plainly identified John the Baptist as the fulfillment of the prophecy regarding Elijah.

Verse 12 And he said unto them, Elijah indeed cometh first, and restoreth all things: and how is it written of the Son of man, that he should suffer many things and be set at naught?It would seem that Cranfield is correct in understanding the second half of this verse as a statement, not a question (punctuation being a human additive to the text).[11]The meaning would thus be: Having admitted that the scribes are correct in this that they say, Jesus goes on to suggest that “restoring all things” cannot mean just what on the surface it seems to mean, since Scripture foretells for the Son of man much suffering and humiliation.[12][11] C. E. B. Cranfield, op. cit., p. 298. [12] Ibid.

Verse 13 But I say unto you that Elijah is come, and they have also done unto him whatsoever they would, even as it is written of him.Mark omitted the statement (Matthew 17:13) that the apostles then understood that Jesus spake of John the Baptist. Thus, the fallacious arguments of the scribes were exposed and refuted. Jesus even went further here and indicated that the death of John the Baptist was a prophecy of what would happen to himself. “As Elijah’s coming was a heralding of the Lord’s coming, so Elijah’s rejection was a warning of the Lord’s rejection."[13] All of these things were prophesied in Scripture. ENDNOTE: [13] A. Elwood Sanner, Beacon Bible Commentary (Kansas City: Beacon Hill Press, 1964), p. 346.

Verse 14 And when they came to the disciples, they saw a great multitude about them, and scribes questioning with them.THE CURE OF A LUNATIC BOYThe scene which greeted the Lord and the three when they came down from the mountain is a miniature of the world itself: parental anguish, youth under the power of evil, disciples unable to do anything, scribes raising questions and discussing the situation but also powerless to do anything helpful. All in all, it was a miserable situation.

Verse 15 And straightway all the multitude, when they saw him, were greatly amazed, and running to him saluted him.Greatly amazed … This has been taken by some to indicate that Jesus’ face still bore some traces of the glory of the transfiguration; but, since that would have been to nullify the Saviour’s injunction of secrecy imposed on the three, their amazement must have derived from something else. Perhaps it was in the fact that, when they looked up from the mess they were in, they were amazed to find the answer to their problems, not in themselves, but in the Lord. It was certainly so with the nine frustrated disciples who had failed to cure the boy.

Verse 16 And he asked them, What question ye with them? And one of the multitude answered him, Teacher. I brought unto thee my son, who hath a dumb spirit; and wheresoever it taketh him, it dasheth him down: and he foameth, and grindeth his teeth, and pineth away: and I spake to thy disciples that they should cast it out; and they were not able.The nature of the malady which afflicted this child seems to have been compound. The symptoms certainly suggest epilepsy; but the Greek word which describes it is literally “moonstruck” and much more reasonably bears the translation “lunatic.” (Both the Emphatic Diaglott and the Nestle Greek text concur in this). Further, there is the phenomenon of demon possession, confirmed by our Savior’s conversation with the Twelve afterward. The complicated nature of the malady, as well as the evident slackening of the apostles’ faith, perhaps due to the campaign of the scribes, seems to have entered into the failure of the disciples to effect a cure. See under Mark 9:29.

Verse 19 And he answered them and saith, O faithless generation, how long shall I be with you? how long shall I bear with you? bring him to me.The evident exasperation of Jesus here is understandable. All of Israel were in the process of rejecting the Lord. The scribes, so diligent in the situation, were opposing the Lord with every conceivable device, their efforts having had a perceptible influence even on the Twelve, and only the Saviour’s great love of mankind motivated him to go forward. How frustrating such a situation must have been for Jesus.

Verse 20 And they brought him unto him; and when he saw him, straightway the spirit tare him grievously; and he fell on the ground and wallowed foaming.The hatred of the evil spirit for the Lord is evident in his malignant tearing of his victim in anticipation of his impending cure. The implications of the text cannot be explained as the normal ravages of any disease. Demonic possession and affliction of humanity are indicated. The physical phenomenon evident here in the demon’s aggressiveness before the boy’s healing has its counterpart in the spiritual realm also. When any soul is in the act of turning to Jesus for life and redemption, evil restraints and impediments against it are always multiplied. Souls on the brink of salvation always confront the active hostility and opposition of the evil one. Spurgeon devoted an entire sermon to this phenomenon.[14]ENDNOTE: [14] Charles Haddon Spurgeon, Sermons (New York: Funk and Wagnalls Company, Vol. 2), p. 297.

Verse 21 And he asked his father, How long time is it since this hath come unto him? And he saith, From a child.We cannot know by what power Satan was able to dominate and possess the life of a child; but it may be that God permitted this in order that “the works of God might be manifest in him” (John 9:3).

Verse 22 And oft-times it hath cast him both into the fire and into the waters, to destroy him: but if thou canst do anything, have compassion on us, and help us.If thou canst do anything … By such a remark, the father of the afflicted boy would have made the burden of responsibility for his son’s healing to rest upon the Lord; but he was not correct in such an insinuation, as Jesus’ following words quickly showed. There are many in all generations who would like to shift the burden of all betterment to some other than themselves, but they too are wrong. A great deal of the improvement of the human condition is inherently incumbent upon the needy themselves, who under every circumstance of whatever extremity must first do everything possible to alleviate their own affliction, that being the basic and invariable precondition to any effective help from without. Here, the thing required of the father was faith in the Lord. Have compassion on us, and help us … The use of possessive pronouns here is very poignant and touching and shows that the whole family of the unfortunate lad had identified themselves with the afflicted and considered his distress as also their own. This is an expressive picture of all members of a family suffering with one of its members.

Verse 23 And Jesus said unto him, If thou canst! All things are possible to him that believeth.These words must be understood as Jesus’ rebuke of the father’s lack of faith, and so the father accepted them. It is as if Jesus had said, “Look, any man who has faith will not set any limit on what the Lord is able to do.” As Cranfield observed: “The father, instead of doubting the power of Jesus to help him, ought to have had a faith like that of the leper in Mark 1:40."[15]ENDNOTE: [15] C. E. B. Cranfield, op. cit., p. 303.

Verse 24 Straightway the father of the child cried out, and said, I believe; help thou mine unbelief.Who is he who cannot identify with this distraught parent in his experience of faith with an admixture of doubt? Unbelief is never very far away from faith; and their name is legion who, like Peter of old, walk over tempestuous waves one moment and sink into faithless despair the next. This doubting believer properly appealed to the Lord as the only source of strengthening his faith.

Verse 25 And when Jesus saw that a multitude came running together, he rebuked the unclean spirit, saying unto him, Thou dumb and deaf spirit, I command thee, come out of him, and enter no more into him.The multitude mentioned here is not exactly identified; and Barclay and others have suggested that “Jesus must have taken the father and son apart”;[16] and the crowd, already mentioned in Mark 9:14, would in such a case have been trying to catch up with the action. Jesus did not wait for them but cast out the evil spirit at once. From the Lord’s command, it is evident that the son was also mute. His words must have been of the greatest consolation to the father, for they included the assurance that there would be no recurrence of the lad’s pitiful condition. Thus, his halting faith, greatly strengthened by Jesus, was richly rewarded. ENDNOTE: [16] William Barclay, op. cit., p. 225.

Verse 26 And having cried out, and torn him much, he came out: and the boy became as one dead; insomuch that the more part said, He is dead. But Jesus took him by the hand, and raised him up; and he arose.Regarding the terminal activity of the evil spirit, see under Mark 9:20. Mark mentioned Jesus’ taking the lad by the hand, and Luke added the detail that Jesus restored the boy to his father. It is foolish to make anything of the variable nature of these accounts except that they are the certain evidence of independent narratives. This writer rejects the allegation that Mark’s account is in any sense more original than the others. All three are original accounts, and the most complicated system of comparisons ever devised fails to prove anything else.

Verse 28 And when he was come into the house, his disciples asked him privately, How is it that we could not cast it out? And he said unto them, This kind can come out by nothing, save by prayer.Asked him privately … It was well for the reputation of the apostles that they sought a private answer, for they were grievously at fault. Matthew quoted Jesus as saying their failure was due to their “little faith” (Matthew 17:20), and Mark’s words indicate either a failure to pray at all or some serious lack in their prayers. Even the greatest miracles performed by Jesus were done so in answer to prayer (John 9:31; John 11:41); and, although the mention of the Saviour’s prayers in connection with his mighty deeds was not always included by the sacred writers, the assumption must ever be that all of them included the Saviour’s asking of God in prayer the accomplishment of the wonders recorded. The failure of the apostles here seems to have been that of omitting prayer.

That they fully expected to succeed is evident, so their faith was not that of failing to expect success, but of taking it for granted that they could succeed without praying to God for the expected blessing. The apostles had often succeeded before (Mark 6:13; Mark 6:30); and they perhaps believed that they had the power IN to continue doing such things. They had to learn that God’s power is not given to men in that way. It has rather ever to be asked for afresh. To trust in God’s power in the sense that we imagine we have it in our control and at our disposal … is to trust in ourselves instead of in God.[17]ENDNOTE: [17] C. E. B. Cranfield, op. cit., p. 305.

Verse 30 And they went forth from thence, and passed through Galilee; and he would not that any man should know it. For he taught his disciples and said unto them, The Son of man is delivered up into the hands of men, and they shall kill him; and when he is killed, after three days he shall rise again. But they understood not the saying, and were afraid to ask him.ANOTHER OF THE PASSIONThese verses show the Lord’s great need for privacy and the opportunity to instruct his apostles regarding the forthcoming Passion. Here Christ again mentioned, more briefly, the teachings given in Mark 8:31, which see. For their lack of understanding, see under Mark 9:10.

Verse 33 And they came to Capernaum: and when he was in the house he asked them, What were ye reasoning on the way?A OF WHO WAS THE The omniscience of Christ is evident in that he already knew the subject of their conversation. He asked, not for information, but for the purpose of requiring them to bring the matter up in his presence.

Verse 34 But they held their peace: for they had disputed one with another on the way, who was the greatest?About the only thing accomplished thus far by Jesus’ repeated reference to his approaching death was the development of an argument among the Twelve over who would be the head man afterward. Human ambition had reared its ugly head, James and John, particularly, demanding to be accounted the greatest, a post also evidently desired by Peter.

Verse 35 And he sat down, and called the twelve; and he saith unto them, If any man would be first, he shall be last of all, and servant of all.Alas, the disciples of the Lord in all ages have invariably lost their spirituality in just such a manner as this, falling into all kinds of vanity in the pursuit of human ambition. There has hardly ever been a congregation on earth in which the question of who would be the “greatest” did not at one time or another hinder the work of God. Against such ambitions, the Lord has imposed a standard of greatness that depends upon service and not upon position. However this was not a problem that the Lord confronted only once. A comparison of several New Testament references (Luke 9:48; Luke 22:26; Matthew 20:26; Matthew 23:11; and Mark 10:43) indicates that this question came up frequently in different situations, the instance before us being, in all probability, “an independent saying."[18]ENDNOTE: [18] Ibid., p. 308.

Verse 36 And he took a little child, and set him in the midst of them: and taking him in his arms, he said unto them, Whosoever shall receive one of such little children in my name receiveth me, and whosoever receiveth me, receiveth not me, but him that sent me. This was an acted parable teaching the same lesson which the Lord stated verbally in Matthew 18:4-6. True greatness is not a matter of position and power but in the child-like qualities of innocence, trustfulness, humility, lack of prejudice, lovableness, faith and teachableness. Receiving a little child in Jesus’ name includes the unselfish care and support given for little children and also the quality of receiving an humble believer on the basis of his simple trust in the Lord, and without regard to any lack of earthly preeminence on his part.

Verse 38 John said unto him, Teacher, we saw one casting out demons in thy name; and we forbade him, because he followed not us.THE MAN WHO DID NOT FOLLOW USThis was another outcropping of party spirit and jealousy on the part of the Lord’s disciples. The human temptation to channel all good through our own hands and to despise all groups except our own is evident here.

Verse 39 But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man who shall do a mighty work in my name, and be able quickly to speak evil of me. For he that is not against us is for us.There is no special approval here for the unknown exorcist, who, for all that is stated, might indeed have proved eventually to have been an enemy of the Lord; but rather there is a prohibition against the servants of God making it their business to monitor and pass judgment upon the works of others. The lesson here is the same as that against pulling up tares, as forbidden in the parable (Matthew 13:39 f).

Verse 41 For whosoever shall give you a cup of water to drink, because ye are Christ’s, verily I say unto you, he shall in no wise lose his reward.The totality of humanity belongs to God: and the divine purpose condescends to accept any human aid of that purpose, affirming the certainty that every gracious act shall receive its due reward.

Verse 42 And whosoever shall cause one of these little ones that believe on me to stumble, it were better for him if a great millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea.In this whole paragraph, and especially beginning here, there are a number of maxims in which no clearly discernible connective theme exists. They are isolated sayings of the type that Jesus uttered frequently and in various contexts, and they seem to have been written down here in the order of Mark’s remembrance of them. See underMark 9:1. The teaching of this verse regards the extreme gravity of causing any humble believer to lose his faith in the Lord. Persons guilty of such a breach of the will of God would be better off drowned in the sea. The word for “millstone” here means “a millstone drawn by an ass,” that is, a very large one, and contrasting with the smaller “hand millstone.”

Verse 43 And if thy hand cause thee to stumble, cut it off; it is good for thee to enter life maimed, rather than having thy two hands to go into hell, into the unquenchable fire.Stumble … was a prominent word in Mark 9:41, referring not to some inconsequential stumbling, but to a complete falling away from God so as to be lost eternally. This is another maxim related not to causing another to stumble, but to one’s stumbling himself. The teaching is that whatever must be sacrificed to maintain faith and loyalty to God must be renounced and given up by the disciple, regardless of the personal loss or cost to himself. Hell, into the unquenchable fire … The saddest teaching in the word of God relates to the subject introduced here. The word Gehenna (which is translated as “hell” or “hell-fire”) refers to the Valley of Hinnon near Jerusalem, a place where the city’s garbage was burned, and a valley tarnished by many unsavory memories for the Jews. Here a king made his son pass through the fire to Molech (2 Kings 23:10; see also 2 Chronicles 28:3). It was a place of defilement and horror. Perhaps it is in this place’s character as a garbage dump that the most appropriate likeness to HELL is found; because hell is God’s cosmic disposal device for that which is finally unconformable to His holy will.

Here also is seen the necessity for it. No industry, no kitchen, no household were ever possible without the means of disposing of the refuse; and it would be illogical to suppose that God could run the whole universe without some means of taking care of the refuse. For a more extensive discussion of this, see my Commentary on Matthew, Matthew 25:41 ff.

Verse 45 And if thy foot cause thee to stumble, cut it off: it is good for thee to enter into life halt, rather than having thy two feet to be cast into hell.The teaching here is identical with that of Mar 9:43. The personal force of such an admonition was reduced by the interpretation favored by some of the ancients who applied it to the church as meaning that the church should excommunicate undesirable members whose sins demanded it. However, it seems to this writer that the Saviour had in view the need of personal sacrifice to maintain loyalty to God. The metaphor of cutting off hands and feet, and plucking out eyes, is not any more severe than that of “eating and drinking” Christ’s flesh and blood (John 6:53); and it was doubtless used to emphasize the extreme importance of loyalty to Christ, as well as the awful consequences of failure.

Verse 47 And if thine eye cause thee to stumble, cast it out: it is good for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, rather than having two eyes to be cast into hell.The teaching is the same as that in Mark 9:43; Mark 9:45; and the repetition of it by these astonishing metaphors stresses its importance.

Verse 48 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.These words were repeated in Mark 9:44 and Mark 9:46, both of which are omitted in the English Revised Version (1885). They are a description of Gehenna, the valley of Hinnom (translated “hell” in this version), and were added to emphasize the undesirability and the awfulness of the place where the wicked shall be punished with “everlasting destruction.” It should be noted that like other descriptions of hell in the New Testament, the purpose is not that of describing hell but rather showing its awful nature. Worms and fire, in nature, do not exist in the same place; and thus, as in the case of “fire and brimstone” and “outer darkness,” are actually opposed to each other. It is thus clear that Christ is not here describing hell but warning people of its horrible character. When it is considered that hell is such an awful place that Christ had recourse to such terrible words as these in his warnings against it, the soul draws back at the very contemplation of such a place.

Verse 49 For every one shall be salted with fire.This maxim seems to have been triggered in Mark’s mind by the mention of fire in the previous verses. And what is the meaning? If we understand “fire” as a reference to the persecutions and tribulations that invariably beset the Christian pilgrimage, it means that none shall be saved except through the endurance of the world’s scorn and opposition. Paul expressed this thought as “All that live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution” (2 Timothy 3:12). Of course, this is a difficult verse, and all kinds of notions have been advocated as the meaning of it. Certainly, we may set aside the superstition that this is a reference to all souls passing through the fires of purgatory!

Verse 50 Salt is good: but if the salt has lost its saltness, wherewith will ye season it? Have salt in yourselves, and be at peace one with another.Jesus said of his disciples, “Ye are the salt of the earth,” and their saltness would therefore be their quality of having in themselves the likeness and teachings of Jesus. Such salt is indeed good for this world. Christians are the salt of the earth in the sense of their preserving it from destruction. If the salt have lost its saltness … is a metaphor based upon the salt commonly used in Jesus’ day, which was not a pure product at all, but mixed with other elements. If the true salt had been leached out, only a worthless residue was left, a perfect metaphor of the Christian who has lost his identity with the Lord. Have salt in yourselves … is a reference to the Christian’s necessity of keeping his identity with Christ and of continuing faithfully in his teachings. And be at peace one with another … is an admonition to brother-love and forbearance, a requirement frequently stressed by the Lord, and absolutely mandatory for all who would follow in his steps.

Mark 9:1. the kingdom of God come.—Where Matthew uses the expression, “till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom” (Matthew 16:28); Mark uses the expression, “till they have seen the kingdom of God come with power;” and Luke, the expression, “till they see the kingdom of God” (Luke 9:27). All of these refer to the same event, and this event was to occur before some then present would taste of death. They saw the kingdom of God in organized existence and activity for the first time on the next Pentecost after the resurrection of Jesus. They then saw the kingdom “come with power,” because such was the power of the Holy Spirit’s demonstrations through the apostles, that three thousand men were that day turned to the Lord. And they saw the Son of man coming in his kingdom, not literally, but by manifesting his invisible presence to the eye of faith. What they saw with their eyes and heard with their ears attested his presence in his kingdom. For further remarks on this prediction, and a fuller explanation of the entire speech, see the notes on the parallel in Matthew. The Transfiguration, Mark 9:2-13. (Matthew 17:1-13; Luke 9:28-36) Mark 9:2-13.—This display of the majesty of Jesus is more fully treated by Matthew. Mark adds no material fact; hence the remarks on the parallel in Matthew are sufficient for both passages. An Obstinate Demon Cast Out, Mark 9:14-29. (Matthew 17:14-21; Luke 9:37-43) Mark 9:14. the scribes questioning.—The questioning of the scribes had reference, no doubt, to the ineffectual attempt of the nine disciples to cast out the demon. (Comp. 15-18.) It was a great triumph to these unbelievers to witness even one such failure, and they eagerly pressed the advantage which it appeared to give them. Mark 9:15. were greatly amazed.—It is difficult to account for the amazement of the people at seeing Jesus. The conjecture that his face was still shining from the transfiguration, as did the face of Moses when he came down from the mount (see Alford, Lange, and others), is not even suggested by the text. The natural impression from the text is not that it was something peculiar in his appearance, but the fact of his being seen at that particular time and place, which amazed them. I infer that the people supposed Jesus to have been at a much greater distance from them than he had been, and that his return was most unexpected. If they were partaking in the doubts and suspicions of the questioning scribes, the thought of being caught by him in such a state of mind would have added much to their excitement; or if they were pained by the momentary triumph of the enemy, they would be equally excited, though from a different cause, at his unexpected return. But whatever was the cause of their amazement, its effect was to make them run to him and salute him. Mark 9:16. he asked the scribes.—Before any one had found time to tell Jesus what had been going on, he surprised the scribes by demanding of them, “What question ye with them?” They saw at once that he knew all, and their failure to answer shows that they felt a deserved rebuke for their exultation. Mark 9:17. one of the multitude answered.—As the scribes made no answer, the father of the afflicted youth spoke out and told what had given occasion for the questioning referred to. I have brought unto thee.—The father had run forward with the multitude to meet Jesus, and had brought his son, but not into the immediate presence of Jesus. (Verse 20.) As he began the sad story he stepped forward and kneeled down at Jesus’ feet. (Matthew 17:14.) a dumb spirit.—Called a dumb spirit because it deprived its victim of speech. (Comp. 25.) The young man was not only deaf and dumb, but a lunatic, and subject to fits. (Matthew 17:15.) Mark 9:18. wheresoever he taketh him.—The convulsions seem to have occurred at irregular intervals, being regulated by the whim and moods of the demon which produced them. (Comp. 20.) The father’s expression, “wheresoever he taketh him,” seems also to imply that he supposed the spirit to be in the child only at these periods of severe suffering; and this thought is confirmed by the words of Jesus; “Come out of him, and enter no more into him.” (Verse 25.) Mark 9:19. O faithless generation.—On this expression of Jesus, see the note on Matthew 17:17. Mark 9:20. straightway the spirit tare him.—Convulsed him. This act of the spirit in the very presence of Jesus, as they brought the child near, displayed a wickedness and obstinacy on its part unequaled in the accounts of these desperate beings. Having clung to its victim in spite of all the efforts of the disciples, it now seems determined to defy the power of Jesus himself. How different from the piteous supplications of the legion at Gadara! Mark 9:21-22. How long is it ago.—The question, “How long is it ago since this came to him,” brought out the fact that it was a case of long standing, and thus rendered the subsequent cure the more remarkable. The father’s answer, “Of a child,” more accurately rendered, “From childhood,” does not mean from his birth, but from early childhood as distinguished from youth; for Mark still calls him a child. (Mark 9:24.) The time had been when he was free from both the dumbness and the convulsions. The father’s answer shows still further the malignity of the demon, in that it would often throw its victim into the fire and into the water, as if it took a fiendish pleasure in the pain which it had the power to inflict. Mark 9:23. If thou canst believe.—The father’s doubting remark, “If thou canst do any thing,” is echoed by the answer, “If thou canst believe.” Each would be more happily rendered, “If you are able to do any thing,” “If you are able to believe.” The additional remark, “All things are possible to him that believeth,” does not imply inability to heal an unbeliever, for many of the miracles were wrought on persons who had no faith; but it hinted at a possible refusal, as at Nazareth, to heal those who in the face of competent evidence were still unbelievers. It also served as an incentive to the father to get rid of the doubt implied in his petition, and it was an assertion in the presence of the scribes who had exulted over the failure of the disciples, that “all things were possible” with himself. Mark 9:24. said with tears.—The Savior’s response brought about within the afflicted father the struggle which was intended. His tears expressed his anxiety for his son, and his words declared the weakness of the faith on which the cure was now to depend. The contradictory answer, “I believe; help thou my unbelief,” can have sprung only from a heart distracted between a burning desire and a weak faith. It can not have been invented by Mark. Having said, “I believe,” he feared that he had gone too far; he calls his weak faith unbelief, and begs Jesus to help it. How different this from the conduct of the scribes who were resisting the force of evidence and struggling to maintain a stubborn unbelief! Mark 9:25. When Jesus saw.—Already a large portion of the multitude had surrounded Jesus, having run to him when he first came into view. (Verse 15.) The running together mentioned in this verse was the coming of others from the vicinity, and perhaps the rush of all to get still nearer to him. This was a wide departure from the privacy which he had been maintaining, so Jesus immediately proceeded to cast out the demon, and to withdraw with his disciples into a house. (Verse 28.) Mark 9:26-27. as one dead.—Nothing but the amazing cruelty and effrontery of the demon can account for the convulsion into which he threw the young man as he left him. The outcry was not an articulate sound, but one of those fearful shrieks which are sometimes heard from the deaf and dumb, while the shock given to the nervous system of the young man left him pulseless and apparently dead. Such torture wantonly inflicted by a demon, gives an awful conception of the state of society which must prevail among these Godforsaken spirits. While the bystanders were saying that the youth was dead, the touch of Jesus, who alone can deliver us from the power of the devil, brought instant restoration to him, and joy to the heart of his kind father. Mark 9:28-29. Why could not we.—On the reason why the disciples could not cast out this demon, see the notes, Matthew 17:18-21. Return through Galilee, and Second Prediction of Death, Mark 9:30-32. (Matthew 17:22-23; Luke 9:43-45) Mark 9:30. and passed through Galilee.—They were returning from Cæsarea Philippi (Mark 8:27), whither they had gone by passing east of the upper Jordan through the district called Iturea. That they returned “through Galilee,” shows that they came down on the west of the Jordan. They were on their way back to Capernaum. (Mark 9:33.) that any man should know it.—The statement that as they passed through Galilee “he would not that any man should know it,” is the last mention made of the privacy which Jesus had maintained ever since his journey to the vicinity of Tyre. (Comp. Mark 7:24 Mark 7:33 Mark 7:36 Mark 8:23 Mark 8:26 Mark 9:25.) It was this privacy which occasioned the taunting remark of his unbelieving kindred, “Depart hence and go into Judea, that thy disciples also may see the works that thou doest. For there is no man that doeth any thing in secret, and he himself seeketh to be known openly.” (John 7:3-4.) Mark 9:31. is delivered.—Jesus here uses the present tense—“The Son of man is delivered into the hands of men”—because the sad event was so vividly present to his imagination. The usage is common in the writings of the prophets. the third day.—The corrected text has it “after three days,” thus furnishing a second example in Mark of the use of this expression where Matthew has “on the third day.” (Comp. Matthew 17:23, and see note on Mark 8:31.) Mark 9:32. afraid to ask him.—They could not understand the plain words of this prediction, simply because they were not willing to receive them in their obvious import, and they could not discover in them any other meaning. It is not unfrequently the case, even at the present day, that a passage of Scripture is obscure merely because it is capable of but one meaning, and this meaning one that we are unwilling to accept. Being for this reason unable to understand Jesus, they were afraid to ask him what he meant, lest he should rebuke them as he had rebuked Peter when the subject was first mentioned. (Mark 8:33.) Dispute about Who shall be Greatest, Mark 9:33-37 (Matthew 18:1-35; Luke 9:46-50) Mark 9:33. What was it.—There is an appearance of discrepancy here between Matthew and Mark. Matthew represents the disciples as beginning the conversation by asking who should be greatest, while Mark introduces it by saying that Jesus asked them, “What was it that ye disputed among yourselves by the way?” We take both reports as true, and each as elliptical. As Matthew states, the disciples came to Jesus and asked, “Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?” (Matthew 18:1.) They ask this with an air of innocent inquiry, giving no intimation of the dispute in which they had engaged. Jesus begins his reply by asking them, “What was it that ye disputed among yourselves by the way?” showing that he knew the cause and the occasion of their inquiry. Confused and conscience-smitten, “they held their peace.” (Mark 9:34.) Mark 9:35-37. and saith to them.—Mark is here very brief, devoting only two short paragraphs (33-37 and 42-50) to a discourse which occupies the entire eighteenth chapter of Matthew. (For remarks on Mark 9:35-37, see notes, Matthew 18:1-5.) John’s Jealousy, and Remarks about Offenses, Mark 9:38-50. (Matthew 18:6-9) Mark 9:38. we forbade him.—The expression, “he followeth not us,” means that he was not one of the immediate attendants of Jesus. Seeing such a man casting out demons excited John’s jealousy, because he thought that no others than the chosen twelve ought to be honored with this power. Such jealousy in regard to official prerogatives is a very common passion, and one against which men occupying positions of trust and authority should be constantly on their guard. Mark 9:39. Forbid him not.—If the man had been an enemy of Christ, using his power in opposition to the truth, it would have been right to forbid him; but, according to John’s own statement, he was casting out demons in the name of Jesus, and this proved him to be a friend. Moreover, John should have known that no man could cast out demons in the name of Jesus unless Jesus had given him power to do so; and if Jesus had given him the power it was his privilege to exercise it. Mark 9:40. he that is not against us.—It is impossible for a man to occupy strictly neutral ground in reference to Christ. His influence must preponderate in one way or the other. If in no sense he is against Christ, then he is for him; and if he is not for Christ, he is against him. (Comp. Matthew 12:30.) Mark 9:41-42.—On these verses, see the notes, Matthew 10:40-42 Matthew 18:6. Mark 9:43-47. into hell.—On the origin and significance of the term hell, see the note on Matthew 5:22. The view there taken of its meaning is confirmed by the present passage; for Jesus shows the sense in which he uses it by adding the explanatory clause, “into the fire that never shall be quenched.” Hell, then, is equivalent to the fire that never shall be quenched. It is also placed here in opposition to “life”: “It is better to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell.” The life here referred to is not the temporal life, nor the Christian life, into both of which the disciples addressed had already entered; but eternal life, into which they had not yet entered. Being cast into hell, then, which is the alternative of entering into this life, can be none other than punishment in the future state. The reader will please to notice the changes in these verses adopted by some of the critics. If they are correct, the explanatory clause, “into the fire that never shall be quenched,” properly occurs only in verse 43, and the clause, “where their worm dieth not,” only in verse 48. On the word “offend,” see the note on Matthew 18:8 Mark 9:48. their worm dieth not.—The image is taken from Isaiah (Isaiah 66:24), and is that of worms feeding on the dead carcasses of men. Applied to the future state, as it unquestionably is in this passage, it represents those who shall be cast into hell as being in a state of decay and rottenness, while unquenchable fires are burning them but never consuming them. Mark 9:49. salted with fire.—This is confessedly an obscure passage, and on the meaning of it a variety of opinions have been advanced. The difficulty in the first clause centers chiefly, as Bloomfield justly remarks, in the word “fire.” As we take it to be a symbol of punishment, or a symbol of purification, our interpretation of the entire verse must vary. If the passage were entirely isolated, it would be more naturally understood as referring to purification; for salt is the symbol of perpetuity, and fire is often used in the Scriptures as a symbol of those trials which purify the soul as the precious metals are purified by fire. But the passage is not isolated: it is the concluding part of a closely connected discourse, and is tied to the preceding by the conjunction for (γαρ). The context must therefore determine the sense in which “fire” is to be taken. But in the context this term is used with great emphasis three times according to the corrected text, and six times according to “the received text,” as a symbol of punishment.

Indeed, the disaster of being cast into hell fire is held up as a warning throughout the context, and, for the purpose of emphasis, it is repeated again and again. When, therefore, immediately after the last repetition of it in the words, “where their worm dieth not and the fire is not quenched,” the remark follows, “For every one shall be salted with fire,” it would be doing violence to one of the most invariable rules of interpretation to assign to the term “fire” a new and different sense. We conclude, then, that the term is used here, as elsewhere in the paragraph, to denote punishment, and that with this conclusion our interpretation of the sentence must harmonize. This being so, the expression “every one” (πᾶς) must also be limited by the context, and must mean every one who, contrary to the teaching just given, refuses to cut off the offending hand, or to pluck out the offending eye. It had just been intimated that all such would be cast into hell fire; it is now said that every such one shall be salted with fire. As salt, on account of its power to preserve meats, is the symbol of perpetuity, to be salted with fire is to be perpetually permeated by fire, or to be kept perpetually in a state of the severest pain. Editor’s Comment: Heaven is a prepared place for a prepared people. Hell is a prepared place for an unprepared people. Are you remaining faithful? (Revelation 2:10) and every sacrifice.—The meaning of this clause turns on the question, whether it expresses a comparison of those who are salted with fire with the sacrifices which are salted with salt, or presents those who are salted with fire in antithesis with others who would make the required sacrifices. Alford and some other interpreters adopt the former view, and would express the idea thus: “For every one shall be salted with fire, just as every sacrifice is salted with salt.” But if this had been the meaning, it is inexplicable that the conjunction and (κα) is used to connect the two clauses, instead of the adverb so (ς or στε). It is safer, and far more in harmony with the context, to take the conjunction in its proper and ordinary sense, and to understand the clause as continuing the antithesis which has been kept up throughout the context between those who would cut off the offending hand or foot, and enter into life, and those who, refusing to do so, would be cast into hell. By every sacrifice is meant every person who presents himself as a sacrifice to God in cutting off his offending members, or, in other words, by denying himself those sinful pleasures and enjoyments which are represented by these. (Comp. Romans 12:1.) That such shall be salted with salt, as contrasted with being salted with fire, means that they shall be preserved unto everlasting life— that they shall enter into that life which is contrasted with being cast into hell. The figure and the mode of expressing it are both taken from a provision in the law which required that every offering presented at the altar should be seasoned with salt. (Leviticus 2:13.) Mark 9:50. Salt is good.—Salt is here used, as in the preceding verse, to symbolize that principle in Christian life which leads to perseverance amid all required self-sacrifice. The remark is sententious and emphatic, giving preeminence to the virtue in question. wherewith will ye season it?—Here the salt is supposed to have lost its saltness, and the question is asked, “wherewith will ye season it?” The question answers itself, being the figure of erotesis, and affirms that the lost saltness can not be restored. Passing from the symbol to that which is symbolized, it is affirmed that if a man lose the power of perseverance in the Christian life, there is no restoration for him; his inevitable fate is to be cast into hell, to be “salted with fire.” Have salt in yourselves.—Maintain in yourselves the quality of perseverance by making every sacrifice necessary thereto. Their contention as to who should be greatest (Mark 9:33-34), and their jealousy toward the brother who had been casting out demons (Mark 9:38), were calculated to impair this quality by causing alienations and discouragement. In opposition to this they are required to encourage patience in one another, and it is added, “have peace one with another.” Strife among them would destroy their salt; peace would tend to preserve it. Argument of Section 8The two miracles recorded in the preceding section— the cure of the blind man at Bethsaida (Mark 8:22-26), and the casting out of the obstinate demon (Mark 9:14-29)— are additional demonstrations of the divine power of Jesus. They are not mere repetitions of former proofs, but they possess peculiar force in that the blind man was cured by progressive steps, each one of which was a miracle in itself, and in that the demon in question was one of peculiar power and obstinacy. The foreknowledge of Jesus is again displayed in his two predictions concerning his own death (Mark 8:31-33 Mark 9:30-32), and with his foreknowledge, his predetermined purpose to submit to death at the hands of his enemies. But the crowning argument of the section is contained in the account of the transfiguration. If the testimony of those who witnessed this scene is not false testimony, his divine majesty and his God-given right to be heard in all that he chooses to speak, are established beyond all possibility of a mistake. Mark 9: We have now reached the close of the first general division of Mark’s narrative. Hitherto, after a few introductory statements in the first chapter (Mark 1:1-13), all the incidents which he records occurred in Galilee, or in the regions immediately adjoining. Now the writer leaves Galilee, and returns to it no more. (See comments on Mark 10:1.)

Questions by E.M. Zerr For Mark 91. What was soon to come? 2. Who were assured they would see it? 3. In six days where did Jesus go? 4. Whom did he take with him ? 5. What happened to him? 6. Describe his raiment. 7. Who appeared to them ? 8. Where had Elias been? 9. What had happened to Moses ? 10. Were these men conscious? 11. State the proposition of Peter. 12. Why did he say this? 13. What came over them? 14. Tell what was said. 15. How did this differ from that at his baptism? 16. What sudden change took place? 17. How secret were they charged to keep? 18. For how long were they to keep it? 19. What subject puzzled the disciples ? 20. Tell what they asked Jesus. 21. Who was this Elias? 22. What was he to do? 23. They thought this would prevent what? 24. What were multitudes doing with the disciples 25. How were they diverted from them? 26. What did Jesus ask them? 27. State the cause of the commotion. 28. In what had the disciples failed ? 29. What did Jesus call that generation? 30. What did he then order? 31. How did the demon perform now? 32. What did Jesus do about it? 33. How long had the son been afflicted? 34. Which was required to believe, father or son? 35. After the miracle what was condition of the son? 36. Slate the private question of the disciples. 37. And the answer. 38. Where did they next journey? 39. What was Jesus’ desire now ? 40. Whom did he wish to teach? 41. On what subject did he inform them? 42. How did it affect them? 43. State what city they entered. 44. What had happened on the way? 45. Was it done openly? 46. State their behaviour at his question. 47. What did Jesus use for illustration? 48. What desire makes one the last? 49. Receiving Christ includes whom? 50. What did John report having seen? 51. Why had they forbidden him? 52. Tell what Jesus commands them. 53. In what name were these miracles done? 54. How would this name have to be treated? 55. Can one be “ neither for nor against” Christ? 56. Will trivial gifts be rewarded? 57. What will bring a penalty worse than drowning? 58. What should be done with an offending hand? 59. Tell what is worse than a maimed life. 60. What kind of fire is it to be? 61. Tell what will not die. 62. To what other members is this lesson applied ? 63. What mineral perpetuates its surroundings? 64. What other element is compared to this ? 65. Who will have this applied to them? 66. Tell when this will be. 67. When is salt not good? 68. What may it preserve in us now?

Mark 9:1

1 This statement of Jesus denotes that the kingdom of heaven was not yet set up, and also it was to come in the lifetime of some men then living. Since all of the people living then are dead, we know that the kingdom of heaven has been in existence for centuries and that much teaching on that subject today is false.

Mark 9:2

2 Six days after the conversation of the preceding verse is what is meant. These are the three apostles whom Jesus frequently took with him on special missions. To be transfigured means to take on another appearance.

Mark 9:3

3 White raiment indicates purity and heavenly splendor. A fuller is a cleanser of cloth and no man in that occupation could put a garment into the condition of whiteness that appeared upon the body of Jesus.

Mark 9:4

4 Elias is the same as Elijah of the Old Testament who went to heaven in a whirlwind (2 Kings 2:11) and hence never died. Moses was the lawgiver of the Old Testament and died (Deuteronomy 34:5). Peter, James and John had not died and were therefore still in the flesh. So at this event the three states of man were represented, the fleshly, the intermediate and the eternal.

Mark 9:5

5 Peter had a feeling of hospitality and wished to provide for the guests, which indicates they had the appearance of men who could be cared for in earthly housing.

Mark 9:6

6 Wist is an obsolete word meaning he knew not what to say, or, he did not realize what he was saying. Sore afraid means they were exceedingly amazed.

Mark 9:7

7 The announcement from the cloud was like the one heard at the baptism of Jesus except it had the words, hear him. The earthly work of Jesus was virtually completed and the authority of the Son of God over Moses and the prophets was thus announced in this important assembly.

Mark 9:8

8 The purpose of the visit of the special guests was accomplished, and when the apostles rallied from their amazement they noted the absence of Moses and Elias.

Mark 9:9

9 This vision was so special that the public in general was not yet ready for its announcement. (See the comments on chapter 8:30.)

Mark 9:10

0 The restriction Jesus placed on them which was connected with the resurrection confused the apostles. They discussed the subject among themselves and then decided to ask Jesus a question.

Mark 9:11

1 The apostles did not realize that Elias was used figuratively only.

Mark 9:12

2 Jesus affirmed the prediction that Elias was to come first and restore all things, which means to get things in readiness for Christ.

Mark 9:13

3 Jesus then explained that the prediction had been fulfilled. This matter is explained in more detail at Matthew 17:10-12.

Mark 9:14

4 Came to his disciples means the ones Jesus left waiting while he was in the mount. The scribes were generally at hand with their critical questions, and when they could not approach Jesus they contacted his disciples.

Mark 9:15

5 The people means the crowd in general who were usually in a favorable frame of mind toward Jesus. Their attention was called to him and they were greatly amazed or surprised. But they were favorably impressed by his sudden appearance for they came and saluted him.

Mark 9:16

6 Jesus asked the scribes why they were questioning the disciples. As far as the text goes they never answered the question put to them by Jesus.

Mark 9:17

7 One of the multitude (not one of the scribes) announced to Jesus that he had brought his son unto him. That denotes that he came with his son expecting to meet Jesus. But as he was not with the disciples the father had turned the case over to them. A dumb spirit is stated because it had that effect on the boy. We know it does not. literally mean the devil that was dumb for when Jesus commanded it to come out (verse 26) it cried which shows the spirit itself was not dumb.

Mark 9:18

8 These symptoms were the effects this particular spirit had on the boy. The possession of evil spirits did not always work the same, the reason for which is not made known in the text. The father then stated that the disciples could not cast the evil spirit out of his son.

Mark 9:19

9 This charge of faithfulness was meant for the disciples (Matthew 17:20).

Mark 9:20

0 These terrible symptoms were the results of being possessed with a devil. The devils knew Jesus and feared him, but as a desperate piece of vengeance when this one saw Jesus he overcame the boy and inflicted the injuries mentioned.

Mark 9:21

1 This son had been possessed with the devil most of his life.

Mark 9:22

2 The child evidently would have lost his life had it not been for friends.

Mark 9:23

3 All things are possible as far as the Lord’s power is concerned, but he does not bestow that power unless the case is regarded worthy, and that point is frequently (not always) determined by the degree of faith manifested.

Mark 9:24

4 Believe and unbelief seem like opposite terms. The man said he did believe, so the request meant that his faith should be made stronger.

Mark 9:25

5 Jesus did not want the commotion to become too great so he did his work promptly. The devils are intelligent beings is the reason the Lord could command them.

Mark 9:26

6 The spirit cried which shows it was not dumb, but it had produced dumbness at times in the boy. Having suffered these attacks from early childhood the boy was exhausted when the devil was cast out so that he appeared to be dead.

Mark 9:27

7 Jesus then cured the boy of his weakness so that he arose.

Mark 9:28

8 The disciples were baffled over their failure to cast out the devil, and when they had a chance alone they asked Jesus to explain this failure.

Mark 9:29

9 The account that Mark gives is very brief. For a fuller treatment of the subject see the text and my comments at Matthew 17:20-21..

Mark 9:30

0 This verse means that Jesus wished to have as much privacy as possible. His public work was about over and it was unnecessary to meet the public as he had.

Mark 9:31

1 Jesus warned his disciples of what was coming, and the same things had been prophesied in the Old Testament.

Mark 9:32

2 The language of Jesus was plain and he used words that were in common use. The reason the disciples did not understand them was their delusion of an earthly kingdom they thought he was going to set up.

Mark 9:33

3 Jesus did not need to ask questions for information (John 2:25), but this was his way of bringing the subject before the disciples, for he knew they had been disputing about it as they were going to Capernaum.

Mark 9:34

4 They held their peace because they felt ashamed as well as surprised that he could read what had not been intended for him even to hear. They had an earthly form of kingdom In mind that Jesus was to set up, and were contending among themselves about who should be in the highest position as a member of it.

Mark 9:35

5 True greatness is the subject of this speech of Jesus. In earthly kingdoms it is usual for men to seek prominence and try to become great from the standpoint of authority over others. In the kingdom of heaven it is just the opposite of that. One reason is that this kingdom is an absolute monarchy, and in such a government any attempt of the citizens to attain to greatness in the nature of authority must be interpreted as an infringement upon the king.

Mark 9:36

6 This child was small for Jesus took him in his arms, after he had placed him in full view of the apostles.

Mark 9:37

7 Receiving a little child in the name of Christ means to do so because of the comparison between them. A man who will do that is bound to have a humble attitude, and humility is what constitutes true greatness in the kingdom of Christ. Receiveth not me, but him, etc. This denotes the close association between Christ and his Father. No person can obtain any favor from one of them if he ignores the other.

Mark 9:38

8 We notice that no denial was made as to whether the man actually was casting out devils. The complaint was that he was not walking along bodily in the same crowd with Jesus and the twelve. John did not understand that only the apostles were required to “be with him” in that sense. (See chapter 3:14.)

Mark 9:39

9 The fact the man was actually casting out devils proved that he was a true disciple. Had he been a mere pretender he would have failed as did the men reported in Acts 19:13-16 who were brought to such shameful defeat.

Mark 9:40

0 There is no actual neutrality with regard to matters pertaining to Christ. A man may not be very active in an unrighteous life, but unless he is active in the service for Christ he is counted as being “on the other side” (Obadiah 1:11).

Mark 9:41

1 This is to be understood in the same light as verse 37.

Mark 9:42

2 When a man becomes like a little child he is then classed as a little one in the sense of the word here. This is evident from the truth that he can be offended which means to stumble or do wrong, and that is possible only with a person of responsible age and mentality.

Mark 9:43

3 Offend means to cause to stumble or do wrong. The hand is a valuable member of the body and is used to illustrate anything one might be cherishing but that causes him to do wrong. One would give up the hand if it became diseased and endangered the whole life of the man. Likewise, we should sacrifice any practice or associate however dear, if our spiritual welfare should be endangered by it. A description of hell as it is defined In the lexicon may be seen with comments on Matthew 5:30.

Mark 9:44

4 All of the illustrations that are ever used here or elsewhere as to the duration of punishment, must be interpreted to mean that the unsaved will be in punishment that will be conscious and endless: Their worm dieth not is commented upon by another writer in better language than I can produce as follows: “The awfully vivid idea of an undying worm, everlastingly consuming an unconsumable body.” The reason the worm will not die is that the body will not be consumed, even though in the midst of an unquenchable fire, and hence there will always be something to keep the worm alive.

Mark 9:45

5 The foot is used instead of the hand, otherwise the lesson in this verse is the same as that in verse 48 on the subject of making self-denials.

Mark 9:46

6 Worm dieth not is explained at verse 44.

Mark 9:47

7 This is the same lesson as in verses 43 and 45.

Mark 9:48

8 See verse 44 for the explanation of this.

Mark 9:49

9 Salted with fire. Here we see fire used figuratively for salt. Salt, through its preserving qualities, tends to perpetuate an object brought into contact with it. It is thus connected with the fire of perdition because of the perpetual duration of that fire. Salt is used with the idea of perpetuation in Numbers 18:19.

Mark 9:50

0 Just as salt is used to illustrate the perpetuation of the punishment of the wicked, so it also can preserve and perpetuate the good qualities of man. Jesus exhorted the disciples not to let the salt of their good lives lose its strength. They could have peace one with another by using the salt of brotherly love.