Chapter # 3 Paragraph # 1 Study # 4
September 24, 2019
Moss Bluff, Louisiana
(108)
1901 ASV
4 And he saith unto them, Is it lawful on the sabbath day to do good, or to do harm? to save a life, or to kill? But they held their peace.
5 And when he had looked round about on them with anger, being grieved at the hardening of their heart, he saith unto the man, Stretch forth thy hand. And he stretched it forth; and his hand was restored.
6 And the Pharisees went out, and straightway with the Herodians took counsel against him, how they might destroy him.
- I. Mark's "He Is Saying To The Man".
- A. Is intensive by reason of the use of the historical present (creating a picture of Jesus in action as He "is speaking"). The point: Mark wants his readers to "envision" what Jesus "is saying".
- B. There is no other recorded action on Jesus' part in reference to the man (no indication that Jesus "did" anything on the "Sabbath" for which He could be "accused").
- II. The Man's Obedience.
- A. Jesus "says" to him to "stretch forth the [withered] hand".
- B. The man "stretched forth".
- 1. If there was any "sabbath-violating-work" done at all, it was the man's "work".
- 2. The Pharisees could hardly call "extending your arm on the sabbath" an "unlawful" act.
- a. They are "caught" here by their own sophistry.
- 1) They know that the entire creation was accomplished by "the Word of God" (Hebrews 11:3) and that this "accomplishment" [Hebrews 11:3 says "framed" by the Word of God; the use of "framed" in the New Testament means "brought to completion"] was called "work" in the records of the Old Testament and that afterwards God "rested" (Exodus 20:9-11). This is the foundation of the entire "sabbath" requirement.
- 2) But, they also know that no "man" can accuse another mere "man" of "working" by simply speaking because such "speaking" was done on every sabbath in the synagogues of Israel. Plus, there is no record anywhere of any Pharisee condemning Jesus for "speaking" to the demon and commanding his departure on the sabbath.
- 3) It is clear that Jesus is "forcing" their understanding by "doing" nothing but speak, yet the thing was "done". As far as the Pharisees are concerned, no "man" can "speak his power into action" without the use of anything but his tongue.
- b. But, their "hardness of heart" blinded them to anything that would make them see that it was their hatred, not their theology, that was in the driver's seat.
- C. The hand was "restored".
- 1. The verb used is an intensive form of the verb, kathistemi, which is generally used when some one/thing is "made the authoritative actor" in a given situation.
- 2. Mark's "point" is that the man's "hand" was returned to its "functional ability to act (as a "lord"; i.e., it was returned to its ability to set things in motion by actions taken).
- 3. The Authorized Version's "whole as the other" lacks the necessary support in the textual tradition to warrant being in this record.
- III. The Pharisaical Response.
- A. As a matter of "direction of focus" Mark says they "straightway" (Authorized Version) took counsel...".
- B. There was an alliance formed between the Pharisees and the Herodians.
- 1. That this "alliance" endured is revealed by Mark 12:13.
- 2. But that this "alliance" existed at all is remarkable in that the Pharisees and the Herodians were like unto the "pro-life"/"pro-abortion" sects of our current day.
- C. This "counsel" is a "did counsel"; i.e., they held a formal "council" to attempt to obtain their objective.
- D. This "objective" was the "destruction" of Jesus.
- 1. The word is consistently used by Mark to indicate a "final" result; i.e., "death" if a man is in view.
- 2. They may well have "settled" for Jesus' reputation to be so damaged that no one would pay Him any further attention, but they really wanted to kill Him.