Chapter # 3 Paragraph # 6 Study # 1
December 17, 2019
Moss Bluff, Louisiana
(130)
1901 ASV
31 And there come his mother and his brethren; and, standing without, they sent unto him, calling him.
32 And a multitude was sitting about him; and they say unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren without seek for thee.
33 And he answereth them, and saith, Who is my mother and my brethren?
34 And looking round on them that sat round about him, he saith, Behold, my mother and my brethren!
35 For whosoever shall do the will of God, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.
- I. Jesus' Definition of His Family.
- A. The Setting.
- 1. The mother "is coming" (Present Indicative Third Person Singular -- the Textus Receptus has the form of third person plural, but that form has too little support to even get a mention in the textual commentary associated with the Nestle/Aland 26), and the brothers. Emphatic historical present; to be mentally viewed as a "happening" as it happens, with the "viewer" as a participant in the "mental movie".
- a. The previous declaration of intent in 3:21 stands over this record as an umbrella.
- 1) This "intent", revealed by Mark's use of the verb "to lay hold of" (Authorized Version; translation of krateo), is to subject Him to themselves and their agenda for Him.
- a) This verb is the same one used in 6:17 to describe Herod's "laying hold of John so as to put him in prison", and it is used in 14:1, 44, and 46 to describe the "arrest" of Jesus and the "binding" of Him so that He would not escape.
- b) The "arrest" was effected by a large mass of men, called in some texts a "cohort" which, technically, referred to a unit of 600 Roman soldiers, but which was often used hyperbolically to simply indicate a large number. In Mark 15:16 the "whole cohort" was called together to mock Jesus and prepare Him for crucifixion.
- 2) It is abundantly clear that "Mary" (not identified by name by Mark in this text, but identified later in 6:3), along with the "brothers", were going to attempt to take Him under their "power" to force an end to His actions and teachings.
- b. This "mother" is Mary. That Mark presents her as the one "coming" is indicative of his "perspective" of her as the "matriarch", the dominant personality in the family. This may be the outcome of Mark's own family history. There was a "reason" that Mark abandoned the task in Acts 13:13, an action that caused a significant "problem" as recorded in Acts 15:37-40. This "may" is rooted in the possibility that Mark had been raised by a domineering "mother" who was over-protective of him so that he lacked the courage of "manliness" that no "mother" can give a "son". This would explain why Mark's "Gospel" is of a "Jesus" that can overcome a "man's" bondage to the lust for the good opinions of others. Significantly, it was His "mother" that engineered the changing of the water to wine in Cana at a wedding regarding which it is said that "the mother of Jesus was there" (John 2:1-11).
- 1) According to 6:24 and 28, it was a "mother" that demanded the execution of John the Forerunner.
- 2) According to 10:35, James and John approached Jesus to seek His exalting of them to the two highest places of prominence in His kingdom, but Matthew 20:20 says it was actually their "mother" that made the request.
- c. In some ways, this is disheartening because Mary's more than thirty-year-long participation with Jesus at every stage of His life has not made her "stable" in the "faith" of earlier days (Luke 1:38). In fact, there is every possibility that her special position as the "mother" of Messiah worked in her a special "pride" that was coupled to the demeaning she received from those who took her pregnancy to be an indication of immorality on her part. There is a good possibility that Mary's experience of false charges actually made it difficult for her to have Jesus creating such a divisive stir in Israel: "Your Son thinks too highly of Himself". The very fact that the Roman perversion of the Truth has exalted Mary to "the mother of God" status with "immaculate conception" and "perpetual virginity" assigned to her by "abject status seekers" who forbid men to marry if they wish to be used by God in special ways. What man among us would be willing to forsake marriage unless somewhat "put off" by a "domineering woman/mother"?
- d. However, we can take heart from the fact that her "Son" was/is the embodiment of Deity (Colossians 2:9) and has taken on the massive problem that depravity in humanity presents, and He has done that in the face of this testimony of Mary's attitude and actions. He came to "save" people like Mary.
- 2. And the brothers; the mother is not alone, but the sisters are not mentioned (Matthew 13:56) except in some manuscripts at the point in this record of 3:32 in the Nestle/Aland 26 edition of the Greek New Testament.
- a. The textual commentary on that edition indicates that the majority of the editors were in agreement that Mark probably did include "sisters" in his original record, but that the phrase got "dropped" somehow, so they show the phrase in brackets (being committed to the theory of "the shorter text tradition").
- b. But "sisters" does come into play without textual variation in 3:35; and they are in the "offense" segment in 6:3 without textual issues.
- c. It is clear that Mark is presenting the physical family of Jesus as having significant problems with His claims and actions along with a reluctance to disown Him. Sad tale.
- 3. "And standing (Present Active Participle Nominative Masculine. Plural -- the "brothers" are standing, along with the "mother") without (there is little, to no, room for them to get inside).
- a. The first use of the verb translated "standing" by the Authorized Version of Mark's record is in the previous paragraph where "divided" entities "cannot stand". This brings James 1:8 to mind: a "double minded man is unstable in all of his ways". It is not a likely "accident" that Mark presents the "double minded" family as "standing outside".
- b. This is a declaration of "reality": one cannot "be" a part of the "family" of Jesus if there is no firm commitment to Him and to His identity and actions.
- 4. "They sent" (Aorist Indicative Active Third Person) to Him, calling (Present Active Participle Masculine Plural Nominative) Him.
- a. The verb translated "sent" is used 20 times in Mark, but the immediate context puts "sent" in 3:14 into a "contrary" setting in 3:31. Jesus had called those whom He wanted and they came to Him to be, eventually, "sent" by Him to preach. In this text Jesus is "sent for" and He won't "come" because the "callers" are not committed to Him, nor His agenda.
- b. The verb translated "called" has a bit of a textual "issue" about it: the Nestle/Aland 26 has the same verb (unintensified) as is found in 3:13 while the Textus Receptus has an altogether different verb, with no textual commentary comments (indicating the Textus Receptus is not a strong witness to the text). At issue in a "call" is the desire to have the "called" respond in a proper manner, and Jesus did not do that.
- 5. And a crowd "was sitting" (Imperfect Indicative Third Person Singular) around Him.
- 6. And "they are saying" (Present Active Indicative Third Person) to Him...
- a. Behold, your mother and your brothers [and your sisters] "without" are seeking (Present Indicative Active Third Person) you.
- b. The mention of "sisters" is textually and reasonably unlikely, but the textual scholars put it into the text anyway -- for their own reasons. The Textus Receptus does not have any mention of "sisters", nor do those manuscripts that are characteristically "shorter". It is possible that Mark actually did include the sisters in order to emphasize Jesus' "rejection" of the "He is beside Himself" nonsense.
