Chapter # 3 Paragraph # 6 Study # 2
January 7, 2020
Moss Bluff, Louisiana
(132)
1901 ASV
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. The Attitude of The Multitude.
- A. A "crowd" was sitting (Imperfect; typical historical narrative) around Him.
- 1. The "crowd" (36 references by Mark) was "problematic" as Mark's first reference (2:4) indicates: those "seeking" to get close to Him were often prevented from doing so. But, also, 15:10 indicates that it was "problematic" because of the lust of the "chief priests" for the popularity it represented.
- 2. As with 2:4 (as a "first reference" by Mark to the crowd), Mark's first use of "sitting" is in 2:6 where we read of the initial opposition of the scribes to His pronouncement of the "forgiveness of sins" and this current text refers to the "crowd's" "sitting" (to tie the issue of "response" to the envy of the chief priests as noted above) as a "problematic" issue.
- B. Individuals from the "crowd", Mark wrote, "are saying" (Present Indicative Active; another use of the atypical, present tense in historical narrative -- to call for attention by the readers).
- 1. The "are saying" is yet another use of lego as a statement reserved for "significant" content.
- a. This strongly implies that the "crowd" has some fairly significant attitudes toward the fact that the "family" is seeking to have Jesus come out to them.
- b. At the root of these "attitudes" lies an expectation: He will go out to them because they are "family".
- 2. The "saying" is that "mother", "brothers", and "sisters" have a "behold" kind of primacy when it comes to "expectations": Jesus, apparently, would "go out to them" simply because it was "family" that was "without, seeking Him" (another present tense indicative). But, as strong as this idea of family-primacy was in them, they would not sacrifice their own place "close to Him" so that the "family" could have the access they sought.
- 3. This is a significant observation because of the setting of the text in the "response" section of Mark's record and because the "family" has a seriously deficient "response". It is also of note that the "crowd" was not about to back off and make a path for the "family" to get to where Jesus was.
- II. Jesus' Correction of The "Attitude".
- A. The text reads "answered" in the form of an Aorist Participle: an attendant idea tied to the main verb, which is another use of lego. Jesus' response is given as a "content-significant" "answer".
- 1. The implied significance of "answered" is that there exists in the setting certain "issues" that need explanation (even if no "question" has been verbalized).
- 2. In this context, the "issue" that needs "explanation" is just how little "blood relationship" means: "family" (as a consequence of blood relationship) is not to be a dominant part of "relationship" considerations. Since when does having a relationship with someone who is considered "family, because of blood" have any weight in one's considerations, especially when actions are about to be decided upon?
- a. Perhaps the most dangerous realm of "respect of persons" in the light of decisions that are to be made and executed is the misguided notion of "family loyalties".
- b. Jesus makes it very clear that "family loyalties" do exist, but only when "family" is rightly determined.
- 1) An enormous body of truth exists in the Bible about the primacy of legitimate "family" issues, beginning with the identification of God as "Father" and going from there to the apostolic instructions about how to deal with fellow-believers because they are "brethren".
- 2) But, in Mark 10:29 Jesus directly posits the reality that His agenda will often require the "leaving" of "family by blood".
- 3) And, in Luke 14:26 Jesus puts this issue in even starker terms in that no one can be His disciple without the deliberate rejection of "family claims" upon the aspiring disciple.
- B. His "answer" as "doctrine" [lego] is a question: "Who is the 'mother' of Me and the 'brothers' [of Me]?" This is the question of "to whom do I show my real loyalties?".
- C. Then He "answers" His own question in lego fashion by declaring that those "sitting around' (peri in 3:32; in periblepsomenos in 3:34; with another peri in 3:34; and kuklo in 3:34) Him are, in "Behold" fashion, His 'mother' and His 'brothers', even though these same "around Him" people will not let the family through to see Jesus.
- 1. This is a "potent" contradiction of the crowd's expectations and way of looking at relationships in terms of "loyalties".
- 2. He redefines the foundation of "relationships".
- a. The "father" or "mother" in legitimate loyalty-relationships is critical and Jesus claims that "The God" is the primary "parent" (call no man 'father' -- Matthew 23:9) and those who "do the wishes of The God" are the ones who can claim "loyalty" from His offspring.
- b. Human parents are "progenitors". They are the sources of egg/sperm unities that create human beings. But this gives them no "status" as "ultimate objects of loyalty". There is a focus in the Scriptures regarding "loyalties" with respect to "honor", but not with respect to "submission".
- III. A Major Conclusion.
- A. Those who presume upon "having a relationship with God" when there is no "truth" to the "faith" that has led to the presumption, are blind ("We have Abraham as our father"; John 8:30).
- B. Without "faith' it is impossible to please God and He counts no "non-faith" foundation to be legitimate.
- C. At the root of this delusional belief system is a basic reality: men "lust" to be in God's place as He Who is all powerful and all wise.
- D. In this entire paragraph (along with its prior "intro" in 3:21), the issue is the total illegitimacy of the attitude and expectation of the "blood relatives". It is "lukewarm" and absolutely repugnant to Jesus (Revelation 3:16). The "unforgivable" scribes from Jerusalem have a higher status in the eyes of Jesus than "Mary, the 'mother of God'" (in the words of the most perverse of expressions of 'Christianity' on the planet because of its doubling-down on the entire delusion of "family loyalties" as a basis for the Christian life).
