Chapter # 6 Paragraph # 1 Study # 7
July 20, 2021
Moss Bluff, Louisiana
(Download Audio)
(243)
Thesis: Jesus' "truism" regarding the rejection of Him by those of His own "patridi" goes to the very root of Sin.
Introduction: In our last study of
Mark 6:1-6 we considered the foolishness of the reasoning of the people of Nazareth. That foolishness is revealed by the clearest of all realities: there is absolutely
no discernible connection between Jesus' recognized "authoritative teaching", His recognized "superior wisdom", and His recognized "power to do miracles" and the arguments of the people in the synagogue as to why He could not possibly be "God's Christ".
This is a critical issue because of Paul's principle in Romans 12:2 that all development in true godliness has its roots in "the renewing of the mind". When people commit to being "mindless" (illogical/irrational), their doom is guaranteed because the commitment is Satanic in its opposition to The Word of God. "Words" are only of value as they have the ability to summon people to rational thought. Thus, to succeed, Satan has to corrupt both the principles of mental primacy and the content of words. The elevation of "emoting" over "reasoning" is transparently a key principle of rebellion as we see in the chaos of our days.
Thus, as we come to Jesus' response to the mindlessness of the people of the place where He spent the first thirty years of His life, we are given, by Him, a fundamental truism of the depravity that Sin has brought into the creation of God: God's words are not important.
- I. Jesus' "Truism".
- A. Concerns the reality of "prophets" as God's mouthpieces by which He interacts with "persons".
- 1. At issue is the "inescapable" being rejected by the "irrational": Romans 1:20.
- 2. "Prophets" are established as such by the compatibility of their "words" with "observable reality".
- a. Mark's first reference to a "prophet" is in the opening sentence of his "Gospel" (1:2).
- 1) By this opening sentence, Mark is resting his entire case for Jesus being Christ upon the compatibility between the prophecy of Isaiah, given in words, and the "beyond obvious" historical facts regarding John the Baptizer.
- 2) By this opening sentence, Mark is condemning every angelic and human creature who rejects the words of God's mouthpieces by "emoting" rather than "thinking".
- 3) The level of the importance of this issue is revealed by two things...
- a) The ultimate and inescapable consequences of "condemnation": ETERNITY in the Lake of Fire.
- b) The "absolute" focus of God's "non-negotiable" from Genesis 3 to Revelation 21:8: Faith leads to Eternal Life and Unbelief leads to Eternal Death.
- b. Mark's second reference to a "prophet" is in our current text (6:4).
- 1) In this text Mark presents Jesus' response to those in Nazareth who opt to "emote" and reject their own case for "thinking".
- a) They admit the inescapable historical realities of Jesus' abilities.
- b) Yet they reject His "teaching" (words) as given in the "synagogue" (the central element of "teaching" for Judaism).
- c) The irrationality of this response is so "beyond obvious" that Mark presents it as his ultimate explanation for man's rejection of God's "non-negotiable": faith.
- 2) In this text Mark presents Jesus' own claim to be "The Mouthpiece of God" by telling his readers that it was Jesus Who decided to couch His response to the people in their irrationality in terms of "a prophet" and the issue of "honor".
- a) Jesus is clearly self-identifying as a "prophet".
- b) Jesus is also clearly identifying the underlying issue: "honor".
- B. Concerns the root issue as the giving, or withholding, of "honor".
- 1. Interestingly, this is Mark's only reference to "honor".
- 2. Also, interestingly, this is Jesus' choice of a "word" to describe what is really going on.
- a. It is not difficult to see that this choice by Jesus means "to reject a person's status" (a person is "dishonored" when his/her status is demeaned in the eyes of others).
- b. It is also not difficult to see that Jesus is presenting the root issue for the rejection of Him by the people in the synagogue (ETERNITY rests upon whether, or not, people "give honor" to The Mouthpiece of God by "believing" Him").
- 1) "Honor" is given when a person's words are "believed unto action".
- 2) "Dishonor" is revealed when a person refuses to "believe" a person's words "unto action".
- 3. The question, then, becomes: Why did the people who had had the greatest exposure to Jesus decide to "emote" rather than "think"?
- a. This is partly answered by the fact that, normally, "a prophet" is "honored" by those who have some level of remoteness to him.
- 1) There is something about "distance" that makes it possible for people to not have the motivation to "dishonor".
- 2) So, when people who have "distance" from a recognizable "prophet" also "dishonor", we can see that they have something in common with those whose "dishonor" arises from the lack of distance.
- b. And this is partly answered by the fact that, normally, "a prophet" is "dishonored" by those closest to him.
- 1) What is it about the people of closest association and the people of distance who yet dishonor that is the same?
- a) Mark tells us why "those of distance" decided to accuse Him of being in league with "the archon of the demons" (the ultimate "dishonor") by his record of their forcing Him to stand before Pilate in 15:10.
- b) The strong implication, then, is that the people of closest association shared the same motivation: envy (this is as old as Cain and has a host of biblical examples such as Joseph, David, Saul of Tarsus, etc.).
- 2) Why does "envy" show up when the people involved are "of the closest association"?
- a) "Envy" is always present (it is often called "sibling rivalry").
- b) But it is "hidden" from view when there is enough "distance" to allow it to be hidden.
- c) It is only when the association is close that it becomes more difficult to hide, or, in the case of the religious rulers, the impact is too large to ignore.
