Thursday, June 14, 2018

Mark 3:20-35



Mark 3:20-35

20 and the crowd came together again, so that they could not even eat. 21 When his family heard it, they went out to restrain him, for people were saying, "He has gone out of his mind."

22 And the scribes who came down from Jerusalem said, "He has Beelzebul, and by the ruler of the demons he casts out demons." 23 And he called them to him, and spoke to them in parables, "How can Satan cast out Satan? 24 If a kingdom is divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. 25 And if a house is divided against itself, that house will not be able to stand. 26 And if Satan has risen up against himself and is divided, he cannot stand, but his end has come. 27 But no one can enter a strong man's house and plunder his property without first tying up the strong man; then indeed the house can be plundered. 28 "Truly I tell you, people will be forgiven for their sins and whatever blasphemies they utter; 29 but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit can never have forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin"— 30 for they had said, "He has an unclean spirit."

31 Then his mother and his brothers came; and standing outside, they sent to him and called him. 32 A crowd was sitting around him; and they said to him, "Your mother and your brothers and sisters are outside, asking for you." 33 And he replied, "Who are my mother and my brothers?" 34 And looking at those who sat around him, he said, "Here are my mother and my brothers! 35 Whoever does the will of God is my brother and sister and mother."   



Mark 3:20-21 is a story about Jesus involving the fears of the family of Jesus. Both Matthew and Luke omit the story. In context, the tension between Jesus and his family shown in verses 20-21 and 31-35 form the context for the Beelzebul controversy. 20 and the crowd came together again, so that they could not even eat. 21 When his family heard it, they went out to restrain him. The family wanted to control the actions of Jesus.  They combine concern for Jesus as a person with a lack of sympathy for his purpose. Those who thought they had known Jesus the longest and the best ‑‑ his oldest friends and family ‑‑ cannot comprehend all the stir and turmoil that now follows him. The reason the family acts this way is that people were saying, "He has gone out of his mind." The Pharisees made this charge as well. People are calling into question his sanity.

            Let us consider the possibility that at least in some area of our discipleship, it would be good if the world considered us crazy. Saint Francis illustrates this stage in many memorable ways. When he hears one day that the people of Assisi are calling him a saint, he invites Brother Juniper to join him in a walk through his old hometown. Brother Juniper was the first simpleton (that is a compliment!), the holy fool of the original friars. Francis knew he could always trust him to understand what he was saying. Francis once said, "I wish I had a whole forest of such Junipers!" Francis told Brother Juniper, "Let's take off these robes, get down to our underwear, and just walk back and forth through Assisi. Then all these people who are thinking we are saints will know who we really are!" Now that is a saint: someone who does not need others to call him a saint. Therefore, he can walk foolishly in his underwear the full length of Assisi. A few years later, when people were again calling Francis a saint, he said, "Juniper, we've got to do it again." This time they carried a plank into the piazza. They put it over some kind of a stone or maybe the fountain, and there they seesawed all day. They had no need to promote or protect any reputation or pious self-image. That is a rather constant spiritual tradition in the Eastern Church and in the Desert Fathers and Mothers, but it pretty much got lost after the 13th-century Franciscans. We became more and more serious about this intense salvation thing, or you might say we took ourselves far too seriously. Moralism replaced mysticism. This only increased after the in-house fighting of the 16th-century reformations. We all needed to prove we were right. Have you noticed that people who need to prove they are right cannot laugh or smile?[1]

           
Mark 3:22-30 is a pronouncement and sayings on Jesus and Beelzebul.  The pronouncement replies to the charge that Jesus exorcized demons by the power of Satan. The controversy arose with the exorcism of a dumb demon. Mark attributes the charge to scribes from Jerusalem. Jesus viewed himself as being in a battle with the devil.

In verse 22, Mark establishes the setting of this controversy. 22 The scribes who came down from Jerusalem said, "He has Beelzebul, and by the ruler of the demons he casts out demons." Verses 23-26 are proverbial wisdom and subtle irony.[2] Verse 23 states the general principle. 23 He called them to him, and spoke to them in parables, "How can Satan cast out Satan? Verses 24-25 are the first illustration of the general principle. 24 If a kingdom divides against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. 25 Further, if a house divides against itself, that house will not be able to stand. Verse 26 is the second illustration of the general principle. 26 Finally, if Satan has risen up against himself and divide himself, he cannot stand, but his end has come. The saying may include a use of irony. It may also simply be common wisdom. Jesus may have meant something like this, using irony (Barth), “If I am in league with Satan, then Satan’s domain is divided against itself.”  In that case, Satan is coming to an end and by his own hand working through me.  Is that what you intend to say? The meaning is obviously that he would have an end, even if they were right in their wild supposition. However, the supposition is a thoroughly bad one.[3]

The cultural/anthropological focus on these pericopes sees an overarching discussion of "shame and honor" affecting all these players and pronouncements.[4] The fact that Jesus ‑‑ a commoner outside the boundaries of the scribal tradition or Pharisaic authority ‑‑ had publicly amazed people with his mastery of Scripture, his healings and his exorcisms had gained him honor. In the eyes of the scribes, this gain meant that they had lost honor and had shame heaped upon them instead. The only accepted method of redistributing the shame/honor scales was through public confrontation.  However, Jesus easily disarms the barbed accusations of "blasphemy" that the scribes hurl at him. His logic shoots down their attack ("How can Satan cast out Satan?") and sinks them deeper into shame. If regaining lost honor and making Jesus look bad were the scribes' original intentions, they failed miserably.

Verses 27-30 imply that Jesus binds Satan now, through his ministry.27 But no one can enter a strong man's house and plunder his property without first tying up the strong man; then indeed the house can be plundered. Jesus offers the surprising comparison of exorcism to breaking and entering. Exorcisms prove that Jesus has bound Satan. It is consistent with what Jesus taught about the kingdom of God.  Bultmann himself believes this might have been characteristic of the preaching of Jesus.  No one can invade Satan’s domain without first overpowering Satan.  Comparing the conquest of Satan through exorcism to house breaking and entering is a bold stroke.  One might compare it to Luke 16:1-9 and Thomas 98, in which the texts compare God’s rule to a dishonest or violent act.  The “strong man” is Satan.  If the text recalls Isaiah 49:24-25, it may reflect belief in Jesus as the victorious servant of God.  The binding of evil powers is eschatological.

Verses 28-29 relate sayings on the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. 28 "Truly I tell you, people will be forgiven for their sins (note the universality of forgiveness) and whatever blasphemies they utter; 29 but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit can never have forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin"— 30 for they, the scribes from Jerusalem, had said, "He has an unclean spirit." The source is material common to Matthew and Luke as well as Mark. The point here is that the mighty acts of Jesus are the work of the Holy Spirit.[5] God will not forgive the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.  God can forgive all human offence.  Since the Spirit is in Jesus, God cannot forgive anyone who criticizes Jesus.  In terms of the sin against the Holy Spirit, we must remember that forgiveness of sin is a primary theme of the gospel.  This sin is a perversion of spirit in which one calls light darkness.  Attributing charitable acts, such as exorcism, to Satan, would be such blasphemy. There is great moral danger in getting to this point. The darkest of all the sayings of Jesus occurs after these parables, the saying about the blaspheming against the Holy Spirit that makes those who commit it guilty of an eternal sin for which they can receive no forgiveness. If they knew what they were saying, calling the clean unclean, the holy unholy, the good bad, life death, the kingdom of God the kingdom of Satan, they would have realized their danger. They excluded themselves from liberation, the new aeon, the proclamation of forgiveness, salvation, their reception. Jesus did not identify himself as angry. He has nothing more to say to those who think and speak in this way. He simply draws attention to this sin. If they have fallen into it, they have done so through their actions.[6] The controversial saying may be part of the theme that the Spirit has a function at the judgment. The fatal result of such judgment finds illustration in the story of Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1-11).[7]
Mark 3:31-35 is a pronouncement on the true family of Jesus. Mark does not focus on the fallout from this diagnosis until verse 31. At this point, the closest family of Jesus arrives. 31 Then his mother and his brothers came; and standing outside, physically and metaphorically, they sent to him and called him. They seem to demand that he come to them. 32 A crowd was sitting around him; and they said to him, "Your mother and your brothers and sisters are outside, asking for you." This unprecedented behavior leads Jesus to offer a pronouncement about the new nature of kinship. 33 He replied, "Who are my mother and my brothers?" 34 Looking at those who sat around him, he said, "Here are my mother and my brothers! 35 Whoever does the will of God is my brother and sister and mother." The priority of blood family ties recedes in favor of spiritual ties that bind together all those who do "the will of God."  One can use the shame and honor culture to explain this story. Here the issue of kinship and blood loyalty makes honor an even more crucial commodity. The flagrantly dis‑honorable action of one family member could bring shame and dishonor on the entire kinship unit. Because one's most basic identity lay with the group, the family, threatening the honored status of the group put all members at risk.


[1] --Adapted from "Franciscan Mysticism" (an unpublished talk). Some wisdom from Richard Rohr's Daily Meditations -- HOLY FOOL, Wednesday, December 17, 2014:
[2] A separate tradition from the material common to Matthew and Luke is in Luke 11:14-15, 17-18. In Q, “son of man” may refer to humanity. Mark’s version of the kingdom divided against itself in v. 23-26 is a later version than in Luke 11:17-18. Q contradicts Mark in that blasphemy against the son is forgivable.  Yet, given I Corinthians 12:3, it is difficult to imagine the church inviting criticism of Jesus.  However, it is more likely that the saying is an example of the community setting limits on the ecstatic leaders.
[3] Barth, Church Dogmatics IV.2 [64.2] 231.
[4] (See David M. May. "Mark 3:20‑35 From the Perspective of Shame/Honor," Biblical Theology Bulletin 17 [1987], 83‑87.) 
[5] Pannenberg, Systematic Theology Volume 1, 266.
[6] Barth, Church Dogmatics IV. 2[64.3] 231-2.
[7] Pannenberg, Systematic Theology Volume 3, 623.

No comments:

Post a Comment