Chapter # 3 Paragraph # 1 Study # 4
September 24, 2019
Moss Bluff, Louisiana
(Download Audio)
(107)
Thesis: Because Jesus "doubled down" on His identity in a way that left them unable to legitimately accuse Him, the Pharisees created a council with the Herodians to try to figure out a way to eliminate Him.
Introduction: In this final explanatory paragraph, Mark makes his point that the opponents of Jesus were not "godly men", interested in "Truth", and "looking out for the best interests of Israel". His task, from his point of view, was to explain why Jesus was rejected by the national leadership so that those within the nation (who wondered how He could be the Person He claimed to be, when those leaders rejected Him) would have a solid answer.
At issue is, as always, whether people could legitimately "believe" in The Man Who identified Himself as "The Divine Servant God". Jesus was first authoritatively identified at His baptism by the descent of the Spirit and the Voice of the Father as "The Beloved Son of God" in a context of being completely under the Father's authority, agenda, and Truth. This makes Him a "servant". Then, He self-identifies in these explanatory paragraphs as both One Who can forgive sins "on the earth" and One Who is in absolute authority over the Sabbath and its "Rest Requirements". These two self-identifications are established by the restorations of the physical body's typical abilities; one, the paralytic, and, two, this withered hand.
This evening we are going to see the final developments of this final explanatory paragraph. How did it happen that Jesus was rejected by an alliance between the Pharisees and the Herodians (long-time enemies because of a most fundamental conflict about the question of how God was going to maintain Israel's present national privileges and, ultimately, extend them).
- I. Jesus' Extremely Frustrating Wisdom in Action.
- A. The "they" of 3:2 were watching Him with purpose: they "hoped" He would heal the man with the withered hand so that they could lodge legal accusations against Him.
- B. With the "bottom line" being an "unlawful", "non-rest", action "on the sabbath" (capital crime), they sat in hope of an unlawful action that would fulfill their wish.
- C. But Jesus did not "do" anything for which He could be accused.
- 1. He simply "says" (emphatic present in historical narrative) to the man: "extend your hand".
- a. Mark's emphatic present tense is deliberate: this is all that Jesus did.
- b. His point is that Jesus put His adversaries between a rock and a hard place.
- a) The Old Testament makes it very clear that God's "speech unto a finished creation" was "work" from which He rested on the sabbath (Exodus 20:9-11).
- b) But, to acknowledge that Jesus had just done a "work-less work" would have destroyed their ability to fulfill their own agenda.
- 2. In Mark's only other use of this word (1:41), Jesus extended His hand and "touched" a leper so that He took on the man's leprosy and gave the man His health (an obvious "work", but not done on a sabbath in a synagogue).
- 3. Mark's "point" here is that Jesus didn't "do" even so much as extending His hand.
- a. The Pharisees knew the "truths" set forth for us in Hebrews 11:3.
- 1) The biblical presentation of God's creation "works" were all accomplished by "words" alone.
- 2) It was their theological position that bringing a completed creation into being by words alone signaled the deity of the One Who could do that.
- b. Thus, when Jesus produced a significant "work" by words alone, they could not "accuse" Him of an "unlawful" "work on the sabbath" without sabotaging their own agenda.
- 1) To "accuse" Him of an "unlawful work" was to admit He was both "Forgiver of Sins" and "Lord of the Sabbath".
- 2) Their goal, however, was to totally reject those "self-identities" by "legitimate accusation".
- 3) Jesus' goal, however, was to give them a peek into their future under His "wrath" as He completely out-foxed them.
- c. This lack of overt action could not be used to "accuse" because all men everywhere on every sabbath in history extended their hands without any sense of "lawless labor on the sabbath".
- II. The Reaction of the Pharisees.
- A. Was a euthus issue: a significant "point" in Mark's record.
- B. Was a totally unexpected thing.
- 1. The Pharisees and the Herodians were significantly hostile toward each other, and had been for a long time.
- a. The Pharisees, being the conservative, follow-the-Word-of-God, leaders of "biblical" methods, could not stand the Herodians' "practical apostasies" in their "let's go down to Egypt" mentality of unbelief.
- b. The Herodians, being the "practical", "do what will work", type of reprobates, could not stand the "holier than thou" Pharisees.
- 2. But here we have the formation of a "Council" to "take counsel" from one another to seek a way to bring an end to this Jesus.
- C. Was a totally "hate-filled" thing that had nothing to do with "Truth", "Righteousness", or a "For Israel's True Good" type of leadership.
- 1. This "proves" Mark's point.
- 2. It is perfectly legitimate to embrace this Jesus in spite of the opposition of the leaders.
