Chapter # 6 Paragraph # 1 Study # 4
June 29, 2021
Moss Bluff, Louisiana
(Download Audio)
(237)
Thesis: Mark's presentation of God's "non-negotiable" ("faith") accepts the enormous difficulties involved, but mercilessly exposes the rationale for "unbelief".
Introduction: In our studies of this paragraph to this date, we have considered the most significant "plus" that exists behind the scenes: God's immutable "purpose". In
Romans 11:29 Paul declared that "the gifts and the calling of the God are irrevocable". He wrote that in the light of what he called "the standard of election", which he had earlier called "a standard of election out of grace" (
11:5), which he had even earlier addressed as the underlying foundation for the establishment of "purpose" (
9:11). The reason for our focus upon "purpose" in those studies is revealed in the paragraph before us in this study: the "beyond-human capacity" to grasp and know what the truth actually is.
Because there is such a thing as a divine "non-negotiable" upon which rests every man's eternal experience, and because there is such a reality as a "beyond-human capacity", it is of enormous importance that we yield to both the complexity and the simplicity which Mark sets before his readers.
- I. The Complexity.
- A. Begins with "the things of 'Sabbath'".
- 1. The fact that the translators ignored the details of the grammar involved complicates the issue.
- a. There is a very clear, and easy, way to say "when the Sabbath came": make the word "Sabbath" a nominative case noun so that it is the subject of the verbal idea of "coming".
- b. Mark deliberately did not follow that grammatical pattern: he used the genitive form of "Sabbath" which forces us to attempt to understand why.
- 1) The genitive form is the form for indicating "ownership".
- 2) The use of this form for the word "Sabbath" indicates that it is not "the Sabbath" that "came"; it is, rather, those things which "belong to Sabbath" that "came".
- c. This grammatical point means that we are to understand that Mark is dealing with all of those "things" that "Sabbath" brings to the table.
- 2. There are two major categories of "things" which belong to "Sabbath".
- a. First, and primary, are the "things" which were tied to "Sabbath" in the very beginning.
- 1) First, and foremost, is the fact that "Sabbath" was commanded by God because He was making it "THE" issue for the right observance of "Law": Exodus 31:13-16.
- 2) Second, to affirm the importance of the "First" is the elevation of violation of the Sabbath to a capital crime by word and deed (Numbers 15:32-35).
- 3) Third, the explanation for the captivity to Babylon was the persistent refusal of Judah to observe "Sabbath things" (2 Chronicles 36:20-21).
- b. Second, there are all the "barnacles" that accrued to "Sabbath things" over centuries of Israel's fixation upon the crucial importance of properly observing the Sabbath.
- 1) Given the extreme severity attached to violations of the Sabbath, every time someone turned around there arose a question as to whether a certain action was a violation of the Sabbath.
- 2) Out of this situation there arose a vast number of writings that were designed to be very precise about what was, and what was not, a "trigger" of God's wrath.
- 3. Mark gave us this issue to explain how decisions were made regarding Jesus in Mark 2:23-28 and 3:1-6.
- B. Develops because of Jesus' "teachings" in the synagogue.
- 1. Jesus' teaching was first noted to be both "new" and "authoritative" (1:27).
- 2. Then Mark brought Jesus' contradictions regarding Sabbath "things" to the fore (2:23-3:6).
- 3. What Jesus was teaching was done "in the synagogues".
- a. The synagogues were the primary places of the teaching of the doctrines of Judaism.
- b. Jesus was forcing the issue: His "new" doctrine(s) and their "old" traditions.
- 4. The fact that everyone, because of the complexities involved, develops a "litmus test" to make it possible to make decisions without having to figure out the puzzle of the Gordian Knot.
- 5. Mark tells us that the outcome of Jesus' "teaching in the synagogue" put the "many who were hearing" into a "mental panic mode".
- II. The Simplicity.
- A. The "many" understood what He was saying, that it was wisdom, and that it was tied to His awesome powers.
- B. And they used their familiarity with Him from His youth as their "argument" that their unbelief was justifiable.
- C. The issue of a "non-negotiable" which carries an extreme consequence, has a "simple" standard: the rationale for "believing" or "taking offense" must be "legitimate".
