Mark 2: The Paralytic and the Forgiveness of Sins: Passing by Nehushtan
Mark 2, the Paralytic and the Forgiveness of Sins
Mark 2:10-11 But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (he saith to the sick of the palsy,) I say unto thee, Arise, and take up thy bed, and go thy way into thine house.
Here is a short article. It won’t take you 5 minutes to get through it, and it will be worth it.
The incident in question occurs here and in Matt. 9 and Luke 5.
Mark and Matthew say this occurred in Capernaum.
In Luke, the entering of Jesus into the city is recorded this way:
Luke 5:17 (KJV) And it came to pass on a certain day, as he was teaching, that there were Pharisees and doctors of the law sitting by, which were come out of every town of Galilee, and Judaea, and Jerusalem: and the power of the Lord was present to heal them.
I don’t think I have read a commentator that thinks Jesus was talking about healing the doctors of the Law and Pharisees. The consensus is that this refers to the multitudes. But is this language not instructive?
In many manuscripts “them” is in the singular, then read like “the power of the Lord was there for His healing.” Regardless, this rendering is perfect, because the doctors of the Law and the Pharisees were examples of the people there that most in need of healing, but also supposed to be the true healers as well. But it is these false physicians people who take the lead in dismissing real healing power in favor of a doctrinal perspective which can’t heal:
Matthew 9:3 (KJV) And, behold, certain of the scribes said within themselves, This man blasphemeth.
Luke 5:21 (KJV) And the scribes and the Pharisees began to reason, saying, Who is this which speaketh blasphemies? Who can forgive sins, but God alone?
Sins can only be forgiven by God. How true. But are the Pharisees right, that this is the main issue here? Or is Jesus coming to correct not the conclusions of the theology, but their priorities with respect to true healing?
This exchange presents another illustration of Jesus trying to teach why messianic prophecy of Him is a superior consideration in religion and theological discourse, especially in its application to the Truth needy, to that of those pertaining to disputations over its mere outward expressions and relatively minor doctrinal considerations, fallen religion always putting the latter over the former. Yes, that means that the issue of the deity of Christ, although true, is a relatively minor issue to that of Jesus’s proof of messianic credentials.
This is why Jesus directs himself to what people are reasoning within themselves (v.8) rather than to what they give as outward displays. The battle is always between carnal and the spiritual, righteous spirituality being a concern over the words of the prophets of the Messiah. Bad spirituality is a consideration for outward forms of bodily expression in act and speech and toward religious conclusions instead of religious transcendent evidence.
In V. 9 Jesus effectively states that to the Pharisees and Scribes the Messianic sign of the Messiah forgiving sins (see Jesus and the Forgiveness of Sins: an Aspect of His Prophetic Ministry, by Tobias Hagerland, if you can ignore the Documentarian perspective), not the actual forgiveness of sins by anyone other than God, or the that a man could heal the sick miraculously, is the more difficult truth taken from Scripture about Him. But Jesus says its the other way around:
Mark 2:9 (KJV) Whether is it easier to say to the sick of the palsy, Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Arise, and take up thy bed, and walk?
Translation: “Which is easier, to say I am the Messiah because what you see of my healing ministry is scripturally promised only for Messiah, or that I perform a disconnected miracle?”
Jesus cements this in the next verse:
Mark 2:10 (KJV) But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (he saith to the sick of the palsy,)
The “Son of Man” is his Messianic title, taken primarily from Daniel 7.
Daniel 7:13-14 (KJV) I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.
“Son of Man” is used mostly in Ezekiel by God for Ezekiel. If you harmonize Ezekiel and Daniel you have: “Divine Messiah who is the ultimate prophet also an ultimate man.” Its a designator for the Messiah from prophecy, the first consideration, and the second his divinity as Messiah.
It is obvious that even the subject of sin is a more difficult one to think about to a certain sure conclusion than whether a miracle has occurred since one is only understood through thought and the other through sight. The Pharisees have decided, however, that the issue over who can forgive sin is less clear and easier and more needful than who is the Messiah from Scripture, something that they can see with their own eyes by consulting the Tenach.
Jesus rebukes the Pharisees for failing to apply themselves to the greater truths of the Messianic ministry in favor of religious concerns informed from emotion and tradition. Without the greater truths neither they nor anyone else could never recognize Messiah should he come, and without which Jesus could not possibly be God and any forgiveness possible.
That the “Son of Man” would forgive sins is untimely not for physical healing, but of the spiritual healing of the forgiveness of sins, only possible through God’s demonstration and faith.
The idea that Jesus is primarily trying to teach himself as God here is true, but, in the same calculation as above, it is not possible to righteously entertain it without Him first being seen and confessed as the Messiah of the OT. God will fulfill prophecy not how we would wish but by His own council. This should teach us that long before our particular take on what constitutes the exact fulfillment of prophecy, the greater consideration is the certainty that prophecy was to be fulfilled unexpectedly and with great power. Why? Because of God’s Prophetic Word of Demonstration1, that it had been historically fulfilled so many times in the past.
From this, might we re-speculate on what kind of sins Christ is forgiving? We seem to take it for granted that it’s about sins of bodily motion of some form, but those are not now, with Jesus’s New Covenant of the Word, the fundamental sins. The sins of the Paralytic are not mentioned. Why would Jesus forgive his sins? What did this poor man do? What sins are Jesus forgiving? Adamic sin? His abuse of his wife? His misappropriation of money? Well, I would say original sin, but not the one we want it to be, which is assumed represented and plain to see by one’s actions or words, which we hide behind.
As indicated elsewhere, it was clear that the Jews believed that physical maladies were curses of God upon the afflicted for their sins (John 9:2). Jesus rebukes this. Jesus is using the symbol of the physical malady to represent the real sin. He uses this irrespective of the individual’s particular spiritual state to illustrate that the Word of God will cure the ubiquitous sin of disallowing the Word’s full power in faith if the sinner allows. That Word is the Word of the Prophets concerning Jesus of Nazareth. The previous resistance to the removal of this sin is by honesty and humility, a deep desire to know in helplessness the truth, allowing it to speak and act for itself.
Paralysis of the body is a symbol of paralysis of the mind of one form or another in respect to spiritual matters, and particularly to messianic prophecy as the informational ruler of faith. Of every sin that is conceived today or over the last 1800 years, can you think of a more common one? Since it is the motion of the spirit in faith in His fulfillment as Messiah that is an essential response to Jesus in salvation, Jesus forgives only the sin of ignorance of, or bad or non-existent faith in, Himself as Messiah through His performance of the Father’s Prophetic Word. Only the willingness of Jesus to put man’s corruptions of faith behind him, in a response to man’s willingness to consider His claims fairly by what He has done, can Man be redeemed. Any mere physical display of faith can never again be the main means of indicating God’s required spiritual reality for Man when the Messiah has performed the ultimate kind of work in the world.
Please see these recent articles:
Head and Heart: John 14:1-12: Having Jesus In Your Heart But Not In Your Head
Mark 12: Prophetic Streams of the Shema and the Undertow of Prophetic Sin
Mark 2: Bride Chambers, New Cloth, and Jesus: Passing by Nehushtan
https://www.amazon.com/Systematic-Theology-1-Wolfhart-Pannenberg/dp/0802865038 ↩
