Mark 2:1-3:6

From Feast upon the Word ( Copyright, Feast upon the Word.
(Redirected from Mark 2-3)
Jump to: navigation, search

Home > The New Testament > Mark > Chapters 1-8a > Chapters 2-3a / Verses 2:1-3:6
Previous page: Chapter 1                      Next page: Chapters 3b-6a

This page would ideally always be under construction. You are invited to contribute.


This section should be very brief. Click the "edit" link to edit or add content to this section. →


This section is for detailed discussion such as the meaning of a symbol, how a doctrinal point is developed throughout a passage, or insights that can be further developed in the future. Contributions may range from polished paragraphs down to a single bullet point. The focus, however, should always be on understanding the scriptural text consistent with LDS doctrine. Click the "edit" link to edit or add content to this section. →

  • Mark 2:10: Son of man. In Moses 6:57 the Lord tells Moses that Son of man is the name of Jesus in the language of Adam. That verse also suggests that "man" refers to "Man of Holiness"--the name of God in the language of Adam. The connection between the use of "son of man" in the New Testament and the way it is used in the Old Testament is a topic of much discussion in biblical criticism.
  • Mark 2:6-10. Until now, Jesus has seemed relucant to let people know who he is. But starting in this section, he doesn't back away at all from suggestions that he is divine.
  • Mark 2:6-10. Note that verse 9 doesn't ask the question whether it is easier forgive sins or heal someone. Instead, it asks which of the two is easier to say. The following two verse go on to say that the Jesus healed the man with palsy so that the scribes would know that Jesus had power to forgive sins. The implied answer then to Jesus's question is that it is easier to say someone's sins are forgiven (how would someone prove you wrong) than it is to say they are healed.
  • The New Testament frequently cites Jesus calling himself the "son of man." Though we know from the Book of Moses (see lexical notes) that this title is a reference to Jesus as the Son of God, it seems that the people who heard Jesus call himself the son of man (as in verse 10 here) did not understand that this title referred to the Son of God. Otherwise, they would have reacted to the claim as blasphemous, which they do not.
  • Mark 2:12. It is interesting to note that in verse 12 the people praised God rather than Jesus for what had happened. Presumably, Jesus made clear that he wasn't taking the glory for himself, but acting on behalf of the one who had sent him.
  • Mark 2:16-17. This is a powerful lesson in judgmentalism. To the outsider, it would seem that those who were fasting, those who weren't sinners, would be the most righteous and the ones Jesus would spend his time with. But the reverse turns out to be true. Jesus seems to be saying, come to me wherever you are in life, whatever your sins may be, and I won't reject you. At the same time, he doesn't say that those who come to him have no need of change; in fact, he says just the opposite.
One of the ironies of this section is that those in this section who believe themselves to be righteous probably aren't, for they are the ones who are most criticized by Jesus elsewhere. All people have the need for Jesus, but those who believe themselves to be righteous just don't know it.
  • Mark 2:23ff. In verses 23 and what follows, it is interesting to note that Jesus does not reject the law of the Sabbath (although his opponents may have seen it that way). Instead, he points to higher law and gives examples of where people of God have followed that higher law.
It also appears here that Jesus is implicitly criticizing the judgmentalism of the Pharisees.
  • Mark 2:28. In verse 28 Jesus again is implicitly making a claim of divinity.
  • Mark 3:1-6. This section draws a sharp contrast between Jesus, who believes it is right to do good on the sabbath, and his critics, who see no exception to their intepretation of the law.

Unanswered questions[edit]

This section is for questions along the lines of "I still don't understand ..." Please do not be shy. The point of these questions is to identify things that still need to be addressed on this page. Click the "edit" link to edit or add content to this section. →

  • Mark 2:5: Son. Why does Jesus call the paralytic his son?

Prompts for life application[edit]

This section is for prompts that suggest ways in which a passage can influence a person's life. Prompts may be appropriate either for private self reflection or for a class discussion. Click the "edit" link to edit or add content to this section. →

Prompts for further study[edit]

This section is for prompts that invite us to think about a passage more deeply or in a new way. These are not necessarily questions that beg for answers, but rather prompts along the lines of "Have you ever thought about ..." Prompts are most helpful when they are developed individually, thoughtfully, and with enough background information to clearly indicate a particular direction for further study or thought. Click the "edit" link to edit or add content to this section. →

  • Mark 2:10: Son of man. Why does Jesus use the title Son of man to refer to himself? What did it mean to the people who heard it?


This section is for listing links and print resources, including those that are also cited elsewhere on this page. A short comment about the particular strengths of a resource can be helpful. Click the "edit" link to edit or add content to this section. →

  • Mark 2:10: Barker on Son of man. Recent work by non-LDS biblical scholar Margaret Barker argues that Jehovah was known by the title Son of Man in the Old Testament period, but that these references were mostly removed by the Deuteronomists and others after 600 BC. According to Barker, this tradition did continue in some veins of Judaism, and was recognizable to at least some New Testament era Jewish sects. See interesting summary here and article here.
  • Mark 2:10: BCC post Son of man. See the post "Son of man" at the BCC blog for a summary of a letter by Charles Penrose to Joseph F. Smith regarding a difference of opinion on the meaning of the phrase "son of Man." Note also some summary of Bible scholarship on this topic (e.g. this quote from the Anchor Bible entry).
  • Mark 2:10: Strauss quote. See a passage by David Friedrich Strauss on this topic here.


Footnotes are not required but are encouraged for factual assertions that average readers cannot easily evaluate for themselves (such as the date of King Solomon’s death or the nuanced definition of a Greek word). In contrast, insights rarely benefit from footnoting, and the focus of this page should always remain on the scriptures themselves rather than what someone has said about them. Links are actively encouraged on all sections of this page, and links to authoritative sources (such as Strong's Bible Concordance or the Joseph Smith Papers) are preferable to footnotes.

Previous page: Chapter 1                      Next page: Chapters 3b-6a