Healing on the Sabbath (3:1–6)
Another time he went into the synagogue, and a man with a shriveled hand was there (3:1). The man with the shriveled hand would have stood out in the synagogue when the congregation rose and lifted their hands in prayer. A shriveled hand is frequently understood to be the punishment of God.74 Jeroboam’s hand “dried up” when he tried to take action against the rebellious prophets (1 Kings 13:4–6), and it was healed only after he pleaded that the prophet pray for his restoration.
They watched him closely to see if he would heal him on the Sabbath (3:2). Jesus makes the man the center of attention by calling him forward and healing him. This healing violates the Pharisees’ interpretation that disallows minor cures on the Sabbath.75 Rabbi Shammai was so strict that he is reported even to have opposed praying for the sick or visiting the sick on the Sabbath, since it conflicted with the day’s character as one marked by joy.76 All the later rabbis agreed that danger to life overrode the Sabbath; they only disagreed over the scriptural basis for this conclusion.77 Since this man with a withered hand is not in a life or death situation, the opponents assume that he can and should wait for a cure.
But how does Jesus violate the Sabbath? He prepares no ointments and lifts nothing; he simply speaks. The text assumes that if this man’s healing were not in accord with God’s will, he would not have been healed. Jesus uses the healing to make the point that the Sabbath can become an occasion to do good rather than simply a time not to do work. Why should this man have to wait a day for help when the power to heal him is available now? The point: God did not send the Messiah to observe the Sabbath but to save life.
The Herodians (3:6). The precise identity of the Herodians (see also 12:13) is hazy. Most assume that they were supporters of the Herodian rule. In Galilee, they would be partisans of Herod Antipas and consequently influential. Economically and religiously they were comparable to the Sadducees, who had been pro-Hasmonean. Their agenda was less motivated by religious fervor than a concern to maintain the social and political status quo, which religion nicely abetted.
Others have guessed that “Herodians” was a tag that the common people gave to the Essenes. Josephus tells the story of an Essene teacher who won the favor of Herod the Great as a young boy by greeting him as king of the Jews and predicting a happy reign.78 They became the favored religious party during his rule, inhabiting the Essene quarter in the southwest corner of Jerusalem.79
Summary of Jesus’ Healing (3:7–12)
Many people came to him from Judea, Jerusalem, Idumea, and the regions across the Jordan and around Tyre and Sidon (3:8). The multitudes pressing on Jesus come from places that correspond to the land of biblical Israel. They swarm around the house he is in so that he is unable even to eat (3:20). This makes it necessary for him to prepare an escape route by boat (3:9).
PALESTINE
Whenever the evil spirits saw him, they fell down before him and cried out, “You are the Son of God” (3:11). Only the demons know who Jesus really is, but they can never be agents of revelation. In the first-century setting, most would have considered it ominous for demons to shout out a name in recognition (see comments on 1:24). They would not assume that demons were paying Jesus homage but that they were attempting to control him by pronouncing his divine name. Jesus’ rebuke shows his power over them.
Calling of Disciples on the Mountain (3:13–19)
Jesus went up on a mountainside (3:13). Mark does not identify the mountain where Jesus calls the twelve disciples. Mountains serve in the Bible as places of revelation, but the mountain here is simply an isolated place that allows Jesus to be alone. Crowds do not follow him here; he calls those whom he wants.
He appointed twelve—designating them apostles (3:14). “Twelve” has symbolic significance, evoking God’s promises of redeeming Israel. God commanded Moses to take men from each tribe to be “with him” as representatives of the “heads of the clans of Israel.”80 The twelve disciples represent the heads of the divisions of Israel, which are being restored; and Jesus stands over them as leader. His choice of twelve testifies to his self-understanding that he has been sent to gather Israel.
Simon (to whom he gave the name Peter) (3:16). Simon, James, and John head the list as the three most prominent disciples and appear at significant junctures in the story. Simon was a popular name and nearly all the Simons mentioned in the New Testament are given some distinguishing name: for example, Simon the Cananaean (3:18; NIV, the Zealot), Simon the Leper (14:3), Simon of Cyrene (15:21), Simon the Pharisee (Luke 7:40), Simon Iscariot (John 6:71), Simon the sorcerer (Acts 8:9), Simon the tanner (Acts 9:43), and Jesus’ brother Simon (Mark 6:3). In the biblical tradition, however, God or a divine agent gives new names to persons who will have a significant role in the story of God’s people.81 When someone in the Bible is given a different name, it represents a promise to that person (see Gen. 17:15; 32:28).
Jesus calls Simon petros. The word petros in Greek usually means a free standing “stone” that can be picked up. The word petra usually means rock, cliff, or bedrock (see Matt. 7:24). Both terms could reverse their meanings, and no clear-cut distinction can be made between the two.82 A rock could serve as a foundation or security, but it could also become a rock of stumbling and an obstacle to agriculture (Mark 4:16).
Boanerges, which means Sons of Thunder (3:17). James and John, previously introduced as the sons of Zebedee, are now presented as “Sons of Thunder.” The word Boanerges means nothing in Greek and it is unclear what Aramaic phrase it might transliterate. It may imply excitability or anger (see Luke 9:54), but this is uncertain. God’s voice is referred to as thunderous (Ps. 29:3), and in Revelation 16:18, the final judgment is ushered in with peals of thunder.
Simon the Zealot (3:18). The translation follows Luke 6:15 (Acts 1:13), but the text reads literally Simon the Cananaean. We are not to think that he was a revolutionary. The term qannaîm appears in rabbinic sources to refer to those who were especially zealous for the law and its observance. This notion may be connected to his label (see Gal. 1:14).
Judas Iscariot (3:19). The name may mean “man of Kerioth.” Textual variants found in John 6:71; 12:4; 13:2; and 14:22 add apo Karyomtou (from Kariot), which represent an early explanation for the term’s meaning. Kerioth could be a town in Moab (Jer. 48:24; Amos 2:2) or a town in southern Judea (Josh. 15:25). If this reading is correct, Judas would have been in the minority as a Judean among Jesus’ Galilean disciples. Other less likely suggestions contend that the name refers to his membership in a group of assassins (“dagger man,” sicarius) or a clan (“man of Issachar”), his deceit (“the false one”), his betrayal (“the one handing over”), his origin (“man from the city”), or his ruddy complexion.
Mention of betrayal hints of the death that awaits Jesus. Judas does not worm his way into the inner circle but is chosen by Jesus from the beginning. Jesus’ culture cherished loyalty and trust and abhorred treachery that shreds the fabric of a close-knit community. Betrayal was regarded as inexcusable and unforgivable.
The Reaction of Family and Teachers of the Law (3:20–35)
Two groups try to quash Jesus’ ministry for different reasons. His family seeks to protect him from danger and to protect the family honor, thinking that he is out of his mind. Teachers of the law from Jerusalem try to dishonor him with the people, claiming he works by Beelzebub.
He is possessed by Beelzebub! (3:22). The text reads literally, “He has Beelzebub,” which parallels the charge that he has an unclean spirit (3:30). The origin of the term Beelzebub is vague, but it clearly is connected to “the prince of demons.” The name may be a perversion of the name of a Philistine deity lampooned as “the lord of the flies.” Beelzebul (which some MSS. read here) is identified as the prince of the demons in the Testament of Solomon 2:9–4:2. According to a rabbinic tradition, Jesus was condemned to death for practicing sorcery and misleading the people:
It has been taught: On the eve of Passover they hanged Yeshu. And an announcer went out, in front of him, for fourteen days [saying]: “He is going to be stoned because he practiced sorcery.”83
This tradition independently confirms that Jesus was well known for doing miracles even though it attributes the source of his wonders to an evil power.
How can Satan drive out Satan? (3:23). Jesus’ opponents concede that he is a successful exorcist, but they deliberately attempt to undermine him by labeling him as evil. Describing the enemy as subhuman or evil in some way makes it easier to justify doing away with him. They assume that someone who flouts his hallowed traditions can only be an undercover agent for Satan or for one who has made a compact with Satan.
Jesus exposes how absurd their accusation is. If they are correct, it must mean that civil war erupted in the ranks of Satan. Would Satan try to do himself in? Would he grant satanic power to someone to decimate his own minions? Satan extends his kingdom by sowing chaos and enslaving humans, not by setting them free. If it is unlikely that these exorcisms are worked by Satan’s power, then how is it happening? Jesus answers only indirectly with an allegory about a stronger one who binds the previously reigning strong man and pillages his house. In Jesus’ allegory, the strong one is Satan. His house is his domain, the present world he seeks to hold secure. His vessels are those hapless victims whom he has taken captive. The stronger one is Jesus, who has come from God (see 1:7; also Isa. 49:24–25), invaded Satan’s stronghold, and bound him. Anyone with common sense would recognize that exorcisms bring healing, not harm. These opponents obdurately refuse to recognize that Jesus’ ministry has to do with the collapse of Satan’s kingdom, not its upsurge. Ironically, these experts from Jerusalem who seek to sabotage Jesus’ ministry and blacken his reputation are the ones siding with the forces of Satan.
Whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven (3:28). God is at work in Jesus. The sin referred to is willfully and spitefully denying the activity of God’s Spirit in the ministry of Jesus and labeling it an unclean spirit. Jesus uses hyperbole to make his point and warn his listeners of its severity. In the Old Testament, defiant, high-handed sin is labeled unpardonable.84 McNeile comments: “If the Lord spoke as a Jew to Jews and used the type of expression current in His day, and derived from the Old Testament, He meant, and would be understood to mean, no more than that blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, by whose power He worked, was a terrible sin—more terrible than blasphemy against man.”85
Who are my mother and my brothers? (3:33). In Jesus’ world, people did not think of themselves as individuals but as members of a primary group, usually the family. Jesus’ behavior brought unwanted attention to the family and dishonor since the accusations against him also reflect directly on them.