AS JESUS WALKED beside the Sea of Galilee, he saw Simon and his brother Andrew casting a net into the lake, for they were fishermen. 17“Come, follow me,” Jesus said, “and I will make you fishers of men.” 18At once they left their nets and followed him.
19When he had gone a little farther, he saw James son of Zebedee and his brother John in a boat, preparing their nets. 20Without delay he called them, and they left their father Zebedee in the boat with the hired men and followed him.
21They went to Capernaum, and when the Sabbath came, Jesus went into the synagogue and began to teach. 22The people were amazed at his teaching, because he taught them as one who had authority, not as the teachers of the law. 23Just then a man in their synagogue who was possessed by an evil spirit cried out, 24“What do you want with us, Jesus of Nazareth? Have you come to destroy us? I know who you are—the Holy One of God!”
25“Be quiet!” said Jesus sternly. “Come out of him!” 26The evil spirit shook the man violently and came out of him with a shriek.
27The people were all so amazed that they asked each other, “What is this? A new teaching—and with authority! He even gives orders to evil spirits and they obey him.” 28News about him spread quickly over the whole region of Galilee.
29As soon as they left the synagogue, they went with James and John to the home of Simon and Andrew. 30Simon’s mother-in-law was in bed with a fever, and they told Jesus about her. 31So he went to her, took her hand and helped her up. The fever left her and she began to wait on them.
32That evening after sunset the people brought to Jesus all the sick and demon-possessed. 33The whole town gathered at the door, 34and Jesus healed many who had various diseases. He also drove out many demons, but he would not let the demons speak because they knew who he was.
35Very early in the morning, while it was still dark, Jesus got up, left the house and went off to a solitary place, where he prayed. 36Simon and his companions went to look for him, 37and when they found him, they exclaimed: “Everyone is looking for you!”
38Jesus replied, “Let us go somewhere else—to the nearby villages—so I can preach there also. That is why I have come.” 39So he traveled throughout Galilee, preaching in their synagogues and driving out demons.
40A man with leprosy came to him and begged him on his knees, “If you are willing, you can make me clean.”
41Filled with compassion, Jesus reached out his hand and touched the man. “I am willing,” he said. “Be clean!” 42Immediately the leprosy left him and he was cured.
43Jesus sent him away at once with a strong warning: 44“See that you don’t tell this to anyone. But go, show yourself to the priest and offer the sacrifices that Moses commanded for your cleansing, as a testimony to them.” 45Instead he went out and began to talk freely, spreading the news. As a result, Jesus could no longer enter a town openly but stayed outside in lonely places. Yet the people still came to him from everywhere.
Original Meaning
THIS SECTION CONSISTS of five scenes. With the authority of God, Jesus calls four fishermen (1:16–20). He then teaches with authority in the synagogue and works miracles as the Holy One of God, who has come to destroy the demonic reign of terror (1:21–28). Next, he heals Simon’s mother-in-law and many others who flock to him for healing that evening (1:29–34). The cures cause a sensation, and the next morning he retreats for prayer. When the disciples track him down, he informs them of the need to move out from Capernaum into all Galilee to proclaim the good news of God’s reign (1:35–39). The next scene shows him healing a leper whose refusal to keep silent results in Jesus’ fame stretching far and wide.
After the call of the first disciples, the next scenes form a unit bracketed by the exorcism of an unclean spirit in the synagogue while he is teaching (1:21–28) and the healing of a paralyzed man in the house while he is preaching (2:1–12).1 Both occur in Capernaum (1:21; 2:2). In both passages, a group of persons questions what Jesus says or does among themselves (1:27; 2:6), and the issue of authority comes to the fore. The scribes figure in both scenes. The crowd applauds Jesus as one who teaches with authority and not as the scribes (1:22); he responds to the scribes’ questioning by announcing (2:10) that the Son of Man has authority to forgive sins. Both passages conclude with the crowd’s responding with amazement (1:22, 27; 2:12), which underscores the point of the newness of his authoritative teaching, for “he even gives orders to evil spirits and they obey him” (1:27). The crowd’s amazement in 2:12 leads to glorifying God because they have never seen anything like this. This section does not simply report highlights in Jesus’ initial ministry but reveals the new, Spirit-empowered reality that has burst forth from heaven.
Jesus’ Call to Discipleship (1:16–20)
JESUS ABRUPTLY APPEARS by the Sea of Galilee and without warning calls unsuspecting fishermen to be disciples. Jesus is not going to be a lone prophet wandering in the desert but a leader, whose task as Messiah is to create a community of followers. Since Peter and Andrew cast nets from the shoreline, they are possibly too poor to own a boat while the Zebedees are more upscale, with a boat that can take them anywhere on the lake and hired hands to help with the labor.2 Whatever their circumstances, these men show their repentance, their desire “to turn,” by dropping everything to heed Jesus’ call. Their repentance is more than just a matter of an internal transformation; they turn into something that they are not now, from fishermen to fishers of men.
Jesus does not call them to be shepherds, gathering in the lost sheep of the house of Israel, or to be laborers, bringing in the sheaves (Matt 9:36–38), but to be fishers. Old Testament prophets used this metaphor for gathering people for judgment (Jer. 16:14–16; Ezek. 29:4; 47:10; Amos 4:2; Hab. 1:14–17), and one should not assume that Jesus uses fishing as a benign reference to mission. When the fisherman hooks a fish, it has fatal consequences for the fish; life cannot go on as before. This image fits the transforming power of God’s rule that brings judgment and death to the old, yet promises a new creation (see Rom. 6:1–11). The disciples are called to be agents who will bring a compelling message to others that will change their lives beyond recognition. Jesus’ call has the same effect on them.
What is striking is that Jesus calls them to “follow me.” Prophets did not call people to follow themselves but to follow God (compare 1 Kings 19:19–21). The sages of Jesus’ day never called people to follow them, only to learn Torah from them. Jesus’ call of the disciples is therefore dramatically authoritative and matches the biblical pattern of God’s calling of humans: a command with a promise, which is followed by obedience (see Gen. 12:1–4).3 The call so overpowers these disciples that their lives will never be the same again.
Teaching with Authority (1:21–28)
ONE WHO CALLS with such astounding spiritual power also teaches with power. The next scene, depicting Jesus teaching in a synagogue, concludes with a stunned crowd extolling him as one who teaches with authority and with the news of his feats rocketing through the Galilean countryside. Mark emphasizes the power of Jesus’ teaching, not its content. Jesus rarely gives lengthy, sagelike discourses in Mark’s Gospel but instead offers pithy statements and dramatic action. In this scene Jesus’ teaching consists of “an overpowering word of exorcism.”4
The readers already know that Jesus’ authority derives from the Spirit of God, who came on him at the baptism, but even the crowds detect that one is in their midst who speaks for God and not simply about God, as the scribes do. Judaism had become a book religion, and the scribe had authority because of his erudition in sacred Scripture and tradition. He did not claim direct revelation from God but was an interpreter and had influence only as a learned man. Mark does not tell us precisely what feature of Jesus’ teaching exhibits authority in contrast to that of the scribes. Nevertheless, the narrative reveals that Jesus couples his teaching with mighty deeds—certainly one key difference. The scribes simply make theological pronouncements (2:6–7; 9:11; 12:35); Jesus comes with the authority of God to dismantle the tyranny of Satan. He confronts demons with destruction and Judaism with a new teaching.5 Consequently, both demons and the religious authorities will be threatened by him.
An outburst from a man with an unclean spirit interrupts Jesus’ teaching. Most would take steps to remove the troublemaker from a place of worship, but Jesus moves to deliver the troubled man. Those who suffer from unclean spirits/demons in Mark are victims who are entirely helpless. Unlike the sick in body, they are too helpless to ask for aid. The demon controlling the man (“they knew who [Jesus] was,” 1:34) sees Jesus as a threat and speaks. Only demons and angels fathom the mysteries of the unseen world at this point in the narrative. They recognize that Jesus is not just another exorcist, but the one God has anointed to break the rule of Satan.
The unclean spirit’s noisy recognition of Jesus may be viewed as a panicked defensive stratagem or as a reverent acknowledgment of his power. Knowledge is power, and the unclean spirit may be attempting to fend off its impending defeat with the classic exorcist’s trick of pronouncing the name of the opponent.6 He shouts out both an earthly name, Jesus of Nazareth, and a divine name, the Holy One of God, and hints that he has plenty of reserves in his camp, “Have you come to destroy us?” Gundry argues that the Hellenistic audience who hears the unclean spirit will think that it has gained the upper hand by identifying Jesus, but Jesus moves aggressively to silence it.7 On the other hand, the unclean spirit may be conceding submissively that Jesus is its opposite. He is holy, pure, and close to God, and it has met its match.8
Whichever is the case, Jesus tells the spirit to shut up. One might think that Jesus would appreciate the free advertising before the synagogue crowd. The unclean spirit is right, but Jesus does not want testimony that is demonic. He will not accept the hollow confessions of spirits that are not cleansed and transformed. The demons’ recognition of Jesus also can only mislead others. Jesus’ healing miracles do not simply remedy human physical maladies; they represent a war against demonic forces. Jesus disarms Satan’s power that has been pirating human souls and sets the victims free one by one. The demons therefore know him as the victorious Son of God, not as one who must undergo suffering and death.9 Consequently, Jesus orders their silence. Demons, however, rarely go quietly. This one exits “with a shriek,” a death roar not dissimilar to the one Jesus cries when he dies on the cross (15:37).
The witnesses are dazed. They do not wonder at what the unclean spirit proclaims about Jesus. Do they even hear it? Are they stupefied because it is simply too overwhelming for them to comprehend? They remain in the dark about the source of Jesus’ power or his mission, and no shrieking demon will reveal it to them. The full truth can only be revealed by the one who cries out in pain on the cross.
Healing Fever (1:29–31)
JESUS IMMEDIATELY EXITS the synagogue and enters the house of Simon and Andrew. These disciples just as immediately speak to him of Simon’s mother-in-law, who is in bed with a fever. In the time of Jesus, many considered fever an illness in and of itself and not simply a symptom of a disease.10 It also had more theological significance since, according to Leviticus 26:16 and Deuteronomy 28:22, it was a punishment sent by God to those who violated the covenant.11 Because of Deuteronomy 28:22, some considered fever to be a divine chastisement curable only by the intervention of God. In a later rabbinic tradition a rabbi pronounces:
Greater is the miracle wrought for the sick than for Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah. [For] that of Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah [concerned] a fire kindled by man, which all can extinguish; whilst that of a sick person is [in connection with] a heavenly fire, and who can extinguish that?12
The implied answer is that no one can extinguish it except God.
In this incident, Jesus goes to Peter’s mother-in-law and raises her up by seizing her hand, and the fever forsakes her. The translation “the fever left her” is too mild. A literal rendering, “the fever forsook her,” suggests, as do the other two references to fever in the New Testament, that the cause of the fever was supernatural (either induced by demons or as a divine chastisement). What is significant is Jesus’ miraculous ability to extinguish a heavenly fire—something that only God or God’s agent could do.
Peter’s mother-in-law proves that she has fully recovered by waiting on them (lit., “she was serving them”), a sign of her physical wholeness and her spiritual responsiveness to Jesus. Such menial service does not suggest her insignificance; on the contrary, the angels offered Jesus the same service in the desert (1:13). Serving is also a characteristic of discipleship, which Jesus tries to get across with some difficulty to his disciples (9:35; 10:41–45). Jesus’ female followers seem to grasp the need to give themselves in service to others more quickly than the male followers. Mark describes the women who saw his death from afar as those who “had followed him [in Galilee] and served him” (15:41; “cared for his needs,” NIV). This miracle reveals that God heals so that one may better serve.
Summary of Healing and Jesus’ Affirmation of His Ministry (1:32–39)
THE SABBATH ENDS in the evening, and the next scene pictures the whole city pounding at the doors. The townsfolk bring all the ill and demon-possessed to Jesus, and he heals “many.”13 “He would not let the demons speak because they knew who he was” refers back to 1:24, where the evil spirit named him, but the crowd noises the healing abroad so that his fame spreads throughout Galilee (1:28).
The next morning finds Jesus venturing out to “a solitary place” to pray. The noun is the same word (eremos) that appeared in 1:3–4, the voice calling “in the desert,” and in 1:12–13, the locale of the testing by Satan. “Desert” is an inappropriate word to describe any geographical area around Capernaum, but in Mark’s Gospel it connotes the quarter where the divine and the satanic vie for life. After Jesus’ victory in the desert, however, it has become a place where one can seek solitude and prayer14 and receive divine replenishment and where angels give succor. The desire for secluded prayer makes it plain that Jesus is not a sorcerer working by magic independent of God’s help. His authority, strength, and power come from God alone (see 9:29).
Jesus meets temptation again in this lonely place when Simon and those who are with him “hunt him down” (katadioko—not “look for him” as in NIV, or “follow him” as in the RSV). The verb suggests they have engaged in an urgent manhunt for Jesus. They interrupt his moments of private meditation to inform him that everyone in Capernaum is “looking for” him15 and to urge him to return to the scene of so many personal triumphs and to where he has such a tremendous following. When Jesus called these men to follow him, this was not what he had in mind. This episode is the first hint that the disciples (who are not called disciples here, but “Simon and his companions”) will create more trouble for Jesus than support. They are looking for him in Capernaum because of the miracles, not because of his words, and the disciples would like to accommodate this surge in popularity: more evening healings with a band concert, perhaps they could even develop a Capernaum healing theme park. Jesus is not interested in the fleeting adulation of crowds and refuses to go back to Capernaum because he is to go to preach to all Israel. He came out of the village to find seclusion to prepare himself through prayer to go out on his mission to preach the kingdom.
The good news cannot be static. Throughout the Gospel, Jesus keeps his bags packed, traveling hither and yon. He will not be distracted from his divine purpose, even by success, and will not remain as a localized guru or healer. Consequently, Mark tells us in verse 39 that it is no longer rumors about Jesus that are flying about Galilee (1:28) but Jesus himself.
Healing the Leper (1:39–42)
MARK RECORDS JESUS as barnstorming through Galilee, preaching in the synagogues and casting out demons (1:39), but he zeroes in on one miracle as particularly significant. A leper comes to him and begs him on his knees, “If you are willing, you can make me clean!” We should not automatically equate his leprosy with Hansen’s disease, since the term applied to several skin diseases16 and even to garments and houses (Lev. 14:33–57). Anyone who had suspected signs of leprosy was brought to a priest for examination, who alone could pronounce that he or she had the disease or had been cleansed from it. The priests of Israel differed from those of other religions, who purportedly knew curative secrets, in that they had no power and could offer no ritual to heal disease. Israel believed that healing was entirely in the hands of God. Priests, therefore, simply declared what was clean and unclean (13:59; 14:57). That is why Leviticus 13–14 goes into such detail describing the cases so that the priest could identify the presence or absence of particular physical signs, such as skin color change, hair color, infiltration, extension, or ulceration of the skin.
If the priest declared a particular skin problem to be leprosy, the sufferer was excluded from the community by divine decree (Lev. 13:45–52; Num. 5:2–4). This banishment was not rooted in any fear of spreading the disease but of spreading religious impurity. Leprosy was considered a primary source of uncleanness. Like a corpse, the leper could impart impurity to objects found within the same enclosure. As a result, he or she was viewed as a living corpse, and a cure was likened to raising the dead.17 The leper was confined by a strict set of rules that governed his contact and relations with other people.18 The leper in Mark 1:40, however, does not keep a safe distance but breaks through the religious barricade to confront Jesus. He is willing to chance that Jesus has both the power and the grace to heal him.
A curious textual variant in 1:41 reads that Jesus “is angry” instead of “filled with compassion” for the man. This may be the original reading since Jesus is also said to rage at him (embrimesamenos, cf. 14:5) and then immediately casts him out (exebalen, 1:43). If Jesus’ first response is anger, he is not annoyed at the man for breaching the ritual barriers that bar him from any contact with others.19 He may be expressing the anger of God toward the ravages of the disease (cf. John 11:33–38).20 His compassion for the man is expressed in his touch, probably the first time another “clean” human has touched this social derelict in a long time. He also commands him to “be clean.” At Jesus’ word, the leprosy leaves the man immediately. Jesus just as immediately sends him away.21
This healing is the only one that requires some kind of witness from others, for the leper cannot be restored to full functioning in Jewish society until a priest examines him and declares him clean (see Luke 17:14).22 Jesus’ words, “Be clean!” are not in the indicative mood, which would mean that he is simply declaring that the leper is clean. Rather, the verb is an imperative. Jesus causes the cleansing of the disease, just as the charge to demons to come out effected an exorcism. The leper, however, may not go merrily on his way, even though he has been healed. Every cure had to be consecrated by a religious ceremony, and the one for lepers was long and involved (see Lev. 14:1–32). Until it was completed, the leper remained in social limbo. For this reason, one should not take the phrase “as a testimony to them” in a negative sense. Lane comments that if the priests establish that the man is clean and “fail to recognize the person and power through whom the healing has come, they will stand condemned by the very evidence which they have supplied.”23 But how can the priests know who is behind this healing since Jesus commands the leper to be silent? One should interpret this command positively (Hos. 2:14, LXX), as a witness to the people that he has been cured and that they can associate with him after the procedures prescribed in the law have been followed.
The Commands to Keep Silent (1:43–45; cf. 1:25, 34)
MARK 1 RECORDS the first of Jesus’ frequent commands to demons and to those whom he healed to keep silent (vv. 25, 34, 44). He commands the leper to tell no one about the miracle and hastily speeds him on his way. These commands have nothing to do with any so-called messianic secret, as suggested by Wrede.24 The reasons for the command to silence lie elsewhere.
(1) The command makes clear that as a miracle worker Jesus wants to remain hidden; this is what sets him apart from other miracle workers in the ancient world.25 Jesus does not work miracles to amaze people as false prophets would do. Many in his age assumed that itinerant religious/philosophical teachers were in the business of building their own reputations and sought out fame for the financial bonanza that came with it. Jesus has no interest in taking on the role of a celebrity healer.
(2) Jesus does not trust a faith based on spectacles, and he knows that the clamor of the moment will not last. He also knows that God’s power is not revealed solely through miracles. It becomes clearest in the crucifixion, but those who want only miracles can see nothing.
(3) Jesus prefers to keep the news of his miracles quiet so that it will give him more time to put off his inevitable destruction by the powers that be and to sow the word. Some cannot be trusted with the information because they will only use it to try to destroy him. Others will give him no peace, prying into his life, limiting his free movement, and giving him no time to instruct his disciples in private. Despite the pains he takes to try to squelch the fervor created by his healing powers, however, the news spreads like wild fire. The upshot is that the unwanted publicity that comes from the disobedience to his command to silence hinders important facets of his mission with his disciples. Whenever someone disobeys this command, the next scene begins by mentioning the crush of the crowds. The hubbub restricts Jesus’ free movement as he is harried by the increasing numbers of supplicants and autograph hounds (3:9). He is no longer able to enter a town openly, and people from miles around seek him out (1:45). The leper’s disobedience forces Jesus to avoid the cities and to retreat to deserted places, but even they are no longer deserted. Throngs who come from all over mob him (see also 6:32–33; 7:24).26 When he returns to Capernaum, the crowd is so thick that they are hanging from the rafters (2:2, 4). Ironically, Jesus’ attempts to cloak himself in secrecy only serve to magnify his reputation.
(4) As far as Mark is concerned, the command to secrecy makes it clear that any charges of insurrection made against Jesus are false. Jesus does not arrogate titles for himself, unlike the false christs who acclaim themselves (13:6); he repeatedly tries to escape and restrain the crowds that gather around him. Consequently, Rome has no reason to fear him as king of the Jews (15:2–5), intent on fomenting an uprising of the people.
(5) The failure to hush those who are healed reveals that the news of his power to heal is not something that can be kept hidden. One cannot keep silent, and the good news will spread to the end of the earth. Ultimately, however, God reveals secrets and mysteries and will unlock the secret in due time (4:21–23).
Bridging Contexts
THE POWER OF Jesus’ call. Jesus preaches to the crowds, but the call to follow comes to individuals. Mark does not tell us why Jesus singled out Simon and Andrew and James and John as disciples or why they decided to respond instantly. The accounts of the calling of the first disciples in John and Luke make more sense to the modern reader, who typically wants some rational explanation for their behavior. In the Fourth Gospel, John the Baptist tips off the first disciples (John 1:35–37). In Luke, Jesus gives them a remarkable preview miracle (Luke 5:1–11). Nothing in Mark’s narrative, however, has prepared the reader to expect these fishermen to drop their nets and leave everything to follow Jesus. How do they even know who he is?
Modern readers may be tempted to supply some psychological basis for their rapid response. Perhaps they were having bad times in the fishing business and were ready to make a career change. They had been longing for some time for the Messiah to come to relieve foreign oppression and to bring the new Jerusalem or whatever restoration they might have imagined. They had an itch for some kind of action and jumped at the chance to take the plunge and follow him. They had made a decision during one of his sermons to rededicate their lives. But Mark provides no such explanations, and one is not allowed such psychological speculation when preaching from Mark’s text. These men have witnessed nothing of Jesus’ powers and have no idea what his battle plans might be. They do not take a few days to mull over their decision, to ask their families’ permission, or to seek counsel from a panel of religious experts. To us it may seem an incredibly hasty decision to take off after someone who happens to pass by and abruptly beckons people to follow him. We know that something more must have happened—and we learn such details from Luke and John. They must have heard and believed his preaching that the kingdom of God had come. But Mark’s text presents us with a sudden call and a response that is just as sudden.
The only explanation for the sudden response of disciples is that Mark wants to underscore the force of Jesus’ call. It alone propels them to follow him.27 He chooses whom he wills, and his call comes like “a sharp military command” that produces obedience. His call, however, is much more than a dramatic summons. Lohmeyer concludes, “He commands as God commands.… He makes of the fisherman something new, that which he wills.”28 Psalm 33:9 exalts the mighty creative word of God, “For he spoke, and it came to be; he commanded, and it stood firm,” and provides the backdrop for understanding the response of these disciples. Like God, Jesus speaks, and it happens.
Jesus speaks, “Come, follow me!” and it creates obedience that compels people to follow and join his band. They are willing for their identity and support to come from being his disciples, not simply from being a member of this or that family, this or that profession, or this or that village. Jesus speaks, “Be quiet!… Come out of him!” and unclean spirits are routed (1:25). Jesus speaks, “Quiet! Be still!” and the wind stops, and there is a great calm (4:39). Jesus speaks, “‘Talitha koum!’ (which means ‘Little girl, I say to you, get up!’)” and the dead are raised (5:41). Jesus speaks, “‘Ephphatha!’ (which means, ‘Be opened!’)” and ears are opened (7:34). Jesus speaks, “May no one ever eat fruit from you again,” and a fig tree is withered to its roots (11:14, 20). Jesus cries a great cry, and the temple veil splits from top to bottom (15:38–39).
The power of the one who sees persons long before they see him and calls as God calls is the only explanation why these disciples respond immediately as they do, and it may escape the notice of modern readers. This unit has a Christological dimension, and this first incident immediately raises the question: Who is this who can create such immediate obedience? The miracles that Mark records in this unit prompt a similar question: Who is this who can do these things? When interpreted from a biblical perspective, they reveal that Jesus, the bringer of the kingdom, has unique power as God’s Son and can overmaster demons, offer forgiveness of sins, and effect healing of disease. The powerful call of this one can still transform lives today.
Casting out unclean spirits: Jesus the exorcist. The New Testament takes the existence of demons for granted but offers no explanation of their origin or descriptions of their appearance. Many are not comfortable with the idea of demons, although we still use phrases like, “What’s gotten into him?” or “What’s come over you?” The world of demons is exotic and bizarre to most moderns. They either reduce them to cartoonlike gremlins or deny their existence completely. Modern scientific attitudes heavily influence us; and since demons do not show up on scientific radar screens, many dismiss such cases as some primitive misdiagnosis that is now made obsolete by modern medical advances. It would make many happier if Mark had given some medical name to the maladies of these sufferers. If he told us, for example, that the man in the synagogue suffered from Tourette’s Syndrome, some psychosis, or had a bad reaction to drugs, it would not give us pause because these terms are more a part of our worldview. At the opposite pole, however, are those who brand everything that they do not comprehend as demonic. Both views trivialize the problem of an evil that wages mortal combat with God.
To bridge the contexts, one must first recognize that Mark is not giving a medical diagnosis when he identifies a person as demonized or possessed by an unclean spirit. In 1:32, Mark makes a distinction between those who are sick and those who have demons.29 Those afflicted with demons are never said to be “healed”; instead, the demons go out from them. “Unclean spirit,” Mark’s favorite expression, is a religious term and a spiritual diagnosis. What is unclean in the Old Testament has “evaded the control of the divine holiness”30 and banishes humans from God’s presence. By attributing the malady to an unclean spirit (or demon), Mark asserts that one should attribute it to an enemy that seeks to estrange one from God. Some spiritual force has taken control in a human being and attempts to thwart God’s purposes by twisting and maiming human life and alienating that person from God and from others.
Second, Best notes that the possession is treated as evil but not as sinful. The victim is not offered forgiveness.31 The unclean spirits require expulsion, and that can only come from divine intervention. What once could invade human personalities and evade God’s control can do so no longer. It must submit to the greater power of Jesus.
This raises a third point. Just as the unclean spirit controls the man in the synagogue, the Holy Spirit has taken control of Jesus (1:10, 12). The one who preaches the gospel of God is the Holy One of God, and when the Holy and the unclean meet, it is no contest. The one John predicted would unleash the Spirit of God immediately disarms the unclean spirit. The ousting of the unclean spirits affirms that we are not in the battle with evil alone nor do we need to be helpless victims. Mark’s account of an ordinary exorcism shows that something extraordinary is happening: Satan is being restrained until his final defeat. The advent of the kingdom of God is the beginning of the end for the thralldom of Satan, and one need not fear the molesting unclean spirits if God is acting on one’s behalf. We should be careful to stress this point. The New Testament contains a dramatic drop in the fear of demons when compared with other literature from this era. It results from the faith that God has won a decisive victory over Satan in the cross and that the more powerful one who baptizes with the Holy Spirit protects his followers.
Twelftree argues that the contemporary church “would do well to follow the example of the early Church—not to ignore the demonic, but to focus attention on Jesus the healer who defeats the demonic.” He cites the warning of Karl Barth:
the theologian … must not linger or become too deeply engrossed [in the demonic, as] … there is the imminent danger that in so doing we ourselves might become just a little or more than a little demonic.32
In Mark, Jesus’ casting out of demons is an undeniable sign that the kingdom of God has come and Satan’s realm is being routed. They are not routine miracles; they represent the inevitable submission of this world and its powers to the reign of God. Theissen points out that other miracle workers existed in the ancient world and in Israel before Jesus. But Jesus alone combined “the apocalyptic expectation of universal salvation in the future and the episodic realisation of salvation in the present through miracles.” Theissen asserts, “Nowhere do we find miracles performed by an earthly charismatic which purport to be the end of the old world and the beginning of a new one.”33 Mark shows that Jesus does not simply announce the coming reign of God and the end of the reign of Satan; he actualizes it in the lives of individuals with his miracles.
One last point should be noted. Mark makes clear that Jesus’ first mighty act is closely tied to his teaching. That means that while we do not have the same access to the one who displayed such great power as did those who met him in the towns and synagogues of Galilee, we still have access to that power in Jesus’ teaching. It did not disappear when he died. Jesus’ teaching continues to produce mighty acts.34
Healing disease: Jesus as the Great Physician. The Old Testament and the later rabbinic literature regard God as the author, controller, and healer of disease.35 Most attributed the onset of a disease to divine retribution for some grave sin or to the onslaught of some demonic power. This perspective of disease is also found in the New Testament. Paul tells the Corinthians that some of them are sick and dying because of their sinful abuse of the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor. 11:30; see Acts 5:1–11; 12:20–23; 2 Cor. 12:7). James counsels, “Therefore confess your sins to each other and pray for each other so that you may be healed” (James 5:16), because he believed that illness and sin were related. In the time of Jesus, leprosy was viewed as the classic punishment for sin.36 It was the telltale sign that the sufferer was a culprit who had committed sins unknown to his neighbors. The suffering indicated that while sin might be hidden from others, it could not be hidden from God, and it served as forewarning of the ultimate fate of the sinner.
Almost everyone would have classified the leper as a sinner, who must appeal for mercy to be healed. To understand the full significance of this miracle in a first-century context, one needs to be aware of the widespread belief in Judaism that only God could heal leprosy. One might compare the desperate response of the king of Israel to the request that he heal the Syrian general Naaman of his leprosy, “Am I God? Can I kill and bring back to life? Why does this fellow send someone to me to be cured of his leprosy?” (2 Kings 5:7).
The leper in Mark 1 is bold because everyone believed that he was in that condition as a result of some sin. He is even more bold in thinking that Jesus had the power to cleanse him of the disease. The leper’s petition, “If you are willing” (not “If you ask”!), assumes that Jesus is like God, who can do as he wills (Wisd. Sol. 12:18). Jesus could have responded to this request in many ways. He could have said as the king of Israel did, “Am I God, to forgive your sin and to cure you of your leprosy?” Or, he could have interceded on his behalf as Moses cried to the Lord for Miriam to be healed of her leprosy (Num. 12:13). Or, he could have told him to go wash seven times in the Jordan, with the hope that God would forgive his sin and heal his leprosy. Instead, Jesus stretches out his hand like God,37 touches him, announces, “I am willing,” and commands, “Be clean!” Modern readers might miss the Christological impact of this healing, which leads into the next incident (2:1–12), set in a crowded house in Capernaum, which emphasizes Jesus’ authority to forgive sin. Jesus can heal the man of his leprosy, understood as a smiting by God because of sin, by virtue of his authorization to forgive sins.
Jesus’ concern to avoid publicity should give us pause. Unlike modern politicians and pop stars, whose survival depends on their remaining in the public eye, Jesus does not hustle to increase his name recognition. In our day, the miracles might make the headlines for a few weeks, but then interest would probably flag as people hanker after something new and more sensational. Jesus’ mission is not to provide sound bites and fresh sensations for the eleven o’clock news each night. He is not after personal glory that will deflect credit from God (see 2:12; 5:19; 10:18). He wants to avoid the adoration of a crowd that is without understanding and personal commitment. The miracles are of “news value,” and it is good news to those who are on the receiving end. But it is not the sum total of the good news, which also involves suffering and death.38 At this stage, the crowds can only marvel. They are like those who witnessed the explosion of the first atomic bomb. The great explosion of power fills them with awe, but they do not fully realize that the explosion will change everything for the world—in this case, for good. Its fallout brings life, not death.
Contemporary Significance
DISCIPLESHIP. THE KINGDOM of God is something that only God creates; it is not something built by valiant human effort. But that fact does not mean that one needs only to sit by passively and to wait for God. God has already acted. The kingdom of God invading history in the ministry of Jesus requires submission in discipleship to him and demands all of one’s heart, soul, mind, and strength (12:33)—one’s whole being. The calling of the first disciples shows that one must not only repent and believe the gospel (1:15) but must also be ready to leave and follow.
Unlike John the Baptizer, Jesus does not wait for people to come to him at some chosen site. He takes the initiative by seeking out followers with the command, “You! Come, follow me!” He does not put up a sign-up sheet (like church softball) asking for volunteers (“Messiah: Interested in a few good men and women”) or post office hours when he will be available to discuss the kingdom of God with those who might be curious. The disciples also do not join him as a pupil might select a rabbi to learn the law39 and absorb his religious wisdom. Jesus selects his disciples, not vice versa (1:16–20; 2:14; 3:13–14, “those he wanted”). One can conclude from this that becoming a disciple of Jesus is more of a gift than an achievement.40 Jesus models what he calls them to do as fishers of men. They have been caught in the nets of God’s grace, and it will transform their lives.
A second noteworthy element in the calling of disciples is that those who are drafted apparently have no special preparation. Jesus does not choose the most socially prominent, the best trained, or even the most religiously devout. He does not find them in some hallowed religious setting, such as the synagogue, but he is just passing by (1:16; see also 2:13; 3:7; 4:1) and finds them in the midst of everyday life, going about their daily routines.41 His command, however, shatters that comfortable everyday world.
The call and the instant response of these fishermen reveal something of what discipleship to Jesus entails and should shatter our comfortable world of middle-class discipleship. Disciples are not those who simply fill pews at worship, fill out pledge cards, attend an occasional Bible study, and offer to help out in the work of the church now and then. They are not merely eavesdroppers and onlookers. When one is hooked by Jesus, one’s whole life and purpose in life are transformed.
(1) To be a disciple means accepting Jesus’ demands unconditionally. Jesus requires absolute obedience and sacrifice. Discipleship in Mark is not part-time volunteer work on one’s own terms and convenience. One must be prepared to leave everything to follow him. Simon and Andrew turn from their nets; James and John turn from their father and their boat (not just their nets). Theirs was a sacrifice that Peter apparently felt he needed to remind the Lord about now and then: “We have left everything to follow you!” (10:28). They had to leave the securities, even their livelihoods, no matter how meager or substantial they were, for something new and unpredictable. The call to discipleship comes as an unreasonable, scandalous demand. It seems too risky, and for those who respond, too reckless. These first disciples are not given time even to transfer whatever equity they have or to put it in trust. Few would make the radical commitment these first disciples made, and most would hope that Jesus might offer a less rigorous category of auxiliary discipleship, which would promise the same rewards while allowing one to continue the pursuit of money and success.
My maternal grandparents felt a call to India in the early 1900s. My grandfather did not qualify for support by the Methodist Mission Society but decided to go anyway as an independent faith missionary. They were recruited by a man who claimed that if they collected enough money, they could run a wonderful boarding school while learning the language. They gathered enough money from friends to pay their passage to India and to support them for a year; but when they arrived, they found that the boarding school did not exist and that the man had absconded with all the money. They were stuck in India with no money, no place to live, and no work. They begged a ride on a train to Calcutta, where some other missionaries took them in. For some reason, they did not despair and started an independent work in Bihar that became so successful the Methodist Mission Board requested that they work under their auspices. And they did—for thirty-six years! They made enormous sacrifices—three of their six children died from disease—but they reaped enormous spiritual rewards. Others might offer many explanations as to why they made such sacrifices, but they attributed it to the power of Jesus’ call to go and serve.
The problem with trying to balance friendship with the world and service to God is that one becomes religiously a split personality, looking both to God and to the world for standards and assurance. In the imagery of the Bible, one winds up with two hearts (two wills) and tries in vain to walk along two separate ways. When one tries to accommodate God and Mammon, one cannot be totally committed to God. Mammon crowds God out. The advantage of leaving all sources of human security is that the disciples are now totally dependent on Jesus. People take a big chance in putting their lives entirely in God’s hands. It is the kind of risk that the rich man refused to take, and it disqualified him from discipleship and the eternal life he so coveted (10:17–22). Most humans spend their lives consumed with anxiety for their earthly destiny; but disciples look beyond this world to their eternal destiny, which, they are convinced, is best left in the hands of God.
What keeps us from this full commitment is a fatal illusion that our real needs are physical, and it results in our self-centered concern for material security. But Jesus is not only able to deliver people from the bondage of unclean spirits and disease, he can deliver us from bondage to material concerns (such as the desire to preserve our standard of living at all costs). He gives us a vision that there is more to life than catching a string of fish. The center of life is to revolve around God. The authority of his call dispels our hesitancy and awakens total confidence in God. Disciples are the ones who throw caution to the winds. Like the field hand who finds a treasure and a pearl merchant who discovers a valuable pearl, the disciples are confronted with a chance of a lifetime. They are fortunate to have the chance, but it requires decisiveness to capitalize on it. One cannot possess the treasure or the pearl without making a commitment. The price is high: One must sell everything to acquire it. One does not get something for nothing; one gets something for everything. What formerly had supreme value, however, now pales beside the supreme worth of the kingdom.
(2) Jesus is going somewhere and requires his disciples to come along with him (1:18; 2:14; 10:21). He does not call them to attend endless seminars on discipleship training with lively discussions on the theological fine points of the law. Discipleship in Mark is not about mastering theoretical ideas; it is about mission, a common mission with Jesus (6:7, 30). The disciples in Mark learn on the way with Jesus what discipleship entails. It is on the way that they encounter the power of his miracles and that they learn about suffering (8:27; 9:33–34; 10:32). They are going to be fishers of people, who will be sent out on mission (6:7–13). Just as they cannot drop a sign into the lake announcing “Fish wanted! Please enter net!” and expect much success, so it is with humans. They may not retreat to the safety of the harbor but must go on a voyage into the deep and turbulent waters and cast their nets widely.
These observations do not mean that study, prayer, and training are not important. The disciples are rebuked more than once for failing to understand, as are Jesus’ opponents for failing to know Scripture (12:24). The problem for Christians today is twofold. Some are tempted to lock themselves in the study and never apply their theological and biblical knowledge to life. A study at Princeton Seminary gathered students together and read the parable of the Good Samaritan to them. They were then instructed to go to a building across the quadrangle one at a time to give a brief talk on the parable. They were urged to be punctual and not to keep the researchers waiting. Along the way they planted a shabbily dressed man slumped along the side of the path. Only 40 percent of the students responded to the man.42
On the other hand, some Christians rush into action without any theological or biblical reflection. In 1:35–37, the disciples appear more interested in action than prayer. Here Jesus is shown praying before going into action. Busy ministers probably can easily identify with Jesus here. The demands of ministry and church members frequently interrupt study and prayer, and they are tempted to spring into action before preparing their hearts and minds before God. The worst thing that can happen is for them to be temporarily successful because they can delude themselves into thinking that prayer and study are dispensable extras in ministry. The same can be said for the busy parent desperately trying to keep up with hectic family schedules.
(3) One final point about what discipleship means: It will become clear later in the story that disciples are not called to a program of self-development but to service. Jesus will require them to deny themselves, to endure suffering, to take up a cross.
Jesus’ authority and ours. In the first scene where Jesus displays his miraculous power, the bystanders are dazed by his authoritative teaching. Jesus’ authority is a key theme for Mark. Not only does he have authority as a teacher (1:21–22); he also has authority over the Sabbath (2:27–28), over forgiveness of sins (2:5–12), over unclean spirits (3:19–27), over nature (4:35–41; 6:45–52), over the law (7:1–13, 14–20), over the temple (11:12–33; 12:1–12), and over the mystery of the kingdom of God, which he gives to others (4:10–11). The next scenes—the healing of Peter’s mother-in-law, the leper, and the paralyzed man—make it clear that Jesus is not an inaccessible authority figure but a compassionate healer.
Many today in Christian leadership crave for the same thing to be said of them as was said about Jesus—he or she speaks with authority. They aspire to winning a pliant crowd of devoted followers who bow to their every word. Recent history reminds us how religious leaders can stake a claim to authority and hoodwink the credulous, distraught, and disenfranchised. It is easy for all but a handful to recognize the crackpots who tragically brainwash their followers with their authoritarian ranting and raving, arm them to the teeth, and engage in sexual promiscuity. But what about those who would speak authoritatively within more traditional churches and denominations? They announce: “This is my unanimous decision. I know this is the will of God. Is there any discussion?”
To evaluate religious leaders today, we must judge them by the standard of Jesus. Do they share his aversion to publicity and acclaim? Do they want to receive credit for all that happens? Are they primarily interested in a power grab, in building empires for themselves, and in serving their own needs? Do they truly speak in the name of the Lord from sincere motives? Are they accessible to those in need, not just the wealthy and influential but those from the margins of society?
Healing and our ministry. Humans are psychosomatic beings, and healing involves mind, body, emotions, and spirit. These first miracles reveal that Jesus embodies God’s mercy and purpose to take away the diseases, infirmities, and sins of the people. The leper pleads: “If you are willing, you can make me clean” (1:40). Reaching out to touch one who was branded untouchable by religion and society dispels any doubts about Jesus’ willingness. The leper does not have to convince him that he is even worth the effort. This man with his disease does not horrify Jesus. His “power to cleanse is thus demonstrably greater than the power of the leprosy to contaminate.”43
But touching, hands-on contact, makes us vulnerable. In Jesus’ day, the concern was impurity; in our day, the concern is contagion. Few would make the sacrifice of Father Damien, who, in 1870, went to serve the lepers banished to the island of Molokai. He lived with the corrupted bodies, the stench, the rats and flies, and no running water to fulfill what he said was his priestly duty—to let them know that God has not forsaken them. He himself died a leper, having contracted the disease of those he served.
The miracles in this section also reveal that Jesus is not someone who is aloof, inaccessible, or detached. Our culture does not touch, and many people live in isolation from others. We seal ourselves off from one another with our privacy fences and retreat to the inner sanctum of the family room. The church is sometimes in danger of doing the same by retreating to its members-only, fully equipped Family Life Center, which becomes a safe cocoon from contact with the harsh realities of a disease-ridden, sin-sick world. We want others quarantined from us so that they will not infect us. But those who bear the name of Christ need to minister in the name of their Lord to those who are the untouchables in our society.
The church needs to minister in a nonjudgmental way. The attitude toward leprosy in biblical times is no different from our attitude toward certain diseases today. Some people are afflicted from illnesses that we assume they have contracted because of some sin. Many pronounce them guilty for supposedly having committed worse sins than their own and treat their disease as a curse that sets them adrift from the community and from God’s grace. What does it accomplish to declare piously that they are receiving in their bodies the just penalty of their sin (Rom. 1:27) and to stigmatize and ostracize those who already despair? It can only drive people further into despair.
Obviously, our behavior has consequences for our health. We cannot defy the laws of science and health or the laws of God without repercussions. Abuse of alcohol can lead to cirrhosis of the liver; smoking can lead to emphysema. The same people who would hardly assess the suffering from these diseases as divinely appointed judgment for sin, however, will declare that those infected with the AIDS virus because of sexual promiscuity are suffering God’s punishment. There is more than one account of those suffering from AIDS, however they contacted the disease, who are turned away from church after church.44 We do not want the one with the unclean spirit disturbing our worship, or the leper with his hidden sin and thus a public disease defiling our company. Even when we do minister to the suffering, a self-righteous attitude can erode our compassion. A doctor who treated AIDS patients confessed that when he began his treatment of a patient, he had the attitude that this disease was different from other diseases; like the Pharisee in Jesus’ parable (Luke 18:9–14), he thanked God he was not like him. He writes:
I did not consider that this stigmatized man had repented and had been forgiven while I was yet in my sins. In my heart, I approved of his suffering and inevitable death.45
If Jesus is the model for the church’s ministry, we see that he never condemns the afflicted. He never tells people that they are sinners or that they are possessed by unclean spirits. We see, instead, one who is confident in the power of God, who touches the unclean and restores the banished to his community and the sick to a meaningful role of service. The touch is a sign of acceptance. He does not treat people as outcasts or as some kind of a pollutant. He is able to heal all fever, especially the fevers of the soul: the burnings within from anger, resentment, envy, and feverish lives.
What about healing today? Many people today do not believe that miraculous healing is possible. Morton T. Kelsey has outlined the historical roots of the church’s present negative attitude toward healing.46 First, there are those who believe that only scientific medical means can affect significant healing. Medicine is for the body, it is assumed; religion is for the soul. To try to mix the two only breeds superstition and fraud.
An attitude prevails among others that God controls all sickness and sends it as a chastisement for sin. Sick persons are therefore meant to learn from their wretchedness. The minister has no healing role and can only exhort confession or help the individual to grow in faith through the suffering.
A third view cherishes the historical value of the New Testament but believes that such things as healing miracles do not exist today. The two most influential Reformers, Luther and Calvin, adopted a cessationist approach to miracles, and their influence continues. Deere claims that they were prompted to make cessationist arguments because their Catholic enemies pointed to miracles as proof that God approved of their doctrine and practices, whereas the Reformers could appeal to none. They did not judge the dearth of miracles in their experience to be attributable to any theological error or spiritual deficiency; consequently, they concluded that the gift of healing evident in the New Testament served only a temporary purpose.47 To many today, God granted to the early church a special ability to demonstrate his power to scoffers, to help the church get started, and to authenticate the apostles. Clearly a large portion of the Gospels and Acts describe a variety of miracles performed by Jesus and his apostles. Today, miracles are not only less prominent, they have virtually disappeared in many churches. Few if any seminary curricula treat this subject. The cessationist’s explanation for this miracle shortage is that God has withdrawn this gift.48
A fourth view rejects entirely the biblical worldview, which assumes that supernatural beings can intervene in the natural world order as something totally foreign to a modern, educated people now “come of age.” It regards healing miracles to be impossible because they violate the laws of nature, and therefore it dismisses the New Testament miracle accounts as legends aimed at magnifying Jesus. Kelsey summarizes the influence of the four views:
Certainly most Christian thinking, both Catholic and Protestant, has been swept clean of any idea of Christian healing. On the one hand the successes of medicine have made it unnecessary, and on the other, modern theology has made any belief in it untenable. First of all, the church had accepted the necessity of dealing with the natural world on its own natural, material terms. Then there has been an acceptance of sickness as a part of the world, put there by God. Dispensationalism [sic] has found a way to divide this world so that healing, once seen as one of the greatest divine gifts, no longer seems needed or even wholesome. Finally, most modern theology has made it clear in ample reasoning why it did not happen at all.49
The problem with the cessationist’s approach is that it can be interpreted negatively as a kind of bait-and-switch tactic on God’s part. The church got started through the power of miracles, but it was withdrawn later. If one does believe that God wills our physical and spiritual wholeness and that God’s power remains available to us and can intervene directly in our lives, then one must allow for Christian healing today. Christians and Christian communities can be instruments of that power and love. It does not necessarily follow that because many persons today have not witnessed New Testament quality miracles, they therefore are no longer possible. We do not understand the vast world of microorganisms, let alone how God works in our world. It is best, therefore, not to place limits on God regarding healing.
At the same time, we are required to discern the spirits and must guard against shamanism and religious quackery. We should suspect automatically any promise of an instant cure by a self-appointed miracle worker who couples it with an appeal for money.50 We should distrust anyone who performs miracles in a showlike atmosphere, exalts his or her own power to heal anyone, anywhere, and at anytime, or makes outrageous claims. We should reject all those who blame the victim’s lack of faith for any failure to heal. We should be leery of those who would have us ignore medical treatment entirely or longstanding remedies (see 1 Tim. 5:23). We should also exercise caution, since a community may become divided over the exercise of the gift of healing. Most do not possess this gift, and therefore we should take intercessory prayer more seriously than we perhaps do.