Bible Mark 3. Interpretation of the New Testament by Theophylact Bulgarian. Interpretation of the books of the New Testament. Gospel of Mark

1–6. Healing the dry-armed on Saturday. - 7-12. General depiction of the activities of Jesus Christ. - 13-19. Election of 12 students. - 20-30. Jesus Christ's response to the accusation that He casts out demons by the power of Satan. – 31–35. True relatives of Jesus Christ.

Mark 3:1. And he came again to the synagogue; there was a man with a withered hand.

(See comments on Matt. 12:9-14 for the healing of the withered hand.)

Evangelist Mark notes that the sick man had a withered hand, not a dry one (Matt. 12:10). He, therefore, was not born with such a hand, and it shrunk, probably from some kind of wound.

Mark 3:2. And they watched him to see if he would be healed on the Sabbath to accuse him.

According to Mark, the Pharisees - of course, they are talking about here - watched with special attention (παρετήρουν) to see if Christ would heal (θεραπεύσει) him on the Sabbath. Of course, after such a healing, they intended to accuse Christ of violating the Sabbath law.

Mark 3:3. He says to the man who had the withered hand, stand in the middle.

"Stand in the middle" - more precisely: "Rise in the middle!". The Lord was in the midst of the people - He was surrounded mainly by the Pharisees (cf. verse 5: looking, or, more precisely, looking around those who were sitting around Him). The Lord thus proceeds to openly attack His enemies, demanding that they clearly express their thoughts about Him.

Mark 3:4. And he said to them: Shall we do good on the Sabbath, or do evil? save the soul, or destroy? But they were silent.

“Doing good” means doing generally good meritorious deeds (ἀγαθόν ποιῆσαι). What is the "good work" that Jesus meant here, He immediately explains. If you do not help the unfortunate, when possible, it means to offer him as a victim of certain death. It is obvious that the withered hand had a serious dangerous disease, the so-called muscle atrophy, which had to go progressively, and the Lord not only healed one of his hands, but also destroyed the disease itself at its root. The Pharisees could not answer anything to Christ’s question: they did not want to agree with Christ, and they did not find any reason to contradict the view expressed by Him on this issue, since the sixth commandment directly said: “Thou shalt not kill.”

Mark 3:5. And looking at them with anger, grieving for the hardness of their hearts, he said to the man: Stretch out your hand. He stretched out, and his hand became healthy, like the other.

Looking around his enemies and not seeing any attempt to answer the question directly, the Lord at the same time cast an angry look at them as hypocrites, grieving for their bitterness or stubbornness (see Ex. 4:21; Deut. 9:27) .

Mark 3:6. The Pharisees went out and immediately took counsel with the Herodians against Him, how to destroy Him.

(For the Herodians, see comments on Matt. 22:16.)

Mark 3:7. But Jesus with His disciples withdrew to the sea; and many people followed Him from Galilee, Judea,

The depiction of the activity of Christ at this time takes five verses from Mark, and one from Matthew (Matt. 4:25). The Lord moves away to the sea not out of fear of his enemies, the Pharisees and Herodians (the enemies of Christ, of course, did not dare to do anything against Him, since a huge crowd of people rushed after Him), but simply because He saw how useless it would be further continue the conversation with the Pharisees.

Mark 3:8. Jerusalem, Idumea and beyond the Jordan. And those who dwelt in the vicinity of Tire and Sidon, when they heard what He was doing, they came to Him in great numbers.

The Evangelist Mark lists seven regions or places from which people came to Christ. This number obviously has a symbolic meaning here. It means the entirety of the countries or regions of Palestine. Even distant Idumea and Phoenicia sent their representatives to Christ. But if it is said about the Galileans and the inhabitants of Judea that they "followed" Christ (verse 7), then about the Jerusalemites and the inhabitants of Palestine mentioned further on, the evangelist says only that they "came" and, perhaps, only looked at what would happen. do Christ.

Mark 3:9. And he told his disciples to have a boat ready for him because of the crowd, so that they would not crowd him.

Mark 3:10. For He healed many, so that those who had the plagues rushed to Him to touch Him.

Here, obviously, the four disciples already known (Mk. 1:16-20) are meant. The people crowded to Christ mainly, of course, in order to receive healing from Him - this can be said about those Galileans and Jews who "followed" Christ. Others simply wanted to see with their own eyes that Christ really heals the sick.

Mark 3:11. And the unclean spirits, when they saw Him, fell down before Him and cried out: You are the Son of God.

Mark 3:12. But He strictly forbade them not to make Him known.

"Unclean spirits", i.e. people who had unclean spirits. The Son of God is a more important expression (see Matt. 4:3) than the Holy One of God (Mark 1:24). But whether those people were aware of the true meaning of this name is not clear. The Lord did not reject this name, but only forbade the possessed to shout it out (see comments on Mark 1:25). How strange it was that Christ, the great Wonderworker, was persecuted by representatives of Judaism and only demons were magnified!

Mark 3:13. Then he ascended the mountain and called to Himself whom He Himself wanted; and they came to him.

(On the calling of the 12 apostles, cf. Matt. 10:2-4).

"On mountain". The seashore was, so to speak, a place of constant public meetings. On the other hand, in the mountains that are north of the Sea of ​​Tiberias, one could find a rather secluded place. The Lord goes there to get away from the crowd. The disciples are called to follow Him - namely, only those on whom the choice of Christ fell in this case, and not all. Evangelist Mark does not even call those invited by Christ "disciples", it is very possible that among the disciples already previously called by Christ there were completely new faces.

“And they came to Him” (ἀπῆλθον), i.e., having followed Him, they also left their former occupations.”

Mark 3:14. And he appointed twelve of them to be with him and to send them to preach,

"And set" - ἐποίησεν. in this sense the verb ποιέω is used in 1 Sam. 12– i.e. chose twelve (without the addition of the Apostles, which is in Mt. 10:2).

"To be with Him." This is the first purpose of election: the apostles must be constantly with Christ in order to prepare for their ministry.

"And to send them:" This is the second purpose of calling the apostles. By "preaching" the Evangelist Mark here, of course, means the proclamation of the coming of the Kingdom of God, which served as the subject of the sermon of Christ Himself.

Mark 3:15. and that they might have power to heal sickness and cast out demons;

"And heal from sickness." This expression is not found in the Codex Sinaiticus and Vatican, which is why Tischendorf and other recent critics omit it. But it is in the Syrian, Alexandrian and Western, Latin, codes (cf. Mt. 10:1).

Mark 3:16. appointed Simon, calling his name Peter,

According to the most ancient codices, Tischendorf begins this verse thus: “and he set twelve” (καὶ ἐποίησεν τοὺς δώδεκα).

"I appointed Simon, calling his name Peter." More correctly, according to Tischendorf: "and called the name of Simon Peter." Such an addition to the name of Simon was made even at his first call to follow Christ (see John 1:42). The Evangelist Mark, however, found it necessary to mention this only here, just as Matthew found it necessary to say the same thing when describing another later event (cf. Matt. 16:18). Peter is not a proper name, but a nickname - "rock", so that the apostle bore both names together.

Mark 3:17. James of Zebedee and John the brother of James, calling them the names Boanerges, that is, "sons of thunder",

Neither the Evangelist Matthew nor Luke separate Andrew from his brother Simon, probably meaning that both brothers were called to follow Christ at the same time. But Mark puts the sons of Zebedee in second and third place, obviously because of their recognized importance in the circle of the apostles (Peter as the "mouth of the apostles", always speaking on behalf of all the apostles, Mark puts, like the Evangelist Matthew, in the first place).

"Voanerges, that is," sons of thunder "". The word "Boanerges" apparently comes from two words: "voan" - an Aramaic word corresponding to the Hebrew "bnei" (from "banim") - "sons", and the verb "ragash". Last verb in biblical Hebrew does not mean "thunder", but could have had such a meaning in common Hebrew at the time of Christ. At least in Arabic there is a verb close to this, namely "rajasa", meaning "thunder to thunder". Why the Lord so called James and John - the Evangelist Mark does not say, so in this case one has to turn to the Gospel of Luke for clarification. In the latter, one case is reported when both brothers showed very great swiftness and angry temper, which could serve as a reason for giving them such a nickname - "sons of thunder" (Luke 9:54). Some interpreters saw in this nickname a hint of the powerful impression that both brothers (Evfimy Zigaben) made on the listeners with their sermon. Origen called John the Evangelist "a mental thunder".

Mark 3:18. Andrew, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Thomas, Jacob Alfeev, Thaddeus, Simon Cananita

Mark 3:19. and Judas Iscariot, who betrayed Him.

For an explanation of the names of the apostles, see the comments on Matt. 10:2-4. Having singled out the twelve, Christ thereby laid the foundation of the Church as a society that is visible and has its own hierarchy.

Mark 3:20. They come to the house; and again the people came together, so that it was impossible for them even to eat bread.

Mark 3:21. And when his neighbors heard him, they went to take him, for they said that he had lost his temper.

One evangelist Mark mentions the accumulation of masses of people near the house where Christ was in Capernaum, and about the departure of Christ's relatives to Capernaum in order to take Christ. On the other hand, he omits the story of the healing of the possessed, which in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke serves as an introduction to the description of the attacks of the Pharisees on Christ: he already spoke about such miracles performed by Christ earlier. Obviously, the Evangelist Mark, who has just depicted the election of 12 who made up the closest circle around Christ, like a cell of the New Testament Church, is in a hurry to show the readers how this new step of Christ was reacted, firstly, by the people, and secondly, by relatives Christ and, thirdly, His enemies - the Pharisees, and then shows how Christ treated the Pharisees and His relatives.

"They come to the house." Here the Evangelist Mark does not use his favorite expression “immediately” (εὐθύς) and, thus, makes it possible to assume that after the election of the 12 there was a certain period of time, to which the Sermon on the Mount, which the Evangelist Luke has immediately after the story, can be attributed election of 12 (Luke 6 et seq.).

"Again" (cf. Mark 2:2).

“So it was impossible for them to eat bread,” i.e. arrange a meal. The people, obviously, also filled the yard, where they usually arranged meals for guests:

"His neighbors". Interpreters understand this expression in different ways.

According to Schantz and Knabenbaur, here "neighbors" (οἱ παρ´ αὐτοῦ) are understood to be Christ's supporters in Capernaum. These scientists find grounds for such an assertion.

a) in the fact that in the book of Maccabees this expression means exactly the adherents (1 Mac. 9:44, 11, etc.),

b) the relatives of Christ lived in Nazareth and could not find out so soon what was happening in Capernaum,

c) when the Mother and brothers of Christ come, Mark calls them differently (verse 31).

But against this evidence says the following:

a) the expression “neighbors” can also mean relatives (Prov. 31:21, where the Hebrew word translated in Russian by the word “her family” in Greek bible denoted by the expression οἱ παρ´ αὐτῆς);

b) what is said in verse 20 could go on for a long time, so that the relatives of Christ could learn about what was happening;

c) Mark is referring to the same persons in verses 21 and 31, but he names them more precisely after they arrive. Therefore, most interpreters see in the "near" relatives of Christ. (For the time being, the evangelist interrupts his speech about these relatives of Christ, giving them, so to speak, time to arrive in Capernaum, but for now he depicts a collision with the scribes).

"For they have spoken." Who spoke? Weiss sees here an impersonal expression: “they spoke among the people in general, they spoke here and there: and these conversations reached the relatives of Jesus, who, out of love for Him, went to take Him and take Him home.” But it is most natural to see here an indication of the impression that was made on the relatives of Christ by the stories of people who came to Nazareth from Capernaum about the situation in which Christ was at that time in Capernaum. They probably began to discuss among themselves what they should do in relation to Christ.

“That He went out of Himself” (ὅτι ἐξέστη), i.e. He is in such an agitated state that He can be called a "man out of his mind." Such a person usually neglects the usual rules of life, being completely carried away by the idea that absorbs him. But this is not a fool, just as the apostle Paul did not consider himself a fool, of course, when he said: “if we go out of ourselves, then for God” (εἴτε γὰρ ἐξέστημεν, (2 Cor. 5:13). Relatives did not consider Christ crazy, but they only thought that He needed to rest from the terrible spiritual tension in which He was then and in which He even forgot about the need to strengthen His strength with food. He thinks it necessary to prove that he is in good health, He only dismisses their claims to take care of Him.

Mark 3:22. And the scribes who came from Jerusalem said that He had Beelzebub in Himself and that He cast out demons by the power of the prince of demons.

According to the Evangelist Matthew, the Pharisees denounced Christ in fellowship with Beelzebub and denounced before the people, and did not directly express this to Christ (Matt. 12:24). According to the Evangelist Mark, the scribes who arrived from Jerusalem come out with such tales, apparently as spies from the Sanhedrin, who were supposed to observe all the actions of Christ and indicate to the people in which Christ violates the generally accepted rules of conduct.

"Beelzebub" (see comments on Matt. 10:25).

The scribes put forward two propositions: a) Beelzebub in Christ, i.e. Christ is possessed by a demon and b) Christ casts out demons by the power of the lord of demons.

Mark 3:23. And calling them, he spoke to them in parables: How can Satan cast out Satan?

Mark 3:24. If a kingdom is divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand;

Mark 3:25. and if a house is divided against itself, that house cannot stand;

Mark 3:26. and if Satan has risen up against himself and divided himself, he cannot stand, but his end has come.

Mark 3:27. No one entering the house of a strong man can plunder his things, unless he first binds the strong man, and then he plunders his house.

Mark 3:28. Truly I say to you: all sins and blasphemies will be forgiven the sons of men, no matter how they blaspheme;

Mark 3:29. but whoever blasphemes the Holy Spirit, there will be no forgiveness forever, but he is subject to eternal condemnation.

Mark 3:30. He said this because they said, He has an unclean spirit.

The Evangelist Mark does not say, as Matthew did, that Christ penetrated the thoughts of His adversaries: according to him, the scribes expressed their accusations openly. But he alone notes that the Lord called the scribes aside from the crowd and spoke to them in parables, i.e. comparisons (until verse 30). See comments on Matt. 12:25-32.

“But he is subject to eternal condemnation” (verse 29). According to Tischendorf: "he will be guilty of eternal sin" (ἁμαρτήματος, ῥ not κρίσεως, as in our Textus Receptus). This means that the guilty person is forever attached to sin, cannot leave it behind (the previous expression has the same meaning: “for him there will be no forgiveness forever”). From this it is still impossible to draw a direct conclusion about what will happen in afterlife. It is only clearly stated that sin will always weigh on a person - there will be no such period when he would feel relieved: But our reading in the Textus Receptus has a lot of grounds (see Tischendorf, p. 245). If we accept it, then here we are talking, undoubtedly, about the eternal condemnation of the sinner.

Mark 3:31. And His mother and brothers came and, standing outside the house, sent to Him to call Him.

Mark 3:32. People were sitting around him. And they said to Him, Behold, Your mother and Your brothers and Your sisters outside the house are asking You.

Mark 3:33. And he answered them, Who are my mother and my brothers?

Mark 3:34. And surveying those who were sitting around Him, He said: Here are My mother and My brothers;

Mark 3:35. for whoever does the will of God is my brother and sister and mother.

For the relatives of Christ, see Matt. 12:46-50.

The Evangelist Mark puts this story in its proper place, it is quite clear with him the motives for which the relatives were looking for Christ (according to Matthew and Luke, they simply wanted to see Him or talk to Him) - they want to turn Him away from preaching, and then what Christ says about this.

“People sat around him.” From the way Christ speaks further (verse 34) about the people, some interpreters rightly conclude that the scribes by this time had already left the house where Christ was.

. And he said to them: Shall we do good on the Sabbath, or do evil? save the soul, or destroy? But they were silent.

. And looking at them with anger, grieving for the hardness of their hearts, he said to the man: Stretch out your hand. He stretched out, and his hand became healthy, like the other.

On the occasion of the accusation by the Jews of the disciples because they plucked ears of corn on Saturday, the Lord, by the example of David, has already blocked the mouths of the accusers, and in order to instruct them even more now, He works miraculously, through this He expresses the following: this is how my disciples are innocent of sin: I myself do it on the Sabbath day, showing this miracle. If it is a sin to work miracles, then in general it is a sin to do what is necessary on the Sabbath; but to perform a miracle for the salvation of a person is the work of God, therefore, the one who does something not evil on the Sabbath does not violate the law. Therefore, the Lord asks the Jews: “Should we do good on the Sabbath?” reproving them for hindering Him from doing good. In a figurative sense, it is dry right hand anyone who does not do the works of the right side. To such a person Christ says: "stand," that is, get away from sin, "stand in the middle," that is, in the middle of the virtues, since every virtue is a middle that does not tend either to lack or to excess. So, when he stands in this middle, then his hand will again become healthy. Note also the word "became"; there was a time when we had hands, or active forces, healthy, when, that is, a crime had not yet been committed: and since our hand stretched out to the forbidden fruit, it became dry in relation to doing good. But it will return to its former healthy state when we stand in the midst of the virtues.

. The Pharisees went out and immediately took counsel with the Herodians against Him, how to destroy Him.

. But Jesus with His disciples withdrew to the sea; and many people followed Him from Galilee, Judea,

. Jerusalem, Idumea and beyond the Jordan. AND living in the vicinity of Tire and Sidon, when they heard what he was doing, they came to him in great numbers.

. And he told his disciples to have a boat ready for him because of the crowd, so that they would not crowd him.

. For He healed many, so that those who had the plagues rushed to Him to touch Him.

. And the unclean spirits, when they saw Him, fell down before Him and cried out: You are the Son of God.

. But He strictly forbade them not to make Him known.

Who were the Herodians? - or the warriors of Herod, or some new sect that recognized Herod as Christ for the reason that under him the succession of the Jewish kings ended. The prophecy of Jacob determined that when the princes from Judah were impoverished, then Christ would come (). So, since in the time of Herod no one was any longer a prince from the Jews, but Herod a foreigner ruled (he was an Edomite), some took him for Christ and formed a sect. It was these people who wanted to kill the Lord. But He leaves because the time of suffering has not yet come. He leaves the ungrateful and in order to benefit a greater number of people. Many indeed followed Him, and He healed them; even the Tirians and the Sidonians benefited, despite the fact that there were foreigners. Meanwhile, his fellow tribesmen persecuted him. So there is no use in kinship if there is no good manners! So strangers came to Christ from afar, but the Jews persecuted Him who came to them. See how Christ is a stranger to love of glory; so that the people do not surround Him, He requires a boat in order to be at a distance from the people in it.

The evangelist calls illnesses “sores”, for illnesses really contribute much to our admonition, so that he punishes us with these ulcers, like a father of children. In a figurative sense, pay attention to the fact that the Herodians want to kill Jesus, these carnal and rude people (Herod means leather). On the contrary, those who came out of their homes and from their own country, that is, from a carnal way of life, they will follow Him; why their wounds will be healed, that is, sins that stab the conscience, and unclean spirits are cast out. Finally, understand that Jesus orders His disciples to bring the boat, so that the people do not embarrass Him. Jesus is the word in us, commanding that our boat, that is, our body, be ready for Him, and not be left to the storm of worldly affairs, so that these crowds of worries about affairs do not disturb the Christ who lives in us.

. Then he ascended the mountain and called to Himself whom He Himself wanted; and they came to him.

And put of them twelve, to be with him and to send them to preach,

. and that they might have power to heal sickness and cast out demons;

. appointed Simon, calling his name Peter,

. James of Zebedee and John the brother of James, calling them the names Boanerges, that is, "sons of thunder",

. Andrew, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Thomas, Jacob Alfeev, Thaddeus, Simon Cananita

. and Judas Iscariot, who betrayed Him.

Climbing a mountain to pray. Since he worked miracles before him, after performing miracles, he prays, of course, as a lesson to us, so that we thank God as soon as we do something good, and would attribute it to the power of God. Or since the Lord intended to ordain the apostles, then on this occasion he ascends the mountain to pray for our instruction, that we too, when we intend to ordain someone, must first pray that he be revealed to us worthy and so that we do not become participants "in other people's sins"(). And that Judas also chooses to be an apostle, we must understand from this that a person who has to do evil is not turned away because of his future evil deed, but what kind of real virtue of his honors him, even if he later becomes a bad person. The Evangelist enumerates the names of the apostles about the false apostles, so that the true apostles may be known. He calls the sons of thunder the sons of Zebedee, as especially great preachers and theologians.

. They come to the house; and again the people came together, so that it was impossible for them even to eat bread.

. And when His neighbors heard Him, they went to take Him, for they said that He had gone out of Himself.

. But the scribes who came from Jerusalem said that he had in itself Beelzebub, and that he casts out demons by the power of the prince of demons.

“Having heard,” he says, “his neighbors,” perhaps people from the same native city with Him, or even brothers, went out to take Him; for they said that he had lost his temper, that is, that he had a demon. Since they heard that He casts out demons and heals diseases, out of envy they thought that He had a demon and “became beside himself,” which is why they wanted to take Him in order to bind Him as possessed. So thought and wanted to do with Him and His neighbors. Likewise, the Jerusalem scribes said that He had a demon in Himself. Since they could not reject the miracles performed before them, they reproach them in a different way, producing them from demons.

. And calling them, he spoke to them in parables: How can Satan cast out Satan?

. If a kingdom is divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand;

. and if a house is divided against itself, that house cannot stand;

. and if Satan has risen up against himself and divided himself, he cannot stand, but his end has come.

. No one entering the house of a strong man can plunder his things, unless he first binds the strong man, and then he plunders his house.

Refutes the hated Jews with undeniable examples. How is it possible, he says, for a demon to cast out demons, when even in ordinary houses we see that as long as those who live in them are peaceful, the houses stand safely, and as soon as there is a separation in them, they fall? How is it possible, - he says, - that someone should plunder the dishes of a strong one, if he does not first bind him? These words mean the following: "strong" is the devil; his "things" are people who serve him as a container. Thus, if someone does not first bind and depose the devil, how can he plunder from him his vessels, that is, those who are demonized? Therefore, if I plunder its vessels, that is, I free people from demonic violence, then, therefore, I bound and cast down demons in advance, and I turn out to be their enemy. So how do you say that I have Beelzebub in Myself, that is, that I cast out demons, being their friend and magician?

. Truly I say to you: all sins and blasphemies will be forgiven the sons of men, no matter how they blaspheme;

. but whoever blasphemes the Holy Spirit, there will be no forgiveness forever, but he is subject to eternal condemnation.

. This He said, because they said, He has an unclean spirit.

What the Lord says here means the following: people who sin in everything else can still apologize for something and receive forgiveness, according to God's condescension to human weakness. For example, those who called the Lord a poison and a wine-drinker, a friend of publicans and sinners, will receive forgiveness in this. But when they see that He works undoubted miracles, and meanwhile they blaspheme the Holy Spirit, that is, miracles that proceed from the Holy Spirit, then how will they receive forgiveness if they do not repent? When they were offended by the flesh of Christ, then in this case, even though they did not repent, they will be forgiven, as people who have been offended; but when they saw Him doing the works of God, and still blasphemed, how will they be forgiven if they remain impenitent?

. And surveying those who were sitting around Him, He said: Here are My mother and My brothers;

. for whoever does the will of God is my brother and sister and mother.

The brethren of the Lord, out of envy, came to take Him as violent and demon-possessed. And the Mother, probably inspired by a sense of honor, came to distract Him from the teaching, thus showing the people that she freely disposes of the One Whom they marvel at and can distract Him from the teaching. But the Lord answers: It will be of no use to My Mother to be My Mother if She does not combine all the virtues in Herself. In the same way, kinship will be useless for My brothers. Because those are only the true relatives of Christ, who do the will of God. So, saying this, He does not renounce the Mother, but shows that She will be worthy of honor not only for birth, but also for every other good deed: if She did not have this, then others would anticipate the honor of kinship.

Synodal translation. The chapter was voiced according to the roles by the Light in the East studio.

1. And he came again to the synagogue; there was a man with a withered hand.
2. And they watched him to see if he would be healed on the Sabbath, to accuse him.
3. But he says to the man who had the withered hand, stand in the middle.
4. But he said to them, “Should we do good on the Sabbath, or do evil?” save the soul, or destroy? But they were silent.
5. And looking at them with anger, grieving for the hardness of their hearts, he said to the man, Stretch out your hand. He stretched out, and his hand became healthy, like the other.
6. The Pharisees, going out, immediately took counsel with the Herodians against Him, how to destroy Him.
7. But Jesus with His disciples withdrew to the sea; and many people followed Him from Galilee, Judea,
8. Jerusalem, Idumea and beyond the Jordan . And those who live in the vicinity of Tyre and Sidon, when they heard what he was doing, they came to him in great multitudes.
9. And he said to his disciples, that a boat be ready for him because of the crowd, so that they would not crowd him.
10. For many he healed, so that those who had the plagues rushed to him to touch him.
11. And the unclean spirits, when they saw Him, fell down before Him and cried out: You are the Son of God.
12. But He strictly forbade them not to make Him known.
13. Then he ascended the mountain and called to Himself whom He Himself wanted; and they came to him.
14. And he appointed twelve of them to be with him and to send them to preach,
15. And that they might have power to heal sickness and cast out demons;
16. Appointed Simon, calling his name Peter,
17. James of Zebedee and John the brother of James, calling them the names Boanerges, that is, "sons of thunder,"
18. Andrew, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Thomas, Jacob Alfeev, Thaddeus, Simon Kananit
19. and Judas Iscariot, who betrayed him.
20. Come to the house; and again the people came together, so that it was impossible for them even to eat bread.
21. And when his neighbors heard him, they went to take him, for they said that he had lost his temper.
22. And the scribes who came from Jerusalem said that He had Beelzebub in Himself and that He cast out demons by the power of the prince of demons.
23. And calling them, he spoke to them in parables: How can Satan cast out Satan?
24. If a kingdom is divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand;
25. And if a house is divided against itself, that house cannot stand;
26. And if Satan has risen up against himself and divided himself, he cannot stand, but his end has come.
27. No one entering the house of a strong man can plunder his things, unless he first binds the strong man, and then he plunders his house.
28. Truly I say to you, the sons of men will be forgiven all sins and blasphemy, no matter how they blaspheme;
29. But whoever blasphemes the Holy Spirit, there will be no forgiveness forever, but he is subject to eternal condemnation.
30. This He said, because they said, He has an unclean spirit.
31. And His mother and brothers came and, standing outside the house, sent to Him to call Him.
32. People were sitting around him. And they said to Him, Behold, Your mother and Your brothers and Your sisters outside the house are asking You.
33. And he answered them, Who are my mother and my brothers?
34. And looking around at those who were sitting around Him, He said: Here are My mother and My brothers;
35. For whoever does the will of God, the same is My brother, and sister, and mother.

Commentary on the book

Section comment

5 "Looking at them with anger"- these words show that Jesus Christ could not relate without "anger" to any unrighteousness (cf. the expulsion of merchants from the Temple). This confirms the correctness of reading Matthew 5:25: "one who is angry with his brother in vain" ... Only he who is angry without sufficient reason "is subject to judgment."

6 "With the Herodians" - see Mt 22:16.

8 Idumea is a country lying to the south of the Holy Land and inhabited by a people who have been hostile to the Jews since ancient times. From it came the family of King Herod. Tire and Sidon are the famous ancient seaside cities of Phoenicia, the country that separated Galilee, the birthplace of Jesus Christ, from the west and north from the Mediterranean Sea.

11 "Unclean spirits", i.e. possessed. See Mt 8 31.

14 "Twelve" is a sacred number. The founders of the new Israel must be chosen according to the number of the tribes of Israel. After the fall of Judas, their number was restored ( Acts 1:26) and is preserved forever in heaven ( Matthew 19:28 steam; Rev 21:12-14).

17 "Voanerges" (from Aram. " Beneroges" = sons of thunder). A name indicating the impulsive nature of the brothers James and John.

21 "I lost my temper." The Savior's relatives are worried, seeing that He is constantly busy and does not find time to eat.

22 "Beelzebub" - see Mt 12:24.

29 "Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit" - cm Mt 12:31.

30 "He has an unclean spirit"- to see the action of an unclean spirit in the deeds of the Holy Spirit means to reject the light of divine grace and close one's way to salvation.

31-32 "Brothers ... sisters" - see Mt 12:46.

1. John, who bore the second, Latin name Mark, was a resident of Jerusalem. Ap. Peter and other disciples of Christ often gathered at his mother's house (Acts 12:12). Mark was the nephew of ap Joseph Barnabas, a Levite, a native of Fr. Cyprus, who lived in Jerusalem (Acts 4:36; Col 4:10). Subsequently, Mark and Barnabas were the companions of St. Paul on his missionary journeys (Acts 12:25), and Mark, as a young man, was destined "for service" (Acts 13:5). During the trip of the apostles to Perga, Mark left them, probably because of the difficulties of the journey, and returned to his homeland in Jerusalem (Acts 13:13; Acts 15:37-39). After the Apostolic Council (c. 49), Mark and Barnabas withdrew to Cyprus. In the 60s, Mark again accompanies St. Paul (Philm 1:24), and then becomes the companion of St. Peter, who calls him his “son” (1 Peter 5:13).

2. Papias of Hierapolis reports: “Mark, the translator of Peter, accurately wrote down everything that he remembered, although he did not adhere to the strict order of the words and deeds of Christ, because he himself did not listen to the Lord and did not accompany Him. Subsequently, however, he was, as it was said, with Peter, but Peter expounded the doctrine in order to satisfy the needs of the listeners, and not in order to convey the Lord’s conversations in order ”(Eusebius, Church. History. Ill, 39). According to Clement of Alexandria, “while the Apostle Peter was preaching the gospel in Rome, Mark, his companion, ... wrote ... the Gospel, called the Gospel of Mark” (cf. Eusebius, Church. Ist. 11, 15).

St. Justin, quoting one passage from Mk, directly calls it "Peter's Memoirs" (Dialogue with Trypho, 108). St. Irenaeus of Lyon reports that Mark wrote his Gospel in Rome shortly after the martyrdom of Peter, whose "disciple and translator" he was (Against Heresies, III, 1,1). An Peter was crucified in all likelihood in 64 (or in 67), and, therefore, the Gospel of Mk must be dated to the end of the 60s.

3. Mark is speaking to Gentile Christians living mainly in Rome. Therefore, he expounds to his readers the geography of Palestine, often explains Jewish customs and Aramaic expressions. Everything related to Roman life, he believes known. For the same reason, there are far fewer references to the OT in Mark than in Matthew. Much of Mark's narrative is similar to that of Matthew, and therefore comments on parallel texts are not repeated.

4. Mark's primary purpose is to establish in Gentile converts faith in the divinity of Jesus Christ. Therefore, a significant part of his gospel is occupied by stories of miracles. In doing them, Christ at first conceals His Messiahship, as if expecting that people would first accept Him as a Wonderworker and Teacher. At the same time, Mark, more than Matthew, paints the image of Christ as a person (eg Mk 3:5; Mk 6:34; Mk 8:2; Mk 10:14-16). This is explained by the closeness of the author to an Peter, who conveyed to his listeners the living image of the Lord.

More than other evangelists, Mark pays attention to the personality of the head of the apostles.

5. The plan of Mark: I. The period of hidden messianism: 1) The preaching of the Baptist, the baptism of the Lord and temptation in the wilderness (Mark 1:1-13); 2) Ministry in Capernaum and other cities of Galilee (Mark 1:14-8:26). II. The Mystery of the Son of Man: 1) Peter's confession, transfiguration and journey to Jerusalem (Mk 8:27-10:52); 2) preaching in Jerusalem (Mark 11:1-13:37). III. Passion. Resurrection (Mark 14:1-16:20).

INTRODUCTION TO THE BOOKS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT

Holy Bible The New Testament was written in Greek, with the exception of the Gospel of Matthew, which is said to have been written in Hebrew or Aramaic. But since this Hebrew text has not survived, the Greek text is considered the original for the Gospel of Matthew. Thus, only the Greek text of the New Testament is the original, and numerous editions in various modern languages all over the world are translations from the Greek original.

Greek language in which it was written New Testament, was no longer a classical ancient Greek language and was not, as previously thought, a special New Testament language. This is the colloquial everyday language of the first century A.D., spread in the Greco-Roman world and known in science under the name "κοινη", i.e. "common speech"; yet the style, and turns of speech, and way of thinking of the sacred writers of the New Testament reveal the Hebrew or Aramaic influence.

The original text of the NT has come down to us in a large number of ancient manuscripts, more or less complete, numbering about 5000 (from the 2nd to the 16th century). Before recent years the most ancient of them did not go back beyond the 4th century no P.X. But lately, many fragments of ancient manuscripts of the NT on papyrus (3rd and even 2nd c) have been discovered. So, for example, Bodmer's manuscripts: Ev from John, Luke, 1 and 2 Peter, Jude - were found and published in the 60s of our century. In addition to Greek manuscripts, we have ancient translations or versions into Latin, Syriac, Coptic and other languages ​​(Vetus Itala, Peshitto, Vulgata, etc.), of which the oldest existed already from the 2nd century AD.

Finally, numerous quotations from the Church Fathers in Greek and other languages ​​have been preserved in such quantity that if the text of the New Testament were lost and all ancient manuscripts were destroyed, then specialists could restore this text from quotations from the works of the Holy Fathers. All this abundant material makes it possible to check and refine the text of the NT and to classify its various forms (the so-called textual criticism). Compared with any ancient author (Homer, Euripides, Aeschylus, Sophocles, Cornelius Nepos, Julius Caesar, Horace, Virgil, etc.), our modern - printed - Greek text of the NT is in an exceptionally favorable position. And by the number of manuscripts, and by the brevity of time separating the oldest of them from the original, and by the number of translations, and by their antiquity, and by the seriousness and volume of critical work carried out on the text, it surpasses all other texts (for details, see "The Hidden Treasures and New Life, Archaeological Discoveries and the Gospel, Bruges, 1959, pp. 34 ff.). The text of the NT as a whole is fixed quite irrefutably.

The New Testament consists of 27 books. They are subdivided by the publishers into 260 chapters of unequal length for the purpose of providing references and citations. The original text does not contain this division. The modern division into chapters in the New Testament, as in the whole Bible, has often been ascribed to the Dominican Cardinal Hugh (1263), who elaborated it in his symphony to the Latin Vulgate, but it is now thought with great reason that this division goes back to Stephen the Archbishop of Canterbury. Langton, who died in 1228. As for the division into verses now accepted in all editions of the New Testament, it goes back to the publisher of the Greek New Testament text, Robert Stephen, and was introduced by him into his edition in 1551.

Holy books The New Testament is usually divided into law-positive (Four Gospels), historical (Acts of the Apostles), teaching (seven conciliar epistles and fourteen epistles of the Apostle Paul) and prophetic: the Apocalypse or Revelation of St. John the Evangelist (see the Long Catechism of St. Philaret of Moscow).

However, modern experts consider this distribution outdated: in fact, all the books of the New Testament are law-positive, historical, and instructive, and there is prophecy not only in the Apocalypse. New Testament science pays great attention to the exact establishment of the chronology of the gospel and other New Testament events. Scientific chronology allows the reader to follow the life and ministry of our Lord Jesus Christ, the apostles and the original Church according to the New Testament with sufficient accuracy (see Appendixes).

The books of the New Testament can be distributed as follows:

1) Three so-called Synoptic Gospels: Matthew, Mark, Luke and, separately, the fourth: the Gospel of John. New Testament scholarship devotes much attention to the study of the relationship of the first three Gospels and their relation to the Gospel of John (the synoptic problem).

2) The Book of the Acts of the Apostles and the Epistles of the Apostle Paul ("Corpus Paulinum"), which are usually divided into:

a) Early Epistles: 1 and 2 Thessalonians.

b) Greater Epistles: Galatians, 1st and 2nd Corinthians, Romans.

c) Messages from bonds, i.e. written from Rome, where ap. Paul was in prison: Philippians, Colossians, Ephesians, Philemon.

d) Pastoral Epistles: 1st to Timothy, to Titus, 2nd to Timothy.

e) The Epistle to the Hebrews.

3) Catholic Epistles ("Corpus Catholicum").

4) Revelation of John the Theologian. (Sometimes in the NT they single out "Corpus Joannicum", i.e. everything that ap Ying wrote for a comparative study of his Gospel in connection with his epistles and the book of Rev.).

FOUR GOSPEL

1. The word "gospel" (ευανγελιον) on Greek means "good news". This is how our Lord Jesus Christ Himself called His teaching (Mt 24:14; Mt 26:13; Mk 1:15; Mk 13:10; Mk 14:9; Mk 16:15). Therefore, for us, the "gospel" is inextricably linked with Him: it is the "good news" of salvation given to the world through the incarnate Son of God.

Christ and His apostles preached the gospel without writing it down. By the middle of the 1st century, this sermon had been fixed by the Church in a strong oral tradition. The Eastern custom of memorizing sayings, stories, and even large texts by heart helped the Christians of the apostolic age to accurately preserve the unwritten First Gospel. After the 1950s, when eyewitnesses to Christ's earthly ministry began to pass away one by one, the need arose to record the gospel (Luke 1:1). Thus, the “gospel” began to denote the narrative recorded by the apostles about the life and teachings of the Savior. It was read at prayer meetings and in preparing people for baptism.

2. The most important Christian centers of the 1st century (Jerusalem, Antioch, Rome, Ephesus, etc.) had their own gospels. Of these, only four (Mt, Mk, Lk, Jn) are recognized by the Church as inspired by God, i.e. written under the direct influence of the Holy Spirit. They are called "from Matthew", "from Mark", etc. (Greek “kata” corresponds to Russian “according to Matthew”, “according to Mark”, etc.), for the life and teachings of Christ are set forth in these books by these four priests. Their gospels were not brought together in one book, which made it possible to see the gospel story from different points of view. In the 2nd century, St. Irenaeus of Lyon calls the evangelists by name and points to their gospels as the only canonical ones (Against Heresies 2, 28, 2). A contemporary of St. Irenaeus, Tatian, made the first attempt to create a single gospel narrative, composed of various texts of the four gospels, the Diatessaron, i.e. gospel of four.

3. The apostles did not set themselves the goal of creating a historical work in the modern sense of the word. They sought to spread the teachings of Jesus Christ, helped people to believe in Him, correctly understand and fulfill His commandments. The testimonies of the evangelists do not coincide in all details, which proves their independence from each other: the testimonies of eyewitnesses are always individual in color. The Holy Spirit does not certify the accuracy of the details of the facts described in the gospel, but spiritual meaning contained in them.

The minor contradictions encountered in the presentation of the evangelists are explained by the fact that God gave the priests complete freedom in conveying certain specific facts in relation to different categories of listeners, which further emphasizes the unity of meaning and direction of all four gospels (see also General Introduction, pp. 13 and 14) .

Hide

Commentary on the current passage

Commentary on the book

Section comment

1 On the healing of the dry hand explained. see in Ev. Matthew 22:9-14. Ev. Mark notes that the sick man had a “withered” hand, not a “dry” one (Matt). He, therefore, was not born with such a hand, and it shrunk, probably from some wound.

2 According to Mark, the Pharisees - of course, they are here referred to - watched with special attention (παρετήρουν ) to see if Christ would heal him on the Sabbath. The verb will heal - θεραπεύσει - put in present. time with the intention: the Pharisees would like to say by this that Christ constantly heals on Saturdays, that He made it his principle. Of course, after such a healing, they intended to accuse Christ of violating the Sabbath law.

3 Get in the middle More precisely: “Get up! Here in the middle!” The Lord was in the midst of the people - He was surrounded mainly by the Pharisees (cf. Art. 5: looking, or, more precisely, looking around those who were sitting around Him). The Lord thus proceeds to openly attack His enemies, demanding that they clearly express their thoughts about Him.

4 To do good is to do generally good meritorious deeds ( ἀγαθòν ποιη̃σαι ). What is the "good work" that Jesus meant here - He immediately explains. If you do not help the unfortunate, when possible, this means leaving him to the victim of certain death. Obviously, the withered hand had a serious, dangerous disease, the so-called muscle atrophy, which had to go progressively, and the Lord not only healed one of his hands, but also destroyed the disease itself at its root. The Pharisees could not answer anything to Christ’s question: they did not want to agree with Christ, and, of course, they did not find any reason to contradict the view expressed in this question, since the sixth commandment directly said: “Thou shalt not kill.”

5 Looking around at his enemies and not seeing on anyone's part an attempt to directly answer the question, the Lord at the same time cast an angry look at them as hypocrites, grieving for their hardness or stubbornness (cf. Ex 4:21 And Tue 9:27).

6 For the Herodians see Mt 22:16 .

7 The depiction of the activity of Christ at this time takes five verses from Mark, and one from Matthew ( Mt 4:24). The Lord moves away to the sea not out of fear of his enemies, the Pharisees and Herodians - the enemies of Christ, of course, did not dare to do anything against Him, since a huge crowd of people rushed after Him - but simply because He saw how useless it would be further continue the conversation with the Pharisees.

8 Ev. Mark lists seven regions or places from where people came to Christ. This number obviously has a symbolic meaning here. It means the entirety of the countries or regions of Palestine. Even distant Idumea and Phoenicia sent their representatives to Christ. But if it is said about the Galileans and the inhabitants of Judea that they followed Christ ( Art. 7), then about the Jerusalemites and the further mentioned inhabitants of Palestine, the evangelist says only that they came and, perhaps, only looked at what Christ would do.

9-10 Here, obviously, we mean already known ( 1:16-20 ) four students. The people crowded to Christ mainly, of course, in order to receive healing from Him: this can be said about those Galileans and Jews who “followed” Christ. Others simply wanted to see with their own eyes that Christ really heals the sick.

11-12 Unclean spirits - that is, people in whom there were unclean spirits.

Son of God is a more important expression (cf. Matthew 4:3) than "Holy of God" ( 1:24 ). But whether these people were aware of the true meaning of this name is not visible. The Lord did not reject this name, but forbade only the possessed to shout it out ( explained see 1:25). How strange it was that Christ, the great miracle worker, was persecuted by representatives of Judaism and only demons were magnified!

13 On the calling of the 12 apostles, cf. Matthew 10:2-4 .

On mountain . The seashore was, so to speak, a place of constant public meetings. On the other hand, in the mountains that are north of the Sea of ​​Tiberias, one could find a rather secluded place. The Lord goes there to get away from the crowd. The disciples are called to follow Him, namely, only those who in this case fell on the choice of Christ, and not all. Ev. Mark does not even call those invited by Christ “disciples”: it is very possible that among the disciples already previously called by Christ there were completely new faces.

And they came to Him (ἀπη̃λθον), i.e., following Him, they also left their former occupations.

14 And put - ἐποίησεν . In this sense, the verb ποιέω is used in 1 Samuel 12:6- that is, he chose twelve (without the addition of "apostles", as does, for example, ev. Matthew in Matthew 10:2).

To be with Him. This is the first purpose of election: the apostles must be constantly with Christ in order to prepare for their ministry.

And to send them. This is the second purpose of the calling of the apostles. Under the sermon here Ev. Mark, of course, means the announcement of the coming of the Kingdom of God, which served as the subject of preaching and Christ Himself.

15 And heal from diseases. This expression is not found in the Codex Sinaiticus and Vatican, which is why Tischendorf and other recent critics omit it. But it is in the Syrian, Alexandrian and Western, Latin codices (cf. Matthew 10:1).

16 According to the most ancient codices, Tischendorf begins this verse thus: “and he set twelve” ( καὶ ἐποίησεν τοὺς δώδεκα ).

Put Simon, naming him Peter. More correctly according to Tischendorf: and he called the name of Simon Peter. Such an addition to the name of Simon was made even at his first call to follow Christ (cf. John 1:42). Ev. Mark, however, found it necessary only to mention it here, just as ev. Matthew saw fit to say the same thing when describing another later event (cf. Mt 16:18). Peter is not a proper name, but a nickname - "rock", so that the apostle bore both names together.

17 Niev. Matthew, nor ev. Luke does not separate Andrew from his brother, Simon, probably meaning that both brothers were called to follow Christ at the same time. But Mark puts the sons of Zebedee in the second and third places, obviously because of their recognized importance in the circle of the apostles (Peter, as the "mouth of the apostles", who always spoke on behalf of all the apostles, Mark puts, like St. Matthew, in the first place).

Voanerges, that is, the sons of thunder. The word Boanerges apparently comes from two words: voan - the Aramaic word corresponding to the Hebrew venei (benim) "sons", and the verb ragash. The last verb in Biblical Hebrew does not mean "thunder," but it could have had such a meaning in vernacular Hebrew at the time of Christ. At least in Arabic there is a verb close to this - namely rajas, meaning "thunder to thunder." Why did the Lord call James and John so? Mark does not speak, so in this case one has to turn to the Gospel of Luke for clarification. In the latter, one case is reported when both brothers showed very great swiftness and angry temper, which could serve as a reason for giving them such a nickname - "sons of thunder" ( Luke 9:54). Some interpreters saw in this nickname a hint of the powerful impression that both brothers made on the listeners with their sermon (Evfimy Zigaben). Origen called John the Evangelist " mental thunder».

18-19 For an explanation of the names of the apostles, see Ev. Matthew 10:2-4. Having singled out the twelve, Christ thereby laid the foundation of the Church, as a society that is visible and has its own hierarchy.

20-21 One Ev. Mark mentions the accumulation of masses of people near the house where Christ was in Capernaum, and about the departure of Christ's relatives to Capernaum in order to take Christ. On the other hand, he omits the story of the healing of the possessed, which in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke serves as an introduction to the description of the attacks of the Pharisees on Christ: he already spoke about such miracles performed by Christ earlier. Obviously, the Evangelist Mark, who has just depicted the election of 12 who made up the closest circle around Christ, like a cell of the New Testament Church, is in a hurry to show the readers how this new step of Christ was reacted, firstly, by the people, and secondly, by relatives Christ and, thirdly, His enemies - the Pharisees, and then shows how Christ treated the Pharisees and His relatives.

20 And they come into the house. Here Ev. Mark does not use his favorite expression "immediately" (ἐυθύς ) and, thus, makes it possible to assume that after the election of the 12 there was a certain period of time, to which the Sermon on the Mount, available to the Jews, can be attributed. Luke immediately after the story of the election of 12 ( Luke 6:17ff.).

Again - cf. 2:2 .

So that it was impossible for them to eat bread- that is, arrange a meal. The people, obviously, also filled the yard, where meals were usually arranged for guests.

21 His neighbors. Interpreters understand this expression in different ways. According to Shants and Knabenbaur, here we mean by “neighbors” (οἱ παρ "αὐτω̃) supporters of Christ in Capernaum. These scholars find grounds for such a statement a) in the fact that in the book. Makkab. this expression means precisely supporters ( 1 Mack 9:44; 2:73 etc.), b) the relatives of Christ lived in Nazareth and could not find out so soon what was happening in Capernaum, c) when the Mother and brothers of Christ come, Mark calls them differently ( Art. 31).

But the following speaks against such evidence: a) the expression "neighbors" can also mean relatives ( Proverbs 31:21, where the word is Jewish, translated in Russian by the word "her family" in Greek. the Bible is indicated by the expression οἱ παρ" αὐτη̃ς), b) What is said in verse 20 could continue for a considerable time, so that Christ's relatives could learn about what was happening, c) Mark means both in 21 and 31 st of the same persons, but designates them more precisely after their arrival. Therefore, most interpreters see in the "near" relatives of Christ Beda, Theophylact, Zigaben, Weiss, Holtzman, Loisy and others.. (For the time being, the evangelist interrupts his speech about these relatives of Christ, giving them, so to speak, time to arrive in Capernaum, but for now he depicts a clash with the scribes.) - For they spoke. Who spoke? Weiss sees an impersonal expression here: They spoke among the people in general, they spoke here and there... and these conversations reached the family of Jesus, who, out of love for Him, went to take Him and take Him home.

But it is most natural to see here an indication of the impression that was made on the relatives of Christ by the stories of people who came to Nazareth from Capernaum about the situation in which Christ was at that time in Capernaum. They probably began to argue among themselves what they should do in relation to Christ.

that he went out of himself(ὅτι ἐξέστη ), i.e., is in such an agitated state that He can be called "a man not to himself." Such a person usually neglects the usual rules of life, being completely carried away by the idea that absorbs him. But this is not a madman, just as he did not consider himself, of course, a madman and up. Paul, when he said: “If we go out of ourselves, then for God ( εἴτε γὰρ ἐξέστημεν θεω̨̃ 2 Corinthians 5:13). The relatives did not consider Christ insane, but only thought that He needed to rest from the terrible spiritual tension in which He was then and in which He even forgot about the need to strengthen His strength with food. And Christ Himself does not further reprove His relatives for wanting to take him away, and does not at all consider it necessary to prove that He is in good health: He only rejects their claims to take care of Him...

22 After ev. Matthew was denounced by Christ in communion with Beelzebub by the Pharisees and denounced before the people, and did not directly express it to Christ ( 12:24 ). According to Ev. The scribes who arrived from Jerusalem, obviously, as spies from the Sanhedrin, who were supposed to observe all the actions of Christ and indicate to the people, in which Christ violates the generally accepted rules of conduct, speak to Mark with such tales.

Beelzebub - see interpretation. on Mt 10:25. — The scribes put forward two propositions: a) Beelzebub in Christ, that is, Christ is possessed by a demon, and b) Christ casts out demons by the power of the lord of demons.

23-30 Ev. Mark does not say, as Matthew does, that Christ penetrated the thoughts of His adversaries: in his view, the scribes made their accusations open. But he alone notes that the Lord called the scribes aside from the crowd and spoke to them in parables, that is, comparisons (until verse 30). Explanation. see Ev. Matthew 12:25-32.

29 But he is subject to eternal condemnation. According to Tischendorf: " eternal sin will be guiltyἁμαρτήματος, not κρίσεως as in our T. R. . This means that the guilty person is forever attached to sin, cannot leave it behind (the previous expression has the same meaning: “for him there will be no forgiveness forever”). About what will happen in the afterlife, it is still impossible to draw a direct conclusion from this. It is only clearly stated that sin will always weigh on a person - there will be no such period when he would feel relieved ... But our reading of T. R. has quite a few grounds for itself.(see Tischendorf, p. 245). If we accept it, then here we are talking, undoubtedly, about the eternal condemnation of the sinner.

31-35 About the relatives of Christ - see. Matthew 12:46-50. Ev. Mark puts this story in its proper place: it is quite clear with him the motives for which the relatives were looking for Christ (according to Matthew and Luke, they simply wanted to see Him or talk to Him - they want to turn Him away from His preaching work - and that Christ speaks about this.

32 People were sitting around him.. From what Christ says next ( Art. 34) about the people, some interpreters rightly conclude that by this time the scribes had already left the house where Christ was.

Biblical data on the personality of St. Mark. The proper name of the writer of the second gospel was John - Mark (Μα ̃ ρκος) was his nickname. The latter was accepted by him, probably, when Barnabas and Saul, returning from Jerusalem (Acts 12:25), took him with them to Antioch to make him their companion on missionary journeys. Why John adopted such a nickname, some answer can be found in the similarity of the initial three letters of this nickname with the three initial letters of the name of his mother, Mary.

For a long time John Mark was in friendly relations with app. Peter. When this apostle was released miraculously out of prison, he came to the house of Mary, the mother of John, who is called Mark (Acts 12:12). Shortly before his death, the apostle Peter calls Mark his son (1 Peter 5:13), thus showing that he converted Mark to faith in Christ. This conversion took place early, because Mark is a companion of the apostles Barnabas and Paul around Pascha 44. In the autumn of that year, he settled in Antioch and, perhaps, was engaged in preaching the gospel. However, he did not stand out for anything special at that time - at least his name is not mentioned in the 1st verse of the 13th chapter. Acts, where there is a list of the most prominent prophets and teachers who were at that time in Antioch. Still, in the 50th year, in the spring, Barnabas and Paul took Mark with them on their first missionary journey as a servant (υ ̔ πηρέτης — Acts 13:5). From Colossians (Colossians 4:10) we learn that Mark was Barnabas's cousin (α ̓ νεψ ιός). But if the fathers of Barnabas and Mark were siblings, then we can assume that Mark belonged to the tribe of Levi, to which, according to legend, Barnabas belonged. Barnabas introduced Mark to Paul. However, in Perga, and maybe even earlier, when departing from Paphos on about. Cyprus, Mark separated from Paul and Barnabas (Acts 13:13). Probably, further participation in their “work” seemed difficult to him (Acts 15:38), especially the journey through the mountains of Pamphylia, and his very position as a “servant” under the apostles could seem somewhat humiliating to him.

After this, Mark returned to Jerusalem (Acts 13:13). When Barnabas, after the apostolic council and, it seems, after a short stay in Antioch (about the year 52, Acts 15:35), wanted to take Mark again on a second missionary journey, which he undertook again from St. Paul, the latter opposed the intention of Barnabas, considering Mark incapable of making long and difficult journeys in order to spread the gospel. The dispute that arose between the apostles ended (in Antioch) with the fact that Barnabas took Mark with him and went with him to his homeland - Cyprus, and Paul, taking Silas as his companion, went with him on a missionary journey through Asia Minor. But where did Mark stay between his return to Jerusalem and his departure from Barnabas to Fr. Cyprus (Acts 15:36), unknown. The most likely assumption is that he was at that time in Jerusalem and was present at the apostolic council. From here he could be taken with him to Cyprus by Barnabas, who had previously parted ways with ap. Paul precisely because of Mark.

From now on, Mark disappears from sight for a long time, namely from the 52nd year to the 62nd. When Paul, about the year 62 or 63, wrote from Rome to Philemon, while conveying greetings to him from various men, whom he calls his co-workers, he also names Mark (v. 24). From the same Mark, he sends a greeting in the letter to the Colossians written simultaneously with the letter to Philemon (Colossians 4:10). Here he calls Mark "cousin" of Barnabas (according to the Russian text - "nephew". This is an inaccurate rendering of the Greek word α ̓ νεψιός) and adds that the Colossian church received certain instructions regarding Mark, and asks the Colossians to accept Mark when he will come. It is significant that Paul here names Mark and Justus as his only co-workers for the Kingdom of God, who were his comfort (Col. 4:11). From here it can be seen that Mark was under St. Paul during his Roman bonds and assisted him in the work of spreading the gospel in Rome. When his reconciliation with Paul took place is unknown.

Then we see Mark together with the apostle Peter in Asia, on the banks of the Euphrates, where Babylon used to stand and where the Christian church was founded under the apostles (1 Peter 5:13). It can be concluded from this that Mark indeed went from Rome to Colossae (cf. Col. 4:10) and met St. Peter, who kept Mark for some time with him. Then he was at ap. Timothy in Ephesus, as can be seen from the fact that St. Paul instructs Timothy to bring Mark with him to Rome, saying that he needs Mark for the ministry (2 Tim 4:11), - of course, for the preaching ministry, and maybe also to get acquainted with the mood of the 12 apostles, with whose representative, Peter, Mark was on the most friendly terms. Since 2 Timothy was written around the year 66 or 67, and Mark, according to Col 4:10, was supposed to go to Asia around the year 63-64, it follows that he was away from the an. Paul for about three years, and, most likely, traveled with St. Peter.

In addition to these, one might say, direct evidence about the life of Martha, in his gospel itself one can also find information about his personality. So it is very probable that he was the young man who followed the procession in which Christ was taken in Gethsemane, and who fled from those who wanted to seize him, leaving in their hands the veil with which he wrapped himself (Mark 14:51). Perhaps he was also present at Christ's last Paschal supper (see comment on Mark 14:19). There are also some indications that the evangelist himself was present at some of the other events in the life of Christ that he describes (eg, Mark 1:5 et seq.; Mark 3:8 and Mark 3:22; Mark 11:16).

What does St. the tradition of Mark and his gospel. The oldest testimony about the writer of the second Gospel is found by Papias, Bishop of Hierapolis. This bishop, according to Eusebius of Caesarea (Church. Historian III, 39), wrote: “The presbyter (i.e., John the Theologian - according to the generally accepted opinion) also said: “Mark, the interpreter (ε ̔ ρμηνευτη ̀ ς) of Peter Mark, through the compilation of his work, became the "interpreter" of Peter, that is, he conveyed to many what the apostle said. Peter became, as it were, the mouth of Peter. It is erroneous to assume that Mark is characterized here as a “translator”, whose services were allegedly used by ap. Peter and who was needed by Peter in Rome to translate his speeches into Latin. First, Peter hardly needed an interpreter for his sermons. Secondly, the word ε ̔ ρμηνευτη ̀ ς in classical Greek often denoted a messenger, a transmitter of the will of the gods (Plato, Republic). Finally, the blessed Jerome (letter 120 to Gedibia) Titus is called the interpreter of Paul, as is Mark the interpreter of Peter. Both indicate only that these co-workers of the apostles proclaimed their will and desires. Perhaps, however, Titus, as a natural Greek, was a collaborator of St. Paul in writing epistles; as an experienced stylist, he could give the apostle an explanation of some Greek terms., wrote down with accuracy, as far as he remembered, what the Lord taught and did, although not in order, for he himself did not listen to the Lord and did not accompany Him. Afterwards, it is true, he was, as I said, with Peter, but Peter expounded the doctrine in order to satisfy the needs of the listeners, and not in order to convey the Lord's discourses in order. Therefore, Mark did not at all err in describing some events as he recalled them. He cared only about how not to miss something from what he heard, or not to change it. ”

From this testimony of Papias it is clear: 1) that ap. John knew the Gospel of Mark and talked about it in the circle of his disciples - of course, in Ephesus; 2) that he testified that St. Mark reported those memories that he kept in his memory about the speeches of St. Peter, who spoke about the words and deeds of the Lord, and thus became a messenger and mediator in the transmission of these stories; 3) that Mark did not follow the chronological order. This remark suggests that at that time there was a condemnation of ev. Mark on the fact that it has some shortcomings compared to other gospels, which carefully took care of the "order" (Luke 1:3) in the presentation gospel events; 4) Papias, for his part, reports that Mark was not personally a disciple of Christ, but - probably later - a disciple of Peter. However, this does not negate the possibility that Mark communicates something from what he himself experienced. At the beginning of the Muratorian fragment there is a remark about Mark: “he himself was present at some events and reported them”; 5) that Peter adapted his teachings to the modern needs of his listeners and did not care about a coherent strictly chronological presentation of the gospel events. Therefore, Mark cannot be blamed for deviations from a strictly chronological sequence of events; 6) that Mark's dependence on Peter in his writing extends only to certain circumstances (ε ̓́ νια). But Papias praises Mark for his thoroughness and accuracy in the narrative: he did not hide anything and did not at all embellish events and persons.

Justin Martyr in Conversation with Trypho (chap. 106) mentions the existence of "sights" or "memoirs of Peter", and quotes a passage from Mark 3:16 et seq. It is clear that by these "sights" he means the Gospel of Mark. St. Irenaeus (Against Heresies III, I, 1), also knows for certain that Mark wrote the Gospel after the death of Peter and Paul, who, according to the chronology of Irenaeus, preached in Rome from 61 to 66, wrote exactly as Peter proclaimed the gospel. Clement of Alexandria (hypot. on 1 Peter 5:13) reports that Mark wrote his gospel in Rome at the request of some notable Roman Christians. In his Gospel, he set forth the oral sermon he heard from St. Peter, who himself knew about the desire of the Roman Christians to have a monument of his conversations with them. To this testimony, St. Clement Eusebius of Caesarea adds that St. Peter, on the basis of the revelation that had been given to him, expressed his approval of the Gospel written by Mark (Church. Hist. VI, 14, 5 et seq.).

On the further fate of Mark, Eusebius reports a legend that Mark appeared as the first preacher of the Gospel in Egypt and founded christian church in Alexandria. Thanks to Mark's preaching and his strictly ascetic lifestyle, Jewish therapists were converted to faith in Christ (Mk 2:15). Although Eusebius does not call Mark the bishop of Alexandria, he begins counting the bishops of Alexandria precisely from Mark (Mk 2:24). Having installed Anian as bishop in Alexandria and made several persons presbyters and deacons, Mark, according to the saying of Symeon Metaphrastus, withdrew from the persecution of the pagans to Pentapolis. After two years he returned to Alexandria and found the number of Christians greatly increased there. He himself then begins to preach again and work miracles. On this occasion, the pagans charge him with magic. During the celebration Egyptian god Serapisu Mark was seized by the pagans, tied with a rope around his neck and dragged out of the city. In the evening they threw him into prison, and the next day a mob of pagans killed him. It happened on April 25th (year - unknown Assumptions prof. Bolotov "on the day and year of the death of St. Mark ”(63 - April 4) (Christ. Reading 1893 July and the next book) do not agree with what is obtained from familiarization with the biblical data on the death of Mark.). His body rested for a long time in Alexandria, but in the year 827 Venetian merchants took him with them and brought him to Venice, where Mark, with his lion symbol, became the patron of the city, in which a magnificent cathedral with a wonderful bell tower was built in his honor. (According to another tradition, Mark died in Rome.)

At St. Hippolyta (refut. VII, 30) Mark is called fingerless (ο ̔ κολοβοδάκτυλος). This name can be explained by the testimony of one ancient preface to the Gospel of Mark. According to this introduction (prologue), Mark, as a descendant of Levi, had the title of a Jewish priest, but after his conversion to Christ, he cut off his thumb to show that it was not suitable for correcting priestly duties. This, according to the author of the introduction, did not prevent, however, Mark from becoming the Bishop of Alexandria, and thus the mysterious destiny of Mark to serve God in the holy dignity was fulfilled ... However, it can be assumed that Mark lost his thumb sometime in the time of the tortures to which he was subjected by his pagan persecutors.

Purpose of writing the gospel of Mark. The purpose of writing the Gospel of Mark is revealed already from the first words of this book: “The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God” is an inscription that clearly indicates the content and purpose of the Gospel of Mark. How ev. Matthew, by the words: “the book of Genesis (βίβλος γενέσεως in Russian translation inaccurately: “genealogy”) of Jesus Christ, the Son of David”, etc., wants to say that he intends to give the “history of Christ”, as a descendant of David and Abraham, who in His activity He fulfilled the ancient promises given to the people of Israel, and so did ev. In the first five words of his book, Mark wants to let his readers know what they should expect from him.

In what sense ev. Mark used the word "beginning" (α ̓ ρχη ̀) here, and in which one did he use the word "Gospel" (ευ ̓ αγγελίον)? The last expression in Mark occurs seven times and everywhere means brought by Christ good news about the salvation of people, the proclamation of the coming of the Kingdom of God. But in conjunction with the expression "beginning" the word "Gospel" of Mark is no longer found. App comes to the rescue here. Paul. In the last to the Philippians he uses the same expression in the sense of the initial stage of the gospel preaching, which he offered in Macedonia. “You know, Philippians,” says the apostle, “that at the beginning of the gospel (ε ̓ ν α ̓ ρχη ̨̃ του ̃ ευ ̓ αγγελίου), when I left Macedonia, not a single church showed me participation in giving and receiving, except you alone ” (Philippians 4:15). This expression: “the beginning of the Gospel” can only have the meaning here that the Philippians then knew only the most necessary things about Christ - His words and deeds, which were the usual subject of the initial preaching of the evangelists about Christ. Meanwhile, now, eleven years after the stay of the apostle in Macedonia, of which he speaks in the passage quoted above, the Philippians are undoubtedly already much higher in their understanding of Christianity. So the Gospel of Mark is an attempt to give an elementary description of the life of Christ, which was caused by the special condition of those persons for whom the Gospel was written. This is also confirmed by the testimony of Papias, according to which Mark wrote down the missionary conversations of St. Peter. And what these conversations were about - a rather definite concept of an gives us about this. Paul in the letter to the Hebrews. Addressing his readers, Jewish Christians, he reproaches them for having lingered for a long time at the initial stage of Christian development and even took a certain step back. “Judging by the time, you should have been teachers, but you again need to be taught the first principles of the word of God, and you need milk, not solid food” (Heb 5:12). Thus the apostle distinguishes the beginnings of the word of God (Τα ̀ στοιχει ̃ α τη ̃ ς α ̓ ρχη ̃ ς τ . Χρ . λογ .) as "milk" from the solid food of the perfect. The Gospel of Mark or the sermon of St. Peter and represented this initial stage of the gospel teaching of the facts from the life of Christ, offered to Roman Christians who had just entered the Church of Christ.

Thus, “the beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ” is a short designation of the entire content of the following narrative, as the simplest presentation gospel history. With such an understanding of the purpose of writing the Gospel of Mark, the brevity, conciseness of this book agrees, which makes it look like, one might say, a “reduction” of the Gospel story, most suitable for people who are still at the first stage of Christian development. This is evident from the fact that in this Gospel, in general, more attention is paid to those facts from the life of Christ, in which the divine power of Christ, His miraculous power was revealed, and, moreover, the miracles performed by Christ over children and youths are reported in sufficient detail, while the teaching Christ says relatively little. As if the evangelist meant to give Christian parents a guide for telling the events of the gospel story when teaching truths to children. Christian faith... It can be said that the Gospel of Mark, which mainly draws attention to the miracles of Christ, is perfectly adapted to the understanding of those who can be called "children in the faith", and, perhaps, even for children of Christians in the proper sense of this words ... Even the fact that the evangelist likes to dwell on the details of events and, moreover, explains everything in almost detail - and this may indicate that he had in mind to offer precisely the initial, elementary presentation of the gospel story for people who needed this kind of instruction .

Comparison of the Gospel of Mark with the testimony of church tradition about him. Papias reports that the "presbyter", that is, John the Theologian, found that the Gospel of Mark does not follow a strict chronological order in the presentation of events. This is indeed seen in this gospel. So, for example, reading the first chapter of Mark Mk 1:12.14.16, the reader remains at a loss as to when the “tradition” of John the Baptist happened and when Christ appeared in public service, in what chronological relation to this speech is the temptation of Christ in the wilderness and within what framework the history of the calling of the first two pairs of disciples should be set. — The reader also cannot determine when the Lord calls the 12 apostles (Mark 3:13 et seq.), where, when and in what sequence Christ spoke and explained His parables (ch. 4).

Then the tradition calls the writer of the Gospel John Mark and presents him as a disciple of St. Peter, who wrote his gospel from his words. In the Gospel of Mark we find nothing that could contradict the first message of tradition, and very much that confirms the latter. The gospel writer is obviously a native of Palestine: he knows the language spoken by the Palestinian inhabitants at that time, and he apparently takes pleasure in sometimes giving a phrase in his own language, accompanying it with a translation (Mk 5:1; Mk 7:34; Mark 15:34 etc.). Only the most famous Hebrew words remained without translation (Rabbi, Abba, Amen, Gehenna, Satan, Hosanna). The entire style of the Gospel is Hebrew, although the entire Gospel is undoubtedly written in Greek (the tradition of the original Latin text is a fiction that does not have any sufficient basis).

Perhaps from the fact that the writer of the Gospel himself bore the name John, one can explain why, speaking of John the Theologian, he does not simply call him "John", but adds to this in Mark 3:17 and Mark 5:37 the definition: "brother of Jacob." It is also remarkable that Mark reports some characteristic details that define the personality of the Apostle Peter (Mk 14:29-31.54.66.72), and on the other hand, omits such details from the history of St. Peter, who could overly exalt the significance of the personality of St. Peter. So, he does not convey the words that Christ said to St. Peter after his great confession (Matthew 16:16-19), and in the enumeration of the apostles does not call Peter "the first", as Ev. Matthew (Mt 10:2, cf. Mark 3:16). Is it not clear from here that the Evangelist Mark wrote his Gospel according to the memoirs of the humble ap. Peter? (cf. 1 Peter 5:5).

Finally, tradition points to Rome as the place where the Gospel of Mark was written. And the Gospel itself shows that its writer dealt with Latin Christians from pagans. Mark, for example, incomparably more often than other evangelists, uses Latin expressions (eg centurion, speculator, legion, qualification, etc., of course, in their Greek pronunciation). And most importantly, Mark sometimes explains Greek expressions through Latin and specifically Roman terms. Rome is also indicated by the designation of Simon of Cyrene as the father of Alexander and Rufus (cf. Rom 15:13).

Upon closer acquaintance with the Gospel of Mark, it turns out that he wrote his work for Gentile Christians. This can be seen, for example, in the fact that he explains in detail the practices of the Pharisees (Mark 7:3 et seq.). He does not have those speeches and details that the Jews have. Matthew and which ones could have meaning only for Jewish Christian readers, and for Gentile Christians, without special explanations, would even remain incomprehensible (see, for example, Mark 1:1 et seq., the genealogy of Christ, Mt 17:24; Mt 23 ; Mt 24:20 ; nor on the Sabbath, Mt 5:17-43).

Relation of the Gospel of Mark to the other two synoptic gospels. Bliss. Augustine believed that Mark in his gospel was a follower of the Jews. Matthew and abbreviated only his Gospel (On acc. Heb. I, 2, 3); there is undoubtedly a correct idea in this opinion, because the writer of the Gospel of Mark, obviously, used some kind of more ancient Gospel and actually abbreviated it. Critics of the text agree almost on the assumption that the Gospel of Matthew served as such a guide for Mark, but not in its current form, but in its original form, namely the one that was written in Hebrew. Since the Gospel of Matthew in Hebrew was written in Palestine in the early years of the 7th decade, Mark, who at that time was in Asia Minor, could get his hands on the Gospel written by Matthew and then take it with him to Rome.

There were attempts to divide the Gospel into separate parts, which, by their origin, were related to different decades of the first century and even to the beginning of the second (First Mark, second Mark, third Mark, etc.). But all these hypotheses about the later origin of our current Gospel of Mark from some later remodeler are shattered by the testimony of Papias, according to which, already around the year 80, John the Theologian apparently had in his hands our Gospel of Mark and talked about it with his students.

The division of the Gospel of Mark according to content. After the introduction to the Gospel (Mk 1:1-13), the evangelist in the first section (Mk 1:14-3:6) depicts in a number of separate artistic pictures how Christ preached first in Capernaum, and then throughout Galilee, teaching, gathering the first disciples around Himself and performing miracles that aroused astonishment (Mk 1:14-39), and then, how the defenders of the old orders begin to rise up against Christ. Christ, although he actually keeps the law, nevertheless takes seriously the attacks on him by the adherents of the law and refutes their attacks. Here He expresses a very important new doctrine about Himself: He is the Son of God (Mark 1:40-3:6). The next three sections - the second (Mk 3:7-6:6), the third (Mk 6:6-8:26) and the fourth (Mk 8:27-10:45) depict the activity of Christ in the north of the holy land, for the most part especially in the first period, in Galilee, but also, especially in the later period, and beyond the borders of Galilee, and finally His journey to Jerusalem through Perea and Jordan all the way to Jericho (Mark 10:1ff.). At the beginning of each section, there is every time a narrative referring to the 12 apostles (cf. Mark 3:14; Mark 5:30): narratives about their calling, their sending to preach and their confession on the question of the Messianic dignity of Christ, the evangelist obviously wants to show how Christ considered it his indispensable task to prepare his disciples for their future calling as preachers of the gospel even among the Gentiles, although, of course, this point of view cannot be considered exclusive here. It goes without saying that the face of the Lord Jesus Christ, as a preacher and miracle worker, the promised Messiah and Son of God, stands here in the foreground. - In the fifth section (Mk 10:46-13:37) the activity of Christ in Jerusalem is depicted as a prophet, or rather, as the Son of David, who should fulfill the Old Testament predictions about the future kingdom of David. Along with this, the growth of hostility towards Christ on the part of the representatives of Judaism is described to its highest point. Finally, the sixth section (Mk 14:1-15:47) tells of the suffering, death and resurrection of Christ, as well as His ascension to heaven.

A look at the gradual unfolding of the thoughts contained in the Gospel of Mark. After a brief inscription in which readers are given an idea of ​​what the book is (Mk 1:1), the evangelist in the introduction (Mk 1:2-13) depicts the speech and activity of John the Baptist, the forerunner of the Messiah, and, above all, his baptism of the Messiah Himself. Then the evangelist makes a brief remark about Christ’s sojourn in the wilderness and about His temptation there from the devil, pointing out that at that time the angels served Christ: by this he wants to signify the victory of Christ over the devil and the beginning of a new life for mankind, who will no longer be afraid of all the forces of hell (figuratively represented by the "beasts of the wilderness" who no longer harmed Christ, this new Adam). Further, the evangelist consistently depicts how Christ subjugated mankind to Himself and restored the communion of people with God. - In the first section (Mk 1:14-3:6), in the first part (Mk 1:14-39 of Art. 1st chapter), the evangelist first gives a general picture of the teaching activity of the Lord Jesus Christ (Mk 1:14-15) and at the end (v. 39) His deeds. Between these two characteristics, the evangelist describes five events: a) the calling of the disciples, b) the events in the Capernaum synagogue, c) the healing of Peter's mother-in-law, d) the healing of the sick in the evening in front of Peter's house, and e) the search for Christ, who retired in the morning for prayer, by the people and, chiefly, way, Peter and his associates. All these five events took place during the time from Friday afternoon to Sunday morning (according to Hebrew, the first day on Saturday). All events are grouped around Simon and his associates. It can be seen that the evangelist received from Simon information about all these events. From here the reader gets a sufficient idea of ​​how Christ, who revealed His activity after taking John the Baptist into prison, performed His ministry of Teacher and Wonderworker.

In the second part of the first section (Mk 1:40-3:6), the evangelist depicts the gradually growing enmity towards Christ on the part of the Pharisees and mainly those Pharisees who belonged to the number of scribes. This enmity is explained by the fact that the Pharisees see in the activity of Christ a violation of the law given by God through Moses, and therefore a number of, one might say, criminal offenses. Nevertheless, Christ treats all Jews with love and compassion, helping them in their spiritual needs and bodily illnesses, and at the same time revealing Himself as a being that exceeds ordinary mortals, standing in a special relation to God. It is especially important that here Christ testifies of Himself as the Son of man, who forgives sins (Mk 2:10), who has authority over the Sabbath (Mk 2:28), who even has the rights of the priesthood, as similar rights were once recognized for His ancestor David (eating the sacred bread). Only these testimonies of Christ about Himself are not expressed directly and immediately, but enter into His speeches and deeds. Here we have before us seven stories: a) The story of the healing of a leper is intended to show that Christ, in carrying out the works of His high calling, did not violate the direct decrees of the Mosaic law (Mk 1:44). If he was reproached in this regard, then these reproaches were based on a one-sided, literal understanding of the Mosaic law, of which the Pharisees and rabbis were guilty. b) The story of the healing of the paralytic shows us in Christ not only the physician of the body, but also the sick soul. He has the power to forgive sins. The Lord reveals the attempt of the scribes to accuse Him of Blasphemy before everyone in all its insignificance and groundlessness. c) The history of the calling of the publican Levi as a disciple of Christ shows that even the publican is not so bad as to become Christ's helper. d) Christ's participation at the feast arranged by Levi shows that the Lord does not disdain sinners and tax collectors, which, of course, incites even more Pharisees' scribes against Him. e) Christ's relations with the Pharisees become even more aggravated when Christ came out as a principled opponent of the old Jewish fasts. f) and g) Here again Christ appears as the enemy of the Pharisees' one-sidedness in relation to the observance of the Sabbath. He is the King of the Heavenly Kingdom, and His servants may not fulfill the ritual law where necessary, especially since the law on the Sabbath is given for the good of man. But such a statement of Christ brings the irritation of His enemies to the extreme, and they begin to plot against Him.

b) the teaching of the Lord Jesus Christ, preached by Himself and His apostles about Him as the King of this Kingdom, the Messiah and the Son of God ( 2 Cor. 4:4),

c) all New Testament or Christian teaching in general, primarily the narrative of events from the life of Christ, the most important ( ; 1 Thess. 2:8) or the identity of the preacher ( Rome. 2:16).

For quite a long time, stories about the life of the Lord Jesus Christ were transmitted only orally. The Lord Himself left no record of His words and deeds. In the same way, the 12 apostles were not born writers: they were “unlearned and simple people” ( Acts. 4:13), although they are literate. Among the Christians of the apostolic time there were also very few "wise according to the flesh, strong" and "noble" ( 1 Cor. 1:26), and for the majority of believers, oral stories about Christ were much more important than written ones. Thus the apostles and preachers or evangelists "transmitted" (παραδιδόναι) tales of the deeds and speeches of Christ, while the faithful "received" (παραλαμβάνειν), but, of course, not mechanically, only by memory, as can be said of the students of rabbinic schools, but whole soul, as if something living and giving life. But soon this period of oral tradition was to end. On the one hand, Christians must have felt the need for a written presentation of the Gospel in their disputes with the Jews, who, as you know, denied the reality of the miracles of Christ and even claimed that Christ did not declare Himself the Messiah. It was necessary to show the Jews that Christians have authentic stories about Christ of those persons who were either among His apostles, or who were in close communion with eyewitnesses of Christ's deeds. On the other hand, the need for a written presentation of the history of Christ began to be felt because the generation of the first disciples was gradually dying out and the ranks of direct witnesses of the miracles of Christ were thinning out. Therefore, it was necessary to fix in writing individual sayings of the Lord and His whole speeches, as well as the stories about Him of the apostles. It was then that separate records of what was reported in the oral tradition about Christ began to appear here and there. Most carefully they wrote down the words of Christ, which contained the rules of the Christian life, and were much freer in the transfer of various events from the life of Christ, retaining only their general impression. Thus, one thing in these records, due to its originality, was transmitted everywhere in the same way, while the other was modified. These initial notes did not think about the completeness of the narrative. Even our Gospels, as can be seen from the conclusion of the Gospel of John ( In. 21:25), did not intend to report all the words and deeds of Christ. This is evident, among other things, from what is not included in them, for example, such a saying of Christ: “it is more blessed to give than to receive” ( Acts. 20:35). The Evangelist Luke reports such records, saying that many before him had already begun to compose narratives about the life of Christ, but that they did not have the proper fullness and that therefore they did not give sufficient “confirmation” in the faith ( OK. 1:1-4).

Evidently, our canonical gospels arose from the same motives. The period of their appearance can be determined at about thirty years - from 60 to 90 (the last was the Gospel of John). The first three gospels are usually called synoptic in biblical science, because they depict the life of Christ in such a way that their three narratives can be easily viewed in one and combined into one whole narrative (forecasters - from Greek - looking together). They began to be called gospels each separately, perhaps as early as the end of the 1st century, but from church writing we have information that such a name was given to the entire composition of the gospels only in the second half of the 2nd century. As for the names: “The Gospel of Matthew”, “The Gospel of Mark”, etc., then these very ancient names from Greek should be translated as follows: “The Gospel according to Matthew”, “The Gospel according to Mark” (κατὰ Ματθαῖον, κατὰ Μᾶρκον). By this, the Church wanted to say that in all the Gospels there is a single Christian gospel about Christ the Savior, but according to the images of different writers: one image belongs to Matthew, the other to Mark, etc.

four gospel

Thus, ancient church looked at the depiction of the life of Christ in our four gospels, not as different gospels or narratives, but as one gospel, one book in four forms. That is why in the Church the name of the Four Gospels was established behind our Gospels. Saint Irenaeus called them "the fourfold Gospel" (τετράμορφον τὸ εὐαγγέλιον - see Irenaeus Lugdunensis, Adversus haereses liber 3, ed. A. Rousseau and L. Doutreleaü Irenée Lyon. Contre les hérésies, livre 3, vol 2, Paris, 1974, 11, 11).

The Fathers of the Church dwell on the question: why did the Church accept not one gospel, but four? So St. John Chrysostom says: “Is it really impossible for one evangelist to write everything that is needed. Of course, he could, but when four people wrote, they did not write at the same time, not in the same place, without communicating or conspiring among themselves, and for all that they wrote in such a way that everything seemed to be pronounced by one mouth, then this is the strongest proof of the truth. You will say: "However, the opposite happened, for the four Gospels are often convicted in disagreement." This is the very sign of truth. For if the Gospels were exactly in agreement with each other in everything, even regarding the very words, then none of the enemies would believe that the Gospels were not written by ordinary mutual agreement. Now, a slight disagreement between them frees them from all suspicion. For what they say differently about time or place does not in the least impair the truth of their narration. In the main thing, which is the foundation of our life and the essence of preaching, not one of them disagrees with the other in anything and nowhere - that God became a man, worked miracles, was crucified, resurrected, ascended into heaven. ("Conversations on the Gospel of Matthew", 1).

Saint Irenaeus also finds a special symbolic meaning in the quaternary number of our Gospels. “Since there are four parts of the world in which we live, and since the Church is scattered throughout the earth and has its affirmation in the Gospel, it was necessary for her to have four pillars, from everywhere emanating incorruption and reviving the human race. The all-arranging Word, seated on the Cherubim, gave us the Gospel in four forms, but imbued with one spirit. For David also, praying for His appearance, says: "Seated on the Cherubim, reveal Yourself" ( Ps. 79:2). But the Cherubim (in the vision of the prophet Ezekiel and the Apocalypse) have four faces, and their faces are images of the activity of the Son of God. Saint Irenaeus finds it possible to attach the symbol of a lion to the Gospel of John, since this Gospel depicts Christ as the eternal King, and the lion is the king in the animal world; to the Gospel of Luke - the symbol of the calf, since Luke begins his Gospel with the image of the priestly service of Zechariah, who slaughtered the calves; to the Gospel of Matthew - a symbol of a person, since this Gospel mainly depicts the human birth of Christ, and, finally, to the Gospel of Mark - a symbol of an eagle, because Mark begins his Gospel with a mention of the prophets, to whom the Holy Spirit flew, like an eagle on wings "(Irenaeus Lugdunensis, Adversus haereses, liber 3, 11, 11-22). In other Church Fathers, the symbols of the lion and calf are moved and the first is given to Mark, and the second to John. Starting from the 5th c. in this form, the symbols of the evangelists began to join the images of the four evangelists in church painting.

Mutual relations gospels

Each of the four Gospels has its own characteristics, and most of all - the Gospel of John. But the first three, as already mentioned above, have extremely much in common with each other, and this similarity involuntarily catches the eye even with a cursory reading of them. Let us first of all speak of the similarity of the Synoptic Gospels and the causes of this phenomenon.

Even Eusebius of Caesarea in his "canons" divided the Gospel of Matthew into 355 parts and noted that all three forecasters have 111 of them. IN modern times exegetes worked out an even more precise numerical formula for determining the similarity of the Gospels and calculated that the total number of verses common to all weather forecasters goes up to 350. Matthew then has 350 verses peculiar only to him, Mark has 68 such verses, and Luke has 541. Similarities are mainly seen in the transmission of the sayings of Christ, and differences - in the narrative part. When Matthew and Luke literally converge in their Gospels, Mark always agrees with them. The similarity between Luke and Mark is much closer than between Luke and Matthew (Lopukhin - in the Orthodox Theological Encyclopedia. T. V. C. 173). It is also remarkable that some passages of all three evangelists go in the same sequence, for example, the temptation and speech in Galilee, the calling of Matthew and the conversation about fasting, the plucking of ears and the healing of the withered hand, the calming of the storm and the healing of the demoniac of Gadarene, etc. The similarity sometimes extends even to the construction of sentences and expressions (for example, in the citation of the prophecy Mal. 3:1).

As for the differences observed among weather forecasters, there are quite a few of them. Others are reported only by two evangelists, others even by one. So, only Matthew and Luke cite the conversation on the mount of the Lord Jesus Christ, tell the story of the birth and the first years of Christ's life. One Luke speaks of the birth of John the Baptist. Other things one evangelist conveys in a more abbreviated form than another, or in a different connection than another. The details of the events in each Gospel are different, as well as the expressions.

This phenomenon of similarity and difference in the Synoptic Gospels has long attracted the attention of interpreters of Scripture, and various assumptions have long been put forward to explain this fact. More correct is the opinion that our three evangelists used a common oral source for their narrative of the life of Christ. At that time, evangelists or preachers about Christ went everywhere preaching and repeated in different places in more or less extensive form what it was considered necessary to offer to those who entered the Church. In this way a well-known definite type was formed oral gospel, and this is the type we have in writing in our synoptic gospels. Of course, at the same time, depending on the goal that this or that evangelist had, his gospel took on some special features, only characteristic of his work. At the same time, one cannot rule out the possibility that an older gospel might have been known to the evangelist who wrote later. At the same time, the difference between synoptics should be explained by the different goals that each of them had in mind when writing his Gospel.

As we have already said, the synoptic gospels are very different from the gospel of John the Theologian. Thus they depict almost exclusively the activity of Christ in Galilee, while the apostle John depicts mainly the sojourn of Christ in Judea. In regard to content, the synoptic gospels also differ considerably from the gospel of John. They give, so to speak, a more external image of the life, deeds and teachings of Christ, and from the speeches of Christ they cite only those that were accessible to the understanding of the whole people. John, on the contrary, omits a lot of the activities of Christ, for example, he cites only six miracles of Christ, but those speeches and miracles that he cites have a special deep meaning and extreme importance about the person of the Lord Jesus Christ. Finally, while the synoptics portray Christ primarily as the founder of the kingdom of God and therefore direct their readers' attention to the kingdom he founded, John draws our attention to the central point of this kingdom, from which life flows along the peripheries of the kingdom, i.e. on the Lord Jesus Christ Himself, whom John depicts as the Only Begotten Son of God and as the Light for all mankind. That is why even the ancient interpreters called the Gospel of John predominantly spiritual (πνευματικόν), in contrast to synoptic ones, as depicting a predominantly human side in the face of Christ (εὐαγγέλιον σωματικόν), i.e. bodily gospel.

However, it must be said that weather forecasters also have passages that indicate that, as weather forecasters, the activity of Christ in Judea was known ( Matt. 23:37, 27:57 ; OK. 10:38-42), so John has indications of the continuous activity of Christ in Galilee. In the same way, weather forecasters convey such sayings of Christ, which testify to His divine dignity ( Matt. 11:27), and John, for his part, also in places depicts Christ as a true man ( In. 2 etc.; John 8 and etc.). Therefore, one cannot speak of any contradiction between the synoptics and John in the depiction of the face and deed of Christ.

Reliability of the Gospels

Although criticism has long been expressed against the reliability of the Gospels, and recently these attacks of criticism have become especially intensified (the theory of myths, especially the theory of Drews, who does not at all recognize the existence of Christ), however, all objections of criticism are so insignificant that they are shattered at the slightest collision with Christian apologetics. Here, however, we will not cite the objections of negative criticism and analyze these objections: this will be done when interpreting the text of the Gospels itself. We will only speak about the main general grounds on which we recognize the Gospels as completely reliable documents. This is, firstly, the existence of the tradition of eyewitnesses, of whom many survived until the era when our Gospels appeared. Why should we refuse to trust these sources of our gospels? Could they have made up everything that is in our gospels? No, all the Gospels are purely historical. Secondly, it is incomprehensible why the Christian consciousness would want - so the mythical theory asserts - to crown the head of a simple rabbi Jesus with the crown of the Messiah and the Son of God? Why, for example, is it not said about the Baptist that he performed miracles? Obviously because he did not create them. And from this it follows that if Christ is said to be the Great Wonderworker, then it means that He really was like that. And why could one deny the authenticity of the miracles of Christ, since the highest miracle - His Resurrection - is witnessed like no other event ancient history(cm. 1 Cor. 15)?

Bibliography foreign works according to the four gospels

Bengel J. Al. Gnomon Novi Testamentï in quo ex nativa verborum VI simplicitas, profunditas, concinnitas, salubritas sensuum coelestium indicatur. Berolini, 1860.

Blass, Gram. - Blass F. Grammatik des neutestamentlichen Griechisch. Göttingen, 1911.

Westcott - The New Testament in Original Greek the text rev. by Brooke Foss Westcott. New York, 1882.

B. Weiss - Wikiwand Weiss B. Die Evangelien des Markus und Lukas. Göttingen, 1901.

Yog. Weiss (1907) - Die Schriften des Neuen Testaments, von Otto Baumgarten; Wilhelm Bousset. Hrsg. von Johannes Weis_s, Bd. 1: Die drei alteren Evangelien. Die Apostelgeschichte, Matthaeus Apostolus; Marcus Evangelista; Lucas Evangelista. . 2. Aufl. Göttingen, 1907.

Godet - Godet F. Commentar zu dem Evangelium des Johannes. Hanover, 1903.

Name De Wette W.M.L. Kurze Erklärung des Evangeliums Matthäi / Kurzgefasstes exegetisches Handbuch zum Neuen Testament, Band 1, Teil 1. Leipzig, 1857.

Keil (1879) - Keil C.F. Commentar über die Evangelien des Markus und Lukas. Leipzig, 1879.

Keil (1881) - Keil C.F. Commentar über das Evangelium des Johannes. Leipzig, 1881.

Klostermann A. Das Markusevangelium nach seinem Quellenwerthe für die evangelische Geschichte. Göttingen, 1867.

Cornelius a Lapide - Cornelius a Lapide. In SS Matthaeum et Marcum / Commentaria in scripturam sacram, t. 15. Parisiis, 1857.

Lagrange M.-J. Études bibliques: Evangile selon St. Marc. Paris, 1911.

Lange J.P. Das Evangelium nach Matthäus. Bielefeld, 1861.

Loisy (1903) - Loisy A.F. Le quatrième evangile. Paris, 1903.

Loisy (1907-1908) - Loisy A.F. Les evangeles synoptiques, 1-2. : Ceffonds, pres Montier-en-Der, 1907-1908.

Luthardt Ch.E. Das johanneische Evangelium nach seiner Eigenthümlichkeit geschildert und erklärt. Nürnberg, 1876.

Meyer (1864) - Meyer H.A.W. Kritisch exegetisches Commentar über das Neue Testament, Abteilung 1, Hälfte 1: Handbuch über das Evangelium des Matthäus. Göttingen, 1864.

Meyer (1885) - Kritisch-exegetischer Commentar über das Neue Testament hrsg. von Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer, Abteilung 1, Hälfte 2: Bernhard Weiss B. Kritisch exegetisches Handbuch über die Evangelien des Markus und Lukas. Göttingen, 1885. Meyer (1902) - Meyer H.A.W. Das Johannes-Evangelium 9. Auflage, bearbeitet von B. Weiss. Göttingen, 1902.

Merckx (1902) - Merx A. Erläuterung: Matthaeus / Die vier kanonischen Evangelien nach ihrem ältesten bekannten Texte, Teil 2, Hälfte 1. Berlin, 1902.

Merckx (1905) - Merx A. Erläuterung: Markus und Lukas / Die vier kanonischen Evangelien nach ihrem ältesten bekannten Texte. Teil 2, Hälfte 2. Berlin, 1905.

Morison J. A practical commentary on the Gospel according to St. Morison Matthew. London, 1902.

Stanton - Wikiwand Stanton V.H. The Synoptic Gospels / The Gospels as historical documents, Part 2. Cambridge, 1903. Toluc (1856) - Tholuck A. Die Bergpredigt. Gotha, 1856.

Tolyuk (1857) - Tholuck A. Commentar zum Evangelium Johannis. Gotha, 1857.

Heitmüller - see Jog. Weiss (1907).

Holtzmann (1901) - Holtzmann H.J. Die Synoptiker. Tubingen, 1901.

Holtzmann (1908) - Holtzmann H.J. Evangelium, Briefe und Offenbarung des Johannes / Hand-Commentar zum Neuen Testament bearbeitet von H. J. Holtzmann, R. A. Lipsius etc. bd. 4. Freiburg im Breisgau, 1908.

Zahn (1905) - Zahn Th. Das Evangelium des Matthäus / Commentar zum Neuen Testament, Teil 1. Leipzig, 1905.

Zahn (1908) - Zahn Th. Das Evangelium des Johannes ausgelegt / Commentar zum Neuen Testament, Teil 4. Leipzig, 1908.

Schanz (1881) - Schanz P. Commentar über das Evangelium des heiligen Marcus. Freiburg im Breisgau, 1881.

Schanz (1885) - Schanz P. Commentar über das Evangelium des heiligen Johannes. Tubingen, 1885.

Schlatter - Schlatter A. Das Evangelium des Johannes: ausgelegt fur Bibelleser. Stuttgart, 1903.

Schürer, Geschichte - Schürer E., Geschichte des jüdischen Volkes im Zeitalter Jesu Christi. bd. 1-4. Leipzig, 1901-1911.

Edersheim (1901) - Edersheim A. The life and times of Jesus the Messiah. 2 Vols. London, 1901.

Ellen - Allen W.C. A critical and exegetical commentary of the Gospel according to st. Matthew. Edinburgh, 1907.

Alford - Alford N. The Greek Testament in four volumes, vol. 1. London, 1863.

1–6. Healing the dry-armed on Saturday. - 7-12. General depiction of the activities of Jesus Christ. - 13-19. Election of 12 students. - 20-30. Jesus Christ's response to the accusation that He casts out demons by the power of Satan. – 31–35. True relatives of Jesus Christ.

Mark 3:1. And he came again to the synagogue; there was a man with a withered hand.

(For the healing of the dry-handed, see the comments on.)

Evangelist Mark notes that the sick man had a withered hand, not a dry one (). He, therefore, was not born with such a hand, and it shrunk, probably from some kind of wound.

Mark 3:2. And they watched him to see if he would be healed on the Sabbath to accuse him.

According to Mark, the Pharisees - of course, they are talking about here - watched with special attention (παρετήρουν) to see if Christ would heal (θεραπεύσει) him on the Sabbath. Of course, after such a healing, they intended to accuse Christ of violating the Sabbath law.

Mark 3:3. He says to the man who had the withered hand, stand in the middle.

"Stand in the middle"- more precisely: "Rise to the middle!". The Lord was in the midst of the people - He was surrounded mainly by the Pharisees (cf. verse 5: looking, or, more precisely, looking around those who were sitting around Him). The Lord thus proceeds to openly attack His enemies, demanding that they clearly express their thoughts about Him.

Mark 3:4. And he said to them: Shall we do good on the Sabbath, or do evil? save the soul, or destroy? But they were silent.

"Doing good" - doing generally good meritorious deeds (ἀγαθόν ποιῆσαι ). What is the "good work" that Jesus meant here, He immediately explains. If you do not help the unfortunate, when possible, it means to offer him as a victim of certain death. It is obvious that the withered hand had a serious dangerous disease, the so-called muscle atrophy, which had to go progressively, and the Lord not only healed one of his hands, but also destroyed the disease itself at its root. The Pharisees could not answer anything to Christ’s question: they did not want to agree with Christ, and they did not find any reason to contradict the view expressed by Him on this issue, since the sixth commandment directly said: “Thou shalt not kill.”

Mark 3:5. And looking at them with anger, grieving for the hardness of their hearts, he said to the man: Stretch out your hand. He stretched out, and his hand became healthy, like the other.

Looking around at his enemies and not seeing any attempt to answer the question directly, the Lord at the same time cast an angry look at them as hypocrites, grieving for their bitterness or stubbornness (see;).

Mark 3:6. The Pharisees went out and immediately took counsel with the Herodians against Him, how to destroy Him.

(For the Herodians, see comments on).

Mark 3:7. But Jesus with His disciples withdrew to the sea; and many people followed Him from Galilee, Judea,

The depiction of Christ's activity at this time takes five verses from Mark, and one from Matthew (). The Lord moves away to the sea not out of fear of his enemies, the Pharisees and Herodians (the enemies of Christ, of course, did not dare to do anything against Him, since a huge crowd of people rushed after Him), but simply because He saw how useless it would be further continue the conversation with the Pharisees.

Mark 3:8. Jerusalem, Idumea and beyond the Jordan. And those who dwelt in the vicinity of Tire and Sidon, when they heard what He was doing, they came to Him in great numbers.

The Evangelist Mark lists seven regions or places from which people came to Christ. This number obviously has a symbolic meaning here. It means the entirety of the countries or regions of Palestine. Even distant Idumea and Phoenicia sent their representatives to Christ. But if it is said about the Galileans and the inhabitants of Judea that they "followed" Christ (verse 7), then about the Jerusalemites and the inhabitants of Palestine mentioned further on, the evangelist says only that they "came" and, perhaps, only looked at what would happen. do Christ.

Mark 3:9. And he told his disciples to have a boat ready for him because of the crowd, so that they would not crowd him.

Mark 3:10. For He healed many, so that those who had the plagues rushed to Him to touch Him.

Here, obviously, the already known () four students are meant. The people crowded to Christ mainly, of course, in order to receive healing from Him - this can be said about those Galileans and Jews who "followed" Christ. Others simply wanted to see with their own eyes that Christ really heals the sick.

Mark 3:11. And the unclean spirits, when they saw Him, fell down before Him and cried out: You are the Son of God.

Mark 3:12. But He strictly forbade them not to make Him known.

"Unclean spirits", i.e. people who had unclean spirits. The Son of God is a more important expression (see) than the Holy of God (). But whether those people were aware of the true meaning of this name is not clear. The Lord did not reject this name, but forbade only the possessed to shout it out (see comments on). How strange it was that Christ, the great Wonderworker, was persecuted by representatives of Judaism and only demons were magnified!

Mark 3:13. Then he ascended the mountain and called to Himself whom He Himself wanted; and they came to him.

(On the calling of the 12 apostles, cf.).

"On mountain" . The seashore was, so to speak, a place of constant public meetings. On the other hand, in the mountains that are north of the Sea of ​​Tiberias, one could find a rather secluded place. The Lord goes there to get away from the crowd. The disciples are called to follow Him - namely, only those on whom the choice of Christ fell in this case, and not all. Evangelist Mark does not even call those invited by Christ "disciples", it is very possible that among the disciples already previously called by Christ there were completely new faces.

"And they came to Him"(ἀπῆλθον ), i.e., having followed Him, they left at the same time their former occupations.

Mark 3:14. And he appointed twelve of them to be with him and to send them to preach,

"And set" - ἐποίησεν. in this sense the verb ποιέω is used in - i.e. chose twelve (without the addition of the Apostles, which is in).

"To be with Him". This is the first purpose of election: the apostles must be constantly with Christ in order to prepare for their ministry.

"And to send them:" This is the second purpose of the calling of the apostles. By "preaching" the Evangelist Mark here, of course, means the proclamation of the coming of the Kingdom of God, which served as the subject of the sermon of Christ Himself.

Mark 3:15. and that they might have power to heal sickness and cast out demons;

"And heal from diseases". This expression is not found in the Codex Sinaiticus and Vatican, which is why Tischendorf and other recent critics omit it. But it is in the Syrian, Alexandrian and Western, Latin, codes (cf.).

Mark 3:16. appointed Simon, calling his name Peter,

According to the most ancient codes, Tischendorf begins this verse like this: “and he set twelve” ( καὶ ἐποίησεν τοὺς δώδεκα ).

“I put Simon, calling him the name Peter”. More correctly, according to Tischendorf: "and called the name of Simon Peter." Such an addition to the name of Simon was made even at his first call to follow Christ (see). The Evangelist Mark, however, found it necessary to mention this only here, just as Matthew found it necessary to say the same thing when describing another later event (cf.). Peter is not a proper name, but a nickname - "rock", so that the apostle bore both names together.

Mark 3:17. James of Zebedee and John the brother of James, calling them the names Boanerges, that is, "sons of thunder",

Neither the Evangelist Matthew nor Luke separate Andrew from his brother Simon, probably meaning that both brothers were called to follow Christ at the same time. But Mark puts the sons of Zebedee in second and third place, obviously because of their recognized importance in the circle of the apostles (Peter as the "mouth of the apostles", always speaking on behalf of all the apostles, Mark puts, like the Evangelist Matthew, in the first place).

"Voanerges, that is," sons of thunder "". The word "Boanerges" apparently comes from two words: "voan" - an Aramaic word corresponding to the Hebrew "bnei" (from "banim") - "sons", and the verb "ragash". The last verb in Biblical Hebrew does not mean "thunder," but it could have had such a meaning in vernacular Hebrew at the time of Christ. At least in Arabic there is a verb close to this, namely "rajasa", meaning "thunder to thunder." Why the Lord so called James and John - the Evangelist Mark does not say, so in this case one has to turn to the Gospel of Luke for clarification. The latter reports one case when both brothers showed very great swiftness and angry temper, which could serve as a reason to give them such a nickname - “sons of thunder” (). Some interpreters saw in this nickname a hint of the powerful impression that both brothers (Evfimy Zigaben) made on the listeners with their sermon. Origen called John the Evangelist "a mental thunder".

Mark 3:18. Andrew, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Thomas, Jacob Alfeev, Thaddeus, Simon Cananita

Mark 3:19. and Judas Iscariot, who betrayed Him.

For an explanation of the names of the apostles, see the comments to. Having singled out the twelve, Christ thereby laid the foundation of the Church as a society that is visible and has its own hierarchy.

Mark 3:20. They come to the house; and again the people came together, so that it was impossible for them even to eat bread.

Mark 3:21. And when his neighbors heard him, they went to take him, for they said that he had lost his temper.

One evangelist Mark mentions the accumulation of masses of people near the house where Christ was in Capernaum, and about the departure of Christ's relatives to Capernaum in order to take Christ. On the other hand, he omits the story of the healing of the possessed, which in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke serves as an introduction to the description of the attacks of the Pharisees on Christ: he already spoke about such miracles performed by Christ earlier. Obviously, the Evangelist Mark, who has just depicted the election of 12 who made up the closest circle around Christ, like a cell of the New Testament Church, is in a hurry to show the readers how this new step of Christ was reacted, firstly, by the people, and secondly, by relatives Christ and, thirdly, His enemies - the Pharisees, and then shows how Christ treated the Pharisees and His relatives.

"Come to the house". Here the Evangelist Mark does not use his favorite expression “immediately” (εὐθύς) and, thus, makes it possible to assume that after the election of the 12 there was a certain period of time, to which the Sermon on the Mount, available from the Evangelist Luke immediately after the story, can be attributed election of 12 (Luke 6ff.).

"Again" (cf.).

“So it was impossible for them to eat bread”, i.e. arrange a meal. The people, obviously, also filled the yard, where they usually arranged meals for guests:

"His Neighbors". Interpreters understand this expression in different ways.

According to Schantz and Knabenbaur, here "neighbors" (οἱ παρ´ αὐτοῦ ) are understood to be Christ's supporters in Capernaum. These scientists find grounds for such an assertion.

a) in the fact that in the book of Maccabees this expression means exactly the supporters (, 11, etc.),

b) the relatives of Christ lived in Nazareth and could not find out so soon what was happening in Capernaum,

c) when the Mother and brothers of Christ come, Mark calls them differently (verse 31).

But against this evidence says the following:

a) the expression “neighbors” can also mean relatives (Prov. 31:21, where the Hebrew word translated into Russian by the word “her family” is indicated in the Greek Bible by the expression οἱ παρ´ αὐτῆς );

b) what is said in verse 20 could go on for a long time, so that the relatives of Christ could learn about what was happening;

c) Mark is referring to the same persons in verses 21 and 31, but he names them more precisely after they arrive. Therefore, most interpreters see in the "near" relatives of Christ. (For the time being, the evangelist interrupts his speech about these relatives of Christ, giving them, so to speak, time to arrive in Capernaum, but for now he depicts a collision with the scribes).

"For they have spoken". Who spoke? Weiss sees here an impersonal expression: “they spoke among the people in general, they spoke here and there: and these conversations reached the relatives of Jesus, who, out of love for Him, went to take Him and take Him home.” But it is most natural to see here an indication of the impression that was made on the relatives of Christ by the stories of people who came to Nazareth from Capernaum about the situation in which Christ was at that time in Capernaum. They probably began to discuss among themselves what they should do in relation to Christ.

"That He went out of Himself"(ὅτι ἐξέστη), i.e. He is in such an agitated state that He can be called a "man out of his mind." Such a person usually neglects the usual rules of life, being completely carried away by the idea that absorbs him. But this is not a fool, just as, of course, the apostle Paul did not consider himself a fool when he said: “If we lose our temper, then for God” (εἴτε γὰρ ἐξέστημεν , (). The relatives did not consider Christ insane, but only thought that He needed to rest from the terrible mental tension in which He was then and in which He even forgot about the need to strengthen His strength with food. And Christ Himself does not further reprove His relatives for wanting to take Him away, and does not at all consider it necessary to prove that He is in good health, He only rejects their claims to take care of Him.

Mark 3:22. And the scribes who came from Jerusalem said that He had Beelzebub in Himself and that He cast out demons by the power of the prince of demons.

According to the Evangelist Matthew, the Pharisees denounced Christ in communion with Beelzebub and denounced before the people, and did not directly express this to Christ (). According to the Evangelist Mark, the scribes who arrived from Jerusalem come out with such tales, apparently as spies from the Sanhedrin, who were supposed to observe all the actions of Christ and indicate to the people in which Christ violates the generally accepted rules of conduct.

"Beelzebub" (see comments on).

The scribes put forward two propositions: a) Beelzebub in Christ, i.e. Christ is possessed by a demon and b) Christ casts out demons by the power of the lord of demons.

Mark 3:23. And calling them, he spoke to them in parables: How can Satan cast out Satan?

Mark 3:24. If a kingdom is divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand;

Mark 3:25. and if a house is divided against itself, that house cannot stand;

Mark 3:26. and if Satan has risen up against himself and divided himself, he cannot stand, but his end has come.

Mark 3:27. No one entering the house of a strong man can plunder his things, unless he first binds the strong man, and then he plunders his house.

Mark 3:28. Truly I say to you: all sins and blasphemies will be forgiven the sons of men, no matter how they blaspheme;

Mark 3:29. but whoever blasphemes the Holy Spirit, there will be no forgiveness forever, but he is subject to eternal condemnation.

Mark 3:30. He said this because they said, He has an unclean spirit.

The Evangelist Mark does not say, as Matthew did, that Christ penetrated the thoughts of His adversaries: according to him, the scribes expressed their accusations openly. But he alone notes that the Lord called the scribes aside from the crowd and spoke to them in parables, i.e. comparisons (until verse 30). See comments on .

"But he is subject to eternal condemnation"(verse 29). According to Tischendorf: "he will be guilty of eternal sin" (ἁμαρτήματος, ῥ not κρίσεως, as in our Textus Receptus). This means that the guilty person is forever attached to sin, cannot leave it behind (the previous expression has the same meaning: “for him there will be no forgiveness forever”). From this it is still impossible to draw a direct conclusion about what will happen in the afterlife. It is only clearly stated that a person will always weigh on him - there will be no such period when he would feel relieved: But our reading in the Textus Receptus has a lot of grounds (see Tischendorf, p. 245). If we accept it, then here we are talking, undoubtedly, about the eternal condemnation of the sinner.

Mark 3:31. And His mother and brothers came and, standing outside the house, sent to Him to call Him.

Mark 3:32. People were sitting around him. And they said to Him, Behold, Your mother and Your brothers and Your sisters outside the house are asking You.

Mark 3:33. And he answered them, Who are my mother and my brothers?

Mark 3:34. And surveying those who were sitting around Him, He said: Here are My mother and My brothers;

Mark 3:35. for whoever does the will of God is my brother and sister and mother.

For the relatives of Christ, see.

The Evangelist Mark puts this story in its proper place, it is quite clear with him the motives for which the relatives were looking for Christ (according to Matthew and Luke, they simply wanted to see Him or talk to Him) - they want to turn Him away from preaching, and then what Christ says about this.

“People sat around him”. From the way Christ speaks further (verse 34) about the people, some interpreters rightly conclude that the scribes by this time had already left the house where Christ was.