A Sabbath for Jesus in Capernaum (Mark 1:21-34)
This sermon was preached on 7/2/2010
The previous passage described the calling of four disciples (Peter, Andrew, James and John) by Jesus and detailed that his purpose was to make each of them into fishers of men. It is interesting, therefore, that the first item that Mark then mentions is what took place on a Sabbath. Given that Mark, as an author, has structured carefully his account of the life of Jesus, the passage detailing what took place on that Sabbath points to the fact, which church history has confirmed, that many persons would be caught in the gospel net on Sabbath days.
The reason why they went to Capernaum is probably because most of them stayed there. Verse 29 says that Simon and Andrew had a house there; we also know from other passages that Jesus’ family had moved from Nazareth to Capernaum. Yet I suspect that there is another reason why Jesus took them there. They had to witness for Jesus among those they knew before they moved on to work for him elsewhere.
Two locations are detailed in this passage: the synagogue service and the house of Simon and Andrew. Is Mark saying that the disciples were shown by Jesus that people will be caught (1) in public worship and (2) by his disciples using their homes as a place of witness? Of course, they can be caught elsewhere as well. Yet here are two ways by which sinners will be rescued by the gospel.
The service of public worship (vv. 21-28)
Synagogues were found in every Jewish community – the word means a gathering of people. Their origins probably go back to early in Israelite history when groups of worshippers met locally to worship God. We are familiar with individuals in the New Testament called a ruler of the synagogue, for example Jairus. This ruler was the only official in the synagogue and he looked after the building and its contents – he may also have functioned as a school teacher. But he did not preach during a service. In a service, prayers would be made, psalms would be chanted, and readings made from the Old Testament. Then an opportunity would be given for a visitor to address the worshippers, and if a visitor was not present, then a local member would give an exhortation.
It is clear that for Jesus attendance at services of public worship was a priority. He was willing to take part, even although most of the congregation did not realise that he was the Son of God. The criteria for his attendance was not what the congregation could give to him, but what he could do for them. He performed two tasks – he taught the people and he delivered a man bound with an unclean spirit.
Jesus was asked to preach. We cannot tell if they knew who Jesus was – it is possible that he had spoken in synagogues in addition to the one in Nazareth during his hidden years, and therefore was asked to speak because he was known. Or he may have been asked out of courtesy. The important detail that his disciples would have observed is that Jesus was ready to speak. Sometimes we respond to such incidents and say that Jesus could do this because he was divine and out of his omniscience he was always able to speak on any subject. Such a response would not be very helpful to disciples who were going to imitate him as fishers of men. Instead we need to consider the preparation Jesus would have made as a man. For many years, Jesus had filled his mind with the teachings of the Old Testament and he was able, through the guidance of the Holy Spirit, to speak at a moment’s notice. Later on he assured his followers that the same Spirit would give them words to speak even in difficult situations. But the point I am making at the moment is that years of preparation are needed in order to be ready to speak at a moment’s notice.
His teaching created astonishment. The reason for the sense of wonder was the great difference between his method and the method of the scribes. Jesus spoke with authority, which describes the effect his message had on his listeners. The obvious implication of this statement is that the ones who imagined they spoke with authority – the scribes – did not have any. In what way did scribes teach? Their general approach was to review and repeat the traditions of the elders, much of which had nothing whatsoever do with the Old Testament. Much of what they presented would be above the heads of those in front of them. In contrast, Jesus spoke with simplicity and with freshness as he interpreted the Old Testament accurately. We have samples of his teaching throughout the Gospels and we can see from them that he used illustrations to help his listeners appreciate what he said. He also refuted the distortions the scribes had made concerning the character of God. His disciples should have observed that this is the way to catch men. But they would have also noticed that Jesus’ method included direct application – the audience realised they were not watching a performance as much as listening to a challenge as to their relationship with God.
Opposition was aroused in the outburst of the demon-possessed man. It is difficult to work out what this demon-controlled person looked like. There is no hint that others in the audience noticed anything unusual about this individual before his sudden interruption. Perhaps he had been unwittingly guided there by the demon in order to oppose Jesus. Yet there are some lessons that we can observe from the incident.
First, the issue that brought his secret to the surface was the presence of Jesus. It is not possible for evil to dominate a situation in which Jesus was involved. The demon had to face up to the fact that his realm was under attack. Something similar happens whenever the gospel is preached with authority. A person senses his or her sin and becomes defensive. They sense conviction and realise they are being rebuked; therefore they respond with various ways of self-protection. The man here tried to minimise his lifestyle by suggesting judgement should not happen. There was also a willingness to give Jesus a certain place, although what the words reveal is that all the man had was head knowledge of who Jesus was. But even the truth about Jesus has to be admitted even by those who detest him. The presence of light reveals the hidden things of darkness.
Second, it was an attempt to distract listeners from the message of Jesus. The most effective way of causing a disruption is to create another point of interest. Get the people to focus on this man rather than on the message of Jesus. The most dangerous time for a listener is after he or she hears the message of grace because, as Jesus taught in the parable of the sower, the devil tries an immediate removal of the seed of the kingdom (Matt. 13:19).
Third, the incident shows us that no-one is too bad for Jesus to deal with. The man even tells Jesus to go away. Yet perhaps it is the case that Jesus read the man’s longings rather than the man’s words. Whatever his case, he was in a terrible plight. He was spurning the aid of the only One who could help him. It was good for that man that Jesus did not listen to him, but instead showed mercy towards him and delivered him from his spiritual bondage.
Fourth, this incident shows that Jesus has come to dismantle the edifice erected by the powers of darkness. The dominion that they had over bodies and minds of sinners was going to be overthrown by the coming of Jesus. This power over the wicked spirit is a sample of the victory Jesus would have over all the kingdom of darkness when he suffered on the cross. This is a reminder for us that the gospel is the message of the Conqueror who triumphed on the Cross and is in the process of liberating sinners from their spiritual chains.
Fifth, those who observed all this could not keep it to themselves. By word of mouth, the news of the arrival of Jesus was spread throughout Galilee. They now had something good to speak about – they had seen evil defeated before their eyes and they had to share it with others. Perhaps that is why the crowd came together later that evening.
The Use of our Homes for Jesus (vv. 29-34)
Jesus headed straight for the home of Simon and Andrew. I suppose he would have been invited by them, although the text does not reveal if they had done so. Instead Mark describes Jesus as taking the initiative and making his way to their home. It is hard not to see Mark’s description as stating that when a person becomes a follower of Jesus, his or her assets are then at the disposal of Jesus for him to use for the advancement of his kingdom.
We can imagine Peter’s wife saying to him before he left for synagogue that morning, ‘Peter, don’t take anyone back for lunch. Mum is not very well today.’ Or perhaps she was praying, while the men were at the synagogue, that God would send someone to help her. Whether that be the case or not, the fact is that Jesus was determined to use Peter’s house and he could easily deal with the difficulty they had.
On entering the house, the residents told Jesus about the Peter’s mother-in-law. Mark does not say that they asked Jesus to do anything about her. Merely telling is not a sign of weak faith; instead it is evidence that they had already submitted to the Lordship of Jesus. They may not have known what to ask for, but they knew that Jesus would know what to do. Intercessory prayer is often telling Jesus about those for whom we are burdened. ‘If we have committed our way unto the Lord in prayer, and meekly told him of our crisis it will be our wisdom to be still, and watch till God the Lord shall speak. He cannot be either unjust or unkind, therefore should we say, “Let him do what seemeth him good”’ (Spurgeon).
Jesus responded gently and lovingly. The performance of the miracle did not require that he go to her and take her by the hand – he could have commanded the cure from a distance. Yet his method told his disciples to have time for people, to interact with others according to their weakness. I’m sure the woman eventually forgot the intensity of her fever, but she would never forget the touch of Jesus’ hand. Often what is remembered is not what we did, but how we did it.
Simon’s mother-in-law immediately displayed the only appropriate response of someone whom Jesus has helped – she served him in her capacity. Gratitude was written all over her actions, even if to onlookers it was mundane. Service according to what Jesus expects is the best, indeed the only proper way to express gratitude. And her daughter and son-in-law were not allowed to prevent her showing gratitude to Jesus.
That would have been a happy ending in itself, yet more was to come (vv. 32-34). Jesus may have rested in the afternoon, as would have most people because of the heat. It is very warm in Capernaum – it is several hundred feet below sea level. But once the cool evening hours at come, a steady stream of needy people came to Peter’s house, not to see him, but to see Jesus. In fact, a lot more were helped at his front door than were helped in the synagogue. I suppose Peter would say to us, ‘Let Jesus use your home and it will become a place of blessing. I had no idea what he would do with it. But when I gave everything to him, it meant he could use all my possessions for his glory. And all I can say is that he used my home far beyond what I could imagine.’
The reason why they went to Capernaum is probably because most of them stayed there. Verse 29 says that Simon and Andrew had a house there; we also know from other passages that Jesus’ family had moved from Nazareth to Capernaum. Yet I suspect that there is another reason why Jesus took them there. They had to witness for Jesus among those they knew before they moved on to work for him elsewhere.
Two locations are detailed in this passage: the synagogue service and the house of Simon and Andrew. Is Mark saying that the disciples were shown by Jesus that people will be caught (1) in public worship and (2) by his disciples using their homes as a place of witness? Of course, they can be caught elsewhere as well. Yet here are two ways by which sinners will be rescued by the gospel.
The service of public worship (vv. 21-28)
Synagogues were found in every Jewish community – the word means a gathering of people. Their origins probably go back to early in Israelite history when groups of worshippers met locally to worship God. We are familiar with individuals in the New Testament called a ruler of the synagogue, for example Jairus. This ruler was the only official in the synagogue and he looked after the building and its contents – he may also have functioned as a school teacher. But he did not preach during a service. In a service, prayers would be made, psalms would be chanted, and readings made from the Old Testament. Then an opportunity would be given for a visitor to address the worshippers, and if a visitor was not present, then a local member would give an exhortation.
It is clear that for Jesus attendance at services of public worship was a priority. He was willing to take part, even although most of the congregation did not realise that he was the Son of God. The criteria for his attendance was not what the congregation could give to him, but what he could do for them. He performed two tasks – he taught the people and he delivered a man bound with an unclean spirit.
Jesus was asked to preach. We cannot tell if they knew who Jesus was – it is possible that he had spoken in synagogues in addition to the one in Nazareth during his hidden years, and therefore was asked to speak because he was known. Or he may have been asked out of courtesy. The important detail that his disciples would have observed is that Jesus was ready to speak. Sometimes we respond to such incidents and say that Jesus could do this because he was divine and out of his omniscience he was always able to speak on any subject. Such a response would not be very helpful to disciples who were going to imitate him as fishers of men. Instead we need to consider the preparation Jesus would have made as a man. For many years, Jesus had filled his mind with the teachings of the Old Testament and he was able, through the guidance of the Holy Spirit, to speak at a moment’s notice. Later on he assured his followers that the same Spirit would give them words to speak even in difficult situations. But the point I am making at the moment is that years of preparation are needed in order to be ready to speak at a moment’s notice.
His teaching created astonishment. The reason for the sense of wonder was the great difference between his method and the method of the scribes. Jesus spoke with authority, which describes the effect his message had on his listeners. The obvious implication of this statement is that the ones who imagined they spoke with authority – the scribes – did not have any. In what way did scribes teach? Their general approach was to review and repeat the traditions of the elders, much of which had nothing whatsoever do with the Old Testament. Much of what they presented would be above the heads of those in front of them. In contrast, Jesus spoke with simplicity and with freshness as he interpreted the Old Testament accurately. We have samples of his teaching throughout the Gospels and we can see from them that he used illustrations to help his listeners appreciate what he said. He also refuted the distortions the scribes had made concerning the character of God. His disciples should have observed that this is the way to catch men. But they would have also noticed that Jesus’ method included direct application – the audience realised they were not watching a performance as much as listening to a challenge as to their relationship with God.
Opposition was aroused in the outburst of the demon-possessed man. It is difficult to work out what this demon-controlled person looked like. There is no hint that others in the audience noticed anything unusual about this individual before his sudden interruption. Perhaps he had been unwittingly guided there by the demon in order to oppose Jesus. Yet there are some lessons that we can observe from the incident.
First, the issue that brought his secret to the surface was the presence of Jesus. It is not possible for evil to dominate a situation in which Jesus was involved. The demon had to face up to the fact that his realm was under attack. Something similar happens whenever the gospel is preached with authority. A person senses his or her sin and becomes defensive. They sense conviction and realise they are being rebuked; therefore they respond with various ways of self-protection. The man here tried to minimise his lifestyle by suggesting judgement should not happen. There was also a willingness to give Jesus a certain place, although what the words reveal is that all the man had was head knowledge of who Jesus was. But even the truth about Jesus has to be admitted even by those who detest him. The presence of light reveals the hidden things of darkness.
Second, it was an attempt to distract listeners from the message of Jesus. The most effective way of causing a disruption is to create another point of interest. Get the people to focus on this man rather than on the message of Jesus. The most dangerous time for a listener is after he or she hears the message of grace because, as Jesus taught in the parable of the sower, the devil tries an immediate removal of the seed of the kingdom (Matt. 13:19).
Third, the incident shows us that no-one is too bad for Jesus to deal with. The man even tells Jesus to go away. Yet perhaps it is the case that Jesus read the man’s longings rather than the man’s words. Whatever his case, he was in a terrible plight. He was spurning the aid of the only One who could help him. It was good for that man that Jesus did not listen to him, but instead showed mercy towards him and delivered him from his spiritual bondage.
Fourth, this incident shows that Jesus has come to dismantle the edifice erected by the powers of darkness. The dominion that they had over bodies and minds of sinners was going to be overthrown by the coming of Jesus. This power over the wicked spirit is a sample of the victory Jesus would have over all the kingdom of darkness when he suffered on the cross. This is a reminder for us that the gospel is the message of the Conqueror who triumphed on the Cross and is in the process of liberating sinners from their spiritual chains.
Fifth, those who observed all this could not keep it to themselves. By word of mouth, the news of the arrival of Jesus was spread throughout Galilee. They now had something good to speak about – they had seen evil defeated before their eyes and they had to share it with others. Perhaps that is why the crowd came together later that evening.
The Use of our Homes for Jesus (vv. 29-34)
Jesus headed straight for the home of Simon and Andrew. I suppose he would have been invited by them, although the text does not reveal if they had done so. Instead Mark describes Jesus as taking the initiative and making his way to their home. It is hard not to see Mark’s description as stating that when a person becomes a follower of Jesus, his or her assets are then at the disposal of Jesus for him to use for the advancement of his kingdom.
We can imagine Peter’s wife saying to him before he left for synagogue that morning, ‘Peter, don’t take anyone back for lunch. Mum is not very well today.’ Or perhaps she was praying, while the men were at the synagogue, that God would send someone to help her. Whether that be the case or not, the fact is that Jesus was determined to use Peter’s house and he could easily deal with the difficulty they had.
On entering the house, the residents told Jesus about the Peter’s mother-in-law. Mark does not say that they asked Jesus to do anything about her. Merely telling is not a sign of weak faith; instead it is evidence that they had already submitted to the Lordship of Jesus. They may not have known what to ask for, but they knew that Jesus would know what to do. Intercessory prayer is often telling Jesus about those for whom we are burdened. ‘If we have committed our way unto the Lord in prayer, and meekly told him of our crisis it will be our wisdom to be still, and watch till God the Lord shall speak. He cannot be either unjust or unkind, therefore should we say, “Let him do what seemeth him good”’ (Spurgeon).
Jesus responded gently and lovingly. The performance of the miracle did not require that he go to her and take her by the hand – he could have commanded the cure from a distance. Yet his method told his disciples to have time for people, to interact with others according to their weakness. I’m sure the woman eventually forgot the intensity of her fever, but she would never forget the touch of Jesus’ hand. Often what is remembered is not what we did, but how we did it.
Simon’s mother-in-law immediately displayed the only appropriate response of someone whom Jesus has helped – she served him in her capacity. Gratitude was written all over her actions, even if to onlookers it was mundane. Service according to what Jesus expects is the best, indeed the only proper way to express gratitude. And her daughter and son-in-law were not allowed to prevent her showing gratitude to Jesus.
That would have been a happy ending in itself, yet more was to come (vv. 32-34). Jesus may have rested in the afternoon, as would have most people because of the heat. It is very warm in Capernaum – it is several hundred feet below sea level. But once the cool evening hours at come, a steady stream of needy people came to Peter’s house, not to see him, but to see Jesus. In fact, a lot more were helped at his front door than were helped in the synagogue. I suppose Peter would say to us, ‘Let Jesus use your home and it will become a place of blessing. I had no idea what he would do with it. But when I gave everything to him, it meant he could use all my possessions for his glory. And all I can say is that he used my home far beyond what I could imagine.’
Comments
Post a Comment