Coffman, in his commentary, says the following.
‘This is one of those ‘mighty works’ mentioned by Jesus in his reproach of Capernaum, Matthew 11:23 / Mark 2:1. Important details are mentioned in Mark 2:1-12 and Luke 5:17-26, which are not contained in Matthew 9:1-8. Mark says that he was carried by four men, and Luke relates the breaking up of the roof to let him down to Jesus.’
As a result of His teaching and miracles, Jesus’ popularity grew rapidly. So many wanted to hear Him that they filled the house in Capernaum where He was teaching and crowded around it, Mark 2:1-2. Just then, five men arrived, eager to see Jesus too. One of them was paralysed, and the other four carried him on a stretcher, Mark 2:3.
It was impossible for them to get in through the door, so they climbed up on the roof, dug a hole in it and let the paralytic down through the opening they had created, Mark 2:4. We can imagine the commotion among the crowd in the house below. We can only imagine what is going through the minds of those who owned the house.
Notice Jesus saw their faith, Matthew 9:2 / Mark 2:5 / Luke 5:20, but He speaks directly to the lame man and tells him that his sins were forgiven, Matthew 9:2 / Mark 2:5 / Luke 5:20.
Did the lame man demonstrate any faith, or was it just his four friends’ faith? It’s hard to tell from the text, but it does appear that Jesus is speaking about the faith of the four men.
The lame man may have demonstrated his faith in Jesus by allowing his friends to take him to Jesus in such a dramatic way, with the hope of being healed. Maybe his four friends told him about Jesus, and they believed Jesus could heal him, and so the lame man just went along with the idea, thinking he had nothing to lose.
Nevertheless, Jesus tells the lame man his sins are forgiven, Mark 2:5. That was probably not what the man or his four friends had expected, but it is every man’s greatest need. We are not told what the man’s disability was, perhaps he had an accident, perhaps he was born with his disability.
Perhaps, as the popular view was at the time, his disability may have been caused by some sin he was involved in during his life, John 9:2. We can’t be sure, but we do know that sin can have a devastating consequence in our lives.
Notice the lame man, those who brought him in and everyone else didn’t say a thing; it was only the teachers of the law who were present who thought Jesus had blasphemed because God alone can forgive sins, Mark 2:6-7.
The scribes and Pharisees thought it blasphemy to assume the position of God by forgiving sins, Mark 2:7 / Matthew 9:3 / Luke 5:21 / John 10:31-36 / Leviticus 24:15-16. Although they were right, they didn’t recognise that Jesus was indeed God in the flesh, John 1:1-3 / John 1:14.
Jesus knew in His spirit what they were thinking, Mark 2:8 / Matthew 9:4 / Luke 5:22, and so, He read their minds and asked, ‘Which is easier to say, your sins are forgiven, or get up and walk? Mark 2:9 / Matthew 9:5 / Luke 5:23 / Matthew 12:25 / Psalm 139:2 / Luke 6:8 / Luke 9:47 / Luke 11:17.
The answer to this question was simple: both were possible with God, but impossible with men, Mark 10:27. If Jesus has the power to heal someone, then He certainly, as the Son of man, has the authority to forgive someone’s sins, Mark 2:10 / Matthew 9:6 / Luke 5:24 / John 3:2 / John 20:30-31 / Acts 2:22.
To prove His ability to forgive sins, which was something invisible and therefore impossible to verify, He healed the paralytic who then got up and walked, Mark 2:11-12 / Matthew 9:6-7 / Luke 5:25.
Jesus proved His power to conquer the invisible, that is, spiritual problems, by overcoming a visible, physical problem. The crowd was dumbfounded, Mark 2:12 / Matthew 9:8 / Luke 5:26. They had never seen anything to compare with Jesus, Mark 2:12 / Luke 5:26.
Consider the five men as they approached the house in which Jesus was teaching. They had come in order to see Him, but their way to Jesus was blocked by a big obstacle, the crowd. Many would have simply turned around and gone back home. Not these men.
They were determined, even desperate, in their desire to see Jesus. Their procedure, un-roofing the roof, was radical, but it worked. Even today, those who want to come to Jesus frequently encounter barriers in their path.
The only ones who actually reach Him are those who are absolutely determined and who refuse to allow anything to keep them from following Him. How determined are you to be with Jesus?
Because Capernaum was the location of the tax office, where taxes, tolls and land duties were collected for both the Romans, who occupied Palestine and the Herodians, who ruled Galilee.
It hardly needs to be said that those who were involved in the work of collecting money for either Romans or Herodians were despised and hated by the general public, so they had to find their friends among other ‘social outcasts’, who included prostitutes.
One of Jesus’ more surprising actions was calling Matthew to be a disciple. Matthew, also called Levi son of Alphaeus, was a tax collector, Mark 2:13 / Luke 5:27.
In that era, tax collectors were viewed as both thieves and traitors because they used dishonest tactics to raise funds for the hated Roman invaders, Matthew 10:3 / Luke 6:15 / Mark 3:18 / Acts 1:13.
Zacchaeus is a perfect example who may have taken more than he needed to from the people, Luke 19:8. Adding a tax collector to His inner circle was hardly a move that could be expected to increase Jesus’ popularity!
Jesus asks Matthew to follow Him, Mark 2:14 / Matthew 9:9 / Luke 5:27, and immediately he left everything behind and did so, Mark 2:14 / Matthew 9:9 / Luke 5:28. The word ‘followed’ is in the imperfect tense, and means that he ‘kept following’ Jesus. It was a defining moment in his life.
The expression ‘many tax-collectors’, Mark 2:15 / Matthew 9:10, is also significant, because it reveals how lucrative the business of tax collection was for both the authorities and the officials who served them! We have evidence of this when Mark records the call of Levi, later named Matthew, Mark 2:13-14.
The apostle John records who the first five people were called to follow Jesus. John and Andrew were the initial two people called to be disciples by Christ, John 1:35-39.
Then came Peter, also called Simon or Simon Peter, John 1:40-42, followed by Philip, John 1:43-44, and then Nathanael, Bartholomew, John 1:45. The book of Matthew then records that James, a son of Zebedee and brother of John, was called, Matthew 4:21-22, followed by Matthew’s own calling, Matthew 9:9. Why did they leave everything to follow Jesus?
Every young Jewish boy grew up wanting to be a rabbi, and every young Jewish boy and girl would at least go to an elementary school called Bet Sefer, that is, ‘House of the Book’.
Their job was to memorise the first five books of the Hebrew Bible, what we would call the Old Testament, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy.
And the best of the best would be able to graduate and go on to the next school of learning, a type of secondary school called Bet Talmud, or ‘House of Learning’, and their job was to memorise the rest of the Hebrew Bible.
From there, the best of the best of that group would be allowed to apply to Bet Midrash, or ‘House of Seeking’, which was a type of school for would-be rabbis. A student would find a rabbi that he respected, someone that he wanted to be like, and he would say to that rabbi, ‘Rabbi, I want to follow you.’
Now the rabbi’s job was to question the would-be disciple to seek to determine, not whether or not he knew the Scriptures, but whether or not he could imitate his teachings, become like him, and pass on his way of life. And if the student could answer the rabbi’s questions to his liking, then he would say to his student, ‘Come follow me.’
And these are the words that every student longed to hear. And he would leave behind his family, his job, his vocation, and he would go and become a disciple of that rabbi.
Now, if the student didn’t quite make the cut, the rabbi would say, ‘Ah, my son, you know the Torah, you know the teaching well, but I’m afraid that you cannot be my disciple, go home, make babies, and pray that they become rabbis.’
The very fact that Matthew was a tax collector and the other disciples were fishermen, shows that the disciples, were not the best of the best and they did not make the cut and so when Jesus, a respected teacher of the law, a teacher of God’s Word, comes along and says, ‘Come follow me’, they could hardly believe it and so they leave everything behind.
Jesus was inviting them to become like Him. Matthew was not moved by a passing curiosity in this remarkable Teacher. He made a commitment that day! After deserting his Tax Office at the call of Jesus, Matthew called together ‘many tax collectors and sinners’ to a feast, Mark 2:15 / Matthew 9:10 / Luke 5:29.
I think that this ‘great feast’ or ‘great banquet’, as Luke records, Luke 5:29, was his way of marking his break from his past life, and used as an opportunity of introducing his friends to Jesus.
This calls to mind another incident that occurred about that time and in that region when Andrew broke the news to his brother Simon Peter that he had found the Messiah, John 1:40-42. His response to Peter’s scepticism was ‘Come and see!’
At that stage, neither Matthew nor Andrew knew enough to say very much about Jesus, but they could bring people to personally meet Jesus! What a great way to evangelise to your friends in an informal way. You invite all your Christian friends and all your non-Christian friends and just let them mix.
It is also interesting to compare Mark’s account with that of Luke. Luke describes the meal to which these guests were invited, as a ‘great feast’, but his language used in describing them is different from that of Mark, Mark 2:15 / Luke 5:29.
Luke describes them as ‘a great company of tax-collectors’, Luke 5:29. As a Greek, himself, i.e., a Gentile, Luke does not use the religious designation used by Mark who was a Jew, who describes them as ‘sinners’, Mark 2:15.
I wonder if Luke realised that he, also, as a Gentile, would have been included among the ‘sinners’? By the way, the difference in the use of the language used by Mark and Luke is an example of how divine inspiration worked. The Holy Spirit did not inspire Luke to use language that would have been foreign to his thinking.
Luke would never have described non-Jews as ‘sinners’ or ‘Gentiles’, which was an even more offensive expression. Greeks would not use such a discriminative term.
It is true that he does use the word ‘sinners’ in Luke 5:30, but he does so because he is recording accurately, something that had been said by the Scribes and Pharisees.
The scribes and Pharisees were outraged because they thought it improper for a teacher of religion to eat with immoral people, Mark 2:16 / Matthew 9:11 / Luke 5:30.
When Jesus overheard their criticism, He asked, ‘Who needs a doctor, the sick or the well?’ Mark 2:17 / Matthew 9:12 / Luke 5:31. His purpose, He said, was not to call righteous, but sinners, Mark 2:17 / Luke 5:32. The Lord never hesitated to break society’s norms and customs.
Jesus tells them to go and learn what Hosea 6:6 means, Mark 2:17 / Matthew 9:13. Sacrifice was a command of God, 1 Samuel 15:22, but the greater law of mercy must be practised in order to bring sinners to righteousness, Matthew 23:23-24.
Jesus is basically saying to the teachers of the Law, ‘I have no message for you! You guys think you are not sick and think you are already righteous.’ I wonder what they thought when Jesus said those words!
Some of the Pharisees and disciples of John came to Jesus, asking why He and His disciples didn’t fast as other religious people did, Mark 2:18 / Matthew 9:14 / Luke 5:30. These events took place at a time of fasting when the disciples of the Pharisees and John’s disciples were fasting and praying, Mark 2:18 / Luke 5:33.
Jesus explained by illustration and said that no one would fast at a time of celebration, such as a wedding, Matthew 9:15. Mark and Luke’s accounts both say, ‘How can the guests of the bridegroom fast while he is with them?’ Mark 2:19 / Luke 5:34. His own presence on the earth made it a joyous time of feasting because He was the bridegroom.
Since fasting should fit the occasion, it was inappropriate in this situation, but there will come a time when the bridegroom leaves, that’ll be the time to fast, Mark 2:20 / Matthew 9:15 / Luke 5:35. Fasting was just not the right thing to do when the Son of God Himself was present.
He also explained that just as no one would put new wine in old bottles or a new patch on old jeans, it was equally out of place to put the newly revealed Gospel of Christ into the old traditional forms of the Jews, Mark 2:21-22 / Matthew 9:16-17 / Luke 5:36-39.
The word, ‘new’ is in reference to Jesus’ teaching and the word ‘old’ is in reference to the Jewish system, Colossians 2:14 / Romans 7:1-4 / Hebrews 10:9-10. Jesus is saying that fasting isn’t required under his new teaching, but was under the Jewish system. John was practising the old system requirements, Acts 19:1-4.
Fasting was an accepted part of everyday life in Old Testament times. Bear in mind that Israel was not a political state, but a theocracy, which is a religious state in which the Law and will of God were preeminent.
The first reference to fasting is in the Book of Judges, Judges 20:26. The last reference is in the Book of Zechariah, and devout Jews fasted, Zechariah 8:19. Most of the fasting was undertaken voluntarily and was not undertaken at the command of God, but devout Jews undertook to fast for at least two reasons. Not for health reasons, but for the following reasons.
1. They believed it was a way of attracting the attention of God. If they fasted, they thought that God noticed them.
2. They thought that if they fasted, God would be prepared to do something about the situation that had caused them to fast.
If you think about this second reason, you will see that a man thought fasting had influenced God to act; it was very easy for him to imagine that he, personally, was someone special! Matthew 6:16-18.
The reality, although, through the centuries, the Jews, especially after the Babylonian Captivity, introduced fasts for a whole range of reasons, but only one fast was specifically commanded by God, and that was the fast associated with the Day of Atonement, the most important and solemn Day in their religious year.
In Leviticus 16:29, we find the expression, ‘deny yourselves’ or ‘afflict your souls’. This is the expression for fasting, and this was the only fast that the Jews observed faithfully every year.
When we examine the New Testament, it surprises some people to find that the Lord only mentioned fasting twice in Mark 2:18-22 / Matthew 6:16-18. Notice that both passages above record Jesus’ response to the practice of that time.
But also notice, although about sixteen times He says, ‘it was said by those of old-time, but I say to you’, Jesus doesn’t use these words because this kind of fasting about which He was speaking wasn’t covered by the Mosaic Law, but because it was something that the people had taken on themselves in the old law.
In the Book of Acts, Luke records that the church in Antioch sent Barnabas and Paul on the First Missionary Journey, with prayer and fasting. In the next chapter, they fasted in connection with the appointment of elders, Acts 13:1-3. Please note that the whole church didn’t fast, it was only those mentioned, ‘Barnabas, Simeon called Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen and Saul,’ Acts 13:1.
In 1 Corinthians 7:1-5, Paul mentions sexual fasting, but neither here nor anywhere else does he impose it as a command. In 2 Corinthians 6:5 and 2 Corinthians 11:27, he refers to what he suffered for the sake of the Gospel and speaks of times when he went without food. But this wasn’t because he was ‘fasting’, but because he had no food to eat!
The answer to the question, Should a Christian fast? is therefore, yes! If they want to! But remember that fasting, like ‘bodily exercise,’ may do a little good, but ‘godliness is profitable for all things!’ 1 Timothy 4:8.
At that time, is the time after the second Passover of Jesus’ ministry. Luke 6:1. It’s important to remember that the legalistic Pharisees weren’t accusing the disciples of stealing the grain, Mark 2:23-3:6 / Luke 6:1-11 / Matthew 12:1-2.
Under the Old Testament law, a person had a right to pluck the grain from someone else’s field when travelling, though they couldn’t put a sickle to the crop, Deuteronomy 23:25.
They were accusing them of breaking their traditions of the Sabbath by doing the minor work of plucking out the grain on the Sabbath, Mark 2:24 / Luke 6:2 / Matthew 12:2.
Jesus and the disciples were violating one of the numerous laws the Pharisees had bound as a result of the traditions of the fathers in order that the Sabbath be kept, Exodus 20:10 / Exodus 36:2-3 / Numbers 15:32-36.
What David did was actually against lesser legalities of the law, Mark 2:25-26 / Luke 6:3-4 / Matthew 12:3-4 / 1 Samuel 21:1-7, for only the priests were to eat of the showbread, Exodus 25:30 / Leviticus 24:5-9 / Numbers 28:9-10 / 1 Samuel 21:6.
Though David’s actions were technically unlawful according to the law that forbade anyone eating the showbread other than the priests, there was a higher law of God that superseded the original law.
That higher law was the preservation of David, God’s anointed. The Pharisees recognised this. However, they justified David’s actions while at the same time complaining that Jesus and the disciples were breaking the law of the Sabbath.
Jesus pointed out their inconsistent application of the law, though in this context, Jesus and the disciples didn’t violate any Old Testament law. They violated the Pharisees’ interpretation of the Sabbath law.
The priests had to work in violation of Sabbath laws in order to prepare sacrifices because they had to work on the Sabbath in preparation for the sacrifices, Numbers 28:9-10. However, they were blameless because their God-ordained work to prepare sacrifices for the people superseded the law to rest on the Sabbath.
Someone greater than the temple is here, Matthew 12:6, is a clear reference to Christ, Isaiah 66:1-2 / Matthew 12:41-42. Jesus was more glorious than the temple that the Jews honoured above all things on earth, Haggai 2:7-9 / 2 Chronicles 6:18 / Malachi 3:1 / Hebrews 3:3.
Sacrifice was a law of God, Matthew 12:7. However, mercy was a higher law of God. The Pharisees, in their legal understanding and application of the law, could not understand this principle concerning the laws of God, Hosea 6:6 / Micah 6:6-8.
Jesus here attacks the judgmental attitudes of the Pharisees that motivated them to criticise the plucking of the grain. The One who was in their midst was the One who had authority over the Sabbath. Jesus was of the triune God who instituted the Sabbath. Mark records that Jesus said that the Sabbath was made for man, Mark 2:27.
He explained that God had intended for the Sabbath command to provide relief for man, not be an additional burden. The Sabbath was made for the benefit of man, for on the Sabbath men were to rest from their labours, Exodus 20:11.
The Pharisees thought that man was made for the Sabbath. In other words, they believed that God made the Sabbath a holy day of worship in order that men renew their spiritual life and worship God on this day.
However, God intended it to be a day of rest for man, Exodus 20:10-11. It was thus a law that was established for the physical well-being of man. Jesus proclaimed His authority over the Sabbath, saying that He Himself was Lord of the Sabbath, Mark 2:27-28 / Luke 6:5. If Jesus created the Sabbath, surely, He knew what activities violated it.
The Sabbath was supposed to be a day of blessings and relaxation, free from work, but the Jews had turned it into a bunch of rules which consisted of dos and don’ts, and with over six hundred and thirteen laws, they always found a way around them.
In reference to the nation of Israel, the Sabbath was given to the nation of Israel as a sign between God and the nation of Israel. When the Old Testament law was abolished, the Sabbath law was also taken away, Colossians 2:16.