Mark 2:13 And he went forth again by the sea side; Again Jesus went out along the lake--Beck; He left the town and walked once more beside the sea--Rieu; and all the multitude resorted unto him,; All the crowd came to him--NEB; and all the multitude were coming to Him--NASB; and the whole multitude kept coming to Him--Wey; and he taught them.; and he began teaching them--Rhm; and He was teaching them--NASB; and he continued to teach them--Phi; And he went forth again by the sea,--and /all' the multitude\ was coming unto him, and he began teaching them. And he went forth again by the sea, and all the multitude was coming unto him, and he was teaching them, TRNTyeager631,2 - kai exAlthen palin para tAn thalassan, kai pas ho ochlos Archeto pros auton, kai edidasken autous. kai (cintinuative conjunction). exAlthen (3d.per.sing.aor.ind.of exerchomai, constative). palin (adverbial). para (preposition with the accusative of extent). tAn (acc.sing.fem.of the article in agreement with thalassan). thalassan (acc.sing.fem.of thalassa, extent). kai (continuative conjunction). pas (nom.sing.masc.of pas, in agreement with ochlos). ho (nom.sing.masc.of the article in agreement with ochlos). ochlos (nom.sing.masc.of ochlos, subject of Archeto). Archeto (3d.per.sing.imp.pass.ind.of erchomai, conative). pros (preposition with the accusative of extent). auton (acc.sing.masc.of autos, extent). kai (continuative conjunction). edidasken (3d.per.sing.imp.act.ind.of didaskw, conative). autous (acc.pl.masc.of autos, direct object of edidasken). Translation: "And He went out again beside the sea, and all the people began to come to Him, and He began to teach them." COMMENT: Contrast Mk.2:13 with Mk.2:1. He came into Capernaum (Mk.2:1). Now He goes out again (Mk.2:13). He chose the path beside the Sea of Galilee (para tAn thalassan), because He knew that Matthew, the tax collector was sitting out there. palin looks backward to Mk.1:16. Cf. Mt.9:9; Lk.5:27. MARKitGNTwuest51 - "Again;" Expositors says, "This incident is not to be conceived as following immediately after that narrated in the foregoing section. Vs.13 interrupts the continuity of the history." "By the seaside." "By" is para, "alongside." It suggests the idea that our Lord did not only go the seashore, but that He loved to walk along the shore, perhaps for rest and quiet, and for the opportunity to be alone with God His Father. The freshness of the air, the quieting influence of the sound of the waves, and the long view over the sea which met His eyes, all would be a tonic to the Man Christ Jesus, whose human nature with its limitations, needed recreation and rest just as our bodies need these things. "Resorted unto Him." The verb is imperfect, emphasizing action going on. The whole crowd kept on coming to Him. "He taught them." Again, imperfect in tense. He kept on teaching them. Translation: "And He went out along the seashore. And all the crowd kept on coming to Him, and He kept on teaching them. NTC-MARKhendriksen93 - As Mt.9:9 indicates, the healing of the paralytic was followed closely by the calling of the publi- can, Levi. ... Again, as before when he had called the first four disciples (1:16), Jesus was walking along the Sea of Galilee. it is not surprising that out of an uncomfortably crowded house (2:2) the Master made his way to the pleasant and refreshing breezes of the shore. But as soon as the peo- ple knew where he was they started to gather around him again, and this process of gravitation toward Jesus continued for some time. He, in turn, did not ask them to leave but started to teach them, and is here pictured in the act of thus addressing them. The scene somewaht reminds us of the one described in 6:30-34. There, too, Jesus, seeking rest and refreshment for himself and his disciples, leaves the multitudes behind, only to find them regathered at the retreat he had selected. A crowd--or even a person (7:24) -- in need always aroused Christ's sympathy. See Mt.9:36. When Jesus had finished his teaching he resumed his walk along the shore. TNICotNTlane99,100 - The report that Jesus withdrew to the sea and there taught a multitude appears at first sight fragmentary and abrupt. In Ch.2:1-12 he is in Capernaum, and Ch.1:14 he is again within the city since the toll booth was not situated at some isolated point on the shore. Why should Jesus momentarily leave the city only to return there in pursuit of his mission? This action becomes meaningful when it is seen as part of a recurring pattern in Mark's Gospel. After a demonstration of the saving power of God, Jesus withdraws from the populace to a lonely region, whether the wilderness, the mountain or the sea. [e.g. 1:40-44, followed by vs.45; 2:1-12, followed by vs.13; 3:1-6, followed by vs.7; 3:9-12, followed by vs.13; 3:31-35, followed by 4:1; 5:1-20, followed by vs.21, et al.] In Ch.2:13 the sea provides a place of withdrawal. The preceding account concluded with the people praising God; Jesus' withdrawal follows an episode of distinct victory. Yet the sea-side has none of the associations of a peaceful retreat. Mark makes that clear through his reference to the pursuing multitude and Jesus' teaching ministry. Its significance is deeper and more ominous. The withdrawal to the sea should be viewed as an approach to a realm which discloses its real nature in the raging of the sea at the height of a squall, as twice reported by Mark (4:37f.; 6:47f.). Like the return to the wilderness, the move to the sea entails a deliberate entrance into the sphere of forces which manifest their hostility to God. Jesus returns to the place where he confronts Satan and renews his vow to perform the will of God. The consequences of this withdrawal are the calling of a disciple (2:14), the mediation of messianic forgiveness and the renewal of conflict (2:15-17). MARKj&d71 - COMMENT 2:13-17 TIME--Early Summer A.D. 28. PLACE--Near the northern shore of Galilee--on the road from Damascus as it entered Capernaum. PARALLEL ACCOUNTS--Mt.9:9; Lk.5:27,28. OUTLINE--1. Teaching the multitude by the seaside, vs.13. 2. Matthew called from his work to follow Jesus, vs.14. 3. The feast in the home of Levi, v.15. 4. The criticism of eathing with sinners; the answer of Jesus, vs.16,17. ANALYSIS I. TEACHING THE MULTITUDE BY THE SEASIDE, VS.13. 1. The place where He had taught before. 2. A great crowd present because of previous miracles. II. MATTHEW CALLED FROM HIS WORK TO FOLLOW JESUS. vs.14-17. 1. The place of toll was noticed by our Lord. 2. Immediate response. EXPLANATORY NOTES I. TEACHING THE MULTITUDES BY THE SEASIDE, v.13. Our Lord often is found in the open air preaching to the multitudes--especially was this true beside the Sea of Galilee. There were many villages from which came the many people to hear Him. MARKbarclay45,6 - Steadily and inexorably the Synagogue door was shutting on Jesus. Between Him and the guardians of Jewish orthodoxy war had been declared. Now He is teaching, not in the synagogue, but by the lakeside. The open air is to be His Church, the blue sky His canopy, and a hillside or a fishing boat His pulpit. Here is the beginning of that dreadful situation when the Son of God was banned from the place which was regarded as the House of God. He was walking by the lakeside and teaching. That was, in fact, one of the commonest w ays for a Rabbi to teach. As the Jewish Rabbis walked the roads from one place to another, or as they strolled in the open air, their disciples grouped themselves around them and walked with them and listened as they talked. Jesus was doing what any kRabbi might have done. Galilee was one of the great road centres of the ancient world. It has been said that, "Judaea is on the way to nowhere; Galilee is on the way to everywhere." Palestine is the land bridge between Europe and Africa; all land traf- fic must go through her. The great road of the Sea led from Damascus, by way of Galilee, through Capernaum, down past Carmel, along the Plain of Sharon, through Gaza and on to Egypt. It is one of the great roads of the world. Another road led from Acre on the coast away across the Jordan out to Arabia and the frontiers of the empire, a road that was trodden by the regiments and the caravans. Still further--Palestine at this time was partitioned up. Judaea was a Roman province under a Roman procurator; Galilee was ruled by Herod Antipas, a son of Herod the Great; to the east the territory which included Gaulonitis, Trachonitis and Batanaea was ruled by Philip, another of Herod's sons. Now on the way from Philip's territory to Herod's domains, Capernaum was the first town to which the traveller came. Capernaum was by its very nature a frontier town; because of that it was a customs' centre. In those days there were import and export taxes and Capernaum must have been the place where they were collected. That is where Matthew worked. True, he was not, like Zacchaeus, in the service of the Romans; he must have been working for Herod Antipas; but a hated tax-collector he was. (The Authorized Version calls the tax-collectors, publicans; that is because the Latin word was publicanus; the translation publican is, of course, nowadays quite misleading. The translation actually goes back to Wycliffe.) TCGTC-MARKcranfield101 - ... The imperfects Archeto and edidasken 'indicate the coming and going of successive groups of hearers' (Taylor). Mark 2:14 And as he passed by,; And as he was passing along--Gspd; Then, as He walked on farther--Nor; He saw Levi the son of Alphaeus sitting at the receipt of custom,; sitting at the place of toll--ASV; at his seat in the custom-house--NEB; sitting at the tax-office--ABUV; at work in...--Nor; and said unto him, Follow me.; and he said to him, Come with me--Bas; And he arose and followed him.; And he got up...--Gspd; ...and went with him--Bas; And Levi jumped to his feet and went along!-- Tay; And, passing by, he saw Levi, the son of Alphaeus, sitting over the tax-office,--and saith unto him-- Be following me! and, arising, he followed him. and passing by, he saw Levi of Alpheus sitting at the tax-office, and saith to him, 'Be following me,' and he, having risen, did follow him. TRNTyeager632,3 - kai paragwn eiden Levin ton tou `alphaiou kathAmenon epi to telwnion, kai legei autw, akolouthei moi. kai anastas AkolouthAsen autw. kai (continuative conjunction). paragwn (pres.act.part.nom.sing.masc.of paragw, adverbial, temporal). eiden (3d.per.sing.aor.act.ind.of horaw, constative). Leuin (acc.sing.masc.of Laeuei, direct object of eiden). Levi - Mk.2:14; Lk.5:27,29. Meaning: Levi, the son of Alphaeus. A publican. One of the apostles. Otherwise known as Matthew. ton (acc.sing.masc.of the article in agreement with huion, understood). tou (gen.sing.masc.of the article in agreement with `alphaiou). alphaiou (gen.sing.masc.of alphaios, relationship). Alphaeus -Mk.2:14. Meaning: The father of Levi, the publican - Mk.2:14. Not to be confused with #849, q.v. kathAmenon (pres.part.acc.sing.masc.of kathAmai, adverbial, circumstantial). epi (preposition with the accusative of extent). to (acc.sing.neut.of the article in agreement with telwnion. telwnion (acc.sing.neut.of telwnion, physical place). kai (inferential conjunction). legei (3d.per.sing.pres.act.ind.of legw, historical). autw (dat.sing.masc.of autos, indirect object of legei). akolouthei (2d.per.sing.pres.act.impv.of akolouthew, command). moi (dat.sing.masc.of egw, personal advantage). kai (inferential conjunction). anastas (aor.act.part.nom.sing.masc.of fanistAmi, adverbial, temporal). AkolouthAsen (3d.per.sing.aor.act.ind.of akolouthew, ingressive). autw (dat.sing.masc.of autos, personal advantage). Translation: "And as He was walking along He saw Levi, the son of Alphaeus, sitting in the tax office, and He said to him, 'Follow me.' Therefore he arose and began to follow Him." COMMENT: paragwn - Jesus was walking along the side of (para) the sea shore and leading (agw) the people who were following closely, we may be sure. He saw Levi (Matthew), who is identified as the son of Alphaeus (genitive of relationship). The circumstantial participle kathAmenon epi to telwnion tells us what Matthew was doing. He was engaged in his profession as a tax collector. Two words from Jesus were sufficient to change the publican's life. Note the present imperative in akolouthei moi. So He calls us all. "Be always following me." Mark's description is brief and to the point. Matthew simply arose and began his discipleship by following Jesus. There is not a word about his business, which was probably very lucrative and designed to make him a despicable character in the eyes of the Jewish populace. Luke 5:28 says that he left everything behind to follow Jesus. Speaking about the publicans in the period shortly before the birth of our Lord, Will Durant ......says, "The generals who conquered the provinces were the first to profit form them. Lucullus, after his campaigns in the East, became a synonym for luxury. Pompey brought in from the same region $11,200,000 for the Treasury and $21,000,000 for himself and his friends; Caesar took literally untold millions from Gaul. After the generals came the publicans, who collected from the people twice the amount which they remitted to Rome. When a provice or city could not raise enough from its subjects to pay the demanded tribute or tax, Roman financiers or statesmen whould lend them the necessary funds at from twelve to forty-eight per cent interest, to be col- (130) lected, if need be, by the Roman army through siege, conquest, and pillage. The Senate had forbidden its members to take part in such loans, but pompous aristocrats like Pompey, and saints like Brutus, skirted the law by lending through intermediaries. In some years the province of Asia paid Romans twice as much in interest on loans as it paid to the publicans and the Treasury. The paid and unpaid interest on money borrowed by the cities of Asia Minor to meet Sulla's exactions in 84 had swelled by 70 to six times the principal. To meet the charges on this debt communities sold their public buildings and statuary, and parents sold their children into slavery, for defaulting debtors could be stretched on the rack." We do not know to what extent Matthew was involved in this wholesale extortion, though it is probable that he was not ignorant of the situation and that he acquiesced in and profited personally in some measure. The story does support the NT teaching, often stated, that publicans were looked down upon in Israel as enemies of the people and in league with their Roman persecutors. MARKitGNTwuest51,2 - "As He passed by." The durative aspect of the present tense is seen here. As Jesus was passing by, He saw Levi. "Sitting at the receipt of custom." Levi was sitting at the tollgate on the Great West Road from Damascus to the Mediterranean. This was also the customs office at Capernaum, the landing place for the many ships that traversed the Sea of Galilee or coasted from town to town. He was a tax collector who collected toll for Herod Antipas. Being in the employ of the Roman government which bled its subjects for taxes, these tax collectors were hated and despised by the Jews, and classed with sinners. "At" is epi, "on." He was sitting on the elevated platform or bench which was the principal feature of the toll-office, and which was put for the whole establishment. Here was a Jew who loved money more than the good regard of and fellowship with his countrymen. The bodn between Jew and Jew is usually far more close than it is between members of other races, since the Jew is an isolated, unique, persecuted nation. It all shows the sordidness of Levi's soul. But here was a man our Lord could use. He had intensity of purpose, and that intensity could be turned into right channels by Jesus. This is not the first time our Lord had seen Levi. His choice of this man as one of the Twelve, was based upon long observation of him as he sat at his tax collector's desk. And this is not the first time that Levi saw our Lord. The whole city of Capernaum was flooded with our Lord's fame and reputation. "Follow me." The word is akolouthew. It comes from a word meaning "to walk the same road." It means, "to follow one who precedes, to join him as his attendant, to join one as his disciple, to side with his party." All these things were involved in our Lord's command. This was more than an invitation. The word is in the imperative mode, issuing a command. It is not, "Would you like to follow Me? I extend this invitation to you." Here was a King, sovereign in His demands. Levi recognized the imperative tone of our Lord's voice. This was an effectual call, like the call to salvation. The one called is rendered willing to respond. Levi left his tax collector's desk in the power of a com- pulsion which he did not understand. It meant poverty for him, instead of the affluence and luxury to which he had been accustomed. The verb is in the present tense, commanding the beginning of an action and its habitual con- tinuance. It is, "Start following Me, and continue as a habit of life to follow Me." This meant for Levi, that henceforth he would walk the same road that Jesus walked, a road of self-sacrifice, a road of separation, a road of altruism, a road of suffering, a road of holiness. But the command was not merely, "Follow Me." It was "Follow with Me." The pronoun is in the associative-instrumental case. The person indicated by the pronoun is the instrument which completes the association between the two individuals. Our Lord did not therefore merely command Levi to become His follower. He welcomed him to a participation in His companionship. And this "with Me" companionship, was not one of an Indian-file nature, one following after another. It was a side by side walk down the same road. And this blessed fellowship is for every believer in the Lord Jesus. Translation: "And as He was passing by, He saw Levi the son of Alphaeus, sitting at the tax collector's desk. And He says to him, Start following with Me, and continue to do so as a habit of life. And having arisen, he followed with Him." NTC-MARKhendriksen93,4 - Mark and Luke call this man Levi--for explanation of the name see Gen.29:34--, but he calls himself Matthew (Mt.9:9ff.), meaning "gift of Jehovah." When was his name changed from Levi to Matthew? Did Jesus give him this new name when the tax-collector became a disciple, as the Lord had also changed Simon's name to Cephas (=Peter) when the latter joined the group (Mk.3:16; Jjn.1:42)? It is, however, possible that from the beginning the man here described as becoming a disciple had two names, as may also have been true with respect to Thomas (Jn.11:16) and Bar- tholomew (Mt.10:3; Mk.3:18; Lk.6:14; Acts 1:13; cf. John 1:45-49; 21:2). The identity of Levi and Matthew can hardly be questioned, as a comparison of the three Synoptic accounts of this event proves. Moreover, Luke calls Levi a "publican" (5:27), and in the list of The Twelve as recorded in Mt.10:3 there is mention of "Matthew the publican." Levi's father's name was Alphaeus, not to be confused (as is sometimes done) with the man by the same name who was the father of James the less and of Joses (Mk.3:18; cf.15:40). If Levi or Matthew had had a brother who was also one of the Twelve, this fact would probably have been mentioned, as it was in the case of Peter and Andrew, and of James and John. When Jesus, proceeding along the shore, saw Levi, the latter was sitting at (i.e., in or near the entrance of) the tax-collector's booth, the place where the tariff was collected on any merchandise that passed along the international highway between Syria and Egypt. Levi, then, was a tax-collector or "publican." To gather the public revenue on exports and imports pertaining to a province, certain Romans, generally of equestrian rank, would pay a large sum of money into the Roman treasury. These "farmer-generals," as they have been called, were accustomed to sublet the privilege to district "chief publicans," like Zacchaeus (Lk.19:2), who then, in turn, appointed lower rank "publicans" to do the actual collecting. The term "publican," probably at first the equivalent of farmer-general, began to be used in a secondary sense to indicate tax collectors of whatever rank. In this part of the Roman empire the main tax booths were located at Caesarea, Capernaum, and Jericho. Publicans generally charged whatever the traffic would bear, huge amounts. They acquired the reputation of being extortionists. In addition, Jewish publicans were regarded by other Jews as being traitors, unfaithful to their own people and to their own religion. Were they not in the service of the foreign oppressor, ultimately in the service of the pagan Roman emperor? Were they not filling his coffers? The low esteem in which publicans were held appears from passages such as the following: Mk.2:15,16; cf.Mt.9:10,11; 11:19; 21:31,32; Lk.5:30; 7:34; 15:1; 19:7. "Publicans" and "sinners" are at times mentioned in one breath. Yet it was to such a hated individual, such a publican, that Jesus now turns, in order to make him one of his disciples. It should be borne in mind that by this time Jesus had already gathered around him the following disciples: Simon and Andrew, James and John (1:16-20); and according to John's Gospel also Philip and Nathanael (1:35-51). Whether or not any others had been called is not indicated. If not, then Levi (=Matthew) was Christ's seventh disciple. The calling of The Twelve as a group occurred a little later (cf.Mk.2:13,14 with 3:13-19; Lk.5:27,28 with 6:12-16), shortly before the delivery of the Sermon on the Mount (Lk.6:17-49), a sermon which Matthew, not following a chronological order, records in chapters 5-7. When Jesus said, "Follow me," Levi immediately got up and followed him. In Matthew's own Gospel, as well as in Mark, the decisive and immediate obedience of the tax- collector is thus soberly reported. For more detail, with emphasis on the greatness of the sacrifice, we must turn to Lk.5:28, which informs us that Matthew "forsook all." He left his lucrative business and trusted that God would provide for his needs. It is clear that in doing so, his sacrifice was even greater than that of the four men mentioned in Mark 1:16-20. At this stage it was not impossible for Simon and Andrew, James and John to do a little fishing now and then. Matthew's sacrifice, on the other hand, was total. His eagerness to join Jesus and his generosity are also clear from the fact that in his house he proved the sincerity of his act by honoring Jesus with a banquet. In summary, Levi is described in the Synoptics as follows: He was: M atthew, a Jewish tax-collector, in the service of Rome; and as such A bhorred by the Jews, especially by the scribes. Nevertheless, he was T rained in the Old Testament, which he quotes very often. He was also T alented, an inspired writer, acquainted with Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek; H umble and H ospitable; see esp. Lk.5:28,29; E cumenical, in the sense of Mt.28:19, reflecting Christ's mind; and W illing, ready, and eager to boey the master's call. TNICotNTlane100,1,2 - The call of Levi is presented in its barest essentials. Mark records his name, his occupation, the word addressed to him and his response. No attempt is made to identify him further. Moreover, when the evangelist records the names of those whom Jesus chose to be with him (3:13- 19), there is no reference to "Levi the son of Alphaeus." These facts indicate that in (2:14) Mark is concerned to illustrate the radical character of Jesus' call, and that it is the nature of the call, rather than the name of the one called, which is of primary importance. Levi's seat of customs was located at Capernaum, the first site of importance around the northern end of the Sea encountered by travellers from the territory of Herod Philip and from the Decapolis. Levi would be a Jewish tax official in the service of Herod Antipas. Such officials were detested everywhere and were classed with the vilest of men. The practice of leasing the customs duty of a district at a fixed sum encouraged gross oppression by tax officers anxious to secure as large a profit as possible. When a Jew entered the customs service he was regarded as an outcast from society: he was disqualified as a judge or a witness in a court session, was excommunicated from the synagogue, and in the eyes of the community his disgrace extended to his family. In two inscriptions from Magnesia and Ephesus reference is made to "those who are concerned with the toll on fish." Apparently fish were taxed in these Asian cities, and it is possible that a toll on incoming fish was collected in Capernaum as well. It is probable that Levi knew the fishermen who accompanied Jesus. He may have also known Jesus, who spent considerable time in Capernaum. This would do much to explain his response to Jesus when he was called to discipleship. Be this as it may, what was remembered about this incident in the early Church was the brevity and urgency of Jesus' summons and the radical obedience demonstrated in Levi's dramatic response. Abandoning all other concerns, he arose and followed Jesus. The call of Levi has its sequel in the following pericope where grace is extended to yet other despised men in Capernaum. [footnote 30] - The customs officers were not "publicans," who were usually Romans of equestrian rank, but subordinate officials, most of whom were Jewish. In 2:15-16 Mark uses the ordinary Greek term, telwnAs. dAmosiwnAs, which ordinarily renders the Latin term publicanus, never occurs in the Gospels. Except at Jerusalem, and perhaps Jericho, the tax-farmers must be collecting either for the tetrarch or for the municipality. It is questionable whether there were any municipal taxes in Jewish communes except at the very few cities upon which the Herods had bestowed Hellenistic city organization. Capernaum, where the toll- booth was located, was not one of these. ... [footnote 31] - TB Baba Qama 113a lists customs officials together with "murderers and robbers." Jewish sources distinguish two classes of tax officials, those responsible for the income-tax and the poll-tax, and the customs officers who were placed at bridges, canals and on state roads. The latter were especially despised because they had greater opportunities for vexatious exactions. ... The enemies of the Church who wished to discredit Jesus seized upon this incident. Celsus claimed that Jesus chose ten publicans and sailors to be his disciples). MARKj&d71,2 - II. MATTHEW CALLED FROM HIS WORK TO FOLLOW JESUS. vs. 14-17. "He saw Levi" -- There were many who fished in the lake--There were many more who came in and out of the city--from all of these would Levi collect taxes. Jesus had already healed one leper--he is about to heal another--a social leper of the society of His day. Here was a Jew hired to collect taxes of his own people for the despised Romans. If such tax collectors were paid a common wage for their work it would have been scorned as an occupation--but when all knew they assessed beyond the amount prescribed and kept the overcharge for themselves it became a position of utter contempt. "By Mark alone is he called the son of kAlphaeus. There is no reason to suppose that this was any other Alphaeus than the one referred to in all the lists of the apostles where we have "James, the son of Alphaeus." In three of the lists he stands next to Matthew and Thomas. Matthew and James are thus presumably brothers, and if, as is almost certain, Thomas was the twin brother of Matthew, Alphaeus was the father of three of the twelve. If the word "brother" is rightly supplied before "of James" in Lk.6:16 ("Judas the brother of James"), he may have been the father of four." We have no record of a previous acquaintance of Jesus on the part of Levi. We can assume the following: (1) He could have heard the preaching of vs.13. (2) One of his brothers could have introduced Jesus to him. (3) He could have been among the other publicans who were baptized by John (Lk.3:12,13; 7:29). (4) Peter said the apostles were followers of Jesus from the baptism--or baptizing of John (Acts 1:21,22). We must conclude that when the words of Jesus Follow Me fell on his heart it was one prepared to receive them. Here was a hungry sould in the most unlikely of circumstances-- but then our Lord found several of these--we think immediately of the woman at the well (Jn.4:7-38). MARKbarclay46,7,8 -This story tells us certain things both about Matthew and about Jesus. (i) Matthew was a well-hated man. Tax-gatherers can never be a popular section of the community, but in the ancient world they were hated. People never knew just how much they had to pay; the tax-collectors extracted from them as much as they could possibly get and lined their own pockets with the surplus that remained after the demands of the law had been met. Even a Greek writer Like Lucian ranks tax-gatherers with "adulterers, panderers, flatterers and sycophants." Jesus wanted the man no one else wanted. He offered His friendship to the man whom all others would have scorned to call friend. (ii) Matthew must have been a man at that moment with an ache in his heart. He must have heard about Jesus; he must have listened on the outskirts of the crowds to His message; and something must have stirred in his heart, and he must have hated himself and his hated trade. Now Matthew could not possibly have gone to the orthodox good people of his day; to them he was unclean and they would have refused to have anything to do with him. Hugh Redwood tells of a woman in the dock district in London who came to a women's meeting. She had been living with a Chinese and to him she had a half-caste baby, and she brought the baby with her. She liked the meeting and she came back and back again. Then the vicar came to her. "I must ask you," he said, "not to come to this meeting again." The woman looked her question. "The other women," said the vicar, "say that they will stop coming if you continue to come." She looked at him with a poignant wistfulness. "Sir," she said, "I know I'm a sinner, but isn't there anywhere a sinner can go?" Fortunately the Salvation Army found that woman and she was reclaimed for Christ. But that is precisely the thing that Matthew was up against until he found the one who came into the world to seek and to save that which was lost. (iii) But this tells us something about Jesus. It was as He walked along the lakeside that He called Matthew. As a great scholar said, "Even as He was walking along He was looking for opportunities." Jesus was never off duty. If He could find one man for God as He walked He found him. What a harvest we could gather in if we looked for men for Christ as we walked! (iv) Of all the disciples Matthew gave up most. He, of all of them, literally left all to follow Jesus. Peter and Andrew, James and John could go back to the boats. There were always fish to catch and always the old trade to which to return; but Matthew burned his boats completely. With one action, in one moment of time, by one swift decision he had put himself out of his job forever, for having left his tax- collector's job, he would never get it back again. It takes a big man to make a big decision, and yet some time in every life there comes the moment to decide. A certain famous man had the habit of going for long country walks on Dartmoor. When he came to a brook that was rather too wide to cross comfortably, the first thing he always dis was to throw his coat over to the other side. He made usre first of all that there was to be no turning back. He took the dicision to cross and made sure that he was going to stick to it. Matthew was the man who staked everything on Christ; and Matthew was not wrong. (v)From his decision Matthew got at least three things. (a) He got clean hands. From now on he could look the world in the face. He might be very much poorer and life must be very much rougher, and the luxuries and the comforts were gone; but from now on his hands were clean and, because his hands were clean, his mind was at rest. (b) He lost one job but he got a far bigger one. It has been said that Matthew left everything but one thing--he did not leave his pen. Scholars do not think that the first gospel, as it stands, is the work of Matthew [Ed. Some]; but they do think that it embodies one of the most important documents that was ever written. They believe that it embodies a document which was the first written account of the teaching of Jesus, and that that document was written by Matthew. With his orderly mind, his systematic way of working, his familiarity with the pen, Matthew was the first man to give the world a book on the teaching of Jesus. He lost one job but he got a far bigger one to do. (c) The odd thing is that Matthew's reckless decision brought him the one thing he can least have been looking for--it brought him immortal and world-wide fame. All men know the name of Matthew as one of the men whose name is for ever connected with the transmission of the story of the life of Jesus. Had Matthew refused the call he would have had a local ill-fame as the follower of a disreputable trade which all men hated; because he answered the call he gained a world-wide fame as the man who gave to men the record of the words of Jesus. God never goes back on the man who stakes his all on Him. TCGTC-MARKcranfield101,2 - Leuein. Levi (Hebrew Lewi) is only mentioned here and in Lk. parallel passage. The Mt. parallel has 'Matthew' instead. In the list of the Twelve (3:16ff.) Mk includes Matthew but not Levi, while Mt. underlines the identity of the Matthew who is a member of the Twelve with the Matthew mentioned in the parallel to this passage by describing him as ho telwnAs. In Mark's list of the Twelve there is a James who is described like Levi here as 'son of Alphaeus'. Various solutions of the problem have been suggested: (i) Levi and Matthew are two names of the same person; (ii) Iakwbon should be read here with D O f13 (exc. 346) it Tatian (cf. Origne, contra Cels. I. 62); (iii) James and Levi are two names of the same person; (iv) by the time Mk was written there was some confusion about the exact composition of the Twelve. Of these (iv) is perhaps the most likely and then (i). [Ed. I like (i) best of all.] epi. Here used with accusative to indicate position, 'at': see Moule, pp. 49f. telwnion: 'custom office', 'toll house'. Capernaum was the first important place in Herod Antipas' territory that travellers from Herod Philip's territory of Decapolis would pass through, coming round the north end of the lake. Levi was presumably in the service of Herod Antipas. Mark 2:15 And it came to pass, that, as Jesus sat at meat in his house,; And as he sat at table...--RSV; Now Levi was at table in his own house--Mof; Later, when Jesus was sitting at dinner in Levi's house--Phi; So it came about that Jesus sat down to a meal in this man's house--Rieu; many publicans and sinners; many tax-collectors and irreligious people--Gspd; a large number of tax-collectors and disreputable folk--Phi; many bad characters--tax-gatherers and others--NEB; sat also together with Jesus and his disciples:; sat down with Je- sus...--ASV; were dining with Jesus...--NASB; for there were many, and they followed him. ...and they followed him about--Alf; for there were many of them who use to follow him--Mon; ...of these and they had begun to follow him-- Rieu; ...of them among his followers--Gspd; And it cometh to pass, that he is reclining in his house, and /many' tax-collectors and sinners\ were reclining with Jesus and his disciples; for there were many, and they began following him. And it came to pass, in his reclining (at meat) in his house, that many tax-gatherers and sinners were reclining (at meat) with Jesus and his disciples, for there were many, and they followed him. TRNTyeager634 - kai ginetai katakeisthai auton en tA oikia autou, kai polloi telwnai kai hamartoloi sunanekeinto tw IAsou kai tois mathAtais autou, Asan gar polloi, kai AkolouthAsan autw. kai (continuative conjunction). ginetai (3d.per.sing.pres.ind.of ginomai, aoristic). katakeisthai (pres.inf.of katakeimai, substantival, subject of ginetai). auton (acc.sing.masc.of autos, general reference). en (preposition with the locative of place). tA (loc.sing.fem.of the article in agreement with oikia). oikia (loc.sing.fem.of oikia, place where). autou (gen.sing.masc.of autos, possession). kai (continuative conjunction). polloi (nom.pl.masc.of polus, in agreement with telwnai and hamartwloi). telwnai (nom.pl.masc.of telwnAs, subject of sunanekeinto). kai (adjunctive conjunction, joining nouns). hamartwloi (nom.pl.masc.of hamartwlos, subject of sunanekeinto). sunanekeinto (3d.per.pl.imp.ind.of sunanakeimai, conative). tw (instru.pl.masc.of the article in agreement with mathAtais). IAsou (instru.sing.masc.of IAsous, association). kai (adjunctive conjunction, joining nouns). tois (instru.pl.masc.of the article in agreement with mathAtais). mathAtais (instru.pl.masc.of mathAtaAs, association). autou (gen.sing.masc.of autos, possession). Asan (3d.perpl.imp.ind.of eimi, progressive description). gar (causal conjunction). polloi (nom.pl.masc.of polus, predicate adjective). kai (continuative conjunction). Akolouthoun (3d.per.pl.imp.act.ind.of akoloutew, inceptive). autw (dat.sing.masc.of autos, personal advantage). Translation: "And it happened that He went home with him, and many publicans and sinners began to gather about Jesus and His disciples, for there were many of them and they began to follow Him." COMMENT: It is possible to take auton as referring to Matthew, as Williams does and translate, "Levi was at table in his house...k.t.l." We have referred auton, not to Matthew, but to Jesus. In either case the result is the same. Jesus, Matthew, Jesus' disciples and a large number of other publicans and miscellaneous persons of low repute were visiting at Matthew's table in his home. The infinitive katakeisthai is the subject of ginetai, with auton as the accusative of general reference, whether it refers to Matthew or to Jesus. Literally we could translate "His sitting down occurred..." That Matthew was a man of some means seems clear from the dinner party which he hosted, perhaps as a celebration of his conversion and decision to follow Jesus. Cf.Mt.9:10; Lk.5:29. R1190 - gar introduces an explanation by way of an appendix to the train of thought, "for there were many." T348 - In vs.15f., the punctuation should run as follows: "For they were many. There followed him some scribes of the Pharisees. They noticed him eating..." BD434(2) notice the co-ordination of the two finite verbs Asan ...Akolouthoun rather than a participle. MARKitGNTwuest53,4 - "And it came to pass." The verb is in the present tense, the historical present, presenting a past event with the vividness of a present reality. We use the same device today in relating an incident. Literally, "And it comes to pass." "Sat at meat." The verb is katakeimai, "to lie prostrate, to have lain down." The same verb is used of Peter's wife's mother lying prostrate because of her illness (1:30). The orientals did not sit at the table on chairs, but reclined on couches, the head or raised end of the couch being at the table, the couch in its length extending out from the edge of the table. The words "at meat" are not in the Greek text as words. The verb itself refers here to a person reclining at the table for the purpose of eating. In passing, we might suggest that the word "meat" in the A.V., is the translation fo the Greek brwma which means "that which is eaten, food." Today the word is used of edible animal flesh. Substitute the word "food," and the translation is brought up to date. Our Lord said, "My food is to be doing the will of Him that sent Me" (John 4:34). In other words, that which was the sustenance of our Lord's deepest inner life was, to be constantly doing the will of God. "In his house." Luke 5:29 makes it clear that it was the home of Levi. Luke says that Levi made our Lord a great feast. Many sat also together with Jesus. That is, many reclined at the table with Him, or in other words, ate a meal with Him. "Many publicans and sinners." Here was a crowd that Jesus could not contact in the synagogues. Expositors says that these Jewish taxcollectors seem to have been excluded from the synagogue. This was Levi's gesture of introducing his fellow tax collectors to his new-found Saviour.["Saviour" is a little strong for this time of the ministry. The disciples probably see him in a different light at this time.] It was also an indication that our Lord was attracting a following from these tax collectors that swarmed the marts of trade in Capernaum, for Mark says, "There were many, and they followed Him." It appears that some were feasting there who had not received a formal invitation, but because of their fascination for the new Jewish Teacher who befriended them while their fellow- countrymen ostracized them, they had come. "His disciples." The Greek word for "disciples," mathAtAs, means "one who learns." The word in itself does not include the idea of salvation in it, nor is it a guarantee of the fact that the person called a disciple is a saved person. A case in point is that of those individuals who rejected the teaching of salvation through atoning blood (Jn.6:60,66). Judas was a disciple, and yet never was saved. Here the word is used of the disciples our Lord had just called to be His helpers. Translation: "And it comes to pass that, as He was dining in his house, many tax collectors and sinners were dining with Jesus and His disciples, for there were many, and they followed with Him." NTC-MARKhendriksen95,6 - That it was indeed Levi who gave the banquet in his house is clear from Lk.5:29. It was in that house that "he," namely Jesus--the immediate antecedent ("followed him") at the close of vs.14 refers to no one else --was reclining with the Master and his disciples. They were "reclining" on mattresses, couches, or divans around low tables, and resting on the left elbow, as was customary at least at festive occasions. Cf.Mk.6:26; 14:18; 16:14; ... Tax-collectors and sinners! As the Pharisees saw it, a "sinner" was one who refused to subject himself to the Pharisaic interpretation of God's holy law, the Torah. In that sense even Jesus himself and his disciples were sinners, that is, sinners as the Pharisees understood the term; for in several respects--not rinsing the hands before every meal, not observing various man-made sabbath regulations, based on sophistical reasoning--neither the Master nor his followers conducted themselves in accordance with the rabbinical interpretation of the law. In fact, we are not far from expressing the truth when we say that in the eyes of the Pharisees all non-Pharisees were "sinners": "But this rabble that does not know the law, accursed are they" (Jn.7:49). Actually, therefore, the man who by the Pharisees was called a "sinner" might be an individual upon whom God's favor rested, a true disciple of the Lord Jesus Christ. However, here we must be very careful. The term as used in the Gospels must not be interpreted too favorably, as if all these "sinners" who were reclining with Jesus in Matthew's house were "saints" (in the sense of exceptionally virtuous people). Quite the contrary would probably be nearer to the truth. Not only the rabbinical interpretation of God's law but even that divine law itself was often grossly violated by these tax-collectors and sinners. Jesus does not justify or even condone their manner of life. He regards them as the sick who have to be healed (vs.17), as the lost who must be found (Lk.15:1-4; 19:10). He had come from heaven to deliver these people from their sins and miseries. Matthew understands this and honors Jesus with a banquet. He hopes, of course, that all of the despised tax- collectors and sinners will also, like himself, become the Lord's spiritual followers. Although there are divergent explanations of the words at the close of vs.15, yet when they are read in the light of the context the true explanation does not appear to the present author to be very difficult. The key to the meaning is in all probability the repetition of the word "many." Note: "...many tax-collectors and sinners were reclining with Jesus and his disciples; for there were many, and they were beginning to follow him." The second many is probably resumptive, and means that "they, the publicans, and generally the people who passed for sinners, were many, and that they had begun to follow him" (Bruce). The word "for" can then be explained in this way: "It may seem strange that many tax-collectors and sinners, despised people, would be reclining at table with Jesus; nevertheless, it is the truth: they were reclining with him because they had begun to see in him a Friend (cf.Mt.11:19; Lk.7:34), One whom they were beginning to follow." Ear117 - Sinners. The "sinners" referred to here were not men who led wicked lives, but simply those who did not keep all the minute rules and regulations of the "tradition of the elders." So the Pharisees dubbed them "sinners." That is why the word is put in quotation marks in the NIV. TNICotNTlane103,4 - As a spontaneous expression of his joy Levi gave a banquet for Jesus and his disciples to which he invited his fellow tax officers and a group of men who are designated "sinners." This term cannot be understood in the generally accepted sense of "transgressors of the moral law of God" since Mark would then have written "tax officers and other sinners." The term is technical in this context for a class of people who were regarded by the Pharisees as inferior because they showed no interest in the scribal tradition. With the derisive epithet "the people of the land," the scribes often dismissed as inconsequential the common people who possessed neither time nor inclination to regulate their conduct by Pharisaic standards. They were particularly despised because they did not eat their food in a state of ceremonial cleanness and because they failed to separate the tithe. The designation "sinners" as used by the scribes is roughly equivalent to "outcasts." The joint expression "publicans and sinners" denotes well-known and despised classes among the people. MARKj&d72 - "Jesus (he) sat at meat in his house" - Luke tells us the feast was prepared by Matthew for Jesus (Lk.5:29). We are not to conclude this event happened immediately after the calling of Levi--no time element is indicated. We ought to mark the difference in the readings of the King James Version and the American Standard. The name "Jesus" is supplied by the translators--it is much more natural to refer this to Levi--who here in his own house is reclining at the table in the presence of Jesus and many others. Evidently Matthew wanted all publicans to hear and see what he had heard and seen. The publicans were at the feast by invitation as were undoubtedly the disciples of Jesus. TCGTC-MARKcranfield102,3 - ginetai katakeisthai auton. This construction, ginesthai used impersonally with following accusative and infinitive, is found fairly often in NT (e.g. 2:23; Lk.3:21; 16:22; Acts 4:5; 9:3; etc.) and also in the papyri. To whom do auton and autou refer? Most commentators take both to refer to Levi; others take both to refer to Jesus and understand that it was he who was the host and that the meal was either in his own house or in that of Simon and Andrew. Another possibility is that auton refers to Jesus and autou to Levi, and this in spite of its clumsiness is perhaps to be preferred. Lk.5:29 states explicitly that Levi was the host. katakeisthai. It is often assumed that reclining was the normal posture at meals among the Jews in Jesus' time, but this does not seem to have been the case as far as simple people and ordinary meals were concerned, though at solemn festival meals and when guests were being entertained in style reclining was the rule. The meal described here was such an entertainment: hence katakeisthai. Reclining at meals was a Gentile practice. Divans, covered with rugs, were placed around the table, and the guests reclined on them, supporting themselves on their left elbows. telwnai. Contempt for tax-collectors was general on account of their rapacity and can be illustrated from Greek and Latin authors, as well as from Jewish sources. The Jews had additional patriotic and religious reasons for despising men whose work brought them into frequent contact with Gentiles. In Judea and Samaria the taxes and customs were for the Roman treasury, in Galilee and Peraea for Herod. Those who served the Romans and grew rich thereby were naturally regarded as 'quislings', but the telwnai of this passage would presumably be Herod's officials. In the gospels tax-collectors are frequently associated with 'sinners' as here. hamartwloi. Hamartwlos is an adjective (so used in 8:38), but is often, as here, used as a noun. In this context the term probably denotes not simply all those who did not live according to Pharisaic principles (on Pharisees see below), but rather those who on account of their way of life were shunned not only by Pharisees but also by ordinarily respectable people. (Cf. Lk.7:37,39.) mathAtais. The word is here used for the first time in Mk, and the 'disciples' of Jesus are abruptly introduced. The term can denote a circle wider than the Twelve, though often it seems to be the Twelve who are meant. The Hebrew equivalent (talmid) was used of the pupils of a Rabbi. Asan gar polloi, kai Akolouthoun autw is best understood as a parenthesis explaining tois mathAtais autou, no previous indication having been given of the existence of 'many' disciples of Jesus. This is much better than either to take both Asan polloi and Akolouthoun autw to refer to the telwnai kai hamartwloi and to join Akolouthoun autw with what follows, reading kai before idontes in v.16 with ... The two sentences are joined together in Semitic fashion by 'and', but we may translate 'for there were many (by this time) who followed him'. FoSUitBbullinger413 -Amplificatio:Pleonasm. 11. vayehee, "and it came to pass." Sometimes this word appears to be redundant; as well as the Greek kai egeneto. That is to say, as the sense is complete without it, it is added for the sake of emphasis. Here. Mark 2:16 And when the scribes and Pharisees; Some doctors of the law who were Pharisees--NEB; And when the scribes who belonged to the Pharisees' party--Wms; saw him eat with publicans and sinners,; when they saw that he was eating with the sinners and publicans--ASV; saw that he was eating with the sinners and tax-gatherers--NASB; noticed him eathing in this bad company--NEB; they said unto his disciples,; began saying unto his disciples--Rhm; How is it that he eateth and drinketh with publicans and sinners?; Why does he eat with the...--ABUV; Why does he eat with tax-collectors...--RSV; He is eating and drinking with tax-gatherers and sinners!-- Wey; And /the Scribes and Pharisees\ began saying unto his disciples-- /With the tax-collectors and sinners\ is he eathing? And the scribes and the Pharisees, having seen him eating with the tax-gatherers and sinners, said to his disciples, 'Why-- that with the tax-gatherers and sinners he doth eat and drink?' TRNTyeager635 - kai hoi grammateis twn pharisaiwn, kai idontes hoti esthiei meta twn hamartwlwn kai telwnwn elegon tois mathAtais autou, "Hotta meta telwnwn kai hamartwlwn esthiei;" kai (continuative conjunction). hoi (nom.pl.masc.of the article in agreement with grammateis). grammateis (nom.pl.masc.of grammateus, subject of Asan understood). twn (gen.pl.masc.of the article in agreement with Pharisaiwn). Pharisaiwn (gen.pl.masc.of Pharisaios, partitive genitive). kai (continuative conjunction). idontes (aor.act.part.nom.pl.masc.of horaw, adverbial, temporal). hoti (conjunction introducing an object clause, in indirect discourse). esthiei (3d.per.sing.pres.act.ind.of esthiw, indirect discourse). meta (preposition with the genitive of fellowship). twn (gen.pl.masc.of the article in agreement with hamartwlwn). hamartwlwn (gen.pl.masc.of hamartwlos, fellowship). kai (adjunctive conjunction, joining nouns). telwnwn (gen.pl.masc.of telwnAs, fellowship). elegon (3d.per.pl.imp.act.ind.of legw, inceptive). tois (dat.pl.masc.of the article in agreement with mathAtais). mathAtais (dat.pl.masc.of mathAtAs, indirect object of elegon). autou (gen.sing.masc.of autos, possession). Hoti (recitative). meta (preposition with the genitive of fellowship). twn (gen.pl.masc.of the article in agreement with telwnwn). telwnwn (gen.pl.masc.of telwnAs, fellowship). kai (adjunctive conjunction, joining nouns). hamartwlwn (gen.pl.masc.of hamartwlos, fellowship). esthiei (3d.per.sing.pres.act.ind.of esthiw, aoristic). Translation: "And the Scribes were of the Pharisaic party. And when they saw that He was eating with the sinners and publicans they began to say to His disciples, 'With publicans and sinners He is eating!'" COMMENT: twn Phar. is a partitive genitive. The Scribes in question belonged to the Pharisaic political party. Note the first use of hoti, the objective conjunction introducing indirect discourse. (The verb esthiei is present tense, retaining the same tense in indirect as in direct discourse). The second hoti is recitative, introducing direct discourse. The imperfect tense in elegon may be taken as inceptive and continuous. "They began to say...k.t.l." and if we know the Scribes, we may be sure that they continued to talk about it! "The more unusual expression hoi grammateis twn Pharisaiwn is to be preferred, since the tendency of scribes would have been to insert kai after hoi grammateis under the influence of the common expression "the scribes and the Pharisees." Since in the Gospels the verb akolouthoun is used of Jesus' disciples, never of those who were hostile to him, a full stop should follow autw. Unmindful of this usage, copyists transferred the stop to follow polloi and inserted kai before idontes" (Metzger, Textual Commentary). The reaction of the Scribes when they saw Jesus in fellowship with the publicans and other sinners is typical of Pharisaic behavior. They were doing nothing to help the unfortunate lot and were critical of Jesus for His association with them. It is rather doubtful that Matthew had invited the Scribes into his home. Thus the Scribes are probably guilty, not only of the sin of pride, but also of the social indiscretion of criticizing the guest list as a function to which thye were not invited and the actions of the most honored Guest. R1029 - The second occurrence of hoti in this verse has an interrogative sense, "why" (cf. dia ti in Mt.9:11; the first occurrence of hoti introduces indirect discourse, "that"). M43 - Twn pharisaiwn may be a partitive genitive, "of the Pharisees" (cf. T209; Luke 5:30 has "their" scribes"). MARKitGNTwuest54 - "The scribes and the Pharisees." The best Greek texts have "The scribes of the Pharisees," namely, the scribes who belonged to the sect of the Pharisees. The scribes were what Robertson calls "young theologues." One might call them divinity students today. Vincent says that they had followed our Lord into the hall where the company was seated. He says this hall in Levi's home answered to a similar one in Arabian houses which he describes as follows; it "was a long oblong hall about twenty feet in height, fifty in length, and sixteen or thereabouts in breadth. The walls were covered in a rudely decorated manner with brown and white wash, and sunk here and there into small triangular recesses, destined for the reception of books, lamps, and other such like objects. The roof was of timber, and flat; the floor was strewn with fine, clean sand, and garnished all round alongside of the walls with long strips of carpet upon which cushions, covered with faded silk, were disposed at suitable intervals." Translation: "And the scribes belonging to the sect of the Pharisees, having seen that He was eating with the sinners, and tax collectors, were saying to His disciples, With the tax collectors and sinners is He eating? NTC-MARKhendriksen96,7 - Just as not every priest was a Sadducee (see on Jn.1:24), so also not every scribe was a Pharisee. Cf. Lk.5:30, "their scribes; but in the present case we are definitely told that the critics were scribes by profession and belonged to the religious sect of the Pharisees. In all probability it was when the banquet had ended and the guests were departing that these Pharisaic scribes, ever ready and eager to find fault with Jesus, but at times lacking courage to criticize him directly, approached his disciples with the question, "Why does he eat with tax- collectors and sinners?" Does not eating with a person imply sweet fellowship? ... And had not the rabbis laid down the rule, "The disciples of the learned shall not recline at table in the company of the `am ha-'arec"? The term `am ha- 'arec was used by them to indicate "the people of the soil," "the rabble that does not know the law." .... What the critics, because of their unsympathetic, self- righteous attitude (Lk.18:9), failed to understand was that there are times when fellowship with publicans and sinners is entirely proper, so altogether right that lack of such fellowship would be highly improper. Jesus, by associating with these people of bad reputation, was meeting a need, as he himself now declares: TNICotNTlane104 - The Pharisees and their scribes were the spiritual descendants of the Hasidim who had distinguished themselves by zeal for observance of the Law in spite of the repressive measures of Antiochus IV Epiphanes. They were deeply devoted to the Law and strictly governed their own life by the interpretation passed down in the scribal tradition. They criticized Jesus because he failed to observe the distinction between "the righteous" and "the sinners" which was an essential component of their piety. As a teacher of the Law he should have recognized that it was inappropriate for him to recline at table with the men gathered in Levi's house. In their banquets the Pharisees attempted to maintain an exclusive fellowship in order to avoid ritual impurity from contact with others who maintained the traditions less strictly. They considered it disgraceful for one of their teachers to recline at table with those unversed in the Law, and Jesus' disregard of time-honored custom offended them. [footnote 42] - The Mishnah provides the background for understanding their protest: M. Demai II. 2 "He that undertakes to be trustworthy (i.e. a Pharisee) may not be the guest of one of the people of the land"; II. 3 "He who undertakes to be an Associate...may not be the guest of one of the people of the land nor may he receive him as a guest in his own raiment." TB Berachoth 43b lists among six things inappropriate to a scholar "he should not recline at table in the company of ignorant persons," while TJ Shabbath 3c states clearly "Let not a Pharisee eat the sacrifice with the people of the land.." MARKj&d72 - "The scribes and Pharisees" - a better translation would read "the scribes of the Pharisees." "This is the first mention of the Pharisees in Mark's Gospel. They were a sect of separatists. The group began in the Maccabean period, in the second century before Christ. The Pharisees were trying to withstand the rising tide of Hellenism in Palestine. They stood strongly for close adherence to the law, including strict observance of all the ceremonial requirements. But like all such groups, the sect became more and more legalistic in its emphasis." (Earle) These scribes stood outside the house to ask this question of the disciples. MARKbarclay49,50,1,2 - Here once again Jesus is flinging down the gauntlet of defiance. When Matthew had yielded himself to Jesus, he invited Him to his house. Very naturally, having discovered Jesus for himself, he wished his friends to share this great new discovery--and his friends were like himself. It could not be any other way. Matthew had chosen a job which cut him off from the society of all respectable and orthodox people, and he had to find his friends among outcasts like himself. Jesus gladly accepted that invitation; and these outcasts of society sought His company. Nothing could better show the difference between Jesus and the Scribes and Pharisees and orthodox good people of the day. They were not the kind of person whose company a sinner would have sought. The sinner would have been looked at with bleak condemnation, with arrogant superiority. The sinner would have been frozen out os such company even before he had entered it. The orthodox religious people were shocked to the core of their beings. In Palestine a clear distinction was drawn between those who kept the law and the people whom they called the people of the land. The people of the land were the common mob who did not observe all the rules and the regulations of conventional Pharisaic piety. By the orthodox it was forbidden to have anything to do with these people at all. The strict law-keeper must have no fellowship with them at all. He must not talk with them nor go on a journey with them; as far as possible, he must not even do business with them; to marry a daughter to one of them was as bad as giving her over to a wild beast; above all, he must not accept hospitality from or give hospitality to such a person. By going to Matthew's house and sitting at his table and companying with his friends Jesus was defying the orthodox conventions of His day. We need not for a moment suppose that all these people were sinners in the moral sense of the term. The word sinner (hamartwlos) had a double significance. It did mean a man who broke the moral law; but it also meant a man who did not observe the scribal law. The man who committed adultery and the man who ate pork were both sinners; the man who was guilty of theft and murder and the man who did not wash his hands the required number of times and in the required way before he ate were both sinners. These guests of Matthew no doubt included many who had broken the moral law and played fast and loose with life; but no doubt they also included many whose only sin was that they did not observe the scribal rules and regulations. When Jesus was taxed with this shocking conduct His answer was quite simple. "A doctor," he said "goes where he is needed. People in good health do not need him; sick people do; I am doing just the same; I am going to those who are sick in soul and who need me most." Vs.17 is a highly concentrated verse. It sounds at first hearing as if Jesus had no use for good people. But the point of it is that the one person for whom Jesus can do nothing is the person who thinks himself so good that the does not neec anything done for him; and the one person for whom Jesus can do everything is the person who is a sinner and a failure and who knows it and who longs in his heart of hearts for a cure. To have no sense of need is to have erected a barrier between us and Jesus; to have a sense of need is to have the passport to His presence. The attitude of the orthodox Jews to the sinner was really compounded of two things. (i) It was compounded of contempt. "The ignorant man," said the Rabbis, "can never be pious." Heraclitus, the Greek philosopher, was an arrogant aristocrat. One called Scythinus undertook to put his discourses into verse so that ordinary unlettered folk might read and understand them. The reaction of Heraclitus was put into an epigram. "Heraclitus am I. Why do ye drag me up and down, ye illiterate? It was not for you I toiled, but for such as understand me. One man in my sight is a match for thirty thouseand, but the countless hosts do not make a single one." For the mob he had nothing but contempt. The Scribes and Pharisees despised the common man; Jesus loved him. The Scribes and Pharisees stood on their little eminence of formal piety and looked down on the sinner; Jesus came and sat beside him, and by sitting beside him lifted him up. (ii) It was compounded of fear. The orthodox were afraid of the contagion of the sinner; they were afraid that they might be infected with sin. They were like a doctor who would refuse to attend a case of infectious illness lest he himself contracted it. Jesus was the one who forgot Himself in a great desire to save others. C.T.Studd, the great missionary of Christ, had four lines of doggerel that he loved to quote: "Some want to live within the sound Of Church or Chapel bell; I want to run a rescue shop Within a yard of hell." The man with contempt and fear in his heart can never be a fisher of men. TCGTC-MARKcranfield104,5 - hoi grammateis twn Pharisaiwn: i.e. scribes who belonged to the Pharisaic party; cf. Acts 23:9. The name 'Pharisee' is commonly thought to be derived from the Hebrew and Aramaic root prs ('divide', 'separate'), and this explanation was given by the Pharisees themselves: they were 'Separatists' in the sense that they separated themselves from all that was impure in God's sight. Some have suggested that the name meant originally 'interpreters' (the Hebrew paras has the meaning, 'declare distinctly', 'explain'), and others have suggested 'seceders' or 'expelled'. Recently T.W.Manson has proposed another explanation: that originally the name was a nickname given to them by their opponents on account of the foreign elements in their beliefs, Pharisaios being the Graecized form of the Aramaic parsa'ah = 'Persian', to which they themselves later gave a more 'edifying etymology'. At any rate, the Pharisees were the spiritual heirs of the hasidim or 'pious ones' of Maccabaean times. They observed the oral as equally binding with the written Law. Though they were only a small minority of the population, probably for the most part concentrated in Jerusalem, their community organization gave them an influence in social and political life out of all proportion to their numbers. Only a minority of them were 'scribes' (see on 1:22). In the NT the Pharisees appear in the worst possible light, the faults resulting from their legalism standing out with striking clarity. But it is important to recognize their real relative goodness. In the time of Jesus ideals were to prove decisive for the future character of Judaism. Jesus sides with them against the Sadducees in 12:18ff. and certainly had more in common with them than with the Sadducees; and much of their theology is taken for granted in the NT.... esthiei. The tense 'of the original perception' (Taylor). The idea of eating with such people was to the Pharisees particularly offensive on account of their scrupulousness about ritual purity in connection with food. elegon. The imperfect is either inceptive ('began to say') or possibly indicates that the charge was repeatedly made. Their purpose was perhaps to shake the disciples' loyalty to Jesus. The second hoti may be either recitativum or more pro- bably (cf. dia ti in parallels) used in the sense of ti (cf. 9:11,28, and perhaps 2:7). Mark 2:17 When Jesus heard it, he saith unto them,; On hearing this, Jesus said to them--Mof; Jesus overheard and...--NEB; They that are whole have no need of the physician,; They who are well need not a physician--ABUV; Those who are strong have no need of a doctor--Mof; but they that are sick: but those who are ill--Mof; I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.; ...but sinners--RSV; I did not come to invite virtuous people...--NEB; ...invite the pious but the irreligious--Gspd; And /hearing it\ Jesus saith unto them-- //No need\\ have /the strong\ of a physician, but they who are /sick\,-- I came not to call the righteous /but sinners\. And Jesus, having heard, saith to them, 'They who are strong have no need of a physician, but they who are ill; I came not not to call righteous men, but sinners to reformation.' TRNTyeager636,7 - kai akousas ho Asous legei autois (hoti) Ou chreian echousin hoi ischuontes iatrou all' hoi kakws echontes, ouk Althon kalesai dikaious alla hamartwlous. kai (continuative conjunction). akousas (aor.act.part.nom.sing.masc.of akouw, adverbial, temporal and causal). ho (nom.sing.masc.of the article in agreement with IAsous). IAsous (nom.sing.masc.of IAsous, subject of legei). legei (3d.per.sing.pres.act.ind.of legw, historical). autois (dat.pl.masc.of autos, indirect object of legei). (hoti) - (recitative). Ou (negative conjunction with the indicative). chreian (acc.sing.fem.of chreia, direct object of echousin). echousin (3d.per.pl.pres.act.ind.of echw, aoristic). hoi (nom.pl.masc.of the article in agreement with ischuontes). ischuontes (pres.act.part.nom.pl.masc.of ischuw, substantival, subject of echousin). iatrou (gen.sing.masc.of istros, definition). all' (alternative conjunction). hoi (nom.pl.masc.of the article in agreement with echontes). kakws (adverbial). echontes (pres.act.part.nom.pl.masc.of echw, substantival, subject of echousin). ouk (negative conjunction with the indicative). Althon (1st.per.sing.aor.act.ind.of erchomai, constative). kalesai (aor.act.inf.of kalew, purpose). dikaious (acc.pl.masc.of dikaios, direct object of kalesai). alla (alternative conjunction). hamartwlous (acc.pl.masc.of hamartwlos, direct object of kalesai). Translation: "And because Jesus heard it He said to them, 'Healthy people have no need for a physician, but those who have ill health. I did not come in order to call righteous people but sinners.'" COMMENT: Following the analogy, Jesus deals in a bit of divine sarcasm. His comment was triggered by the fact that He heard what the Scribes had said to His disciples. This is the force of the adverbial participle akousas, which is both temporal and causal. First He laid down an obvious proposition. Those in good health need no medical care. Note the participle ischuontes here in a substantival usage to mean not only "strong" (its basic meaning) but also "healthy" as the context demands by its association with istrou. Note that Ou chreian is out of position and therefore emphasized. Sinners need salvation. Not that the Scribes were not also sinners, but the point is that they did not think that they were. Jesus spent plenty of time trying to help the Scribes and Pharisees also, but not to the exclusion of the tax collectors and other unfortunates - two groups with whom the Scribes would never be found in association. Jesus' sarcasm can be restated like this: "Why should I associate with you morally and spiritually healthy people? You are the paragons of moral virtue. You are models of ethical excellence. You have no need, do you? Those having ill health need me. Certainly you will not object if I devote some of my time to helping them!" Then Jesus dropped His sarcasm and made it clear that no righteous man would ever receive the divine call to salvation. Only sinners are so honored. God never has called a righteous man because there are no righteous people (Rom. 3:10). But in their own eyes the Pharisees considered themselves righteous. Since they so regarded themselves, why should they have felt left out when Jesus sought other company? Jesus statement penetrates to the depths of their hypocrisy and perhaps unconscious heart hunger. Not all of the Scribes and Pharisees were abandoned to their sinful fate. Some indeed, by the grace of God and the conviction of the HS, came to realize that they too were in bad health spiritually and needed the Divine Physician. Cf. Mt.9:11, 12, 13; Lk.5:31,32. Thus our Lord dealt with the "dog in the manger" attitude which is so characteristic of the snob who is aware only of the shortcomings of others and blissfully unaware of his own. R990 - The infinitive kalesai expresses the notion of purpose, "to call." MARKitGNTwuest55 - "They that are whole." The word is ischuw, "to be strong." They that are sick." The word is kakws. The word is used in 1:32, and translated "diseased." Literally, "they who are having it bad," physically. The Greek order of words shows where the emphasis is placed in the thought of our Lord, namely, "No need have those who are strong, for a doctor, but those who are sick." In these words is found the reason why Jesus was in that motley group. He was there, not because He enjoyed that kind of company, for He did not. There was sin all about Him, and His righteous, sensitive soul shrank back from it. But He was there to reach their souls for salvation. [????] [Ed. A lot of conjecture for this moment in the life of Christ.] "To repentance." Not in the best texts. Translation: "And having heard, Jesus says to them, No need do they have who are strong, for a doctor, but those who are ill. I did not come to call righteous ones but sinners." NTC-MARKhendriksen97 - The criticism of the scribes had been duly noted by Jesus. He himself, by means of what may have been a current proverb, flings back a clinching answer. When he associates on intimate terms with people of low reputation he does not do this as a hobnobber, a comrade in evil, "birds of a feather flocking together," but as a physician, one who, without in any way becoming contaminated with the diseases of his patients, must get very close to them in order that he may heal them! Moreover, it is especially the Pharisees who should be able to understand this. Are not they the very people who regard themselves as being healthy, and all others as being sick? If, then, in the eyes of the Pharisees, publicans and sinners are so very sick, should they not be healed? Is it the business of the healer to heal the healthy or the sick? The sick, of course. Jesus adds: "I did not come to call righteous people but sinners." Substantially this is the reading also in Matthew and Luke, though in Matthew these words are preceded by a quotation from Hos.6:6, and prefixed by "for"; while Luke adds the phrase "(sinners) to repentance." The passage makes clear that the invitation to salvation, full and free, is extended not to "righteous people," that is, not to those who consider themselves worthy, but rather to those who are unworthy and in desperate need. It was sinners, the lost, the straying, the beggars, the burdened ones, the hungry and thirsty, whom Jesus came to save. See also Mt.5:6; 11:28-30; 22:9,10; Lk.14:21-23; ch. 15; 19:10; Jn.7:37,38. This is in line with all of special revelation, both the OT and the NT (Isa.1:18; 45:22; 55:1,6,7; Jer.35:15; Ezek.18:23; 33:11; Hos.6:1; 11:8; Rom.8:23,24; II Cor.5:20; I Tim.1:15; Rev.3:20; 22:17). It is a message full of comfort and "relevant" to every age! Ear117 - To Repentance? This phrase is not found in the oldest Greek manuscripts and so is left out in most modern versions. TNICotNTlane104,5,6 - Jesus silenced their protest with a traditional proverb: "the healthy have no need of a physician, but rather the sick." With this maxim, which the Pharisees recognized as valid, Jesus implied that it was his responsibility to sit at table fellowship with excisemen and the despised common people. He is willing to adopt the scribal distinction between the righteous and sinners, but limits his own activity to the outcasts. The refusal to call the righteous is open to alternative interpretations. (1) Because the scribes were confident in their own righteousness they were incapable of perceiving the call to repentance. "Righteous" is used ironically or ad hominem, while the "sinners" are the humble who hear and respond to the call of God. (2) Jesus recognized the true zeal for righteousness which distinguished the Pharisees. He shared the common conviction in Judaism that the sins of the righteous did not seriously jeopardize their relationship with God. If he does not occup himself with the righteous it is not because of disdain. As a sensitive pastor he reserves all of his solicitude for the sinners. It is the impoverishment of this latter group, not their good disposition, which Jesus stresses. There are several elements which suggest that there is at least an implied condemnation of the scribes in this statement. The pericope demands the identification of "the righteous" with the Pharisees, and the tax collectors and outcasts with "the sinners." If Jesus at times spoke generously about the Pharisees, he was untiring in condemning their interpretation of the Law which had blurred God's intention (2:23-27; 3:1-5; 7:1-15). This point is clear when the pericope is seen in the context of the hostility of the scribes of the Pharisees (2:6, 16; 3:6, 22). It is accordingly better to see in the use of "righteous" in Ch. 2:17 a point of irony against those who believe themselves to be righteous. Jesus had not come to call for the Kingdom of God men like the scribes who considered themselves to be righteous, but outcasts who knew they needed to be made whole. David Daube has called attention to the tripartite form of this pericope, a form which it shares with at least six other Synoptic incidents. (1) Jesus performs a revolutionary action; (2) the Pharisees or their scribes remonstrate with him; and (3) he makes a pronouncement by which they are silenced. This form, with its direct, dramatic presentation, was well suited to emphasize the startling character of the Kingdom of God which broke in, step by step, as Jesus and those around him performed their task. The first part of the form described an action performed on some definite occasion: Jesus ate with tax officials and outcasts. The middle part of the form, the protest issued in the form of a challenge, assumes that Jesus and his disciples ought to behave as the scribes do. Because Jesus is judged as essentially belonging to the same camp as his remonstrants, his action by adducing a tradition proverb which his opponents recognize as valid ("the healthy have no need of a physician..."). Jesus starts from the same basis as do his antagonists; if he did not, he would be unable to silence them. Where he differs from them is in his interpretation of the teaching adduced. The third member of the form describes the defeat of the scribes by an argument resting upon a basis they acknowledge. It is the first part of this form, Jesus' radical action, which brings into focus the theologically significant elements in this incident. To the scribes Jesus' conduct was offensive because it was improper for a teacher of the Law to share meal fellowship with outcast and ignorant common people. Jesus' action was actually more revolutionary than they could imagine. When Jesus shared meal fellowship with the tax officials and the common people, it was Messiah who was sitting with sinners. The expression used in Ch.2:15, "they reclined at table together with Jesus," suggests that Jesus--the Messiah--and not Levi, was the host at this festive meal. When this is understood, the interest of the entire pericope centers on the significance of Messiah eathing with sinners. The specific reference in vs.17 to Jesus' call of sinners to the Kingdom suggests that the basis of table-fellowship was messianic forgiveness, and the meal itself was an anticipation of the messianic banquet. When Jesus broke bread with the outcasts, Messiah ate with them at his table and extended to them fellowship with God. Mark's interest in recording this incident lies precisely in the demonstration of forgiveness which it affords. It takes its place very naturally with the two preceding sections of the Gospel (2:1-12, 13-14) as a sovereign demonstration of the forgiveness of sins. The meal was an extension of the grace of God and an anticipation of the consummation when Messiah will sit down with sinners in the Kingdom of God. MARKj&d72,3 - "They that are whole (strong)." This was used ironically by Jesus to describe the Pharisees' attitude about himself--since he felt self sufficient--he need not concern himself over the work of the great physician. "They that are sick"--surely even at the risk of contagion the physician must minister to the sick. If the Pharisees felt these publicans and sinners so much in need they could not object if someone attempted to help them. "not to call the righteous but sinners." Jesus plainly states His purpose--His work, His concern would be among sinners--His call--His healing would be for them--if this offended the Pharisees so be it! TCGTC-MARKcranfield105,6 - akousas could mean either that he heard them himself or that what they had said was reported to him. hoti is only read by B D TH and two cursives. If retained, it is recitativum. Ou chreian echousin...echontes. Similar proverbial sayings about the doctor and the sick and the healthy are found in pagan literature, but the idea is so obvious that there is no need to think of borrowing. Mark's use of the rather less natural ischuontes instead of hugiainontes which Lk has substituted is perhaps due to the influence of Aramaic beri'a which means both 'healthy' and 'strong'. Althon. Cf. on 1:38, 4:21. And besides these cf. 10:45; Mt.5:17; 10:34f.; Lk.12:49; Mt.11:19=Lk.7:34; Lk.19:10; and also Mk.1:24; Mt.8:29. The verb erchesthai is often used of Jesus, particularly by himself, and expresses his consciousness of his mission. His use of it is perhaps a pointer to his consciousness of pre-existence .... kalesai. Probably not in the specific sense 'invite' (had Jesus and not Levi been the host in v.15, it might perhaps have been difficult here not to take it in this sense), but, as Lk who adds eis metanoian understands it, in a more general sense (cf. Isa. 66:4; Jer.7:13,27,etc.). To discuss whether dikaious is an 'ironical admission' (cf. Lk.15:7; 18:9) or whether it denotes non-ironically the relatively righteous, the respectable, is really beside the point. In v.17a the real point is that it is not surprising to find a doctor among the sick; the negative statement merely supports the positive. Similarly in the application it is the positive statement that has the emphasis. Jesus is not at the moment concerned either to affirm that some people are relatively righteous or to deny that any are so righteous as not to need to repent; he is simply concerned tyo defend his right to associate with the disreputable. The dilemma propounded by Dodd, that, if dikaious is used ironically, it does not fit the ischuontes of v.17a, while if it denotes the respectable, then the implication is that the respectable are excluded from Jesus' call, is therefore unreal. There is no need to deny the authenticity of v.17b and to regard it as a doctrinal addition by the Church, with Bultmann, Dibelius, Dodd, and others. It is not an unapt 'moral', but fits its context well. Moreover, it expresses what we know from other passages was characteristic of Jesus' attitude (cf.Mt.11:19=Lk.7:34; Mt.18:12-14=Lk.15:1-7; Lk.7:36-50; 15:8-32; 19:1-10). (The use of the Pauline word dikaios tells in favour of authenticity rather than against it, as Taylor notes, for it is clearly not used in its Pauline sense.) The point of the whole verse may be summed up: For Jesus to refuse to have dealings with the disreputable would be as absurd as for a doctor to refuse to have to do with the sick; he has come on purpose to call sinners, and the disreputable people he is associating with are obvious members of that class.