In this chapter, Jesus gets in to more conflict. First it is with the Pharisees, who disagree with him healing someone on the Sabbath. Then he gets into conflict with his own family. He famously says that those around him are his mother, brother and sisters, rather than those looking for him.
This does make me wonder whether conflict is just a normal part of the Christian faith. Will there always be people who disagree with us, even to the point where they want to kill us. Now obviously this is tricky for a number of reasons.
First, it is discerning whether the conflict is motivated for righteous and good reasons. The conflicts Jesus found himself in were obviously acceptable. He was sinless; it was always the other parties that were wrong. How do we know then when our conflicts are sinful or righteous? This is especially the case when, throughout the New Testament, Christians are called to show unity and love for one another. In fact, unity is one of the most important pieces of evidence that we are sent by Jesus. Therefore, if we are in conflicts with one another then we are not being particularly good witnesses for Christ. So, I suggest, that if the conflict is with another believer, it is wrong. Of course, the fact that we are reminded so often to live peacefully, patiently and lovingly with one another means we are likely to forget this. (You don’t remind someone to do something that comes naturally to them.) It takes effort but it’s an effort we should take.
Then, it is perhaps that we should expect conflict with non-believers. Perhaps not to the extreme shown here, but we should expect it nonetheless. But, we need to check our hearts and be humble. I don’t think we should be antagonistic, frustrating, stubborn or arrogant in this, as this is not a good witness. In fact, our words should be seasoned with salt and our answers should be full of grace. We should not pick a fight the the sake of picking a fight. However, we should not be surprised if opposition comes our way.
Mark 2 continues with providing Jesus’ authority, but also that he has the ability to heal both our outward problems in the form of sickness but also our inward sin. This is not to say that a person’s sickness is caused by their sin, rather that sickness and sin are both a type of natural evil that has no place in God’s kingdom.
Now there are some really interesting things in this passage. First, the order in how Jesus responds to the paralysed man. First, he heals his sins. Then, he heals his body. God’s concern for our internal sickness, the sickness of our heart, which is sin, is greater than his concern for our bodily sickness. This is because God knows what is of a more eternal importance. Unless God deals with our sin in this lifetime, we are unable to be eternally healed.
Another thing that people often seem to overlook is the Pharisees’ reaction. They said, “Who can forgive sins but God alone?” They are absolutely correct; their theology is spot on. One thing that amazes me is about the gospels is that the Pharisees’ theology was, in fact, often right. You could not fault their Biblical knowledge. Yet, they did not recognise Jesus. You may have memorised the whole of scripture. Your arguments might be water-tight. But if your knowledge of scripture does not help you to know Jesus better, you’ve missed the point somewhere. It is through Christ that the meaning of Scripture is revealed.
The theme of the teachers of the law not really knowing Jesus continues through this chapter. They rebuke Jesus for associating with sinners. They ask him why he doesn’t fast. They argue with him about the purpose of the Sabbath. Each time, they do not recognise who he is and what he has come to do.
So, my question is this: do I know Jesus? I might have a good theoretical knowledge; I might be able to sing all the names of the books in the Bible in the right order; I could probably do a good flannel-graph version of most the parables. I could know the Bible inside and out. But do I actually know the person of Christ, who is the Son of God?