Mar 3:24 And if a kingdom be divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand.
Alternative: And if a rule is divided against itself, that rule cannot be established.

The general discussion is about the nature of power over adversity. Is adversity caused by a group of evil spirits who fight against good or by the nature of the universe?

What kingdom is Christ referring to here? Christ only recognizes one kingdom, one rule, the rule of the God. Those who teach that the rule of God is somehow divided between good and evil do not understand the nature of power and the nature of authority. The universal rule is not at conflict with itself.

When rules are at conflict with themselves, they are not rules at all. In making human rules, for example, we run into problems when laws can be interpreted in different ways, so broadly to make everything a crime or so narrowly to make nothing a crime. The rule cannot stand because it contradicts itself.

However, a real kingdom is not divided against itself. It has clear rules and one rule-maker. The universal kingdom Christ teaches about is just that kind of place. There is no separate authority over good and evil, but one authority over all. Can you think of another place where Christ says this specifically? That God doesn't treat the good and evil any differently at least on earth?

"Kingdom" is from basileia (basileia), which means "kingdom," "dominion," "hereditary monarchy," "kingly office," (passive) "being ruled by a king," and "reign."

"Divided" is from merizô (merizo), which means "divide," "distribute," "assign," "sever," "cut-off," (passive) "to be divided," "to be dispersed," and "to be reckoned a part."

"Stand" is from histêmi (histemi), which means "to make to stand," "to stand," "to set up," "to bring to a standstill," "to check," "to appoint," "to establish," "to fix by agreement," "to be placed," "to be set," "to stand still," "to stand firm," "to set upright," "to erected," "to arise," and "to place." Like the English words "put" and "set," it has a number of specific meanings from "to put down [in writing]," "to bury," "to establish," "to make," "to cause," and "to assign."

Mar 3:23 How can Satan cast out Satan?

Alternative: By what means can adversity eject adversity?

Did Christ see "Satan" as a real person or did he, as the Hebrew word is generally interpreted in the Jewish tradition, use the term to address the nature of adversity? In this verse and those that follow, we get a clearer idea.

Elsewhere, Christ refers to the personalization of evil with the term Beelzebub (Beelzeboul). This discussion always starts, as it does here, with his opponents using that concept. In response, Christ refers to others using the term (and the concept), aiming it at him as a person:
"If they have called the master of the house Beelzebub..." (Mat 10:25)
"And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils..." (Mat 12:27) (Luk 11:19)
"...ye say that I cast out devils through Beelzebub." Luk 11:18

For Christ, the problems of adversity make much more sense when we take the "persona" of Satan out of the equation. Christ is trying to explain that the approach of identifying adversity as a group of demons, headed by a chief demon, as used by his opponents, doesn't make sense. In the next few verses, he makes this point specifically, as the Gospel writer explains, by analogy ("parables," parabole). In this verse, he starts by saying that while a person might have the authority over others who are subject to him that doesn't make sense if you address reality as it is. It isn't caused by a hierarchy of demons who can be ordered around. Adversity isn't a person. It is a fact of nature.

For Christ, his "authority" over physical disease and mental disorder is identical. In line with his general teaching, both forms of disability arise from a natural, if spiritual cause. While in the modern era, we may see "nature" as solely materialistic, but Christ's view was that the physical was only what was apparent while the spiritual is what hidden, at least temporarily. The spiritual is what persists over time. (Note: While those with mental problems are described in the Gospels as "having demons," this usage is the same as modern expressions where we describe people as battling their "inner demons." ) His authority over people's disabilities and inner demons comes from the "Holy Spirit" that addressed adversity.

For Christ, the concept of adversity persists eternally even though individual instances of adversity come and go. An individual adversary, say a thief (as used later in this verse), might be stopped by another adversary, say a competing thief, but this does not destroy the nature of adversity itself. This anthropomorphizing of adversity takes us away from what Christ is trying to explain about what is really going on in the universe.

"How" is from pôs (pos) which means "in any way," "at all," "by any means," and "I suppose."

"Can" is from the verb, dunamai (dunamai) which means "to have power by virtue of your own capabilities," "to be able," and "to be strong enough." In the previous verse, the word used was the adjective, dunatos (dunatos), which means "strong," "mighty," "possible," and "practicable."

"Cast out" is from ekballô (ekballo) and means "throw out," "cast out of a place,"and "expose." Ek means "out of," "from," and "away from." Ballo is "to throw" or "to scatter." The general idea of ballo is "to throw without caring where something falls," so it isn't like putting something into a specific place. This term is always used when Christ speaks of casting out spirits or ejecting someone from a place where they are unwanted.

"Satan" is from satan (satanus, satan), which means "adversary," "opponent," and
"accuser." These are Hebrew origin words, appearing in Greek only in the New Testament. The traditional Jewish view does not portray "satan" as an evil angel (explanation here). A case can be made that our personalization of Satan is largely an artifact of incomplete translation.

Mar 3:5 Stretch forth your hand.
Alternative: Extend your abilities.

Christ used the hand, both in his actions and words, as symbolic of an invidivual's personal power. Every time he used the word (or used his hands), they were an expression of power. Being "in someone's hands" means being in their power (Mat 17:22). He said that we are better off losing our abilities as symbolized by our hands (Mat 5:30) than misusing them.

The Greek word for "stretch" has the same meaning as the word in English with all its related ideas of extending yourself and your abilities. This extension of abilities has the same sense of being work and a struggle.

Though the immediate context is healing a man with a withered hand, the man represents everyone with limited abilities. Notice that Christ heals the man, but immediately after doing so asks him to demonstrate those abilities. We are given our abilities by God, but it is up to use to work to extend them. This demonstrates what God has done for us and our desire to use those abilities.

In terms of the larger discussion about religion and the Sabbath, Christ answers his own question about the priority of doing good in the context of religious tradition. He has said clearly that religious tradition is our servant not our master. It is meant to give us power and ability not to take it away. Not only does Christ demonstrate his own power in the context of religious tradition, but he asks those that he heals to do so as well.

"Stretch forth" is ekteinô (ekteino), which means "to stretch out," but also means "to offer food," "to prostrate yourself," and "to extend." Its root is teinô, which means "to stretch," "to pull tight," "to strain," "to spread," "to aim at," "to extend," "to struggle," "to exert oneself," and "to reach."

Mar 3:4 Is it lawful to do good on the sabbath days, or to do evil? to save life, or to kill?
Alternative: Is it allowed to do good on the Sabbath or to injure? to keep a soul alive or to slay?

Here, Christ uses the words that mean "good" and "evil" in Greek, which is rare. The terms normally translated as "good" and "evil" are more accurately translated as "beautiful" and "worthless." (More on this topic here.) In this case, Christ is clearly referring to morale ideas and their relationship to religious teaching.

The question about the Sabbath could be applied to any religious restriction. The issue here is purpose: what is the purpose of religion? Christ asks very simply whether or not the ultimate purpose is to do good or to do evil, and, to clarify how he defines "good" and "evil," he goes on to specific saving life or taking life.

This question obviously lies at the heart of all religious questions. Christ has said that the Sabbath, and by extension religion, exists for humanity. Religion is a servant not a master. Any faith that seeks to make religion a master is contrary to Christ's teaching.

By Christ's logic, the purpose of religion is to preserve life, that is, do good. Religion can and does save lives by teaching ways to life that preserve life. By extension, we can never justify taking a life on religous grounds. The only reason for taking a life is to save other lives.

"Lawful" is exesti (exesti), which means "to be allowed," "is possible," and "to be in one's power."

"Do good" is from agathopoieô (agathopoieo), which means "to do good," "to do well," "to act rightly," and "to exert a beneficial influence."

"Do evil" is from kakopoieô (kakopoieo), which means "to do ill," "to play the knave," and "to do mischief," and "to injure."

"Save" is from sôizô (sozo), which means "save from death," "keep alive," "keep safe," "preserve," "maintain," "keep in mind," "carry off safely," and "rescue."

"Life" is from psuchê (psuche), which means "breath," "life," "self," "spirit," and "soul." It has the clear sense of the conscous self. It is also used to describe "the spirit" of things. It is often translated as "soul."

"Kill" is apokteinô (apokteino), which means "to kill," and "to slay" but it is a stronger form than the normal verb kteino. It is more like our "destroy."

Mar 3:3 Stand forth.

Alternative: Rise up halfway! or Wake up halfway!

When Christ describes his works to John the Baptist's followers (Mat 10:8), he describes "awakening the dead" or "raising the dead." The Greek term used in the Gospels to describe "waking" and "rising" is the same term that is used here.

We saw this term before when Christ healed the lame man and now here again, when he heals the man with the withered hand.

Christ views humanity as asleep, especially in understanding our physical nature. As we learn, we wake up. As we wake up, our lives rise up and improve. Christ doesn't expect us to wake up entirely, but if we just wake up halfway and rise to meet God halfway, God can cure much of what inflicts us.

"Arise" is from egeirô (egeiro), which means "to awake," "to rouse," "to stir up" and "to wake up."


"Forth" is from two words. The first is eis (eis), which means "into," "to," "towards," "in regard to," "to the limit of," and "up to (some time)." The other word is mesos (mesos), which means "middle," "in the middle," "central," "impartial," "intermediate," "middling," midst," "difference," "moddle state," and "between."

Mar 2:28 Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath.

Christ first refers to himself as the "son of man" in Mat 8:20. He uses it in Matthew over 30 times, in Mark 15 times, in Luke 25 times, and in John a dozen times. No one else uses it in the Gospels except the people in Joh 12:34 who want to know what the term means. Christ answers metaphorically, referring to himself as the light who allows people to see where they are going and to those who trust in the light as "children of the light."

This metaphorical answer fits nicely into the purpose of this blog.

Christ discusses the parent-child relationship many different times in the Gospels. In all his uses, sons are subject to their parents, servants who do their bidding. Here, Christ uses the word for "master" to contrast it with the idea of a son. In Mat 22:45, Christ uses this same contrast of terms to question how a "son of David" could be also his "master" since the terms have opposite meanings. By calling himself, a "son of Man," Christ was saying that he wasn't humanity's master but its servant.

Christ also uses the parent-son relationship to indicate shared and inherited knowledge (Mat 11:27) and power (Mat 5:45). In a sense, this verse itself falls into this category. The Sabbath was made for mankind so Christ is the master of the Sabbath because he is the son of man. Christ doesn't get this ability from God but from a prior gift of God to man.

Finally, Christ also uses the parent-son relationship to indicate one of trust. A parent only wants what is best for the son and a son trusts in his parent's love (Mat 7:9). In identifying himself as a son of humanity, Christ is expressing his trust in the human race. He was saying that we, the human race, loves him and that he ultimately trusts in our love.

Since Christ recognized God as his Father (and our Father), how can "man" also be his father? Mankind wasn't his father but rather his mother, through Mary obviously, but there is a symbolic marriage here between God and Mankind, where the result is Christ.

"Son" is from huios (huios), which means a "son," and more generally, a "child."

"Lord," is from kurios (kurios), which means "having power," "being in authority" and "being in posession of." It also means "lord," "master of the house," and "head of the family."

Mar 2:27 The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath:

Since the sabbath is the day set aside for worship, we learn something about Christ view of public worship and worship in general. First, we worship God for our own good not because he needs worship. This entire section is about our human needs while we are temporarily separated from God during this life. One of those needs is the need to worship, to recognize that we are not alone, that we are part of something bigger.

God gave us the law, starting with the law of Moses, for our own good. Keeping the Sabbath is something that we need to do because we cannot be consumed by our worldly cares. We need to spend some serious time considering God and our place in the universe.

This rule about this one law of Moses can be extended to the entire ten commandments and from that to all human laws. If divine authority must be obeyed for our own good, so does legitimate human authority. The laws of human authority, like our religious tradition, are made for our own good and it is good to obey them because they are meant to do us good.

However, these laws are only justified when they are good for us. Law is not justified by itself, but by the way it serves humanity. If this is true for religious traditions, which come ultimately from God, it is even more true of human laws.

The logical entension of this idea is that the state as an instrument of law is not our master but our servant. It's laws are justified by their service to us. As God does not make laws for his own needs, the state does not make the law for its own needs. If God's laws are made to serve us, the state, as an artificial creation of mankind, is even more purely a servant and not a master.

From this thinking arises all modern government, especially the limits on government. If there is not God, then the state is the supreme power and all rights come from the state and all laws are meant to support the state. However, if God is the supreme power, all laws are designed to serve us as individuals. Our rights as individuals come from God not the state. Those who promote atheism do not understand how critical this distinction is.

Christ was the first to teach this idea. It is the heart of the good news, the universal rule, and the kingdom of heaven.


"Was made" is from gignomai (ginomai), which means "to become," "to come into being," "to be produced," and "to be."

Mar 2:26 How he went into the house of God in the days of Abiathar the high priest, and did eat the shewbread, which is not lawful to eat but for the priests, and gave also to them which were with him?

This verse balances our physical needs (symbolized by the bread of the temple) against social prohibitions. Notice that while Christ accepts religious authority, he sees it as a legitimate social power not as necessarily representing God's will. Christ never condemns the rules of tradition but he is putting them into a larger framework of virtue consisting of our physical responsibilities, our intellectual responsibilities, and our emotional responsibilities, which include our social responsibilities.

Christ in many parts of the Gospels defines a virtuous man as one who honors the law, both civil law and religion traditions. However, his "good news" is that the law isn't all that there is. We have an eternal life beyond our temporal one. Our temporal life has physical, mental, and emotional needs, but the real purpose of our temporal life is to make progress in our eternal life, that is, our new life under the universal rule or kingdom of heaven. The good news is we can be freed from our errors in our temporal life by getting our priorities straight.

Christ is saying that we can act locally, accepting the local prohibition in our physical life, and globally, accepting that God wants us to realize that there are higher goals, which upon certain occasions, can and should come first.

These higher goals are not just "serviing God," which is always a mystery and an egotistic claim made by those who don't understand that our personal relationship with God is a private matter. Sometimes those higher goals are simply our physical needs, which, even though they are our most basic and common desire, are no less God given. The need for bread is surpassed by our need from God, but the life in the bread is also a gift from God and makes it different thant a plain stone. This is not about our desires (thelo in Greek) but our needs (chreia , see the previous verse), which are necessities.

Christ separates religion, that is, the public expression of a specific tradition from our true faith which is express only in our personal relationship with God. Our personal relationship is hidden as God is hidden and as our personal thoughts are hidden from all but God. The "shewbread" of this verse is literally the bread that was put on public display in the temple as an offering to God but which was eaten by the priests. The word used in Greek to describe it means "to place in public." In this verse, our private needs and the private needs of our fellows both are given a priority over such public displays. Christ does not ever say that public religious displays are worthless (poneros, the word translated as "evil" in the Gospels) and more than he says social law is worthless. They are simply of a lower priority.

What is worthless is respecting neither religious tradition, social law, or our physical, mental, or emotional needs for other desires.

"Bread" is from artos (artos), which means specifically a "cake of whole wheat break," and generally "loaf," and "bread."

"Shew" is from prothesis (prothesis), which means "to place in public," "to lay out," "proposed," "purpose," "public notice," "supposition," "calculation," and "proposition."

"Eat" is from phago (phago), which is a form of the word, phagein, which means to eat," "to eat up," and "to devour." A synonym for esthiô (esthio).

"Lawful" is exesti (exesti), which means "to be allowed," "is possible," and "to be in one's power."

Mar 2:25 Have you never read what David did, when he had need, and was an hungred, he, and they that were with him?

Though this response is to an accusation regarding Christ and his followers picking grain on the Sabbath, this particular verse again identifies Christ and his followers as separate from the traditions of the Jews. Christ did not fast like John the Baptist because the wedding party does not fast when the groom is with them.

Like the verses prior to it in this chapter, Christ is uses food (usually in the form of bread) as symbolic of our human body and its needs. Bread is the symbol of the body with its needs. Eating the bread is symbolic of physical pleasure and survival. Pleasure is not separate from survival but part of it. Food symbolizes the whole feast, the celebration of the wedding.

The cup (or wineskin) is symbolic of the mind which holds knowledge as a cup or wineskin holds drink. Drinking from the cup is symbolic of making a commitment, choosing a path. While we think of tasting as a test (as the water that was converted to wine at Cana was tested), Christ reverses that: what we choose to drink tests us because it is symbolic of a commitment. Think of how we toast the bride and groom at a wedding as a symbol of their commitment.

As the cup is a vessel for the wine, so is our minds the vessels of knowledge but our knowledge is not a passive thing. In Christ's cycle, the mental leads to the physical, knowledge leads to action. Therefore, the cup we choose to drink from is a commitment to a certain action. In this verse, Christ reminds those who challenge him of what they should know or have read, because that knowledge justifies his action.

Clothing (or a cloak, the outer garment) symbolizes our emotions and relationships. Our emotions come from our connections with each other At the wedding feast, the guest without a wedding garment is thrown out. In this verse, the relationship is between David, the king, and his followers. Our position is defined by our relationships. Christ did not come to patch up the Jewish relationship with God, but to define a new relationship.

"Read" is from anagignôskô (anaginosko), which means "to recognize," "to know well," "to know certainly," "to know again," "to own," and "to acknowledge."

"Need" is from chreia (chreia ), which means "need," "want," "poverty," "a request of a necessity," "business," "military service," "a business affair," "employment," "familiarity," "intimacy," and "maxim."

"Hungry" is peinaô (peino), which means "to be hungry" or "to be starved," and it is a metaphor for desire and cravings.

Mar 2:22 And no man puts new wine into old bottles: else the new wine bursts the bottles, and the wine is spilled, and the bottles will be marred: but new wine must be put into new bottles.

In Christ's use of symbols, the cycle of liquids is from water (physical), to wine (mental) to blood(emotional ). When you realize that the word translated as "bottles" actually means "skin" as in "wineskin," this verse has a very interesting transposition: "Noone puts new blood into old skin else the blood bursts the skin and the blood is spilled and the skin is destroyed, but new wine must be put into new skin."

Here, Christ is referring again to the relationship between the old teaching of Judaism (specially, the topic of fasting) as an old skin that cannot contain the new wine, which represents ideas, or the new blood, meaning relationships. His new teaching (specifically, the topic of eating and drinking but beyond that enjoying life) is a new skin that is necessary to contain the new ideas and the new relationships created by Christianity.

As an aside, a minister recently wrote me suggesting that the words of Christ in the Bible were no different from any other words because they were all inspire by the Holy Ghost. I cannot offer an opinion on this idea because I readily admit that I don't try to comprehend the nature of divinity and discussion of the Trinity fall into that arena.

My writing is based on a simpler idea: that Christ was human on a real level and like all humans, he had a unique viewpoint on reality. As God in human form, that viewpoint is something more that our viewpoints, because it sees the whole story, not just a part. I think that those who wrote the Gospels tried to capture the words that Christ used to express his viewpoint as well as humanly possible. We can say that they were inspire by the Holy Spirit, but I believe that Christ really said this words or words that we as close as humanly possible to the ones that were recorded. Here, the Spirit's work wasn't to inspire a human mind to divine ideas, but simply to properly record the words in which those ideas were expressed.

Others may think that the words of Paul or Job or whoever have the same exact weight in communicating God's viewpoint to us, but I do not. Christ was not just a sacrifice. He was first and foremost a teacher.

"Bottles" is from askos (askos), which means "skin," "hide," "skin made into a bag," "wineskin," "belly," "paunch," and "human skin."

"Wine" is from oinos (oinos), which means "wine" and "fermented juice of any kind."

"Marred" is from apollumi, which is a very string form of "to destroy," "to kill," "to slay," and "to lose." It is translated as "lost" and "perish" elsewhere in Matthew. It means "to destroy utterly." It also means "to ruin" a woman.

Mar 2:21 No man also sews a piece of new cloth on an old garment: else the new piece that filled it up takes away from the old, and the rent is made worse.
Alterantive: Also, noone sews a piece of unprepared wool onto an old garment: else the new piece, as it become fuller, pulls away from the old and the tear is made worse.

The exact same language is used in Mat 9:16. As then, the context is the difference between Christ and John the Baptist. The analysis of that verse is here and the vocabulary and concepts discussed apply here as well.

"New" is from agnaphos (agnaphos), which means literally "not fulled" referring to the process of abrading cloth so that it becomes fuller, softer, and warmer,. This process is used specifically for wool. Abrasion pulls the hairs in the woven cloth ("felting" is a similar process for unwoven wool) and tangles them. As the fibers are pulled together, the cloth gets smaller. When you wear, use, and wash a wool garment, it is naturally "fulled," which also make is shrink. Fulling is usually part of preparing the wool before it is sewn into garments because wear alone will full the wool, shinking it. However, in the simpler clothing of Christ's era, which required much less cutting, sewing, and fitting, clothes could be made with raw cloth and fulled by wear.

Christ used clothing as a complex symbol. It represents both wealth, which makes it a part of the mental realm, but it also represents a person's place on society, which is part of the emotional realm. However, wine, the symbol in the next verse, is also symbolic of the mental realm but is also has an emotional component.

The contrast of ideas from the mental realm are also here: the old Jewish tradition of holy men fasting and the new Christian tradition of eating and drinking, satisfying the body and the mind. There is also a contrast of emotions here: the sadness of the old traditional mourning of atonement and the new joy of the celebration of a bridal ceremony. The taking of Christ from his followers is a return to mourning, but it is only temporary because Christ rises again.

There is a strong sense here that things, in this case, wool cloth, get better with age, in this case, because it is made fuller. However, there is also a sense that things wear out over time, as in a piece of clothing that gets a tear in it.

Christ is saying that his message is new and his mission not complete. Fasting, suffering, and mourning is part of the process that will finish his mission, but that process will take time. He is also suggesting that the Jewish tradition had served its usefulness but that its time was at an end. It could be patched, but not with Christ's new ideas, which had yet to be completed.

Interestingly enough, the word translated here as "takes away," referring to the patch being torn away from the cloth, is the same word Christ used describing the bridegroom being taken away in the previous verse.

So Christ is saying that he is not a patch on the old garment of traditional Judaism. Because when the patch is taken away, it would rip the cloth. He is saying that he is something new entirely, new ideas and new emotions, which means new relationships. When he is taken away, his followers will mourn, but only for awhile, because his resurrection will complete something entirely new.

"Garment" is from himation (himation), which was an oblong piece of cloth worn as an outer garment. The term generally means "clothes" and "cloth."

"Take away" is from airo, which primarily means "to lift," and also means "to raise up," "to take up," "to raise a child," "to exalt," "to lift and take away," and "to remove."