HolyStudy
Bible IndexRead BibleNotesChurchesMissionPrivacyTermsContact
© 2026 HolyStudy
HomeRead BibleBible NotesChurchesSign in
HolyStudy
HomeRead BibleBible NotesChurches
Sign in

Mark 2

1

And again he entered into Capernaum after some days; and it was noised that he was in the house.

1
2

And straightway many were gathered together, insomuch that there was no room to receive them, no, not so much as about the door: and he preached the word unto them.

3

And they come unto him, bringing one sick of the palsy, which was borne of four.

2
4

And when they could not come nigh unto him for the press, they uncovered the roof where he was: and when they had broken it up, they let down the bed wherein the sick of the palsy lay.

5

When Jesus saw their faith, he said unto the sick of the palsy, Son, thy sins be forgiven thee.

6

But there were certain of the scribes sitting there, and reasoning in their hearts,

7

Why doth this man thus speak blasphemies? who can forgive sins but God only?

8

And immediately when Jesus perceived in his spirit that they so reasoned within themselves, he said unto them, Why reason ye these things in your hearts?

9

Whether is it easier to say to the sick of the palsy, Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Arise, and take up thy bed, and walk?

1
10

But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (he saith to the sick of the palsy,)

11

I say unto thee, Arise, and take up thy bed, and go thy way into thine house.

1
12

And immediately he arose, took up the bed, and went forth before them all; insomuch that they were all amazed, and glorified God, saying, We never saw it on this fashion.

13

And he went forth again by the sea side; and all the multitude resorted unto him, and he taught them.

14

And as he passed by, he saw Levi the son of Alpheus sitting at the receipt of custom, and said unto him, Follow me. And he arose and followed him.

15

And it came to pass, that, as Jesus sat at meat in his house, many publicans and sinners sat also together with Jesus and his disciples: for there were many, and they followed him.

16

And when the scribes and Pharisees saw him eat with publicans and sinners, they said unto his disciples, How is it that he eateth and drinketh with publicans and sinners?

17

When Jesus heard it, he saith unto them, They that are whole have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

18

And the disciples of John and of the Pharisees used to fast: and they come and say unto him, Why do the disciples of John and of the Pharisees fast, but thy disciples fast not?

19

And Jesus said unto them, Can the children of the bridechamber fast, while the bridegroom is with them? as long as they have the bridegroom with them, they cannot fast.

20

But the days will come, when the bridegroom shall be taken away from them, and then shall they fast in those days.

21

No man also seweth a piece of new cloth on an old garment: else the new piece that filled it up taketh away from the old, and the rent is made worse.

22

And no man putteth new wine into old bottles: else the new wine doth burst the bottles, and the wine is spilled, and the bottles will be marred: but new wine must be put into new bottles.

23

And it came to pass, that he went through the corn fields on the sabbath day; and his disciples began, as they went, to pluck the ears of corn.

1
24

And the Pharisees said unto him, Behold, why do they on the sabbath day that which is not lawful?

25

And he said unto them, Have ye never read what David did, when he had need, and was an hungred, he, and they that were with him?

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?

27

And he said unto them, The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath:

28

Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath.

← Previous ChapterNext Chapter →

Mark 2

Chapter 2 presents five consecutive controversies that introduce the growing conflict between Jesus and the religious establishment. The healing of the paralytic lowered through the roof by four determined friends becomes the occasion for the first Son of Man claim: Jesus forgives the man's sins (which the scribes immediately recognize as a divine prerogative), then heals the paralysis as visible proof that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive — the verifiable miracle serving as evidence for the unverifiable forgiveness. The call of Levi the tax collector from his booth and the subsequent dinner with tax collectors and sinners produces the Pharisees' objection and Jesus' medical analogy: the physician comes for the sick, not the healthy — I have not come to call the righteous but sinners, with the irony that the righteous in view may be those who only consider themselves righteous. The fasting controversy introduces the bridegroom metaphor (Jesus identifying himself with the divine bridegroom of the Old Testament), the first explicit anticipation of his death, and the new-wineskins teaching: the kingdom Jesus brings is new wine that cannot be contained within the old forms no matter how venerable. The two Sabbath controversies — grain plucking and the David precedent, Sabbath healing and the Sabbath-was-made-for-man principle — culminate in the chapter's most sweeping authority claim: the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath.

Mark 2:1

A few days later, when Jesus again entered Capernaum, the people heard that he had come home — Capernaum has become Jesus' home base, and his return is immediately public knowledge. The word home (oikos) is significant: the house of Simon and Andrew has become the operational center of the Galilean ministry, the place people know to look for Jesus when he returns from the regional circuit. The report that he had come home triggers what verse 2 describes: the immediate gathering of a crowd. The healing of the paralytic that follows happens not in a synagogue or a public square but in a private house — the kingdom breaks into domestic space as readily as religious space.

Mark 2:2

So many gathered that there was no room left, not even outside the door, and he preached the word to them — the crowd that fills the house to overflowing is the narrative setup for the roof-opening. The detail that there was no room outside the door echoes the gathering at the door in Mark 1:33, now amplified to complete overflow. Jesus preaches the word (ton logon) — Mark uses this phrase frequently to denote the proclamation of the kingdom. The preaching is happening when the four men arrive with the paralytic; the healing will interrupt the teaching, communicating that Jesus' ministry of proclamation and his ministry of healing cannot be separated.

Mark 2:3

Some men came, bringing to him a paralyzed man, carried by four of them — the four unnamed bearers are among the most theologically significant unnamed characters in Mark's Gospel. They bring the paralyzed man; they are unable to get him through the crowd; they go to extraordinary lengths to reach Jesus. Their persistence is the story's engine. The paralyzed man is entirely passive — he is carried throughout the entire narrative. He does not ask, does not speak, does not choose. Everything that happens to him happens through the initiative of others: his friends who carry him and Jesus who heals him. His complete helplessness makes the faith of his friends the active element.

Mark 2:4

Since they could not get him to Jesus because of the crowd, they made an opening in the roof above Jesus by digging through it and then lowered the mat the man was lying on — the action of digging through the roof is more violent than the image of gentle tile-removal sometimes suggests. Palestinian houses of the period had flat roofs of earth and branches; making an opening required real physical effort and created real mess. The crowd inside the house would have experienced soil and debris falling as the opening was made. The determination of the four men to reach Jesus for their friend is absolute: no obstacle, not even the physical barrier of a crowded house, is sufficient to stop them.

Mark 2:5

When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralyzed man, son, your sins are forgiven — the most striking detail of this verse is that Jesus sees the faith of the four bearers and responds by forgiving the sins of the paralyzed man. The faith that produces the forgiveness is not the paralyzed man's own (he has not spoken or acted) but the faith of his friends, enacted through the roof-opening. This is the New Testament's clearest example of faith-on-behalf-of-another producing healing and forgiveness — intercession enacted through action rather than words. The address son (teknon, child) is warm and intimate. The forgiveness precedes the healing, communicating that the deeper need is addressed first.

Mark 2:6

Now some teachers of the law were sitting there, thinking to themselves — the teachers of the law (scribes) are present in the house, observing, and their reaction to Jesus' forgiveness declaration is internal. They have not spoken yet; their objection is in the heart, not on the lips. Mark's description of their inner dialogue is either a theological claim (Jesus perceived their thoughts) or a narrative technique for presenting the inevitable objection that his readership would also raise. The presence of scribes in the house is a new element in the narrative — the Galilean religious establishment is now monitoring Jesus, and the conflict that will define the rest of the Gospel has begun.

Mark 2:7

Why does this fellow talk like that? He's blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone? — the scribes' objection is theologically accurate: only God can forgive sins. The claim is rooted in Old Testament theology (Isaiah 43:25: I, even I, am he who blots out your transgressions; Psalm 103:3: who forgives all your sins). Their conclusion — blasphemy — follows logically if Jesus is merely human. Their error is not the logic but the premise: they have not allowed for the possibility that God himself has arrived in human form. The question who can forgive sins but God alone is the chapter's theological hinge — Jesus will answer it not by correcting the premise but by demonstrating that the Son of Man on earth has divine authority.

Mark 2:8

Immediately Jesus knew in his spirit that this was what they were thinking in their hearts, and he said to them, why are you thinking these things? — the knowledge of unspoken thoughts is presented without explanation or elaboration in Mark. The immediacy (euthys) and the location of the knowledge in his spirit communicate direct divine perception rather than human inference. The question why are you thinking these things is not a denial of their logic but a challenge to test their logic against the evidence about to be provided. Jesus does not argue against the scribes' theological premise (only God forgives sins); he is about to prove the premise correct and claim to be its fulfillment.

Mark 2:9

Which is easier: to say to this paralyzed man, your sins are forgiven, or to say, get up, take your mat and walk? — the question is deliberately provocative because the answer is not what it first appears. Saying your sins are forgiven is actually easier in one sense: it is unverifiable. No one can look at a person and see whether their sins are forgiven; the claim requires no visible demonstration. Saying get up and walk is harder in that it is immediately falsifiable — the person either gets up or they don't. Jesus is using the verifiable as evidence for the unverifiable: if the healing happens, it confirms the authority to forgive.

Mark 2:10

But I want you to know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins — so he said to the man — the title Son of Man appears here for the first time in Mark, drawn from Daniel 7:13–14 where the Son of Man receives from the Ancient of Days authority, glory, and sovereign power over all nations. Jesus applies this cosmic authority figure's status to his present ministry on earth: the Son of Man has authority on earth, not just in the heavenly vision of Daniel 7. The healing is about to serve as the earthly demonstration of a heavenly authority. The so he said to the man creates a narrative hinge between the theological declaration and its enacted proof.

Mark 2:11

I tell you, get up, take your mat and go home — the command is simple, direct, and tripartite: get up (stand), take your mat (demonstrate that the paralysis is gone), go home (re-enter normal life). The taking of the mat is particularly significant: the mat was the emblem of the man's condition (he was carried on it); now he carries it, reversing the relationship between the man and the mat entirely. The command to go home returns him to the life from which the paralysis had excluded him. The healing is not a dramatic display performed for the crowd but a restoration of a person to their ordinary life — the kingdom's work is not spectacle but rehabilitation.

Mark 2:12

He got up, took his mat and walked out in full view of them all. This amazed everyone and they praised God, saying, we have never seen anything like this! — the triple action (got up, took, walked) mirrors the triple command of verse 11. The full view of them all ensures the witness is comprehensive and undeniable. The response is universal amazement followed by praise of God — the crowd correctly identifies the healing's source even without fully grasping its Christological implications. We have never seen anything like this is the only response adequate to what has just happened: not just healing but the demonstration of authority to forgive sins on earth through visible, verifiable, miraculous action.

Mark 2:13

Once again Jesus went out beside the lake. A large crowd came to him, and he began to teach them — the brief summary verse serves as a transition between the paralytic healing and the call of Levi. The lakeside setting is the familiar Galilean terrain of Mark's early chapters. The large crowd coming to Jesus for teaching communicates the growing momentum of the Galilean ministry. The summary also communicates Jesus' ongoing commitment to proclamation even in the midst of the healing ministry — the teaching and the healing are always together in Mark, neither subordinate to the other.

Mark 2:14

As he walked along, he saw Levi son of Alphaeus sitting at the tax collector's booth. Follow me, Jesus told him, and Levi got up and followed him — the call of Levi mirrors the call of Simon and Andrew (Mark 1:16–18): Jesus sees, Jesus calls, the called one leaves immediately. Levi son of Alphaeus is almost certainly the Matthew of Matthew 9:9. Tax collectors (telōnai) collected tariffs on goods crossing regional boundaries; they were despised for their collaboration with Rome, their potential for extortion, and their ritual impurity from constant contact with Gentile goods and money. Jesus' call of a tax collector as a disciple is as socially provocative as any miracle in the Gospel.

Mark 2:15

While Jesus was having dinner at Levi's house, many tax collectors and sinners were eating with him and his disciples, for there were many who followed him — the dinner at Levi's house is the kingdom's social vision in action: many tax collectors and sinners eating with Jesus and the disciples. The word sinners (hamartōloi) in this context refers not to the morally worst but to those who were considered outside the boundaries of covenant faithfulness by the religious establishment — people who did not observe the purity laws, who worked in degrading occupations, who were not Torah-observant. Jesus eats with them, which in the ancient world communicated acceptance, solidarity, and covenant relationship.

Mark 2:16

When the teachers of the law who were Pharisees saw him eating with the sinners and tax collectors, they asked his disciples: why does he eat with tax collectors and sinners? — the Pharisees' question is directed at the disciples rather than Jesus, a social indirection that communicates their disapproval without confronting Jesus directly. The combination teachers of the law who were Pharisees identifies the most religiously serious segment of the Jewish community — the group most committed to Torah observance and purity. Their objection is not primarily moral disgust but legal concern: table fellowship creates a sharing of status, and eating with the ritually impure creates ritual impurity. Jesus' response reframes the objection entirely.

Mark 2:17

On hearing this, Jesus said to them, it is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners — the medical analogy is both self-evident and subversive. A doctor who refuses contact with the sick in order to maintain personal health has misunderstood the doctor's vocation. Jesus is the physician of Israel, and the sick are precisely his practice. The second statement — I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners — contains an irony: the righteous may refer to those who consider themselves righteous (the Pharisees) rather than those who genuinely are. Jesus is not conceding that the Pharisees have no need; he is diagnosing the condition that makes them unavailable to the physician: they do not know they are ill.

Mark 2:18

Now John's disciples and the Pharisees were fasting. Some people came and asked Jesus, how is it that John's disciples and the disciples of the Pharisees fast, but yours do not? — the fasting question introduces the third controversy of the chapter. The juxtaposition of John's disciples and the Pharisees' disciples is interesting: they are not natural allies, but both practice fasting while Jesus' disciples do not. Jewish fasting was both a community practice (on fixed days) and a private devotional act. The question is not an accusation of immorality but a question of religious practice: why does Jesus' movement not conform to the piety practices that characterize other serious Jewish communities?

Mark 2:19

Jesus answered, how can the guests of the bridegroom fast while he is with them? They cannot, so long as they have him with them — the bridegroom metaphor is the most Christological claim in this chapter after the Son of Man saying. In the Old Testament, God is frequently the bridegroom of Israel (Isaiah 62:5, Hosea 2:19–20, Ezekiel 16); here Jesus implicitly identifies himself as the bridegroom. The wedding is the occasion that makes fasting inappropriate — you do not mourn at a wedding. Jesus is present, the wedding has begun, the kingdom has arrived: this is the time for celebration, not for the fasting that expressed mourning over the exile and the divine absence. The not while he is with them anticipates the time when he will be taken away.

Mark 2:20

But the time will come when the bridegroom will be taken from them, and on that day they will fast — the future tense introduces the first clear anticipation of Jesus' death in Mark. The bridegroom will be taken from them — the passive taken implies external force rather than voluntary departure, pointing to the violent death that will end the Galilean ministry. On that day they will fast: the disciples' fasting will not be a religious performance but a genuine mourning for genuine loss. The verse communicates that fasting has its place — not as a performance of piety but as an authentic response to loss and grief. The resurrection is not mentioned here; the focus is the death that will make fasting appropriate again.

Mark 2:21

No one sews a patch of unshrunk cloth on an old garment. Otherwise, the new piece will pull away from the old, making the tear worse — the parable of the cloth patch is the first of the two new-wine parables, and both make the same point about incompatibility between the old and the new. Unshrunk cloth sewn onto a pre-washed (and therefore pre-shrunk) garment will shrink when washed, tearing the garment worse than the original hole. You cannot repair the old with the new because the new and the old have different properties. The parable is not about whether the old or the new is better but about their fundamental incompatibility when forced together.

Mark 2:22

And no one pours new wine into old wineskins. Otherwise, the wine will burst the skins, and both the wine and the wineskins will be ruined. No, they pour new wine into new wineskins — the wineskin parable completes the pair. New wine (still fermenting and expanding) in old wineskins (dried out and inflexible) will burst the skins as the gas expands — destroying both the container and the wine. New wine requires new wineskins that can expand with it. The kingdom Jesus brings is the new wine: it cannot be contained within the forms of the old order, no matter how venerable those forms are. The Pharisees' fasting practices are old wineskins; they are not wrong in themselves but they cannot contain the kingdom's new reality.

Mark 2:23

One Sabbath Jesus was going through the grainfields, and as his disciples walked along, they began to pick some heads of grain — the Sabbath grainfield controversy is the chapter's fourth and final conflict, shifting the topic from Jesus' associations and practices to his disciples' behavior. Picking heads of grain while walking through a field was explicitly permitted by Torah (Deuteronomy 23:25) — it was not stealing, and no one objects on that ground. The Pharisees' objection is about the Sabbath: picking grain involves a form of work (harvesting) that is prohibited. The disciples' action was not a deliberate provocation but an ordinary act of hunger — and it triggers the chapter's most consequential controversy.

Mark 2:24

The Pharisees said to him, look, why are they doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath? — the accusation is directed at Jesus rather than at the disciples, holding him responsible for his followers' behavior. The unlawful in their framing refers not to the Torah itself but to the scribal interpretation of the Torah: picking a few heads of grain had been categorized as a form of the thirty-nine prohibited labors on the Sabbath. The Pharisees' interpretation of Sabbath law is not arbitrary — it is the product of serious effort to define what work means. But Jesus' response will distinguish between the letter of scribal interpretation and the spirit of the Sabbath's original purpose.

Mark 2:25

He answered, have you never read what David did when he and his companions were hungry and in need? — the appeal to the David precedent is rhetorically brilliant: it challenges the Pharisees' own authority (have you never read) while drawing on the example of the most revered figure in Israel's royal history. The David story of 1 Samuel 21:1–6 shows David eating the bread of the Presence from the tabernacle, bread that the law restricted to the priests — and no later tradition condemned him for it. The parallel with the disciples picking grain is the condition of hunger and need: necessity creates a different evaluative category than routine Sabbath observance.

Mark 2:26

In the days of Abiathar the high priest, he entered the house of God and ate the consecrated bread, which is lawful only for priests to eat. And he also gave some to his companions — Mark's text says Abiathar while 1 Samuel 21 names Ahimelech, creating a historical detail that has generated significant discussion. The most likely explanation is that Abiathar (the son who survived Saul's massacre of the priests and became the famous high priest under David) was so closely associated with his father's priesthood that Mark uses his better-known name. The point of the David precedent is clear: even the most sacred restrictions can yield to genuine need, and the scribal tradition itself recognizes this in the way it treats the Davidic story.

Mark 2:27

Then he said to them, the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath — the principle Jesus articulates reorients the entire frame of the Sabbath controversy. The Sabbath was given by God as a gift to human beings for rest, restoration, and the regular acknowledgment of God's creative sovereignty. It was not given as a cage or a burden. Man was not created to serve the Sabbath's requirements; the Sabbath was created to serve the human being's need. This does not eliminate the Sabbath or make it optional; it clarifies its purpose. Every Sabbath regulation must be interpreted in light of what the Sabbath is for — and the Sabbath is for human flourishing, not human restriction.

Mark 2:28

So the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath — the chapter's second Son of Man claim (after 2:10) concludes the Sabbath controversy with the most sweeping authority statement yet. If the Sabbath was made for human beings, and the Son of Man is the representative human being who embodies Israel's identity, then the Son of Man is Lord of what was made for humanity. The title Son of Man again draws on Daniel 7:13–14 where the Son of Man receives all authority. Jesus' authority over the Sabbath is not a claim to abolish it but to define it — the one who gave the Sabbath its meaning has the authority to interpret its application. The claim is simultaneously humanizing (Sabbath serves people) and divine (the Son of Man rules the Sabbath).