728x90
A Man with a Withered Hand
cAgain dhe entered the synagogue, and a man was there with a withered hand. And ethey watched Jesus,1 to see whether he would heal him on the Sabbath, so that they might accuse him. And he said to the man with the withered hand, “Come here.” And he said to them, f“Is it lawful on the Sabbath to do good or to do harm, to save life or to kill?” But they were silent. And he glooked around at them with anger, grieved at htheir hardness of heart, and said to the man, “Stretch out your hand.” iHe stretched it out, and his hand was restored.
jThe Pharisees went out and immediately jheld counsel with kthe Herodians against him, how to destroy him.

 The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton: Standard Bible Society, 2016), 막 3:1–6.


Five Controversies from Mark 2:1–3:6
ReferencePoint of Conflict
2:1–12forgiveness
2:15–17eating with sinners
2:18–22fasting
2:23–28Sabbath
3:1–6Sabbath, and the decision to kill Jesus Crossway Bibles
 Crossway Bibles, The ESV Study Bible (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 1897.

1절) 예수님께서는 정기적으로 제자들과 함께 회당에 가셔서 예배를 드리셨다. 그 회당에 손 마른 사람, 손이 마비된 사람이 있었다.  그런데 바리새인이 안식일에 주님께서 그 사람을 고치시는가를 주시하고 있었다. 왜냐하면 그들은 안식일에 누군가를 고치는 것은 일하는 것이고 이는 안식일을 어기는 것이라고 여겼기 때문이다. 이렇게 의도를 가지고 주시하고 있는 이들이 있음에도 주님께서는 이를 개의치 않으시고 손마른 사람을 일으켜 세우시고 그를 고치신다. 
- The scribes believe that healing is a form of work and is thus not permitted on a Sabbath. Accuse (Gk. katēgoreō, “accuse, bring charges”) is a technical term: they seek to mount a legal case against Jesus by collecting evidence against him. Crossway Bibles, The ESV Study Bible (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 1898.

4절) 예수님께서 사람들, 곧 자신을 고발하려고 주시하고 있는 바리새인들을 향해서 안식일에 선을 행하는 것과 악을 행하는 것, 생명을 구하는 것과 죽이는 것 중에 무엇이 옳은가를 질문하신다. 이 질문에 대한 대답은 당연히 생명을 구하기 위해서 선을 행하는 것이다. 그렇기에 안식일에 고치는 것이 당연함에도 바리새인들에게 있어서 안식일은 무노동을 원칙으로 하고 있기에 모세 율법의 근본 정신은 도외시하고 그 형식만을 강조하고 있는 것이다. 마가는 안식일에 단지 쉬거나 노동을 하지 않는 것은 안식일의 근본 정신을 살리는데 충분한 것이 아님을 알았다. 안식일에는 반드시 모든 종류의 선한 일을 적극적으로 행해야 한다. 
- By his question Jesus lifted the issue of Sabbath observance above a list of prohibitions to the higher general principle. No one would claim that it was “lawful” or right to do evil or kill on the Sabbath. The obvious alternative is that it must be right to do good and save life. To heal is to do good; to do nothing is to do evil. To heal is to “save” a life;14 not to heal is the equivalent of killing.15 For Mark merely not doing work and resting on the Sabbath or the Lord’s Day was not enough. The day must be used for all kinds of good things.
The Pharisees were silent because whatever answer they gave to Jesus’ question would have undermined their position on Sabbath observance.

14 The verb to save is used here in its nontheological sense of deliverance from any kind of harm. As previously indicated, all of Jesus’ healings of the body are symbols of his healing of the soul, which is often referred to by the technical term “salvation.” Jesus’ healings were a sign of the nearness of the kingdom of God.
15 Some think this is an allusion to the plot to kill Jesus mentioned in v. 6. The most natural interpretation, however, is that killing is set in contrast with healing.
 James A. Brooks, Mark, vol. 23, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1991), 68.

5절) 예수님께서는 잠잠한 그들을 보시고 그들의 마음이 완악함을 인하여 분노를 가지고 탄식하셨다. 예수님의 분노는 죄악된 인간의 분노와는 본질적으로 다르다. 그분의 분노는 악에 대한 분노로 완벽하게 통제된 것이다. 예수님의 분노는 고통에 대해 무감각한 것에 대한 것일 뿐만 아니라 율법의 정신보다 그 문자적인 것에 더욱 강조점을 주는 율법의 전체 시스템에 대한 분노였다. 
- Here is a certain reference to the anger of Jesus (see also 10:14 and compare the comments on 1:41 and the accounts of the expulsion from the temple). In their parallel accounts Matthew and Luke preferred not to attribute to Jesus an emotion that among humans is often sinful. Jesus’ anger was not sinful, however, because it was directed toward evil and because it was controlled. Perhaps “with righteous indignation” would avoid the offense. “At their stubborn hearts” could be translated more literally “at their hardness of heart,” but the word “hardness” often takes on the additional idea of willful “blindness.” The NEB and REB have a striking rendition here: “Looking round at them with anger and sorrow at their obstinate stupidity.” Jesus was angry not only at insensitivity toward suffering but at the entire system of legalism where the letter is more important than the spirit. James A. Brooks, Mark, vol. 23, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1991), 68.

6절) 예수를 죽이기 위해서, 그분을 올무에 빠뜨리기 위해서 평상시에 서로 반목하며 적대시하던 두 그룹, 바리새인들과 헤롯당원들이 서로 손을 잡는다. 본문은 마가복음에서 예수의 죽음에 대해서 처음 암시하는 구절이다. 앞서 5개의 논쟁을 마무리하면서 이러한 갈등이 그분을 죽음으로 이끌어가는 것을 알 수 있다. 이처럼 바리새인들과 헤롯당원이 예수를 죽이려는 음모는 예수님께서 이땅에 오신 이유와는 정반대이다. 그분은 구원하시기 위해서 오셨을뿐만 아니라 모든 사람들에게 생명을 주시기 위해서 오셨기 때문이다. 
- In all of ancient literature the Herodians are referred to only here and in 12:13 (cf. Matt 22:16).16 One can only surmise that they supported Herod Antipas, the tetrarch of Galilee and Perea (see the comments on 6:14–29). They may have further advocated restoration of Herodian rule of Judea, which was a Roman imperial province governed by a legate, or (as such officials were later called) procurator, during the ministry of Jesus. Ordinarily the Pharisees would have had nothing to do with the Herodians, but common enemies often make strange bedfellows. Perhaps the Herodians opposed Jesus because of his relationship to John the Baptist, who condemned Herod’s divorce and remarriage (6:18).
The first explicit reference to Jesus’ death is in v. 6. The verse concludes not only the present pericope but all five conflict stories. The Pharisees’ plot to “kill” (apolesosin, which literally means destroy as one would do to an animal) one who not only saved a life but who came to give life to all exemplifies Markan irony.

16 The references in Josephus, War 1.16.6 and Antiquities 14.15.10 are nontechnical and are associated with supporters of Herod the Great (40–4 b.c.).
 James A. Brooks, Mark, vol. 23, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1991), 69.






+ Recent posts