Good afternoon saints in Christ,
First devotional in second pass through Mark. Commentaries point out that Jesus' use of "Son of Man" is mainly found in Mark and that this ties back to Daniel. We are so removed from the OT world view that this name does not mean as much to us as it did to the audience who heard him and then read the gospels. We have to have it explained to us. They knew what it meant.
Blessings,
Jeff
The authority of the Son of Man to forgive sins is validated by power to heal. The scribes correctly equate divinity with forgiving sins. Jesus puts ability to heal as divine prerogative. Doesn't say the words but makes the logical connection. The OT cleansing from leprosy indicates a leper could be healed but doesn't make it divine power. Miracles were done through the agency of men in OT. But none of them claimed right to forgive sins. Jesus doesn't fit into a category. And that is the whole point.
Miracle directly through speech. God speaks creation into being. God speaks the law. All that God speaks is true by definition. This is what distinguishes Jesus miracles from those done through human agents. I have not validated this thought. It is widely accepted that miracles performed by apostle's are validation of their delegated authority to write scripture. I have to look, but I think that when they do miracles, it is In the name of Jesus. They are not healing in their own authority but in Jesus authority. None of them claim divinity.
In any case, the point is that Jesus is unique mediator between God and man. Moses was a type of mediator but Jesus is the only mediator. The scribes knew that Jesus didn't fit their categories. We moderns try to fit Jesus into our categories (teacher, moral example, wise, etc) but it can't be done.
Comments
Post a Comment