Words'nTone

In the previous posts on this thread I have sketched out another way of understanding the Beelzubul controversy face-off between Jesus and the scribes from Jerusalem (3:22ff), as well as the harsh words of Jesus regarding blaspheming the Holy Spirit (3:28-29).  Three things have been noted: 1) Jesus uses a parable to address the scribe’s false accusations; 2) Jesus is actually applying His parable-response to leadership; and 3) the Beelzubul confrontation and narrative provide a transition to the Mark 4 programmatic parables and the Isaiah 6 referent given to explain why Jesus utilizes parables in the first place.  Mark 3:22ff prepares the listener to hear the parable of the Sower who sows and the hermeneutical tool found in the Isaiah 6 referent offered by Jesus.

We read in Mark 4:11-12:

“And He was saying to them, ‘To you has been given the mystery of the kingdom of God, but those who are outside get everything in parables, so that WHILE SEEING, THEY MAY SEE AND NOT PERCEIVE, AND WHILE HEARING, THEY MAY HEAR AND NOT UNDERSTAND, OTHERWISE THEY MIGHT RETURN AND BE FORGIVEN’” (Mark 4:11-12).

3) The text’s parallel to the Isaiah 6 reference in Mark 4

Rikki Watts, in his work on the use of Isaiah in Mark (Isaiah’s New Exodus in Mark), points out that there are strong parallels between the Beelzubul narrative and the Mark 4 context of the Isaiah 6 referent.

1. There is a contrast between outsiders and insiders (3:21, 31ff/4:10f)
2. There is a ‘kingdom’ focus (3:24/4:11)
3. There is warning of unforgiveness (3:29/4:12c)

Many commentators, including preachers, have shied away from the harshness of Jesus’ use of Isaiah 6, mostly because the text implies repentance is fruitless in that the object (i.e., those who cannot hear the Word of the Kingdom) cannot respond and thus cannot be forgiven.  That’s hard to preach, for sure.  However, the Beelzubul narrative informs us that, in all likelihood, it is the leadership of Israel who are the objects of the curse (i.e., the judgment of Isaiah 6).  As the leadership in Isaiah 1-5 has be indicted on the charge that they have not heeded God’s Word and have followed the anti-Yahweh nations in governing the nation of Israel, so the leadership of Jesus’ day has come to ultimate judgment: they have been turned over to their idolatry and, thus have become like idols which cannot hear (cf. Paul in Romans 1:18ff).

The “softening” of the judgment in the Isaiah referent, the result of the impossibility of unforgiveness, can be seen in two ways: Some just change the text to be causal—one cannot be forgiven, because one cannot hear, and once they hear, then Isa 6 doesn’t apply and they can be forgive; and second, the popular way is usually facilitated by the typical preacher in that, since the parable is about poor soil, all one has to do is become better soil, a good soil so you can hear the word and thus Isa 6 doesn’t apply and you can be forgiven.  Neither of these “softenings” are in the text, however.  The referent from Isaiah is resultant in nature (ἵνα) in that they cannot see and hear and, thus, cannot be forgiven since they have become as idols (cf. the OT Isaiah 6 context).

The judgment of Mark 4:11-12 is the result of what was parable in Mark 3:22ff.  The leadership, as a result of not recognizing the authority of Jesus, the Kingdom He is ushering in, and refusing His word of the Gospel of the Kingdom, comes under the idol-judgment of Isaiah 6.

---

In the next and last post, I will attempt to pull the observations I have made in the previous three posts (1, 2, 3) together and make some conclusions regarding both the Beelzubul-blasphemy of the Holy Spirit narrative and its implications on the parable of the sower/seed/soil in Mark 4.

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.