|
Men as Trees |
|
Brother Royce Ellis -
Associate Editor |
In the
eighth chapter of the book of Mark, a short narrative seems
to have been inserted as an afterthought. We know that’s not
really the case, but five verses of scripture are not joined
with anything that precedes or follows them. The subject,
city and setting before these verses are different, and the
theme and location of the verses following don’t seem to
match. The odd placement causes us to draw closer to the
account in study. Even a casual reading of Mark 8 will show
how these verses stand out.
Preachers tell us in the rules of scripture study, we must
always be careful with context. We must know the setting and
the subject. We must know who is speaking and to whom the
comments are directed. As the saying goes, the entire Bible
is not written to you, but it is written for you.
Our
setting is Bethsaida. Historians believe this was where the
5000 were fed. Phillip, Andrew and Peter were from ‘the
house of the fisherman.” Off these shores Christ walked on
water, yet He pronounces: Woe unto thee, Chorazin! woe
unto thee, Bethsaida! for if the mighty works, which were
done in you, had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would
have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. (Mat
11:21)
Let’s look at these five verses in Mark.
Mar 8:22 And he cometh to Bethsaida; and they bring a
blind man unto him, and besought him to touch him. :23 And
he took the blind man by the hand, and led him out of the
town; and when he had spit on his eyes, and put his hands
upon him, he asked him if he saw ought.
:24 And he looked up, and said, I see men as trees,
walking.
:25 After that he put [his] hands again upon his eyes,
and made him look up: and he was restored, and saw every man
clearly. :26 And he sent him away to his house, saying,
Neither go into the town, nor tell [it] to any in the town.
Jesus
was no stranger to giving sight to the blind. There is a
much detailed scenario in the 9th chapter of John, where the
disciples ask whether it was the blind man or his parents’
sin that caused the condition.
The situation in Mark is different in many ways. One is
privacy. The unnamed benefactor of Christ’s mercy is told
not to tell of his sight recovery to any in the town. In
John, the blind man is brought immediately to the Pharisees
to be questioned.
The second and most notable distinction is the man detailed
in John was born blind. Our subject in Mark 8:22 is one who
had previous sight and lost it. This may well be the key to
our understanding of the scripture.
Common sense tells us that even a person born blind would be
able to recognize men when first receiving his sight. But a
tree one could only know by touch. Further, to visualize a
stationary item walking would require both previous memory
and some imagination. Can you see that? If a person at his
first ever sight viewed a tree at a distance standing, he
might be able to say – yes, I believe that’s probably what
I’ve touched before and been told was a tree. But to see men
as trees, walking – that description tells us he had been an
earlier owner of vision.
Men have developed many rules and tests they apply to the
interpretation of scriptures. I recently heard an able man
proclaim it’s important to determine what “we should first
know.” That’s good advice. Others say we should examine
every Old Testament setting closely to find Christ or the
church.
I have two tests I like to apply to consideration of
scripture. One is the inescapable conclusion. When I have
reached a barricade or end in study that tells me a word,
phrase, verse, etc. can mean nothing else, I work backward,
testing that against the scriptures.
The pen behind the Sherlock Holmes novels describes it
thusly:
"When you have eliminated the impossible, that which
remains, however improbable, must be the truth." ~ Sir
Arthur Conan Doyle (1859-1930)
The second – and best test for an application of
scripture – in my mind is this: When you have arrived at
your conclusion, Does it honor God or man? If it honors man,
there is no doubt the application is incorrect. Now,
granted, it is possible that your perception of a scripture
can honor God and still be the wrong application, yet in
such a case, it probably does the scripture no harm.
Mark 8:23 And he took the blind man by the hand, and led
him out of the town; and when he had spit on his eyes, and
put his hands upon him, he asked him if he saw ought.
No public display this time. Commentaries tell us Jesus had
found many doubters in this town before. Was this just
another tiresome test by the Jewish rulers to catch Him
performing a miracle on the Sabbath, or an attempt to make
Jesus say without equivocation He was the Messiah – that
they might condemn him?
Out of town. But not far. The town was certainly small, and
Jesus and the blind man did not go completely out of the
sight of all men. After all, the blind man would soon be
able to see men. And the witness who would relate the
details to the gospel writer would be fairly close-by.
Why did Jesus take the man out of town? As I prayed and
studied and read and re-read, I believe the Lord opened my
eyes to some of the symbolism.
How sweet to be led out of a terrible condition leaning on
the arm of Jesus! While we were all spiritually blind at one
time, we had to be led to where we could see things a little
clearer, and our state dictated that none but the Lord could
escort us out.
But even more, here’s the end of the law. Our schoolmaster
has brought us to Christ. Jesus takes one who had previously
seen and leads them from their blindness, away from the town
without repentance, from law into grace. (Consider the Jews,
who had the oracles of God, the Ten Commandments, and the
law. The Jews, who, over time perverted all that God had
given them until they were themselves the blind leading the
blind.)
:24 And he looked up, and said, I see men as trees,
walking.
That describes the Jewish people of the day. Men, walking
about, seeking righteousness but not finding it. They had no
root! Trees without root cannot take on water and have no
life. They have no nourishment, and they cannot bear fruit.
They had forsaken the good ground in which their heavenly
Father had planted them.
Rom 10:3 For they being ignorant of God's righteousness,
and going about to establish their own righteousness, have
not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.
Mat 3:9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have
Abraham to [our] father: for I say unto you, that God is
able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.
:10 And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the
trees: therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good
fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
Only a tree that has been cut down or up-rooted can be away
from its earthly moorings.
Mark 8
:25 After that he put [his] hands again upon his eyes,
and made him look up: and he was restored, and saw every man
clearly.
He was restored. I submit the word restored as final proof
the man once had sight. And made him look up. For so long
the Jews had looked unto themselves or to the law for
salvation.
Look up. Before we are aware of our new birth, sometime
after the Spirit of God has made us a new creature, we
discover in ourselves a condemnation. We dare not even look
unto a Just and Holy God. The knowledge and weight of our
sin holds us down to the very earth, where we are mere worms
in His sight. But when the grace of God has touched our
heart and soul and we are made to look up, the weighty
chains of sin’s bondage is cast off our neck and we can
thereafter look up and continue to do so. At some point,
every one of God’s children will look up to the Father.
And saw every man clearly. When you can see every man
clearly, you can see yourself as well. You can see your
condition of total depravity, your sinful nature, your need
of a redeemer. You can see the law clearly as well. For the
nation of Israel, the law was often cloudy and unclear. We
have the benefit of looking back and seeing the intent and
purpose of God in the law. Those closest to it, if you’ll
pardon the expression, couldn’t always see the forest for
the trees.
8:26 And he sent him away to his house, saying, Neither
go into the town, nor tell [it] to any in the town.
You can’t go back the way you came. The old law service
holds nothing for you now. It has served its purpose and has
been fulfilled in Christ. Neither go into the town, nor tell
it to any in the town. Will they be persuaded by recovery of
sight to a blind man? Neither will they be persuaded, though
one rose from the dead. And for us today, the same advice.
Psa 40:2 He brought me up also out of an horrible pit,
out of the miry clay, and set my feet upon a rock, [and]
established my goings.
I’ll leave you with one final thought before you research
the five verses for yourself – and even if you don’t care
for the analysis, it falls safely within our established
standards.
I am not a master of English, but in this final verse, I
know the pronoun ‘he’ is referring to Christ. While I may be
wrong grammatically, it does no harm to the scripture to
suggest “his house” is also referring to the Church. And he
sent him away to his house. That fits. |