Lulrn, however, gives us the additional lnformat.ion that " there were Pharisees and doctors of the Law sitting by." The latter had to do with the Law of the Old 'l'estament. just as the scribes, but in the capacity of jurists. Hence the lawyers and scribes are- commonly thought to have been identical. No doubt the same person might be both- a theologian and a jurist or ecclesiastica.l lawyer; while the Pharisees were the formalists-the religious sect that set such store by form and ceremony. The name is derived from parash, to separate, and thm1 signifies separatists. Now, these parties reasoned the matter out in their own minds (811iJ\.o-,,(&,..1101), and were not long in coming to a conclusion that Jesus was guilty of a blasphemous assumption of an exclusively Divine attribute. X. THE IN'l'EBPRETATION OF THEIR THOUGHTS. It was, "Why does this fellow thus speak blasphemies?" The "this" is contemptuous,and the" thus" implies" wickedly," or" as we have heard." If, however, we accept the text of the critical editors, Lachmann, Tischendorf, Tregelles, as well as that followed by the Revisers, it reads thus: "Why does this man thus speak? he blasphemeth." In the received text the plural denotes intensity, and is equivalent to "all this blasphemy;" or it refers to different expres- sions which they looked upon as blasphemous. It must be here observed that in Scripture language the word passes from the classical sense of speaking evil of or slandering a fellow-creature to the Hellenistic meaning of speaking impiously of God, or laying claim to a Divine attribute, XI. DRIFT OF TIIEIR REASONING. "Who can forgive sins but one, that is, God, or God alone?" Such was the gist of their reasoning ; the natural answer, of course, was that, unless in the exercise of delegated authority, or in a declarative sense, the thing transcended human power, God reserves to himself the power of pardon; Jesus, in his own name and by his own authority, claims to bestow forgiveness; therefore he blas- phemeth, thus making himself equal to God. Both their premisses were correct and strictly logical ; but the conclusion dl'awn from them was altogether erroneous-the very reverse of the fact. It should rather have been, not "he blasphemeth," arrogating to, himself a Divine attl'ibute, but, on the contrary, "he is truly Divine," really possessing Divine power. XII. HELPS THEM TO THE RIGHT CONCLUSION. Our Lord knew at once and well ( l1n"f"obs) in his spirit their secret reasonings; for, though his soul was human, his spirit was Divine; while to the query latent in their minds, he accommodates the question which he addresses to them, as though he said," Ye ask, What right have I to speak thus? I reply, What right have ye to reason thus? Which claim is easier to make-that oi forgiving sins, or that of curing palsy?" But the nature of proof in each of the two cases is widely different: in the one case it is obvious, in the other it is obscure; in the one it is patent, in the other latent, But our Lord proceeds to put them in the position of coming to a correct conclusion. He gives them sufficient data to guide them: of what is cognizable by the senses he gives sensible proof; what is spiritual· he leaves them to infer. "Up," he says to the paralytic, if we adopt the reading t-, ..p•, approved of by Lachmaun and Tischendorf, and to be taken as a particle of excitement, like ci.,-• or ,bca, or auf in German, rather than with a-•ca.,.,.bv understood ; or "Arise," if we read '1-,,/11011, with Tregelles; or "Arise at once," if we adhere to t-y••pa.i of the received text, though Fritzsche affirms that the middle voice signifies " to arouse or raise some one for one's self," while the passive is " to be aroused, raised up," and so "rise.n Our Lord then adds, "Take up thy bed" (1tpd./3/Ja.To11, equivalent to the Latin grabatum, and equivalent to St. Luke's ttAw!IS,011, little bed, or mattress or pallet-every way appro- priate, as well in sense as because the latter evangelist wrote for the Greeks, as St. Mark for the Romans, at least in the first instance), "and go into thy house." XIII. STRANGE CONTRAST. Immediately the command was obeyed, and the man, , who was carried on a bed by four into the Saviour's presence was now raised up ( hlplhJ). and carried his bed on his back in presence of them all. As Bengel has finely expressed it, " Sweet saying I the bed hath borne the man: now the man bore the bed." XIV. PowEB OF FORGIVENESS. Thus our Lord, by this visible, palpable, and nndeniable exercise of Divine power in relieving the body, proved that he possessed the power, and not only the power but the legitimate authority (/(011.,-la.11), to restore the ■ou1 from the disease of sin. XV. Tms POWER POSSESSED ON EAl!.T.IL Of himself he speaks as the "Son of man." 108 'fHE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MARK. [OII. IL 1-28.
Thi~ designation he applies no less than eighty times to himself; but it is only twice or thrice so applied by others, and in each instance of such application his exaltation is implied. He affirms that on earth the &n of man has power to forgive sins, how ruucb more in heaven? In his humiliation, how much more in his exaltation ? In his humiliation on earth, how much more in his glorification in heaven? XVI. Gon GLORIFIED. No wonder ~he man himself, as St. Luke tells u~, glorified God! And no wonder that the multitude (ol llx11.01 according to St. Matthew, ..-dmu .according l:<> St. Mark) all lik~wise united with him in giving:glory to God; while all, at the same time that they glorified God, expressed their own amazement in one way or other-some (as in St. Matthew) in reference to such power given unto men; others -(according to St. L~e) because of the strange things-things beyond expectation ( 1rapdoof,.)-they had Just seen; and some (as we read in St. Mark) because they had never seen it on this fashion.-J. J. G.