CC Bible-Study

[FallingWaters]

Ok, so I've been pondering another passage, and I can't work it out, at all.

[bible]Mark 8:22-26[/bible]

Why did the man first see trees? Jesus could have healed him instantaneously, but he put His hands on the blind man's eyes twice before he saw clearly. Why is that? And, honestly, what's the significance of the trees?

No one knows for sure.
I checked with a few commentaries I have and they're not that helpful.
One says that it was done to show the man that he was dependent on Jesus to receive his full sight.
That one makes the most sense to me.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible
"Mar 8:24 -
I see men, as trees, walking - I see men walking, but see them so indistinctly that, but for their “motion,” I could not distinguish them from trees. I cannot distinctly see their shapes and features. Probably our Lord did not “at once” restore him fully to sight, that he might strengthen his faith. Seeing that Jesus had partially restored him, it was evidence that he could “wholly,” and it led him to exercise faith anew in him, and to feel more strikingly his dependence on him."

 

[Bananna]

Ok, so I've been pondering another passage, and I can't work it out, at all.

[bible]Mark 8:22-26[/bible]

Why did the man first see trees? Jesus could have healed him instantaneously, but he put His hands on the blind man's eyes twice before he saw clearly. Why is that? And, honestly, what's the significance of the trees?

Yeshua (Jesus) spat on the blind man. Some Jews of that time believed the spit of the first born (prince of a tribe) had healing powers.

The act of spitting may have shown that He was heir to the throne in that sense. This gave the man partial sight. Perhaps the healing from the son of David was not adequate.

Then he touches the man and transfers the spiritual healing.

Part of sight is preceiving. His understanding of what he was seeing was jumbled untill he was given the spirit of God to Preceive clearly.

I take this to mean that we must be more than physically healed or having physical sight. We must have spiriitual insight to see clearly the kingdom of God.

Bananna

 

[FallingWaters]

Yeshua (Jesus) spat on the blind man. Some Jews of that time believed the spit of the first born (prince of a tribe) had healing powers.

The act of spitting may have shown that He was heir to the throne in that sense. This gave the man partial sight. Perhaps the healing from the son of David was not adequate.

Then he touches the man and transfers the spiritual healing.

Part of sight is preceiving. His understanding of what he was seeing was jumbled untill he was given the spirit of God to Preceive clearly.

I take this to mean that we must be more than physically healed or having physical sight. We must have spiritual insight to see clearly the kingdom of God.

Bananna

That is very interesting.
Where did you learn about the significance of the spit of the first born?

 

[FallingWaters]

I can't find anything about it on the internet.

 

[Criada]

Ok, so I've been pondering another passage, and I can't work it out, at all.

[BIBLE]Mark 8:22-26[/BIBLE]

Why did the man first see trees? Jesus could have healed him instantaneously, but he put His hands on the blind man's eyes twice before he saw clearly. Why is that? And, honestly, what's the significance of the trees?

Dunno about the trees
I've always seen this as a lesson in holding on to God - not being satisfied.
Cos - the man could have said - "Yes, I can see!", and gone away, satisfied. And then he wouldn't have experienced all that Jesus could do...
But, he knew there was more, and he wanted it! So *then* Jesus gave him the whole thing...
I'm wittering..
But - this kind of encourages me to keep seeking God, to keep wanting Him to make me more as He wants me to be, not to be satisfied with "a bit better".
Does that make any sense?

 

[FallingWaters]

Here's a question.
Why did Jesus lead the man out of town in the first place?
What is significant about Bethsaida?

 

[FallingWaters]

from EASTON'S DICTIONARY

"Bethsaida

House of fish.
(1.) A town in Galilee, on the west side of the sea of Tiberias, in the “land of Gennesaret.” It was the native place of Peter, Andrew, and Philip, and was frequently resorted to by Jesus (Mar_6:45; Joh_1:44; Joh_12:21).

(2.) A city near which Christ fed 5,000 (Luk_9:10; compare Joh_6:17; Mat_14:15-21), and where the blind man had his sight restored (Mar_8:22), on the east side of the lake, two miles up the Jordan."

"Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the mighty works done in you had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. (Mat 11:21 ESV)

 

[FallingWaters]

Matthew Henry is much more helpful:

He answered my question about why Jesus led the man out of town,
which was what I began to suspect:


Mar 8:22-26 -
"...
II. Here is Christ leading this blind man, Mar_8:23. He did not bid his friends lead him, but (which bespeaks his wonderful condescension) he himself took him by the hand, and led him, ... He led him out of the town. Had he herein only designed privacy, he might have led him into a house, into an inner chamber, and have cured him there; but he intended hereby to upbraid Bethsaida with the mighty works that had in vain been done in her (Mat_11:21), and was telling her, in effect, she was unworthy to have any more done within her walls. ...


III. ... In this cure we may observe, 1. That Christ used a sign; he spat on his eyes ... and put his hand upon him. He could have cured him, as he did others, with a word speaking, but thus he was pleased to assist his faith which was very weak, and to help him against his unbelief. ...

That the cure was wrought gradually, which was not usual in Christ's miracles. He asked him if he saw aught, Mar_8:23. Let him tell what condition his sight was in, for the satisfaction of those about him. ...

Now Christ took this way, (1.) Because he would not tie himself to a method, but would show with what liberty he acted in all he did. ...

(2.) Because it should be to the patient according to his faith; and perhaps this man's faith was at first very weak, but afterward gathered strength, and accordingly his cure was. ..."

 

[Lisa0315]

Awesome!!!! This is my favorite thread in CCC. I am learning so much!

Lisa

 

[Lisa0315]

Oh, I have one!

What is the signifigance of Jesus cursing the fig tree? I heard Dr. Sproll (sp?) teach this once. It is very powerful! Here is the Scripture:

Matthew 21:18-22 18 Now in the morning as he returned into the city, he hungered. 19 And when he saw a fig tree F39 in the way, he came to it, and found nothing thereon, but leaves only, and said unto it, Let no fruit grow on thee henceforward for ever. And presently the fig tree withered away.20 And when the disciples saw it, they marvelled, saying, How soon is the fig tree withered away! 21 Jesus answered and said unto them, Verily I say unto you, If ye have faith, and doubt not, ye shall not only do this which is done to the fig tree, but also if ye shall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea; it shall be done. 22 And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive.

 

[Bananna]

That is very interesting.Where did you learn about the significance of the spit of the first born?

Torah study from First Fruits of zion which teaches the Hebrew roots of the Greek scriptures.here is another persons commentary.http://www.konig.org/wc77.htm
(please don't hold any of my personal beliefs against them... )
Bananna

 

[Lisa0315]

Torah study from First Fruits of zion which teaches the Hebrew roots of the Greek scriptures.here is another persons commentary.http://www.konig.org/wc77.htm
(please don't hold any of my personal beliefs against them... )
Bananna

You are most welcome to participate and share your Bible studies with us.

Lisa

 

[Bananna]

Oh, I have one!

What is the signifigance of Jesus cursing the fig tree? I heard Dr. Sproll (sp?) teach this once. It is very powerful! Here is the Scripture:

Matthew 21:18-22 18 Now in the morning as he returned into the city, he hungered. 19 And when he saw a fig tree F39 in the way, he came to it, and found nothing thereon, but leaves only, and said unto it, Let no fruit grow on thee henceforward for ever. And presently the fig tree withered away.20 And when the disciples saw it, they marvelled, saying, How soon is the fig tree withered away! 21 Jesus answered and said unto them, Verily I say unto you, If ye have faith, and doubt not, ye shall not only do this which is done to the fig tree, but also if ye shall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea; it shall be done. 22 And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive.

Fig trees bear figs all year round in the right climate. There are always unripe fruit on the tree. I cannot imagine what would cause a tree to be without any fruit what so ever. The fig tree cursed three times, Three is of God, this is a warning to all who refuse to bear fruit.

Fig trees have no apparent flowers. they look like miniture fruit from the beginning.

 

[Angel4Truth]

Hi greenmunchkin (forgive me if someone else answered this already) Jesus spit in the clay to directly contradict an oral law of the pharisees. They have oral laws as well as the law given in the OT.

It was against the oral law to spit in the dirt on the sabbath but ok to spit on a rock - because spitting in the dirt makes clay and making clay is a work according to the oral law .

Jesus was defying their oral laws because they were not given by God but were man made laws. ((((((((hug))))))))

 

[Lisa0315]

Fig trees bear figs all year round in the right climate. There are always unripe fruit on the tree. I cannot imagine what would cause a tree to be without any fruit what so ever. The fig tree cursed three times, Three is of God, this is a warning to all who refuse to bear fruit.

Fig trees have no apparent flowers. they look like miniture fruit from the beginning.

Very close.

According to the good Dr. Sproll, this particular fig tree that grows in that region produces fruit only once per year. It was the proper time for that tree to have borne fruit, and by all appearances, it should have had fruit. So, this is a warning against those who claim to be Christians, but aren't really. They have all the appearances of Christians on the surface but do not really bear fruit.

Lisa

 

[Bananna]

I would have to disagree with Sproll then. Since as of the time that Yeshua spoke the words, there were no Christians. Yeshua was speaking in the context that He was sent to the lost sheep of Israel.

Taking Sproll's comment it would mean that any who claim to be Jewish...or the chosen people of God...

that I could see as plausible.
bananna

 

[Lisa0315]

I would have to disagree with Sproll then. Since as of the time that Yeshua spoke the words, there were no Christians. Yeshua was speaking in the context that He was sent to the lost sheep of Israel.

Taking Sproll's comment it would mean that any who claim to be Jewish...or the chosen people of God...

that I could see as plausible.
bananna

Often, Jesus' words were multi-meaning. Most of Scripture is. The letters of Paul were written to specific churches, but are timeless and applicable to churches today as well. So, the words of Christ are.

Lisa

 

[Bananna]

Often, Jesus' words were multi-meaning. Most of Scripture is. The letters of Paul were written to specific churches, but are timeless and applicable to churches today as well. So, the words of Christ are.

Lisa

I totally agree that one may take other applications from the scriptures and they can be prophetic also.

However personally I don't believe that a plain meaning of the scripture can be negated by any of the interpretations. Therefore I would look at the context and not apply it to Chrisitans. Had the term Christian been left out of Sprolls explanation it would not conflict with the general rules of interpretation but be a universal application on a personal level.

But that just me.
bananna

 

[Lisa0315]

I totally agree that one may take other applications from the scriptures and they can be prophetic also.

However personally I don't believe that a plain meaning of the scripture can be negated by any of the interpretations. Therefore I would look at the context and not apply it to Chrisitans. Had the term Christian been left out of Sprolls explanation it would not conflict with the general rules of interpretation but be a universal application on a personal level.

But that just me.
bananna

Well, this thread is about how we see Scripture differently as much as it is about seeing it the same. The wonderful thing about Scripture and one of the most awe inspiring things about it for me is this:

Scripture is timeless. It is written to the world and yet speaks to the individual. It is about ancient peoples and yet is as true for the modern world as it was to the old world.

It just amazes me that I can read something and another can read the same passage and each person can have an individual life application, yet, it also is written for the church and for the whole world all at the same time.

I mean, seriously, wouldn't it be cool to have 1000 Christians reading and studying the same passage. Then, each one write out what God has shown them. Would they all be true? I almost think they would.

Lisa

 

[Bananna]

Yes that is true.