Reflective Bible Study

The big idea I see in this passage, and in this unique healing miracle is this: My lack of faith may limit Jesus’ ability to work miracles in my life.

We can see this idea played out in a few details within Mark’s retelling of this event.

First, other people bring the blind man to Jesus. We can assume they are more interested in seeing a miracle than on seeing this disabled man be healed. We see this idea played out (and perhaps a collective groan/sigh) when Jesus takes the blind man out of the village and away from them.

Next, since other people brought the blind man to Jesus, we may conclude that the man wasn’t all that confident in Jesus’ ability to heal him. Other blind people made a much bigger deal when getting near Jesus than this man did. This man likely had lots of doubts about Jesus.

Thirdly, this is one of the only times where Jesus performs a healing that doesn’t “work” entirely the first time around. He has to try again. The big takeaway I have from this two-times approach is that the man needed a little evidence in Jesus’ ability to assure him that Jesus really could heal him. We might call him the “Thomas” (John 20:24-29) of those who Jesus healed.

The now formerly blind man has faith and evidence to believe in Jesus, and it was the partial evidence that he allowed to strengthen his faith that gave him the ability to experience the complete healing miracle.

While Jesus was hanging on the cross, Matthew and Mark describe how Jesus refused a drink offered to Him by the soldiers. Part of me wonders if the wine and myrrh was to help deaden the pain of the cross, or if it was given to help prolong the life of the one being crucified. Perhaps it could have been given as a way of dulling the mind of the person being crucified, which may have resulted in them not having a filter on their last words while alive.

All of these ideas might be accurate, but it is interesting that both of these gospel writers include Jesus refusing to drink it. Mark describes in his gospel that “The soldiers tried to give Jesus wine mixed with myrrh to drink, but he refused.” (v. 23)

Matthew’s gospel says something similar, but he is a little more descriptive: “The soldiers gave Jesus wine mixed with gall to drink. He tasted the wine but refused to drink it.” (Matthew 27:34)

I am curious if Jesus refused this drink because He wanted His mind to be clear for the duration of His death. I wonder if Jesus knew that there was still more to do. Even in His last hours alive, Jesus may have known that there was one more person who would turn to Him – and it would be one of the least likely people possible: a thief being crucified next to Him.

I also wonder if Jesus refused to drink as a way of fulfilling His dedication to God – similar to the vow of a Nazarite in the Old Testament. While Jesus associated with people who drank, He had a reputation for socializing with those who did, and He turned water into wine early on in His ministry, we don’t see any direct record of Him drinking wine or vinegar-based drinks. The juice at the last supper that symbolized His blood is about the closest reference I can think of which would describe Jesus drinking. I wonder if Jesus had dedicated Himself to God in a similar way to how a Nazarite would have in the Old Testament – or if Jesus’ life was a fulfillment in some way of the Nazarite vows those in the Old Testament took.

The last thing I wonder is whether Jesus wanted us to know He was in as sane of a state of mind as one could be during an event like this. If Jesus had taken a drink, we might wonder if what He said to the thief or to anyone at any point during His time on the cross was really Him talking, or some type of alcoholic delusion. By refusing to drink what was offered, we can believe the words Jesus said while on the cross.

I may have to wait until heaven to get all these questions answered, but one thing I do realize in this decision not to drink is this: Even in death, Jesus was very intentional about the choices and decisions He made. Nothing was left to chance, and nothing happened that was not part of God’s great plan of salvation!

If there was anyone who had a great and important mission, it was John the Baptizer. Not only was his mission prophesied about before his birth, he was also “the guy” to prepare the Jewish nation for the Messiah.

And it was a successful mission; perhaps even too successful since people seemed to keep asking him whether he was the messiah.

In this passage, and in my mind’s eye, every time John received this question, he responded in a similar way: “I am not the Christ, but I am the one sent to prepare the way for him.” (v. 28b)

In this passage, after Jesus had began His ministry, John repeatedly directs and points people to Him. He even says, “The bride belongs only to the bridegroom. But the friend who helps the bridegroom stands by and listens to him. He is thrilled that he gets to hear the bridegroom’s voice. In the same way, I am really happy. He must become greater, and I must become less important.” (v. 29-30)

This prompts me to wonder if Jesus’ followers today are called to a similar role. While as a group, we are called the “bride” of Christ, I wonder if we are also called to be friends of the bridegroom as well. In a typical marriage, the bride would ideally be friends with the bridegroom before the marriage, and I hope that the “bride” of Christ is friends with Him before the ceremony or that would be an awkward marriage.

If we are called to be friends of Christ like John was, then it is our responsibility to point people to Him like John did. While Jesus has not returned yet, each of us has an opportunity, like John, to point people to Jesus – and ultimately become part of the church that will be known throughout the universe as Jesus’ “bride”.

Depending on the translation, the big idea I want to focus on in this journal entry can appear clearly, or it can be vague. Fortunately, the translation we are using states it quite clearly, which is important, because this idea runs very counter-cultural – but perfectly aligned with God’s character:

“I tell you the truth, the master will dress himself to serve and tell the servants to sit at the table, and he will serve them.” (v. 37)

What I see being so amazing about this verse and idea is that God/Jesus (represented by a master who has been gone a long time) serves us when He returns. This is the opposite of what I would expect to see happen.

In today’s culture, if a leader returned from a trip, he would expect his assistants and aids to serve him first. After all, he has just returned from a trip and is probably tired from traveling.

However, this is not the case with God. God travels the length of the universe in order to bring us home to be with Him, and the first thing that happens when He arrives is that He serves us. (Can you see a parallel to this idea in Jesus’ life and ministry?)

With God, it really is “all about us” because He loves us. This doesn’t mean that we are to be all about us (a.k.a. conceited), but instead, we are to love God back with the same selfless love that He has shown us.

God, the master of the universe, is willing to serve us – even when we are the ones who technically should be “serving” Him.