The
Meaning of οί παρ' αύτοθ (ν. 21)
The traditional reading of this
passage sees the phrase oi παρ' αύτοϋ (literally, "those beside him")
as a reference to the members of his family who then show up in v. 31 (Martin,
1973:116). Those who challenge the traditional reading posit that the phrase
could mean "his friends" (i.e., his disciples), or "those in the
house" (i.e., that part of "the crowd" that was able to fit
inside the house). There are difficulties with both of these solutions. First, as
the MNT taskforce notes (Brown et al, 1978:55), the dialogue between
Jesus and the scribes (vv. 22-30) is likely to be seen as a "filler"
to account for the time it takes Jesus' family to set out on their journey in
v. 21 until they arrive in v. 31. Mark uses this same "sandwiching"
style in Mark 5:21-43. In 5:21-24 (the "setting out") Jesus is asked
by Jarius (the synagogue ruler) to go to his house and heal his daughter. In
5:25-34 (the "filler") Jesus, on his way to the house of Jarius,
encounters the woman who touches his cloak hoping to be healed of her bleeding.
Finally, in 5:35-43 (the "arrival") Jesus comes to the house of Jarius
and heals his daughter (see also Brown, 1982:375). The parallels between the sandwiching
technique used in this passage and that used in 3:20-35 are too great to be ignored.
This makes it all but certain that oi παρ' αύτοϋ must refer to the family
members who arrive in v. 31.
Second, the meaning "those
in the house seize the crowd" is equally unlikely since, as the MNT
taskforce points out (Brown et al, 1978:55), in that case there is no
completion of the sequence-"the 'his own' never come to the crowd."
Similarly, the phrase έξήλθον κρατήσαι αύτόν (“they set out to seize him")
can hardly refer to those who are already in the house with him; for what need
would they have to "set out" if they were already there? If it is
argued that αύτόν refers to the crowd (as above) then it must also be pointed
out that "the crowd" is said to be in the house with him as well
(Best, 1975:311). The most likely solution is still that this phrase refers to
Jesus' family members who arrive in v. 31. (Eric D. Svendsen, "Who is My
Mother? The Role and Status of the Mother of Jesus in the New Testament and
Roman Catholicism [PhD Dissertation; Potchefstroom University and Greenwich
School of Theology, November 2001], 78-79)
Evidence
Supporting the Traditional View
In addition to the points above,
the traditional view (i.e., that Jesus' family is saying that Jesus is out of
his mind) is supported by the following (Best, 1975:313): First, the subject of
"they were saying" is most easily read as the same subject of
"they went out"-a change of subjects would be awkward at best.
Second, the parallel that this view creates between vv. 20-21 (Jesus'
family accuses him of insanity) and vv. 22-30 (the teachers of the law
accuse Jesus of demon possession) provides a backdrop for vv. 31-35 (Jesus
rejects biological ties and inaugurates the eschatological family) that is more
forceful than the other views allow:
a. there is a "group"
in each pericope (family and teachers of the law)
b. each group is introduced by a
participle (ακουσαντες, v. 21; καταβαντες, v. 22)
c. ελεγον is used in both Gust as
the teachers of the law "were saying," so those in Jesus' family
"were saying")
d. the charge in v. 22 is clearly
against Jesus, and this suggests that the charge in v. 21 refers to him as well
e. the statement in v. 22 has a
harsh tone and this suggests that the tone in v. 21 be harsh as well (i.e.,
Jesus is accused of insanity rather than being overworked)
Third, this view is consistent
with Mark's "sandwiching" technique that he uses elsewhere in his
gospel (5:21-43). In the words of Lambrecht (1974:252): "Since
'sandwiching' (ABA' ) is a favourite Markan literary technique used also elsewhere
in his gospel, one can hold without much risk of illusion that the tendency to
structurize ... is not accidental." Moreover, this instance of the
"sandwiching" technique is strengthened by the fact that Mark places
it in chiastic form (Wansbrough, 1971:125):
3:20-21 The biological relatives
of Jesus fail to understand his mission
22a Accusation
of an evil spirit
22b
Accusation that he drives out devils by the prince of devils
23-26 Saying
about Satan
27 Answer to
second accusation
28-29 Answer
to first accusation
31-35 The true, eschatological
relatives of Jesus
These considerations force us
back to the traditional view of this passage which, at the end of this day, is
still the best option. (Eric D. Svendsen, "Who is My Mother? The Role and
Status of the Mother of Jesus in the New Testament and Roman Catholicism [PhD
Dissertation; Potchefstroom University and Greenwich School of Theology,
November 2001], 81-82)