KJV: And the scribes which came down from Jerusalem said, He hath Beelzebub, and by the prince of the devils casteth he out devils.
YLT: and the scribes who are from Jerusalem having come down, said -- 'He hath Beelzeboul,' and -- 'By the ruler of the demons he doth cast out the demons.'
Darby: And the scribes who had come down from Jerusalem said, He has Beelzebub, and, By the prince of the demons he casts out demons.
ASV: And the scribes that came down from Jerusalem said, He hath Beelzebub, and, By the prince of the demons casteth he out the demons.
| γραμματεῖς | scribes |
|
Parse: Noun, Nominative Masculine Plural Root: γραμματεύς Sense: a clerk, scribe, esp. |
|
| οἱ | those |
|
Parse: Article, Nominative Masculine Plural Root: ὁ Sense: this, that, these, etc. |
|
| Ἱεροσολύμων | Jerusalem |
|
Parse: Noun, Genitive Neuter Plural Root: Ἱεροσόλυμα Sense: denotes either the city itself or the inhabitants. |
|
| καταβάντες | having come down |
|
Parse: Verb, Aorist Participle Active, Nominative Masculine Plural Root: καταβαίνω Sense: to go down, come down, descend. |
|
| ἔλεγον | were saying |
|
Parse: Verb, Imperfect Indicative Active, 3rd Person Plural Root: λέγω Sense: to speak, say. |
|
| ὅτι | - |
|
Parse: Conjunction Root: ὅτι Sense: that, because, since. |
|
| Βεελζεβοὺλ | Beelzebul |
|
Parse: Noun, Accusative Masculine Singular Root: Βεελζεβούλ Sense: a name of Satan, the prince of evil spirits. |
|
| ἔχει | He has |
|
Parse: Verb, Present Indicative Active, 3rd Person Singular Root: ἔχω Sense: to have, i.e. to hold. |
|
| ἄρχοντι | prince |
|
Parse: Noun, Dative Masculine Singular Root: ἄρχων Sense: a ruler, commander, chief, leader. |
|
| τῶν | of the |
|
Parse: Article, Genitive Neuter Plural Root: ὁ Sense: this, that, these, etc. |
|
| δαιμονίων | demons |
|
Parse: Noun, Genitive Neuter Plural Root: δαιμόνιον Sense: the divine power, deity, divinity. |
|
| ἐκβάλλει | He casts out |
|
Parse: Verb, Present Indicative Active, 3rd Person Singular Root: ἐκβάλλω Sense: to cast out, drive out, to send out. |
|
| δαιμόνια | demons |
|
Parse: Noun, Accusative Neuter Plural Root: δαιμόνιον Sense: the divine power, deity, divinity. |
|
Greek Commentary for Mark 3:22
See on Matthew 10:25. [source]
Not connecting two parts of one accusation, but two accusations, as is evident from the two ὅτις , which are equivalent to quotation marks. [source]
Reverse Greek Commentary Search for Mark 3:22
The recognition of Jesus by the demons is surprising. The whole subject of demonology is difficult. Some hold that it is merely the ancient way of describing disease. But that does not explain the situation here. Jesus is represented as treating the demons as real existences separate from the human personality. Missionaries in China today claim that they have seen demons cast out. The devil knew Jesus clearly and it is not strange that Jesus was recognized by the devil‘s agents. They know that there is nothing in common between them and the Son of God Usually τα δαιμονια ta daimonia is the word in the New Testament for demons, but in Matthew 8:31 we have οι δαιμονες hoi daimones (the only example in the N.T.). Δαιμονιον Daimonion is a diminutive of δαιμων daimōn In Homer δαιμων daimōn is used synonymously with τεος theos and τεα thea Hesiod employed δαιμων daimōn of men of the golden age as tutelary deities. Homer has the adjective δαιμονιος daimonios usually in an evil sense. Empedocles considered the demons both bad and good. They were thus used to relieve the gods and goddesses of much rascality. Grote (History of Greece) notes that the Christians were thus by pagan usage justified in calling idolatry the worship of demons. See notes on 1 Corinthians 10:20.; note on 1 Timothy 4:1; note on Revelation 9:20; and notes on Revelation 16:13. In the Gospels demons are the same as unclean spirits (Mark 5:12, Mark 5:15; Mark 3:22, Mark 3:30; Luke 4:33). The demons are disturbers (Vincent) of the whole life of man (Mark 5:2.; Mark 7:25; Matthew 12:45; Luke 13:11, Luke 13:16). [source]
The Rev., unfortunately, and against the protest of the American committee, retains devils instead of rendering demons. See on Matthew 4:1. The New Testament uses two kindred words to denote the evil spirits which possessed men, and which were so often east out by Christ: διάμων , of which demon is a transcript, and which occurs, according to the best texts, only at Matthew 8:31; and δαιμόνιον , which is not a diminutive, but the neuter of the adjective δαιμόνιος ,of, or belonging to a demon. The cognate verb is δαιμονίζομαι to be possessed with a demon, as in Mark 1:32. The derivation of the word is uncertain. Perhaps δαίω , to distribute, since the deities allot the fates of men. Plato derives it from δαήμων , knowing or wise. In Hesiod, as in Pythagoras, Thales, and Plutarch, the word δαίμων is used of men of the golden age, acting as tutelary deities, and forming the link between gods and men. Socrates, in Plato's “Cratylus,” quotes Hesiod as follows: “Socrates: You know how Hesiod uses the word? Hermogenes: Indeed I do not. Soc.: Do you not remember that he speaks of a golden race of men who came first? Her.: Yes, I know that. Soc.: He says of them,But now that fate has closed over this race,They are holy demons upon earth,Beneficent, averters of ills, guardians of mortal men.'”After some further conversation, Socrates goes on: “And therefore I have the most entire conviction that he called them demons, because they were δαήμονες (knowing or wise )Now, he and other poets say truly that, when a good man dies, he has honor and a mighty portion among the dead, and becomes a demon, which is a name given to him signifying wisdom. And I say, too, that every wise man who happens to be a good man is more than human ( δαιμόνιον ) both in life and death, and is rightly called a demon.” Mr. Grote (“History of Greece”) observes that in Hesiod demons are “invisible tenants of the earth, remnants of the once happy golden race whom the Olympic gods first made - the unseen police of the gods, for the purpose of repressing wicked behavior in the world.” In later Greek the word came to be used of any departed soul. In Homer δαίμων is used synonymously with θεός and θεά , god and goddess, and the moral quality of the divinity is determined by the context: but most commonly of the divine power or agency, like the Latin numen, the deity considered as a power rather than as a person. Homer does not use δαιμόνιον substantively, but as an adjective, always in the vocative case, and with a sorrowful or reproachful sense, indicating that the person addressed is in some astonishing or strange condition. Therefore, as a term of reproach - wretch! sirrah! madman! (“Iliad,” 2:190,200; 4:31; ix., 40). Occasionally in an admiring or respectful sense (“Odyssey,” xiv., 443; xxiii., 174); Excellent stranger! noble sir! Homer also uses δαίμων of one's genius or attendant spirit, and thence of one's lot orfortune. So in the beautiful simile of the sick father (“Odyssey,” 5:396), “Some malignant genius has assailed him.” Compare “Odyssey,” x., 64; xi., 61. Hence, later, the phrase κατὰ δαίμονα is nearly equivalent to by chance. We have seen that, in Homer, the bad sense of δαιμόνοις is the prevailing one. In the tragedians, also, δαίμων , though used both of good and bad fortune, occurs more frequently in the latter sense, and toward this sense the word gravitates more and more. The undertone of Greek thought, which tended to regard no man happy until he had escaped from life (see on Matthew 5:3, blessed )naturally imparted a gloomy and forbidding character to those who were supposed to allot the destinies of life. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- In classical Greek it is noticeable that the abstract τὸ δαιμόνιον fell into the background behind δαίμων , with the development in the latter of the notion of a fate or genius connected with each individual, as the demon of Socrates; while in biblical Greek the process is the reverse, this doctrine being rejected for that of an overruling personal providence, and the strange gods, “obscure to human knowledge and alien to human life,” taking the abstract term uniformly in an evil sense. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Empedocles, a Greek philosopher, of Sicily, developed Hesiod's distinction; making the demons of a mixed nature between gods and men, not only the link between the two, but having an agency and disposition of their own; not immortal, but long-lived, and subject to the passions and propensities of men. While in Hesiod the demons are all good, according to Empedocles they are both bad and good. This conception relieved the gods of the responsibility for proceedings unbecoming the divine nature. The enormities which the older myths ascribed directly to the gods - thefts, rapes, abductions - were the doings of bad demons. It also saved the credit of the old legends, obviating the necessity of pronouncing either that the gods were unworthy or the legends untrue. “Yet, though devised for the purpose of satisfying a more scrupulous religious sensibility, it was found inconvenient afterward when assailants arose against paganism generally. For while it abandoned as indefensible a large portion of what had once been genuine faith, it still retained the same word demons with an entirely altered signification. The Christian writers in their controversies found ample warrant among the earlier pagan authors for treating all the gods as demons; and not less ample warrant among the later pagans for denouncing the demons generally as evil beings” (Grote, “History of Greece”). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- This evil sense the words always bear in the New Testament as well as in the Septuagint. Demons are synonymous with unclean spirits (Mark 5:12, Mark 5:15; Mark 3:22, Mark 3:30; Luke 4:33). They appear in connection with Satan (Luke 10:17, Luke 10:18; Luke 11:18, Luke 11:19); they are put in opposition to the Lord (1 Corinthians 10:20, 1 Corinthians 10:21); to the faith (1 Timothy 4:1). They are connected with idolatry (Revelation 9:20; Revelation 16:13, Revelation 16:14). They are special powers of evil, influencing and disturbing the physical, mental, and moral being (Luke 13:11, Luke 13:16; Mark 5:2-5; Mark 7:25; Matthew 12:45). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- [source]
The phrase means literally “those from the side of him (Jesus).” It could mean another circle of disciples who had just arrived and who knew of the crowds and strain of the Galilean ministry who now come at this special juncture. But the idiom most likely means the kinspeople or family of Jesus as is common in the lxx. The fact that in Mark 3:31 “his mother and his brothers” are expressly mentioned would indicate that they are “the friends” alluded to in Mark 3:21. It is a mournful spectacle to think of the mother and brothers saying, He is beside himself Second aorist active indicative intransitive. The same charge was brought against Paul (Acts 26:24; 2 Corinthians 5:13). We say that one is out of his head. Certainly Mary did not believe that Jesus was in the power of Beelzebub as the rabbis said already. The scribes from Jerusalem are trying to discount the power and prestige of Jesus (Mark 3:22). See notes on Matthew 9:32-34; and note on Matthew 10:25; and note on Matthew 12:24 for Beelzebub and Beelzebul. Mary probably felt that Jesus was overwrought and wished to take him home out of the excitement and strain that he might get rest and proper food. See my The Mother of Jesus: Her Problems and Her Glory. The brothers did not as yet believe the pretensions and claims of Jesus (John 7:5). Herod Antipas will later consider Jesus as John the Baptist redivivus, the scribes treat him as under demonic possession, even the family and friends fear a disordered mind as a result of overstrain. It was a crucial moment for Jesus. His family or friends came to take him home, to lay hold of him (kratēsai), forcibly if need be. [source]
Blasphemous accusation here in Judea as in Galilee (Mark 3:22; Matthew 12:24, Matthew 12:27). See notes on Matthew for discussion of the form of this name and the various items in the sin against the Holy Spirit involved in the charge. It was useless to deny the fact of the miracles. So they were explained as wrought by Satan himself, a most absurd explanation. [source]