Mark 2:1-12, Luke 5:18-25, and Matthew 9:1-8 tell the story of the paralytic man whose sins were forgiven by Jesus. The passage is famously cited by believers in the deity of Christ as an early example of Jesus claiming to be God. However, this assertion has been challenged recently, and alternate interpretations have been suggested. Consequently, we need to ask the question. Does Jesus’ authority to forgive sin mean he is God?
Jesus Forgives the Paralytics Sin
The passage begins with Jesus teaching a very large crowd from within a very small house. Being the popular teacher he was, the house quickly filled to capacity. As the crowd swells, a group of men carrying their paralyzed friend arrive in search of a miracle. Unable to push their way into the house, the men cut a hole in the roof and lower their comrade down to Jesus. Impressed by their faith, Jesus does the one thing no one expects and forgives the man’s sins. Right on cue, some religious leaders began to question his statement.
“Why does this fellow talk like that? He’s blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?”
Mark 2:7
Perceiving their contempt in his spirit, Jesus turns to them and claims that he, “the son of man,” has the authority to forgive sin on earth. He then goes on to heal the paralytic as proof.
The Traditional Christian View
The idea that Mark 2:1-12 contains a God claim is deduced from the way Jesus’ actions contrast the religious leader’s statement, “Who can forgive sins but God alone?”
The logic of the argument is very simple. If God is the only one who can forgive sin, then Jesus’ claim to have the authority to forgive the paralytic sin is an indirect claim to be God. When someone says they can do something only God can do, it suggests they are God.
The “Jesus is not God” Position
On the other side, those who don’t believe in the deity of Christ argue that the passage does not have to be interpreted as a God claim. They suggest that the religious leader’s assertion is inaccurate and that there are other ways we can explain Christ’s authority over sin.
The argument goes something like this. The ability to forgive sin is not the kind of thing that should be impossible for God to bestow on someone if he so chooses. And because Jesus never identified where his authority came from, we do not have to assume it was an intrinsic right. It could have been given to him by God. Consequently, the idea that Jesus’ ability to forgive sin constitutes a “God claim” is read into the text. It does not exist within it naturally, nor is it the only possible reading.
The Arguments Validity
As much as I disagree with this view, I do think it has validity.
There is a debate in Christianity about whether or not God has given people the authority to forgive sin. John 20:23 is the central verse of the discussion.
“If you forgive anyone his sins, they are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.”
John 20:23
Catholics take a very literal reading of this passage, citing it as a foundational verse for the Sacrament of Confession. Protestants, on the other hand, typically believe that humans have not been given this authority. Arguing instead that verse 23 can be explained as the spread of the Gospel message. (This interpretation leans heavily on the contextual verses 21 and 22.)
The fact that this is a debate in Christianity means the idea God can give people the ability to forgive sin is not an entirely unreasonable position to hold. Especially since it can be supported by a literal reading of John 20:23.
So, though, I do think Jesus claims to be God in Mark 2:1-12. I agree that the principles behind the skeptic’s reading are not unreasonable. If I’m being real, I think they might even be on to something.
Why Jesus’ Authority to Forgive Sin Proves He’s God
During his ministry, Christ’s public claims about his identity and mission always came with a healthy touch of ambiguity. His statements were always factual and honest but veiled by analogy, scriptural quotations, and parables. This is even true in the Gospel of John, which Is known for having the most direct God claims. So, we shouldn’t be surprised that there are multiple ways someone can interpret Jesus’ statements in Mark 2:1-12. Christ seems to have intended it to be this way. Yet, at the same time, this does not mean there is no good answer.
The Son of Man?
In Mark 2:1-12 Jesus veils his God’s claim by identifying himself as the “son of man.”
“But I want you to know that the Son of Man (Jesus) has authority on earth to forgive sins.”
Mark 2:10
If we want to know where his authority comes from, we first need to understand what “son of man” means.
The term describes two “people” in the Old Testament. First is the prophet Ezekiel, to whom God gives the name. The second is a mysterious figure who, according to Daniel 7 and Psalms 110, shares authority with God in heaven. The figure (sometimes called the second power in heaven) is widely considered to be a member of the Godhead in Christian Theology. According to rabbinical scholar Alan Segal, this idea was also popular in Jesus’ day. In his book, “Two Powers in Heaven,” he talks about how the two-in-one concept of God did not become heretical in Judaism until the second century.
By calling himself the “son of man,” Jesus presents the religious leaders with two possible explanations for the origins of his authority.
If he is identifying with Ezekiel, then his authority, though unique, has to have been given to him by heaven. Prophets don’t naturally have the ability to forgive sin. On the other hand, if he claims to be the “son of man” from Daniel 7/ Psalms 110, then his authority is an intrinsic right. The first claim makes him a man, the second a member of the Godhead.
Which Son of Man Was Jesus?
Verse 8 foreshadows which of the two references Jesus is making. As the Sadducees began talking amongst themselves, Mark says that “Immediately Jesus knew in his spirit that this was what they were thinking in their hearts.” Knowing the thoughts of the “heart” is an ability the Bible often attributes to God.
However, the big reveal doesn’t happen until the final chapters of the Gospel. After the Last Supper, Jesus is arrested and tried before the religious rulers. At the end of the trial, the High Priest charges him to identify himself. In response, Jesus claims to be the Messiah and the “son of man” from Daniel 7.
“You have said so,” Jesus replied. “But I say to all of you: From now on you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.”
Then the high priest tore his clothes and said, “He has spoken blasphemy!”
Mark 26:64-65
Final Thoughts
In isolation, I don’t think we can say Mark 2:1-12 is a definitive example of a God claim. The idea that God could give someone the authority to forgive sin seems like a reasonable notion. The passage also doesn’t specifically tell us where his authority comes from. Consequently, on their own, Jesus’ words can be read in multiple ways.
However, the story was never intended to stand alone. When Christ’s statements are allowed to speak within the context of the Gospel narrative, the veil of ambiguity falls, and the edge of his words can be felt. There is no doubt Jesus believed his authority was an intrinsic right of his nature as the divine son of man. Consequently, he claimed to have the authority to forgive the paralytic’s sins because he is God.
Pingback: Who is the Son of Man? History and Meaning