Question 1

What sequence of actions does Mark emphasize from the seaside teaching to Levi’s call, and how does Levi respond?

Accepted Answer

Mark places public teaching and personal calling back-to-back. Jesus teaches a crowd by the sea, then “as he passed by” he notices Levi sitting at the toll station. The call is brief and direct (“Follow me”), and Levi’s response is equally immediate: he gets up and follows. The narration does not describe hesitation, negotiation, or conditions. That pacing makes the call look effective and decisive, and it links Jesus’ wider teaching ministry with a concrete invitation to one specific, socially marked person.

Question 2

In verse 15, what details show the social setting and the size of the group around Jesus?

Accepted Answer

The meal scene is described as reclining at table in “his house,” suggesting a settled, hosted setting rather than a roadside encounter. Mark highlights that “many tax collectors and sinners” are present and that they are sitting with Jesus and his disciples, which makes the association public and relational. Mark then adds an explanatory note: “there were many, and they followed him.” That comment connects the meal to a broader pattern—these are not isolated individuals but a sizable group attaching themselves to Jesus.

Question 3

Who raises the objection in verse 16, and why is the objection directed to the disciples instead of Jesus at first?

Accepted Answer

The objectors are “the scribes and the Pharisees” (religious teachers associated with boundary-keeping and purity concerns in this setting). They observe Jesus eating with “sinners and tax collectors” and then question the disciples: “Why is it that he eats and drinks with” them? Mark does not explain their strategy, but the narrative effect is clear: the disciples are put on the spot as representatives of Jesus’ movement. The question assumes that table fellowship signals approval or unacceptable closeness.

Question 4

How does Jesus’ physician analogy (healthy/sick) function as an explanation of the meal?

Accepted Answer

Jesus treats the criticism as a misunderstanding of purpose. By comparing himself to a physician, he reframes “eating and drinking with” stigmatized people as appropriate rather than scandalous. The logic is simple: doctors are found where sick people are, not where healthy people feel no need. In the same way, Jesus’ presence at the table aligns with his stated mission toward those regarded as needing change. The analogy is not a medical claim about those people; it is a mission explanation.

Question 5

What does Jesus explicitly say he “came” to do in verse 17, and how does that relate to the labels “righteous” and “sinners”?

Accepted Answer

Jesus explicitly states a purpose: “I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.” The key action is “to call,” and the intended outcome named is “repentance.” Within the scene, the labels “righteous” and “sinners” are part of the dispute about who is fit company for a teacher. Jesus’ wording supports his table fellowship: he associates with those labeled “sinners” because they are the target of his call. The saying also invites reflection on who counts as “righteous” in this context.

Question 6

What possibilities does the text allow for understanding the phrase “his house” in verse 15, and what remains the same either way?

Accepted Answer

The phrase “his house” can plausibly refer to Levi’s house (a meal Levi hosts after being called) or to Jesus’ house (Jesus as the one whose home is in view). Mark does not clarify it here. Either reading preserves the same narrative point: Jesus knowingly shares a meal in a settled home setting with many tax collectors and people labeled “sinners,” and that public association triggers criticism from religious teachers. The argument of the passage does not depend on identifying the homeowner.

Mark 2:13-17

Scripture