Mark 9:38-40 Explained

Wayne Jackson authored this piece which appeared in the May, 1975 edition of The Christian Courier which was published by the East Main Street Church of Christ in Stockton, California and edited by Jackson.

Q. Please explain Mark 9:38-40. Could this teach in principle that there are Christians outside of the body of Christ?

A. Certainly not. Salvation is found only in Christ. (II Timothy 2:10) And those who are "in Christ" are in His spiritual body, the church. (Colossians 1:18) Jesus has promised to save no except those who are in His body (Ephesians 5:23) and this should settle the matter for all who respect the authority of the Bible. It is true however, that some are frequently appealing to the passage cited above in an attempt to justify sincere denominationalists. Let us therefore, carefully examine these verses.

"Now John answered Him, saying, 'Teacher, we saw someone who does not follow us casting out demons in Your name, and we forbade him because he does not follow us.' But Jesus said, 'Do not forbid him, for no one who works a miracle in My name can soon afterward speak evil of Me. For he who is not against us in on our side.'" (Cf. Luke 9:49-50)

Now from this incident the following case is built. Here was a man not with Jesus and the disciples, but he was doing good; hence, the disciples were not to oppose him. Similarly, there are many good people today who are not with us (i.e., not members of the Church of Christ but are within other religious groups). We must therefore, not oppose them for even thought they are not "with us" they are nevertheless serving the Lord in their own way. This is a gross perversion of the truth! It not only ignores the very language of this specific context, it also disregards the general teaching of the Bible on the necessity of dealing with error. The facts are as follows.

JOHN'S TESTIMONY - Since John was an eye witness to this situation, his testimony is critical in determining the facts of the case. The apostle affirms concerning this unknown exorcist: (a) he was casting out demons; (b) he was doing such in Christ's name. We have no reason to doubt John's statement. In fact, since he was complaining about the man, his testimony to the genuineness of the miracles becomes all the more valuable. Viewing the matter from another angle, it is important to note: (a) John does not charge the man with teaching error; (b) he does not contend that the man falsely claimed the ability to expel demons (as in the case mentioned by the Lord in Matthew 7:22-23); (c) nor does the apostle suggest that the exorcism was a mere pretense. Demons were perfectly capable of discerning the difference between those who were true exorcists and those who merely feigned such; see Acts 19:13-16. Finally, John does not accuse the man of misappropriating Christ's name. His sole charge is, "he does not follow us."

THE LORD'S REPLY - Jesus declared, "Do not forbid him." The force of the Greek text is literally, "stop hindering him." The Savior then revealed exactly why the man was not to be hindered. "For no one who works a miracle in My name can soon afterward speak evil of Me." An analysis of this statement reveals the following details: (a) Christ acknowledges that the man is performing mighty works, i.e., genuine miracles; (b) these miracles were being done "in" (Greek: epi) the Lord's name, meaning "on the ground of My authority," (Vine, Expository Dictionary, III, p. 100.) and (c) the man was obviously teaching the truth since his message was supported by a spiritual gift.

SOME CONCLUSIONS: In view of the foregoing facts, certain conclusions are clear. This exorcist had been commissioned by Jesus to both teach and cast out demons. This is evident from the fact that supernatural signs were always connected with teaching. They were never simply works of compassion per se. Since the performance of miracles (including demon expulsion) was to CONFIRM the message being proclaimed (Mark 16:17-20; Hebrews 2:3-4) this man was most certainly not teaching error. Rather, he was accurately instructing his contemporaries regarding Jesus Christ.

Moreover, Jesus plainly indicated that though this man was not "with" them (in their immediate company) he was nevertheless "for" them as far as unity of labor was concerned. The Master's argument, logically arranged, would be as follows. (a) No man, performing genuine miracles, is able to quickly speak evil of Christ. (b) But this man was performing genuine miracles. (c) He thus was not speaking evil against the Lord. Furthermore, (a) Those not against the Lord were obviously for Him. (b) But this man was not against Him. (c) He was therefore, FOR Christ and this is precisely why the disciples were not to hinder his work.

These facts being clearly seen, it is evident that there is absolutely no parallel between this Biblical incident and modern day attempts to countenance error in sectarian bodies. This is true first of all, because denominational groups are not now nor have they ever been FOR CHRIST. They had their origin without His authority and have been perpetuated in rebellion to Him. Secondly, they do not teach uncorrupted truth, but defile His gospel with human dogma. The Savior would never have condoned that exorcist's activity had he been preaching unsound words. And we cannot uphold those who peddle Satan's doctrine today. Rather, we must oppose such teaching and in kindness attempt to lead its exponents into a knowledge of God's truth.