Mark 1:44

Say nothing. Several factors probably prompted Jesus to tell the healed man to say nothing about what had happened, and to send him “forthwith” (v. 43) to present himself to the priests. In the first place, prompt action was necessary in order that the man might reach the priests before they learned who had healed him. Only thus could he expect an impartial decision, for if the priests should learn that it was Jesus who had healed him, they probably would refuse to certify his cleansing. His own interests made silence and prompt action a necessity.

Also, if the many leprosy victims in the region should hear of the power of Jesus to release them from disease, they doubtless would flock to Him and make more difficult His ministry for the people in general. Furthermore, Jesus required as prerequisite a sincere sense of need on the part of the afflicted one, and at least a measure of faith (see Mark 5:34; John 4:49, 50; cf. DA 264, 267, 268).

Another reason for silence was that He sought to avoid creating a reputation for Himself as a mere wonder-worker. The gospel record makes evident that He considered miracles to be secondary; His first and great objective was the saving of men’s souls. Christ ever called upon men to seek first the kingdom of heaven, in full confidence that their heavenly Father would add to them such material blessing as they might need (Matt. 6:33).

Various instances where Jesus, for these and other reasons, forbade the publicizing of accounts of the miracles He performed are to be found in Matt. 9:30; 12:16; Mark 5:43; 7:36; 8:26.

Show thyself. According to the Mosaic law the priests who served as public-health officers diagnosed leprosy and ordered segregation. Since, in the OT at least, other skin diseases were described by the term leprosy, the examiners must have been unable at times to screen out the curable types. Those who recovered from their disease could return home after reexamination, purification rites, and presumably certification (Lev. 14).

Such a certificate from the priest would amount to official recognition of this miraculous cure (see DA 265). The man himself would be a living witness to what had taken place. As it was, many priests were convinced by this and other evidences of the divinity of Christ (see DA 266). After the resurrection many of the priests professed their faith in Him (see Acts 6:7) and joined the infant church.

Jesus’ telling the healed man to follow the injunctions of the law demonstrates that He was not opposed to the laws of Moses. He Himself was born “under the law” (Gal. 4:4; see on Matt. 23:2, 3). But He did express vigorous opposition to the traditions that the scribes had built around the Mosaic precepts, by which they made void both the letter and the spirit of what God had imparted to Moses (see Matt. 15:3; Mark 7:8, 9; cf. DA 395-398). By sending this man to the priests Christ doubtless purposed to demonstrate to them and to the people His own recognition of the laws He Himself had imparted to Moses long before. In this way He hoped to disprove the false charges made by the priests, the official guardians of the law. Thus those who were open-minded among them might see that the charge of disloyalty to the law of Moses was false, and might be led to acknowledge Him as the Messiah (see DA 265).

Offer for thy cleansing. See Vol. I, p. 707, and on Lev. 14.

For a testimony. That is, a testimony to the divine power Jesus manifested, to His sympathetic interest in the needs of mankind, to His respect for the laws of Moses, and for the Jewish leaders as the guardians and executors of the law, and above all, to His power to deliver men from sin and death.

Unto them. It is not entirely clear whether this is a reference to the priests or to the people as a whole, including the priests. However, the context seems to make it refer to the priests. It was to them that the things Moses commanded were to be offered “for a testimony.” The people had seen the evidence acted out before their eyes; the priests had not. But the healed man’s cooperation with the ritual law would testify of the things concerning which Christ desired them to be aware. Of course, the priestly decision would constitute a permanent legal testimony before all the people once it had been entered in the official record.