And John answering said, Master, we saw some one casting out demons in thy name, and we forbad him, because he follows not with us.
John's report exposes a second problem in the disciples: not "which of us is greatest," but "he is not one of us." The Lord's reply — do not stop him — raises a question every believer faces: how do we treat good work done in Christ's name by people outside our own circle?
The dispute over greatness was crude. What John raises sounds better, and that is the danger.
Here comes a much subtler form of self. The most obvious form was the question of which of them should be greatest. Now comes a disguise of self: it looks like zeal for the Master's honour. It was good, and an immense honour, to follow Jesus. But John gave himself away by his own words — "he does not follow with us." If he had kept Jesus before his eye, he never would have made the complaint.
John is not pushing himself forward. He speaks for the group, and that is what makes this hard to spot.
Here John seems not to be thinking of himself, but of the company, the "us." This is a more subtle form of selfishness than the last. It looks like ignoring self for the good of the company you are with. In reality it usually means a desire to exalt the company, so as to make something of self.
The verse sets two things side by side: the man acted in Christ's name, the disciples acted for their own circle.
They had given far too much importance to the "us." After all, it is only a group of people, and not one of them is important in himself. All the importance, as the Lord has just shown them, lay in the Name. Now the man who had cast out the demons had done it "in Your Name." That was the very thing they had just failed to do. So he had the power of the Name, and they had the imagined importance of the "us."
That failure matters. The disciples had just failed to cast out a demon. This stranger had done it.
They followed the Lord. In that they were right and happy. But there was a lack. What was it? The disciples asked the Lord to explain why they could not cast out the demon. Our Lord put His finger on the spot. He replied, "This kind cannot be driven out by anything but prayer" (v. 29). These disciples followed the right Person, but they lacked spiritual condition. The man they tried to forbid did not follow with them, but there must have been spiritual condition with him.
(Pollock quotes an older text of Mark 9:29 that reads "by prayer and fasting.")
This word of Jesus sounds like the opposite of another saying of His. The two answer different questions.
Where it is a question of Christ, the Lord has said, "Whoever is not with me is against me" (11:23). There is no middle path. Where it is a question of working in His name, He would say, "the one who is not against you is for you." Such a person is working in the common cause. He owns the common Master, and that Master owns him. No one, therefore, is to forbid him.
The Lord could have crushed John. Instead He picks up John's own small word and fills it with something better.
John said, "We tried to stop him, because he does not follow with us." That tells the whole tale. They were thinking of themselves, not of Christ; of their own importance, and not His honour. If they had cared about His importance, they would have thought how blessed it was to see the effect of His name. They would have rejoiced that a man was using His power… And notice: the very selfishness of John brings out the grace of Christ. He says "us." You do not know the lot you have with Me. If you find one who can use the power of My name, rejoice in it.
This does not mean the disciples' own place was wrong. Two truths go together here.
Faithful people should value true service wherever they see it, but they can gather only with Christ. We have to bear this in mind. Some work is done in the name of the Lord Jesus, yet not inside the circle that gathers round the true centre. And what are we to do? We should interfere as little as possible. We should own with all our heart whatever is done in His name, and hold fast to Him as our security, our joy and our boast.
- Disguise. Self can hide behind loyalty. John's complaint sounds like zeal for his Master, but he gives himself away with the phrase "with us."
- Name. The man had the power of the Name; the disciples had only the imagined importance of their group.
- Powerlessness. They stopped the very work they had just failed to do. They followed the right Person, but lacked spiritual condition.
- Distinction. Toward Christ Himself there is no neutral ground. Toward work done in His name the rule is wider: not against you means for you.
- Grace. The Lord answers a narrow "us" with His own generous "us" — welcome whatever others do in His name, and hold fast to Him.
And Jesus said to him, Forbid [him] not, for he that is not against you is for you.
The disciples had just been arguing about which of them was greatest. John then tells the Lord about a man driving out demons in Jesus' name. They had stopped him for one reason: he was not in their group. The Lord's short reply raises two questions. What makes a servant genuine? And how does this fit with His other word in Luke 11:23, that the one not with Him is against Him?
The dispute about who was greatest was crude. What follows is harder to spot, because it wears the clothing of loyalty to Christ.
Here comes a much subtler form of self. The crudest form was the question of which of them should be greatest. But now comes a disguise of self, and it looks like zeal for the Master's honour. "Master, we saw one casting out demons in your name; and we forbade him, because he does not follow with us." What a reason! It was good, and a great honour, to follow Jesus. But John gave himself away by his own words — "he does not follow with us." If he had kept Jesus before his eyes, he would never have made the complaint.
Everything turns on which word carries the weight: the disciples' "us," or the Name the man used.
They had given far too much importance to the "us," which after all is only a group of people, and not one of them is of any importance in himself. All the importance, as the Lord has just shown them, lay in the Name. Now the one who had cast out the demons — the very thing they had just failed to do — had done so "in Your Name." So he had the power of the Name and they had the imagined importance of the "us."
Their own recent failure should have made them slower to judge.
They themselves had just failed to cast out a demon, even though they had the authority. They should have known that a man who could do it must have some right to do it. Christ's name was not a thing that one could use as a magic word. There must have been some reverence for that name which could use it as a word of power against Satan.
Readers often set this verse against Luke 11:23, where the Lord says the one not with Him is against Him. The two words answer two different situations.
In the Lord's conflict with Satan everyone, though not taking the ground of being His disciple, who was working with the same end in view (for the man in question was casting out demons in the Lord's name) was really on the Lord's side. He might be defective as to confession and walk, but as long as he was not against the Lord in His warfare with the power of the enemy, he was really for Him… The second case is very different. Here the enemies of Christ charge Him with casting out devils through Beelzebub, the prince of the devils.
Where the person of Christ Himself is the issue, neutrality is not on offer:
Where the question is about Christ Himself, the Lord has said, "Whoever is not with me is against me" (11:23). There is no middle path. Where the question is about working in His name, He would say, "the one who is not against you is for you." Such a person is working in the common cause. He owns the common Master, and the common Master owns him. No one, therefore, is to forbid him.
If the man is not the measure, what is?
It is a common idea that the man vouches for the message — the church ordained So-and-so, so what he says must be right… The whole principle, however, is false. The true principle is the reverse. The message vouches for the man. The Lord's words in Luke 9:49-50 state this principle in effect.
Paul met people who preached Christ from pretense. He responded in a way John did not.
Such conduct on the part of these men was outrageous… How then did the apostle act? We read, "Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is proclaimed, and in that I rejoice. Yes, and I will rejoice" (Phil. 1:18). There was no "We forbade him, because he does not follow US." It was no mere academic rejoicing. No mere lip rejoicing. It was real, genuine joy that Christ was preached.
The same instinct survives wherever believers assume their circle holds the monopoly.
We must guard against thinking that our own company is the only one the Lord can approve… And we can be thankful to see Christians who show an open, unsectarian attitude, even though they stand in a sectarian position. In such cases, their attitude is better than their position.
- The disguise. Self can dress up as loyalty to Christ. This is a subtler form of the same pride that asked who was greatest.
- The Name. All the weight lies in Christ's name, not in the group. The disciples had the imagined importance of "us." The stranger had the power of the Name.
- The test. The message vouches for the man, not the man for the message. Power used in Christ's name proves some reverence for that name.
- The two sayings. Toward Christ Himself there is no middle path. Toward someone working in His name, the one not against you is for you.
- The response. Paul rejoiced that Christ was preached at all. That joy, not "he does not follow us," is what this verse asks of us.