Do Mark 2:7 and Luke 5:21 Prove Only God Can Forgive Sins?

Mark 2:5 - Jesus, seeing their faith, said to the paralytic, "Son, your sins are forgiven you."

Mark 2:6 - But there were some of the scribes sitting there, and reasoning in their hearts,  

Mark 2:7 - "Why does this man speak blasphemies like that? Who can forgive sins but God alone?" 

Mark 2:8 - Immediately Jesus, perceiving in his spirit that they so reasoned within themselves, said to them, "Why do you reason these things in your hearts? 

Mark 2:9 - Which is easier, to tell the paralytic, 'Your sins are forgiven;' or to say, 'Arise, and take up your bed, and walk?' 

Mark 2:10 - But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins" -- he said to the paralytic -- 

Mark 2:11 - "I tell you, arise, take up your mat, and go to your house." 

. 

Luke 5:20 - Seeing their faith, he said to him, "Man, your sins are forgiven you." 

Luke 5:21 - The scribes and the Pharisees began to reason, saying, "Who is this that speaks blasphemies? Who can forgive sins, but God alone?" 

Mark 2:7 and Luke 5:21 are often cited to argue that no one can have authority to forgive sins except God. The reasoning goes: if Jesus forgives sins, then Jesus must be the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob — that is, God Almighty. The phrase commonly quoted is, “Who can forgive sins but God alone?”

Understanding who said it and why

However, the context matters. In both Mark 2:7 and Luke 5:21, the statement is made by Jewish religious leaders — scribes and Pharisees. The Gospels elsewhere describe these leaders as acting from envy and seeking a legal basis to accuse Jesus of blasphemy. Matthew 27:18 notes their envy, while Luke 20:19 and Luke 22:2 show they were looking for a way to arrest and kill Him. Their claim, then, is part of a hostile accusation, not a neutral doctrinal statement.

What Jesus actually claimed in response

In Mark 2:10, Jesus does not respond by claiming to be God. Instead, He identifies Himself as *“the Son of Man”* — a messianic title from Daniel 7:13-14 — and states that *“the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins.”* The text emphasizes **authority given**, not inherent deity.

Who gave Jesus this authority?

One should note this:

He entered into a boat, and crossed over, and came into his own city. Behold, they brought to him a man who was paralyzed, lying on a bed. Jesus, seeing their faith, said to the paralytic, “Son, cheer up! Your sins are forgiven you.” Behold, some of the scribes said to themselves, “This man blasphemes.” Jesus, knowing their thoughts, said, “Why do you think evil in your hearts? For which is easier, to say, ‘Your sins are forgiven;’ or to say, ‘Get up, and walk?’ But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins…” (then he said to the paralytic), “Get up, and take up your mat, and go up to your house.” He arose and departed to his house. 8But when the multitudes saw it, they marveled and glorified God, who had given such authority to men. — Matthew 9:1-8, World English

Matthew 9:8: After Jesus, the Son of the Man, David, heals the paralytic, the crowds “glorified God, who had given such authority to men.” The text presents Jesus as a man among men to whom God granted authority. 

Acts 2:22: Peter addresses the Jews, describing Jesus as “a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by [Greek instrumental “en”, "by means of," -- Strong’s #1722] him in the midst of you.” Here, “God” and “him” are distinct. Peter later identifies this God as *“the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ”* in 1 Peter 1:3. Peter does not identify Jesus as being "God", nor does he present the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as being more than one person. He actually shows that Jesus is not the God of Israel.

1 Corinthians 8:6: Paul writes, “There is one God, the Father, from whom are all… and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all.” The “one God” is identified specifically as the Father. Paul does not identify this one God as being more than one person. Nor does he identify Jesus as being this "one God". Instead, he identifies Jesus as being the "one Lord" through whom are all. If Jesus is the "one Lord" through whom are all, he cannot be the one God from whom are all.

The scriptures make it clear that Jesus received his authority and power from his Father and God. Jesus is nowhere in the Bible presented as being the source of his own power. -- Deuteronomy 18:15-19; Psalm 2:6-8; 45:7; 110:1,2; Isaiah 9:6,7; 11:2; 42:1; 61:1-3; Jeremiah 23:5; Ezekiel 34:23,24; 37:24; Daniel 7:13,14; Micah 5:4; Matthew 12:28; 28:18; Luke 1:32; 4:14,18; 5:17; John 3:34; 5:19,27,30; 10:18,36-38; Acts 2:22,36; 3:13-26; 10:38; Romans 1:1-4; 1 Corinthians 15:27; 2 Corinthians 13:4; Colossians 1:15,16; 2:10; Ephesians 1:3,17-23; Philippians 2:9-11; Hebrews 1:2,4,6,9; 1 Peter 3:22. 

Key takeaway

The argument from Mark 2:7 and Luke 5:21 rests on a statement made by Jesus’ opponents during a confrontation. The broader biblical context shows Jesus claiming delegated authority as the promised Son of Man and Son of David, with that authority given to Him by His God and Father. 

We certainly find nothing in these verses that presents Jesus as being the God of the Old Testament (oneness doctrine), or that presents God as being more than one person (trinity doctrine).

Written By Others:

Healed to Wholeness

Two Miracles for a Paralytic

Genesis 17:1 - Did the Prehuman Jesus Appear to Abraham?

Genesis 17:1 - And when Abram was ninety nine years old, Jehovah appeared to Abram and said to him, I am the Almighty God! Walk before me and be perfect; -- Green's Literal.

Many claim that Jesus is the God of the Old Testament who appeared to Abraham, and thus that in Genesis 17:1, it was Jesus as the second person of the alleged Trinity who appeared to Abraham.

In Genesis 17:1, it is obviously the one person who is "God" in Hebrews 1:1 who is appeared to his prophet Abraham. 

In Genesis 17:2, Jehovah promises to make a covenant with Abraham. Verse 7 shows that this covenant is made not only with Abraham, but also the "seed" of Abraham. The final application of this is to "Christ", the only descendant of Abraham who actually fully kept the Law Covenant. Jesus proved himself to be that true "seed" of Abraham, as the apostle Paul writes:

Galatians 3:16 Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. He doesn't say, "To seeds," as of many, but as of one, "To your seed," which is Christ. 

Galatians 3:17 Now I say this. A covenant confirmed beforehand by God in Christ, the law, which came four hundred and thirty years after, does not annul, so as to make the promise of no effect. -- World English.

Paul is obviously speaking of the covenant that Jehovah spoke of in Genesis 17. Paul does not identify Jesus as being Jehovah who makes this covenant, but rather as Christ with whom the covenant is made.

If Jesus is Jehovah of Genesis 17:1, this would mean that Jesus made a covenant with himself. Actually, Galatians 3:16,17 proves that Jehovah in Genesis 17:1 is not Jesus, but rather it is the God and Father of Jesus. Jesus also spoke of this covenant with Abraham as a covenant for a kindgom:

Luke 22:29 - And, I, covenant unto you - as my Father hath covenanted unto me - a kingdom. -- Rotherham's Emphasized Bible.

Oddly, most translations do not reveal that Jesus was speaking here of a covenant that his Father made with him. That this is the covenant made with Abraham is confirmed in Galatians 3, and Jesus extended this covenant with his followers, so that "If you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's seed and heirs according to promise." -- Galatians 3:29.

It should be apparent that by the above comparison of spiritual revealing with spiritual revealing (2 Corinthians 2:13) that it was the God and Father of Jesus who appeared to Abraham, who made the covenant with Abraham and with Abraham's seed, which is Christ (and all who belong to Christ).

Acts 9:5; 26:14-18 – Who Are You, Lord? - c

Acts 9:5 - He said, "Who are you, Lord?" The Lord said, "I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting.

Acts 26:14 We all fell to the ground, and I heard a voice saying to me in Aramaic, ‘Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me? It is hard for you to kick against the goads.’

Acts 26:15 “Then I asked, ‘Who are you, Lord?’ ” ‘I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting,’ the Lord replied.

Acts 26:16 ‘Now get up and stand on your feet. I have appeared to you to appoint you as a servant and as a witness of what you have seen of me and what I will show you.

Acts 26:17 I will rescue you from your own people and from the Gentiles. I am sending you to them

Acts 26:18 to open their eyes and turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, so that they may receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by faith in me.'”– World English

Acts 26:14-18 is sometimes cited as proof that Jesus is Jehovah, most often to support the trinity or oneness doctrines..

We know that some refer to Saul’s usage of the word “Lord” in Acts 26:15, and the statement “the Lord replied”, and claim by this that Saul was addressing the one whom he speaking to as being the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Such usually claim that the Greek word often transliterated as KURIOS in the NT represents Jehovah. It is true that in many instances in the extant Greek manuscripts, we find that the Holy Name has been replaced with forms of the Greek word KURIOS; this, however, does not mean that KURIOS in the NT is always speaking of Jehovah, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. 

One author states regarding Acts 9:5:

In the Old Testament, the Hebrew word translated "LORD" is the unpronounceable Yhvh, a name which specifically refers to the God of the Bible (to make it pronounceable, Yhvh is referred to as Yahweh, Yahovah or even Jehovah after the addition of vowels). Since there is no equivalent in Greek, kyrios, the Greek word which means "master" or "lord" is used in the New Testament to refer to the God of the Bible. In Acts 9:5, however, Saul is using kyrios in its general sense.

Of course, YHVH in English is not pronounceable, but the name was pronounced in ancient Hebrew. Some seem to think that only the Holy Name of God was written without vowels in ancient Hebrew. The truth is that ancient Hebrew had no written vowels for any word at all; such was not exclusive God's Holy Name. This does not mean that ancient Hebrew had no vowel sounds; the vowel sounds were used when words were spoken although they were not shown in the written words. For more concerning the Holy Name, one may see our site on God's Holy Name.

The assumption is presented as being a fact that there was no equivalent in the Greek, evidently referring to the Koine Greek of the first century. It this be true, then it would also be true of most, if not all, of the Old Testament Hebrew names. Yet, we do find Greek forms of many other Hebrew names that are presented in the New Testament, including forms of Elijah, Moses, Joshua (Jesus), Isaiah, Jeremiah, etc. There is no reason to imagine and assume that forms of the Greek word KURIOS was used to replace the Holy Name because there was no Greek form of the Holy Name.

After presenting some discussion of how the Holy Name is presented as "Kyrios" (another way of transliterating KURIOS) in the New Testament, the author concludes that Kyrios in Acts 9:5 is not being used in that scripture for "Jehovah", but rather in its "general sense" of "master" or "lord." We do commend the author for this conclusion, although we believe that Saul was, in effect, saying, "Sir, who are you?"

One states:

The name Lord summed up all that the Godhead implied. It was a word that could be applied only to Deity. Israel's conception was: "The Lord our God is one Lord." Israel held that God would never give to another, the name of Lord.

Christ accepted that title, and the early saints asserted it. Christ came in the Name of the Lord, He also came bearing the Name, Lord. This was the core of the confession of faith that marked the early Church. They were baptized in the Name of the Lord Jesus, because they confessed that Jesus was Lord, the same as the Father was Lord, and the Spirit was Lord. Neighbour, Robert E. "Wells of Living Water Commentary on Acts 9:5". "Living Water". .

Evidently, the author confuses the Holy Name -- often rendered in English as Jehovah -- as being "Lord". This may be because of the way most translations have changed the Holy name to "Lord" or "the Lord" in most places. Additionally, in the extant New Testament manuscripts we find the the Holy Name has often been changed to forms of the word often transliterated as KURIOS, meaning, Lord, Master, Sir. Due to this confusion, even many Bible scholars inaccurately present the Holy Name as meaning, Lord. For more regarding how the Holy Name has been replaced in the extant manuscripts, we recommend our site:

The Holy Name of God

Nevertheless, it is this confusion of the Holy Name with forms of Kurios that forms the basis of the idea that Saul, when he used “Lord,” meant Jehovah, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

There is no indication in Acts 9:5; 26:15 that Saul thought he was speaking to the God of Abraham. Indeed, if he already knew who it was who was speaking to him, there would have been no need for Paul to have asked the question, “Who are you?” In other words, if he did not know who it was who was addressing him, why would he calling that one the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob by use of the term "Lord?"

Adam Clarke lets us know that Saul's question was:

Who art thou, Sir? He had no knowledge who it was that addressed him, and would only use the term Κυριε, as any Roman or Greek would, merely as a term of civil respect. -- Clarke, Adam. "Commentary on Acts 9:5". "The Adam Clarke Commentary". 

The same applies to the fact that Saul bowed to his knees before this “master” who was speaking to him. Some have claimed that Saul bowed before Jesus in recognition of Jesus' being the God of Israel. The truth is that Saul certainly would not have given homage due only to the Almighty to someone whom he did not know. Such obeisance was common among the Hebrew people and was often given to kings and others; such homage, of itself, does not mean giving homage that is only due to the Most High. 

Albert Barnes tells us:

The word “Lord” here, as is frequently the case in the New Testament, means no more than “sir,” John 4:19. It is evident that Saul did not as yet know that this was the Lord Jesus. He heard a voice as of a man; he heard himself addressed, but by whom the words were spoken was to him unknown. In his amazement and confusion, he naturally asked who it was that was thus addressing him. -- Barnes, Albert. "Commentary on Acts 9:5". "Barnes' Notes on the New Testament".  1870.

John Gill states:

For he knew not whether it was God, or an angel, or who it was that spake to him; he knew not Christ by his form or voice, as Stephen did, when he saw him standing at the right hand of God; he was in a state of ignorance, and knew neither the person, nor voice of Christ, and yet his heart was so far softened and wrought upon, that he was desirous of knowing who he was. -- Gill, John. "Commentary on Acts 9:5". "The New John Gill Exposition of the Entire Bible". 1999.

The conclusion is that there is nothing in these scriptures that offer any proof that Jesus is Jehovah, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Jesus is definitely not the "one God of whom are all," (1 Corinthians 8:6) nor is he the one person who spoke through the prophet Moses. -- Hebrews 1:1,2; Deuteronomy 18:15-19; Exodus 3:14,15; Acts 3:13-26.