In verses 3 to 12, I wonder were they annoyed when they could not get to Jesus because of the crowd? Did they break open the roof in a temper? Probably not, because we read in v 5 "When Jesus saw their faith". So, they had faith when they broke open the roof. But you can still have faith and be annoyed.

Note that it was a "their" faith. I assume the sick man also had faith. But I do like the fact that others' faith on your behalf can also have results.

Notice, in v 7, the sad fact that those Jews who should have respected Jesus and who He was, merely give him the title of "this" (the word "man" in the A.V. is not in the original, they've added it in italics). They gave Him no credit at all for being able to forgive sins. Their means of forgiveness was only by the sacrifices provided by the law. In one thing they were correct: it is only God who can forgive sins. Their mistake was their failing to recognize that the man they merely called "this" was God Himself.

Verses 13 to 17.
Here we see how Jesus not only called a publican, who was not popular with the Jews, but He also went into his house and ate with him. It's obvious, really: we know that Jesus came to save sinners, but would we have approved if we had been in the place of the scribes and Pharisees? Personally, I think I would have been critical like they were.

One thing here that I sometimes wonder about: Jesus often seemed to call the scribes and Pharisees "righteous". But He also says to them " if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins." (John 8:24) Here, in Luke 2 v 17 Jesus mentions "those that are whole" and "the righteous". Now, He is using "whole" as an illustration of those who need remedial help, as do sinners.

What do you think?