In Mark 5 we have the incident of Jarius daughter and the woman with a unstopped flow of blood.  Jesus demonstrates care for these incredibly diverse people.  Mark 4-5 shows Jesus in control of the forces of nature, demons, sickness and even death.  We also see the compassion of Jesus caring for both the physical and emotional needs of those who came to him.  There are also a number of curiosities worth exploring.

Introduction

In a broader context this episode forms the third miracle story in the set from Mark 4:35 the calming the storm, the healing of Legion and now the healing of the women.  Through the process Jesus demonstrates power over the wind & sea, the demons, uncleanness and death.  Little wonder the disciples are asking themselves who is this?!

One of the features of the stories in context is that every case as it relates to people Jesus brings healing and restoration, not just treating the defilement but also offering inclusion and new life to those he touched[1].   To put that another way – we are told by James that thoughts and prayers aren’t enough, we can’t say be warmed and filled.  But Jesus also demonstrates practical help is not enough – people need social inclusion for real healing.  People need to be healed AND restored into community.

The story of the Jarius’ daughter and the woman with the bleeding is found in Matt 9, Mark 5 and Luke 8.  We will stick to the telling in Mark as the earliest recording of the incident (because yes it seems to me that Marcan Priority – ie the theory that Mark’s gospel was written first – has good evidence).

Along the way we will take note of the amazing mercy, and tolerance of our Lord as he changes the lives of these two females.  They have remarkable similarities and differences in their stories.  Both 12 years of life or trouble, a beloved daughter, unclean and defiling under the Mosaic Law.  One was the daughter of a man of position and presumable at least some means, the other a social outcast and broke.  Yet Jesus saves both equally because he is there for everybody. 

Jesus found time to help both parties when their needs appeared to be in conflict.  The urgency of Jarius request was valid – any delay would be disastrous and so it turned out.  Maybe sometimes we can be a Jarius and wonder why Jesus is putting other people first – at our expense.  Maybe it can bring us to a point of throwing it in, not bothering the master anymore.  But real faith is enduring past the point of possibility – and it is there that Jesus will take charge and do more than we imagined, more than we would ask.

Mark’s style

Mark’s gospel is generally accepted as the first written and likely formed part of the background material which Luke and Matthew drew upon in their accounts (Luke 1:1 specifically mentions other pre-existing accounts).  We likely are familiar with Mark’s sense of urgency as a writer and his love the of word immediately.  The following graphic shows the relative frequency of the Greek word in Mark versus every other book it occurs in the NT.

Mark is also fond of the

historical present tense (151 times), a Greek construction that uses present tense verbs in narrative to describe past actions. Though characteristic of a less-refined Greek style, it also gives the narrative a vivid style, like an on-the-spot report.[2]

As part of this style when Mark includes incidents he tends to use a lot of vivid detail. 

Mark’s style is also expansive, with lots of vivid and colorful detail, which Matthew (and to a lesser extent, Luke) tends to abbreviate. Mark’s account of the raising of Jairus’s daughter, for example, is made up of 345 Greek words, while Matthew’s is only 139 (Mark 5:21–43; cf. Matt 9:18–26)[3]

Another feature of Mark’s gospel is his tendency to sandwich one story in the middle of another.  This chapter is an example where the healing of Jarius’ daughter sandwiches the healing of another women.  This is called an intercalation.  A similar structure occurs with

1. the cursed fig tree (which brackets the temple cleansing)
2. the difficult with Jesus’ family which brackets the Beelzebub debate,
3. Jesus trial and the sandwiches story of Peter’s denial.[4]

Capernaum the location

This is a picture of the 4^th century synagogue standing more or less today in Capernaum. This synagogue was built in the 4^th centaury in Capernaum on the black basalt foundations of the previous original which was likely destroyed in the failed war of independence with the Romans in AD66-70. 

While the place name is not specifically in Mark 5 given the structure compared to Mark 1:21 suggests this was Capernaum and Matt 9:1 certainly places the incident there.  Today there are the ruins of what is likely a 4^th century synagogue featuring white marble.  The original synagogue likely did not feature Greek columns and was probably featured the local basalt store.  Quite likely the generous and faithful centurion in Luke 7 contributed to the building of the synagogue – probably in some expansions or repairs.

The approach of Jarius

Jarius was the synagogue ruler.  We know a little about this position, from initially the NT but also later Misnah writings and various Greek and Roman sources along with around 30 inscriptions.  The ruler of the synagogue was an important administrative and political role.  They directed the order of service, coordinated admin and also per Acts 13:15 & 18:8 interacted with the Greek or Roman authorities on behalf of the synagogue[5].

The heads of the Capernaum synagogue had history with Jesus.  In Mark 3:1-6 we find the incident of the man with the withered hand in the synagogue that Jesus healed on the Sabbath. So Jarius had a front row seat to the outrage of the leadership and plots to kill Jesus which followed even if he wasn’t personally involved.  Now he is either reversing his past behaviour or breaking with his social cliché.

In Mark 5:22 Jarius comes and falls at the feet of Jesus.  This is a public demonstration that he has no hope but Jesus – any consequences of associating with Jesus are forgotten in his desperation to find help for his daughter.  Luke 8:42 says she is the only daughter of Jarius and later we learn she is 12 years old.  Parents in normal circumstances will do anything for their kids.  In this instance Jarius is prepared to lay aside his position and beg Jesus for help. 

It is a bit unusual that Jarius is named.  His name means either he enlightens or he awakens[6] which some have sort to link to the daughter being raised.  However Mark doesn’t appear to put any emphasis on this in the healing scene nor is wordplay a typical Mark style.  My suggestion – zero evidence – is that Jarius alone is named in this section because he was known or remembered in Mark’s community either as a prominent person or a believer?  We don’t know and I think that is part of the humbling goodness that we are reminded Mark wasn’t written to us, we don’t share the background knowledge of his first audience as much as the gospel is of value to us.

Dead or near death?

A bit of an aside but an interesting one.

In Mark 5:22 Jarius says his daughter is near death, the Greek means

Extremely, i.e., in extremity, to be at the last gasp, at the point of death[7]

She was on her last legs we might say.  At death’s door.  This situation changes in Mark 5:35 when the servants arrive and say the girl is dead and question whether there is any further point in worrying Jesus.  Now she is dead nothing else can be done.

In Matthew 9:18 however Jarius’ speech is quite different: 

As he was saying these things, a ruler came, bowed low before him, and said, “My daughter has just died, but come and lay your hand on her and she will live

In Matthew the daughter is already dead, there are no messengers and never is there a suggestion that it’s too late don’t worry Jesus anymore.  Matthew’s rendition is significantly shorter missing much of the interaction with the woman as well.

Apart from Schrodinger’s cat things cannot be both dead and alive.  The dead/not dead different is a significant change in the story and one (of many examples) which creates trouble for some models of inspiration. It is also an instance which is readily pointed to by atheists as evidence of Biblical fallibility.  However with the reality of Marcan Priority firmly in mind and acceptance that we are not reading diary notes in the gospels but rather religious testimony we need not be concerned.

The unnamed woman

In v25 we pivot from Jarius to a woman with a flow of blood. Contemporary Greek medical tracts demonstrate the specific language or works used of the woman’s condition refer not a hemorrhage but rather an ongoing menstrual flow[8].  Under Mosaic Law this would make her unclean per Lev 15:25 and surrounding verses.  Anything she touched or sat on anyone who touched her or her clothes would be unclean until they bathed.  She herself would be unclear for 7 days AFTER it stopped.

These purity laws very much remained in place through first century Jewry[9], [10].  The woman was taboo, as is evident in her approach to Jesus. Jarius as a religious leader was part of the group of men, the system, which excluded her and people like her from the synagogue.  How ironic that Jarius, part of the religious framework that excluded this woman, now finds his needs put to one side while this woman interacts with Jesus.

In v26 we are told that the woman had not only endured this for 12 years, she had spent EVERYTHING on doctors. Ancient medicine in some ways achieved remarkable things.  They could do some eye surgery and successfully drilled into skulls at times (and the patient’s survived!)  But – no surprise – a lot of the doctors were just flat out awful.  Among the cures for this specific condition (see [11], [12]) were:

• A big scare
• Eating grain found in a mule’s dung
• Drink wine containing rubber powder, alum and garden crocuses
• A dose of Persian onions cooked in wine
• Carry the ash of an ostrich’s egg in a cloth

I am not a doctor but I really don’t reckon any of those would work.

This woman had enough money that she consulted MANY doctors and now had spent everything without success but rather she was worse.  Physically she was worse and she was now financially ruined.  What a terrible situation she is now all – part the point of hope.

Side bar – I know a number of commentators in the Christadelphian community (eg Alfred Norris) suggest the woman is perhaps the mother of the child.  This speculation fails to appreciate Mark’s pattern of intercalations – unrelated linked stories and the specific medical condition she had. The commonality of the 12 years is a link between the stories of contrast not an identifier.

In v28 the woman’s plan, her thinking, is explained – she thought that if she touched the fringe of Jesus clothing she would be healed.  Note Matt 9:18 and Luke 8 :44 say she was specifically looking to touch the fringe of his robe.

This most likely referred to the blue fringe of the robe which Numbers 15:38 and Deut 22:12 proscribed[13].

Side bar on reading in too much!  It is tempting to link her thinking to the OT and see this through the lens of Jesus being the high priest.  In the OT the garments of the High Priest were unique in that contact with them made other things holy per Exod 30:29 – this was in stark contrast to the usual process where only uncleanness spread.  But the high priest was different – they were a super cleaner if you like – spreading holiness by touch.  This was further amplified in second temple Judaism like the Wisdom of Solomon 18:20-24[14]   But as interesting as that is, the woman is not equating Jesus with the High Priest.  She is not seeking ritual cleansing she is after physical healing.  I think the High priest’s garment link is fascinating – I think Jesus is our high priest and he is the source of holiness so while all a truism it is not the truth Mark is pointing to.

The woman appears to be thinking at the level of magic rather than a well-formed understanding and faith.  It was not unique to her eg Mark 3:10 says others shared this view of touching him to be healed and Mark 6:56 says many sought to touch his fringe – although perhaps more with Jesus’ permission. The idea of power or luck being conveyed by clothing was known in Greek culture – Plutarch mentions one such example[15].  Unlike say Jarius, she doesn’t verbalise any faith per se.  She doesn’t acknowledge – albeit in some limited way – the position of Jesus as Legion did.  She makes no appeal to Jesus based on him being the son of David. 

This woman sneaks her way into the crowd – disregarding the risk to others purity – so she can touch a magic piece of cloth to be healed. What a contrast to Jarius.  He makes an open and humiliating approach to get Jesus’ help – this woman (perpetually humiliated) nearly ruins the rescue mission for Jarius daughter

The contrast

Jarius and the woman have many stark contrasts:

• One is named the other is anonymous
• One is honourable/prominent the other is a social outcast
• He has wealth, she is destitute
• Jarus has a family, the woman is alone and likely without any family
• Jarius approaches openly whereas the woman is surreptitious
• He asks Jesus to lay hands on the girl whereas the woman seeks to touch Jesus’ fringe

There is a stark contrast between Jarius and the woman.  They are totally different people.  Their circumstances vary in every way possible. The only things that these two persons share in common is that

1. they both have heard about Jesus,
2. they desperately desire healing, and
3. they have run out of options.[16]

Mark puts them together because despite all their differences Jesus is there for BOTH of them.  It was a small community – Jarius would have had an opinion about this woman.  I suspect she had one about him.  I’m sure I don’t have to further underline the point here.  Jesus exists for every part of the human spectrum.

Capernaum and its narrow streets

Capernaum was a relatively poor fishing village and while some scholars estimate a large population I believe the most reasonable estimate is circa 600-1500 people at the time of Jesus.  Key evidence for this as suggested by the Lexham Bible Dictionary[17] includes:

• The home/building sizes
• The lack of any luxury items like fancy pottery, oils of other goods in any of the ruins.  It wasn’t big enough to have significantly wealthy people
• The lack of any administrative or civic buildings

The key feature we want to observe here is the small narrow streets – we are not dealing with the broad boulevards of modern cities.

Well the woman has managed to get through the crowd – probably low down because her target is the bottom tassels of Jesus’ robe. Jesus feels the miracle happen – an interesting and unique description – in v30.  He states that someone has touched him. His disciples express exasperation at Jesus for his question – in those narrow streets EVERYONE was touching him – what a silly question to ask who touched him!  But Jesus was right. 

Daughter

In v 32 Jesus looks to see who did this.  The Greek is singular feminine, suggesting that Jesus knew he was looking for a woman and he effectively forces her into the open[18].  Garland in the NIV Application Commentary makes the following comment:

Why does Jesus call attention to what she has done? Has she not suffered enough public embarrassment? Could he not let her go in peace with a silent wink? The public embarrassment caused by singling her out signifies his individual care for her. He will not allow her to slip away and remain anonymous. He forces the issue so that when she leaves healed, she will leave knowing that the one who healed her knows her and cares for her. She is a person who is worth taking time with and addressing.  It turns out that the healing does not come free. Jesus forces her to step out in faith and be identified. It will not bankrupt her as the physicians had done, but she must publicly acknowledge her debt to Jesus, that he is the source of her healing. When she does, he blesses her and announces that her faith has made her well. Faith, then—not any magical properties in Jesus’ clothing[19]

In v34 after she confesses, Jesus calls her daughter.  Luke 13:16 has a healing where Jesus calls a woman a daughter of Abraham.  Zacchaeus the tax collector will be redeemed and declared a son of Abraham in Luke 19:9.  Jesus does this to demonstrate the worth of these individuals even though they perhaps might have fallen into dishonour – they were family so should be saved rather than rejected[20]. 

In this particular instance Jesus doesn’t call the woman a daughter of Abraham though.  He just calls her daughter.  I’m pretty sure this is the only time Jesus addresses a woman as daughter in the sense of his relationship to her rather than “”daughter of…”. 

Jesus frequently does more than just heal the physical issue.  He regularly addresses the social and religious maladies.  Here by publicly proclaiming the woman as healed and referring to her as his daughter he makes an important contribution to her future prospects.  Everyone now knows she is healed.

Obviously in Mark’s account this serves to contrast to Jarius’ daughter.  Both individuals were precious and loved – even though at the start of the two stories only one female knew she was loved.

It says something very wonderful about the Lord that he publicly calls this woman daughter.  Full healing is more than physical relief.  Effective charity is more than providing for material needs.  Jesus modelled an inclusion, affirming an emotional connection and empathy.  To feel included, loved, valued having experienced a long period of solation and rejection is a tremendous gift. 

There is no point anymore

In v35 Jarius gets the terrible news.  There is no more time his daughter is dead.  “why trouble the teacher anymore”?” say his servants

Jarius may well have thought the same thing.  He had just heard Jesus say the power had left him – who knows whether these was anything left for his little girl.

What agony. Jarius saw Jesus working in someone else’s life before him.  Jesus allowed himself to be interrupted.  Jesus then stopped and engaged with a frankly unclean no-body.  Meanwhile his girl died.  But he asked Jesus for help first!  So unfair.  Sometimes we will experience a Jarius moment.  Despite asking it seems Jesus might be otherwise engaged helping others and then our problem gets worse.  Our problem goes beyond solving.  And in that moment it seems like giving up is the only way forward.

In v36 Jesus tells Jarius to stop being anxious – a negated present imperative implying Jarius had already begun being anxious, he was falling apart[21]

Jarius was a man who was in charge. He had come to Jesus while he had faith but also while hope was possible.  Now he is done.  And then Jesus takes charge.  I love this.  Now Jesus will drive the action towards Jarius’ daughter.  He tells Jarius to believe but makes no demands, conducts no test on Jarius.  The belief I want says Jesus, goes beyond the miraculous to the impossible.  Just believe now. 

And what does belief look like? When the situation is impossible and Jesus asks for belief what does Jesus want from us?  Merely following.  Just walking after Jesus as he takes charge because he knows when it is time to act.  Sometimes that action comes long after we think there is no point anymore.  Just follow.  I love this demonstration of Jesus’ care.

Ejecting the scornful

So restricting the crowd an just allowing Peter, James and John to follow Jesus comes to the house where in v38 we read:

They came to the house of the synagogue ruler where he saw noisy confusion and people weeping and wailing loudly

Matt 9:23 records that Jesus saw the flute players as part of the crowd which is consistent with our knowledge of the practices of the time.

Several professional mourners were required even at the funeral of the poorest person; more mourners would assemble at the death of a member of a prominent family like this one. Because bodies decomposed rapidly in Palestine, mourners had to be assembled immediately upon someone’s death, and they had gathered before word even reached Jairus that his daughter had died. Messengers were normally dispatched immediately to bring a parent or spouse the sad news[22].

It is probable that one who held the rank of synagogue-ruler would be expected to hire a large number of professional mourners

In v39 Jesus says something very peculiar – the girl is not dead but sleeping.  In v40 they start mocking him as a result.  Luke 8:53 adds that they mocked him because they KNEW she was dead. But the girl is not Schrodinger’s cat, not some physics thought experiment – she cannot be both sleeping and dead.

How do we explain this apparent misstatement by Jesus?

1. Was she actually in a coma?
   1. The messengers said she was dead in v35.  Luke 8:55 says she was dead and her spirit returned to her and Matt 9:18 as we already mentioned says she was dead (albeit it is out of order!).  Matthew Mark and Luke all plainly say she was dead.  So she wasn’t sleeping literally or in a coma.
2. Did he mean she was dead but not really dead because he was going to raise her so she was really not dead because of his intentions so hence might as well be sleeping?
   1. This is pretty complicated and certainly nothing Mark (or the other gospels say) supports this reading.
3. Is he making a spiritual point about death is really just sleep like he does with Lazarus in John11?
   1. In John’s gospel Lazarus is a faithful friend AND the narrator immediately clarifies the meaning of the comment and then Jesus clarifies that Lazarus is actually dead to his disciples when they fail to grasp his real meaning (John 11:14)
4. A final option may be that our presuppositions about what truth is and requires are causing us to take a difficult reading versus a simpler one.  Perhaps Jesus cannot stand the noise and show of the fake mourning and wants to provide cover for Jarius and the family on the extend of the miracle which is about to happen.

Jesus puts the scorners outside in v40 – well actually

Their scepticism puts them outside. There will be no miracles for the scornful throng[23]

I love how Mark handles v40

And they began making fun of him. But he put them all outside and he took the child’s father and mother and his own companions and went into the room where the child was

Jarius is no longer the synagogue ruler as he was in v22 and 35 and 36 and 38.   When the chips are down Jesus leads not a ruler the child’s father with the mother into the room along with Peter James and John.  

The raising of the girl (in Aramaic)

This miracle has obvious parallels to the miracle resurrections performed by Elijah in 1 Kings 17:17-23 and and Elijah in 2 Kings 4:18-37.  There are some major differences though.  There is no putting everyone outside, prayer and stretching out on the child[24].  The simplicity of the miracle underscores Jesus’ power through the contrast with the Old Testament precedents.

In v41 we simply read

Then, gently taking the child by the hand, he said to her, “Talitha koum,” which means, “Little girl, I say to you, get up.”

I find it tremendously interesting that Mark provides an Aramaic expression here from Jesus’ mouth and provides the translation for his Greek audience.  Mark records a number of Aramaic sayings of Jesus along with some Aramaic place names – usually providing a translation[25].  It ought be evident that Jesus didn’t typically speak Greek when talking to the Jewish locals – this among other things demonstrates that Jesus spoke Aramaic[26] .  Interestingly Mark breaks out of the usual Greek writing to capture the specific articulation of Jesus in this and other incidents (like on the cross).  It shows an awareness in the text that usually the gospel are writers are translating Jesus words from Aramaic to Greek (and then of course we have them third hand in English).

Under the law in Lev 15:28 the woman with the flow of blood would be unclean for 7 days once the flow stopped and of course anyone who touched her would be unclean for 1 day.  In yet another connection anyone who touched the dead girl would be unclean for 7 days according to Num 19:11. 

I suspect what we are also seeing in these verses is Jesus protecting Jarius and his daughter.  By telling the mourners the girl was merely asleep perhaps Jarius wouldn’t have the 7 days of being unclean.  Also more than this by keeping the resurrection secret Jesus was protecting the young girl (and family) from becoming a sensation – or worse becoming the target of Jesus enemies as happened latter with Lazarus.

Whether this is correct or not what strikes me is again the practical care of Jesus.  In v43 he tells them to give the girl some food.  Jesus has a practical immediate care for people.  Here is the son of God, a man who could control the wind and waves – striking fear into his disciples – who could control the legion of demons, solve the impossible medical case and now raise the dead.  Yet for all that Mark has him providing this oh so practical care.  Given her some food.

Conclusion

So what are the takeouts?

1. Jesus cared for incredibly diverse people, with a range of understandings.  People who themselves shared nothing in common apart from their desperate need for Jesus.
2. His care reached beyond just solving the root causes.  Jesus demonstrated personal care for people and offered them social inclusion and acceptance.
3. We also see the how Jesus found time to help both parties when their needs appeared to be in conflict and, for Jarius, how that help came even when it seemed far too late and Jarius was likely anxious that Jesus was working with others and not his daughter

Mark presents a tale of a powerful active Messiah.  But while he can control the forces of nature and strike fear into the hearts of his disciples.  He can cause a stampede of pigs and control the demonic forces of Legion’s mind.  Yet Jesus is a man who cares.  Jesus has time for people and extends grace in remarkable ways to all who seek him.

by Daniel Edgecombe

---

[1] Mark L. Strauss, Mark, ed. Clinton E. Arnold, Zondervan Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2014), 224.

[2] Mark L. Strauss, , ed. Clinton E. Arnold, Zondervan Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2014), 46.

[3] Mark L. Strauss, , ed. Clinton E. Arnold, Zondervan Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2014), 46.

[4] Mark L. Strauss, , ed. Clinton E. Arnold, Zondervan Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2014), 47-48.

[5] Claudia J. Setzer, “Rulers of the Synagogue,” ed. David Noel Freedman, The Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary (New York: Doubleday, 1992), 842.

[6] Joel Marcus, Mark 1–8: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, vol. 27, Anchor Yale Bible (New Haven; London: Yale University Press, 2008), 356.

[7] Spiros Zodhiates, The Complete Word Study Dictionary: New Testament (Chattanooga, TN: AMG Publishers, 2000).

[8] Adela Yarbro Collins and Harold W. Attridge, Mark: A Commentary on the Gospel of Mark, Hermeneia—a Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2007), 280.

[9] Adela Yarbro Collins and Harold W. Attridge, Mark: A Commentary on the Gospel of Mark, Hermeneia—a Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2007), 284.

[10] Joel Marcus, Mark 1–8: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, vol. 27, Anchor Yale Bible (New Haven; London: Yale University Press, 2008), 357–358.

[11] Joel Marcus, Mark 1–8: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, vol. 27, Anchor Yale Bible (New Haven; London: Yale University Press, 2008), 358.

[12] William L. Lane, The Gospel of Mark, The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1974).

[13] Richard C. Blight, An Exegetical Summary of Mark 1–8 (Dallas, TX: SIL International, 2012), 262.

[14] Fletcher-Louis, C. (2013). Priests and Priesthood. In J. B. Green, J. K. Brown, & N. Perrin (Eds.), Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, Second Edition (p. 702). Downers Grove, IL; Nottingham, England: IVP Academic; IVP.

[15] Adela Yarbro Collins and Harold W. Attridge, Mark: A Commentary on the Gospel of Mark, Hermeneia—a Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2007), 282.

[16] David E. Garland, , The NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1996), 224.

[17] Amanda Cookson Carver,  ed. John D. Barry et al., The Lexham Bible Dictionary (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2016).

[18] Joel Marcus, Mark 1–8: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, vol. 27, Anchor Yale Bible (New Haven; London: Yale University Press, 2008), 359.

[19] David E. Garland, Mark, The NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1996), 221.

[20] One can discern in the teachings of Jesus (and as early as the preaching of John the Baptist) a definite attempt to recover among Palestinian Jews a larger sense of kin and cooperation on the basis of shared lineage with Abraham. Thus Jesus will shame the synagogue officials by reminding them that the woman whom he has healed is “a daughter of Abraham,” a sister to those who would water their animals on the sabbath but deny her relief from her crippled, wretched state (Lk 13:16). He declares that the despised Zacchaeus is “also a son of Abraham” (Lk 19:9) to be brought back to the family rather than hated as a “sinner,” with kinship bonds and affections denied (Lk 19:7). Luke 15:1–32 forms an extended address relevant to this problem, particularly the parable of the two sons. Jesus criticizes the scribes and Pharisees for acting as loveless brothers toward their wayward kin, those who respond to Jesus’ call to repent and return to righteous conduct. It is they, the Pharisees, who should be ashamed of their breach of the kinship ethic, including their refusal to show the love for their sisters and brothers that would delight the heart of their Father, and their lack of concern for working together to redeem their kin from the dishonorable lifestyles into which they had fallen.   deSilva, D. A. (2012). Honor, patronage, kinship & purity: unlocking new testament culture (p. 165). Westmont, IL: InterVarsity Press.

[21] Joel Marcus, Mark 1–8: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, vol. 27, Anchor Yale Bible (New Haven; London: Yale University Press, 2008), 362.

[22] Craig S. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1993), Mk 5:35–39.

[23] David E. Garland, Mark, The NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1996), 222.

[24] Robert A. Guelich, Mark 1–8:26, vol. 34A, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 1989), 303.

[25] Robert A. Guelich, Mark 1–8:26, vol. 34A, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 1989), 302.

[26] DeFrancisco, J. J. (n.d.). Which Language Did Jesus Speak – Aramaic, Hebrew, or Greek? .

Healing two women in Mark 5