The Gospel of Mark 5:21 - 6:6 - The result of faith and disbelief
After healing the demonized man, Jesus returns to His side of the lake, probably Capernaum. On His way to heal a sick girl, a woman who had been bleeding for many years touched Him and was healed. He continues on to heal the girl but she dies before He can get there. Encouraging the father to have faith He ends up raising her from the dead. After these great works He goes to Nazareth where He is met with only rejection and insults.
Discussion:
The other side
“And when Jesus had crossed again in the boat to the other side, a great crowd gathered about him, and he was beside the sea. Then came one of the rulers of the synagogue, Jairus by name, and seeing him, he fell at his feet and implored him earnestly, saying, “My little daughter is at the point of death. Come and lay your hands on her, so that she may be made well and live. And he went with him.”
Mark 5:21-24a (ESV)
Mark only says that Jesus crossed over to the other side (5:21), however, when Luke tells this same story in 8:40 he says that Jesus returned, making it likely that Jesus is returning to Capernaum (France 2002, 235). If this is true, this would explain why the name of the Synagogue ruler is given, since this was probably the local synagogue that Jesus normally attended since moving to Capernaum. I would assume that this man had known Jesus for some months, which would explain the way he came to Jesus. Given the nature of the man’s request, we know that he believed that Jesus could perform miracles. His request also represents something important, he clearly believes that God is the source of these great works. Thus, this synagogue ruler shows himself as very different from the normal religious elite that we have seen so far. It is further possible that the term “one of the rulers of the synagogue” may point to a difference between the different rulers, possibly that not all of them were against Jesus (Marcus 2008, 355–356). Jairus can be a Greek transliteration from two possible Hebrew names, one meaning “he enlightens”, the other meaning “he awakens”, the second possibility being extremely significant to the story (Marcus 2008, 356)!
Either way, Jesus immediately goes with the man in order to heal his daughter. But while they are on the way, they are quickly interrupted.
A discharge of blood
“And a great crowd followed him and thronged about him. And there was a woman who had had a discharge of blood for twelve years, and who had suffered much under many physicians, and had spent all that she had, and was no better but rather grew worse.”
Mark 5:24b-26 (ESV)
There is some discussion on what exactly was wrong with this women. The two primary options, from the context, seem to be a woman who has a continuous discharge of blood, or perhaps a woman who had another kind of discharge (Marcus 2008, 357). Either way, this woman would have been considered unclean, and would have been cut off from temple worship. Not only this, but being in a continuous state of impurity she would be unable to be intimate with her husband (if she had one). She must have lived a life of complete misery (Lane 1974, 191-192)! The Jewish people taught that they must avoid contact with such a woman (France 2002, 236), and thus, she would have lived not only with the physical torment, but also with extreme loneliness. It was this life, one of extended physical ailment, social rejection, loneliness, and religious isolation, that drove her to break the social norms and to approach Jesus and touch His clothes.
She touched Him
“She had heard the reports about Jesus and came up behind him in the crowd and touched his garment. For she said, “If I touch even his garments, I will be made well.” And immediately the flow of blood dried up, and she felt in her body that she was healed of her disease.”
Mark 5:27-29 (ESV)
This was shocking that she would be willing to touch Him. Why? Because by touching Him she put Him into a state of ritual impurity where He would have to be removed from the community until nightfall (Edwards 2002, 163). We know that they believed that uncleanness could be transferred from one person to another or one thing to a person (Haggai 2:13). However, holiness cannot be transferred (Haggai 2:12), something is either set apart or not. However, there is one exception to this rule, holiness can be transferred from someone’s clothing!
“And when they go out into the outer court to the people, they shall put off the garments in which they have been ministering and lay them in the holy chambers. And they shall put on other garments, lest they transmit holiness to the people with their garments.”
Ezekiel 44:19 (ESV)
This is the point, Jesus did not become unclean by touching her, just like He didn’t become a leper by touching a leper. Instead, I believe her touching His clothing was done out of faith, because she believed the Lord and believed that Holiness could be transferred to her through His clothing! This is why she chose to touch His clothing!
The flow of blood, the physical issue, was so severe that she knew immediately when it was healed! This must have given her such a shock, but also such an extreme sense of relief! Imagine suffering from something for twelve years, and then suddenly being healed in an instant!
Immediately, Jesus knew someone had “touched Him”, because He felt power rush out of Him and into her.
Who touched me?
“And Jesus, perceiving in himself that power had gone out from him, immediately turned about in the crowd and said, “Who touched my garments?” And his disciples said to him, “You see the crowd pressing around you, and yet you say, ‘Who touched me?’ ” And he looked around to see who had done it.”
Mark 5:30-32 (ESV)
The disciples were shocked and perplexed! Jesus, what do you mean who touched you, don’t you see all these people around you? Yet Jesus knew that someone had touched Him, not because they were near Him, nor because of His fame, but because they had faith for something.
The woman must have retreated immediately, because it says that she came and fell down before Him. She was probably in fear and trembling for two reasons. One, she knew that she had broken social norms and also religious rules about touching someone while in an unclean state, thus, from their perspective, making Him unclean (France 2002, 238). However, she must have also been shocked by the rush of power into her, and the immediate healing. I’m sure she is looking at Jesus with shock and also some fear. But He responded with compassion and love.
Daughter…
“But the woman, knowing what had happened to her, came in fear and trembling and fell down before him and told him the whole truth. And he said to her, “Daughter, your faith has made you well; go in peace, and be healed of your disease.”
Mark 5:33-34 (ESV)
Jesus calling her daughter, was clearly a term of respect (Marcus 2008, 360). He is seeking to put her at ease, for she is scared and fearful. But there is more here. For Jesus calling her daughter must be connected to the daughter of Jairus, thus further connecting the two stories. But what does this imply?
A Markan sandwich
It is possible that these two events really took place together. However, those who study Mark would immediately suspect a Markan sandwich, because there are writing style differences between the two stories and they use different tenses (Marcus 2008, 364). Mark is arranging these stories together to make a theological statement. So what is the point he is trying to make?
Mark finishes the narrative element by continuing the Markan sandwich as the Synagogue ruler continues on to his house so that Jesus can heal his daughter.
Do not fear, only believe
“While he was still speaking, there came from the ruler’s house some who said, “Your daughter is dead. Why trouble the Teacher any further?” But overhearing what they said, Jesus said to the ruler of the synagogue, “Do not fear, only believe.” And he allowed no one to follow him except Peter and James and John the brother of James. They came to the house of the ruler of the synagogue, and Jesus saw a commotion, people weeping and wailing loudly. And when he had entered, he said to them, “Why are you making a commotion and weeping? The child is not dead but sleeping.” And they laughed at him. But he put them all outside and took the child’s father and mother and those who were with him and went in where the child was. Taking her by the hand he said to her, “Talitha cumi,” which means, “Little girl, I say to you, arise.” And immediately the girl got up and began walking (for she was twelve years of age), and they were immediately overcome with amazement. And he strictly charged them that no one should know this, and told them to give her something to eat.”
Mark 5:35-43 (ESV)
Jesus overheard them saying that she had died but ignored it (Stein 2008, 272) and instead instructed the man to not fear, but to have faith. The man has just heard heartbreaking news, your daughter is dead! Yet Jesus knew what He would do, and encouraged the man to have faith even now! Do not look at the circumstances, trust in God! Remember the woman who was just healed, He can do the same for this man’s daughter (Guelich 1989, 300). The faith of the woman who had been healed of her blood flow then, was the lesson that was to encourage this man (Collins and Attridge 2007, 284–285).
We immediately notice that the women who was healed started with faith, was healed, and then felt fear. The man started with faith, but then was told by Jesus not to fear but to have faith, and then His daughter was raised. This is the point then, do not have fear, but believe in Jesus. Mark then moves on from these two stories, to end with a warning.
Many…. were astonished
“He went away from there and came to his hometown, and his disciples followed him. And on the Sabbath he began to teach in the synagogue, and many who heard him were astonished, saying, “Where did this man get these things? What is the wisdom given to him? How are such mighty works done by his hands? Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary and brother of James and Joses and Judas and Simon? And are not his sisters here with us?” And they took offense at him. And Jesus said to them, “A prophet is not without honor, except in his hometown and among his relatives and in his own household.”
Mark 6:1-4 (ESV)
Leaving Capernaum, Jesus returns to His hometown, where he grew up, Nazareth. Yet He is met with a very different attitude there, for they start by insulting Him, implying that He is just a simple carpenter or stone mason (Collins and Attridge 2007, 290). Not only this, but they continue, not addressing Him as Joseph’s son, as would be assumed, but by His mother. This was probably meant as an insult, to imply that Joseph was not His father but that he had been born of adultery (Marcus 2008, 375). After these insults the crowd turned further against Him, for they were offended. This is the same Greek word which means “stumbling block” (Edwards 2002, 173). Making things worse, it seems that the crowd’s reaction is similar to the Scribes when they claimed that Jesus was doing works by the power of the Devil (Marcus 2008, 379). Thus, it seems that the encounter went from bad to worse. Jesus has been insulted and fully rejected by His own people. This led Jesus to remark that a prophet was without honor in his own country, among his own people. This must have been heartbreaking to Jesus, for these were His people, His friends, the people He grew up with! This lack of faith and this hostile attitude limited His miracles and what He could do.
And He could do no mighty work there
“And he could do no mighty work there, except that he laid his hands on a few sick people and healed them. And he marveled because of their unbelief. And he went about among the villages teaching.”
Mark 6:5-6 (ESV)
It is important to remember that Jesus has the power of God, because He is God! Not only this, but often times He did miracles without the people necessarily having faith. If Jesus had done mighty miracles in this state, it would have brought only hard hearts and judgement. William L. Lane explains this well (Lane 1974, 204).
“In the presence of gross unbelief Jesus restricted his activity to the healing of a few sick individuals. It is not Mark’s intention to stress Jesus’ inability when he states that he could perform no miracles at Nazareth. His purpose is rather to indicate that Jesus was not free to exercise his power in these circumstances. The performance of miracles in the absence of faith could have resulted only in the aggravation of human guilt and the hardening of men’s hearts against God. The power of God which Jesus possessed could be materialized in a genuinely salutary fashion only when there was the receptivity of faith. Unbelief excluded the people of Nazareth from the dynamic disclosure of God’s grace that others had experienced.”
However, we must also acknowledge that a lack of faith did limit, because it limited the people (Stein 2008, 284)! This lack of faith was so severe that it shocked Jesus. And so we see the warning of Mark, we must have faith and believe in Jesus, lest we find ourselves with a hard heart and unable to receive miracles and blessings from Him.
Summary
This story starts with Jesus traveling to help a Synagogue ruler, because his daughter is sick. On the way a woman surprises Jesus by sneaking up and touching His clothing. She is immediately healed of a blood flow issue she has had for twelve years! She is embarrassed and fearful, for she has just broken Jewish cultural norms and touched someone while in a state of ritual impurity. Jesus comforts her though and speaks gently to her. Continuing on the man is met by people coming from his daughter explaining that his daughter has just died. Jesus encouraged Him to have faith and believe and resurrects her. After this Jesus moved on to Nazareth where He is met with insults and rejection. They do not have faith and Jesus was unable to do any mighty works.
Life Application
The synagogue ruler provides us a very good lesson when it comes to our lives. He is confronted with the very worst case scenario, his daughter has died. Yet, Jesus encouraged him to believe in Him. Do we have faith, even when we are met with the worst case, when life is failing all around us. Do we look to Jesus or our circumstances?
Questions to Consider
Do we judge those who are “unclean”, or do we see what Jesus does and see the person?
Do we have faith in Jesus or do we let our circumstances dictate if we have faith or not?
Connections
Matthew 9:18-26, 13:53-58
Luke 8:40-56
Outline
Jesus heals a woman who has been unclean with a blood flow for 12 years and raises a 12-year-old girl from the dead.
The people of Nazareth do not believe in Jesus and their lack of faith limited His miracles.
References-
R. T. France, The Gospel of Mark: A Commentary on the Greek Text, New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI; Carlisle: W.B. Eerdmans; Paternoster Press, 2002), 235.
Joel Marcus, Mark 1–8: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, vol. 27, Anchor Yale Bible (New Haven; London: Yale University Press, 2008), 355–356.
“Jairus. Gk Iairos. Most of Mark’s minor characters, including the two females healed in our story, are anonymous. The inclusion of Jairus’ name, therefore, may mean that it is significant; it could be the Greek transliteration either of Yāʾîr = “he enlightens” or of Yaʿîr = “he awakens” (see Guelich, 295). Either name would be appropriate for Jairus, since his seeing of Jesus is emphasized in our verse, and Jesus “awakens” his daughter from the sleep of death in 5:39–43.”
ibid, 356.
“a woman who had a flow of blood. Gk gynē ousa en rhysei haimatos, lit. “a woman being in a flow of blood”; cf. the similar construction “a man in an unclean spirit” in 1:23; 5:2, though there the expression should be taken more literally (see the NOTE on “in” in 1:23). The woman’s bleeding is probably vaginal; if it had been, say, “a little bleeding at the nose” (cf. van der Loos, Miracles, 510 n. 1), Mark would not have been so shy about specifying its location. Moreover, the linguistic background for the present phrase and for “the fountain of her blood” in 5:29 lies in statutes in Leviticus regarding the ritual uncleanness incurred by the menstruant (niddâ) and the woman with a vaginal discharge outside of her period (zābâ, lit. “oozer”; see Lev 12:7; 15:19–33; 20:18; cf. Selvidge, “Mark 5:25–34,” and S. Cohen, “Menstruants”); the Mishnah has a tractate devoted to each, with the zābâ being treated along with her male counterpart. As Cohen points out (“Menstruants,” 288–89), two third-century Christian documents, the Epistle to Basilides of Dionysius of Alexandria (chapter 2) and the Didascalia Apostolorum (chapter 26), confirm this diagnosis by treating the woman as akin to a menstruant. It is impossible to be certain whether the woman’s ailment is an abnormally heavy monthly flow (menorrhagia) or a chronic light hemorrhage (see van der Loos, Miracles, 509–10; Gundry, 279), but in view of the narrative’s emphasis on her immediate knowledge of the cure (5:29), a chronic condition is more likely; she is therefore, in Jewish terms, a zābâ (see Cohen, “Menstruants,” 278–81).
As a zābâ the woman would probably have been quarantined, since zābôt and niddôt seem to have been treated in this way in Second Temple and later Judaism (see e.g. 11QTemple 45:7–17; 46:16–18; 48:14–17; Josephus Ant. 3.261; m. Nid. 7:4; cf. Milgrom, Leviticus, 1.765). Cohen, to be sure, argues that the quarantine of zābôt and niddôt began only in the sixth or seventh century, when it is attested in the Beraita de Nidda; he cites our passage in support of this argument, since the story does not indicate that the woman, though clearly a zābâ, is regarded as impure or suffers isolation. The surreptitiousness of the woman’s approach to Jesus, however, is probably an indirect indication that she is ritually unclean and is violating a taboo by being out in public;”
ibid, 357.
William L. Lane, The Gospel of Mark, The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1974), 191–192.
R. T. France, The Gospel of Mark: A Commentary on the Greek Text, New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI; Carlisle: W.B. Eerdmans; Paternoster Press, 2002), 236.
“According to the Torah, a woman was unclean for seven days after her monthly period, but if she had a protracted gynecological problem, as does this woman, she remained unclean throughout its duration. Anyone who came into contact with her during menstruation would be banished until evening (Lev. 15:19–27). Josephus’s testimony that “the temple was closed to women during their menstruation” (War 5.227) indicates that this particular Torah ruling was carefully observed in Jesus’ day. Accordingly, a menstruating woman—and whoever touched her—was banished from the community until purification.”
James R. Edwards, The Gospel according to Mark, The Pillar New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI; Leicester, England: Eerdmans; Apollos, 2002), 163.
R. T. France, The Gospel of Mark: A Commentary on the Greek Text, New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI; Carlisle: W.B. Eerdmans; Paternoster Press, 2002), 238.
Joel Marcus, Mark 1–8: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, vol. 27, Anchor Yale Bible (New Haven; London: Yale University Press, 2008), 360.
“This “sandwich” is probably a Markan creation, like similar structures elsewhere in Mark (cf. 2:1–12; 3:20–35; 6:14–29; 11:12–25; 14:1–11; 14:54–72); each story is a self-contained unit, and there are significant stylistic differences between them: the one about Jairus is composed of short sentences dominated by the historical present, whereas the one about the woman is made up of long sentences filled with participles and dominated by the aorist (see Guelich, 292).”
Joel Marcus, Mark 1–8: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, vol. 27, Anchor Yale Bible (New Haven; London: Yale University Press, 2008), 364.
“The term παρακούσας (parakousas) in 5:36 can mean to “overhear” or to “ignore.” The seven times that it is used in the LXX and the only other use of the term in the NT (Matt. 18:17) all have the sense of “ignore” (Guelich 1989: 291n1). It is best, therefore, to translate it similarly here, even though “overhear” fits the context well.”
Robert H. Stein, Mark, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2008), 272.
Robert A. Guelich, Mark 1–8:26, vol. 34A, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 1989), 300.
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), 284–285.
“The first rhetorical question, “Is this not the carpenter?” may be read as an insult. Criticism of social background was a standard mode of invective in antiquity. The compiler of the Life of Sophocles denied the statements of earlier writers that Sophocles’ father was a carpenter, a bronzesmith, or a sword-maker, and defended his aristocratic background. The writers of Old Comedy made fun of Euripides by calling him the son of a woman who sold vegetables. The claim that Jesus himself was a carpenter could be an insult if taken literally.”
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), 290.
“These alternate theories being found wanting, and given the hostile nature of the confrontation, it is likely that the use of Jesus’ mother’s name is a slur against his legitimacy, as Stauffer (“Jeschu”) and S. Wilson (Strangers, 188) among others argue. This aspersion would correspond to the tendency in later Jewish traditions to portray Jesus as a bastard (see e.g. Origen Against Celsus 1.28–32, 39, 69; b. Sanh. 67a), a pattern that may already be reflected in John 8:41. Ilan, though disagreeing with this exegesis, cites an interesting parallel, the derogatory designation of Titus as “the son of Vespasian’s wife” in ʾAbot R. Nat. 7 (B), which implies that he is illegitimate (see Ilan, “Man,” 42–43 n. 86, and cf. Saldarini, Fathers, 68 n. 15).”
Joel Marcus, Mark 1–8: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, vol. 27, Anchor Yale Bible (New Haven; London: Yale University Press, 2008), 375.
James R. Edwards, The Gospel according to Mark, The Pillar New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI; Leicester, England: Eerdmans; Apollos, 2002), 173.
Joel Marcus, Mark 1–8: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, vol. 27, Anchor Yale Bible (New Haven; London: Yale University Press, 2008), 379.
William L. Lane, The Gospel of Mark, The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1974), 204.
Robert H. Stein, Mark, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2008), 284.
