Hosea 4:1-10

God Accuses Israel

4:1 Hear the word of the LORD, O people of Israel;

for the LORD has an indictment against the inhabitants of the land.

There is no faithfulness or loyalty,

and no knowledge of God in the land.

2 Swearing, lying, and murder,

and stealing and adultery break out;

bloodshed follows bloodshed.

3 Therefore the land mourns,

and all who live in it languish;

together with the wild animals

and the birds of the air,

even the fish of the sea are perishing.

4 Yet let no one contend,

and let none accuse,

for with you is my contention, O priest.

5 You shall stumble by day;

the prophet also shall stumble with you by night,

and I will destroy your mother.

6 My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge;

because you have rejected knowledge,

I reject you from being a priest to me.

And since you have forgotten the law of your God,

I also will forget your children.

7 The more they increased,

the more they sinned against me;

they changed their glory into shame.

8 They feed on the sin of my people;

they are greedy for their iniquity.

9 And it shall be like people, like priest;

I will punish them for their ways,

and repay them for their deeds.

10 They shall eat, but not be satisfied;

they shall play the whore, but not multiply;

because they have forsaken the LORD

to devote themselves to11 whoredom. (Hosea 4:1-10, NRSV)

The following comments are repeated here from October 3, 2006 (Tuesday in the week of the Sunday closest to September 28, Year Two):

Chapter three of Hosea presents more narrative about the personal life of the prophet (Hos. 3:1-5); compare the earlier prose narrative (1:1-2:1), which sets the scene for the poetic parts about the LORD’s divorcing Israel (2:2-13) and wooing her again (2:14-23 [with vv. 16-21 in prose in the NRSV]). The “Daily Office Lectionary” of the Episcopal Book of Common Prayer passes over Hosea chapter three in the current series, but the daily lectionaries of the Presbyterian Book of Worship and the Lutheran Book of Worship list Hosea 3:1-5 as the reading for tomorrow. According to Gregory Mobley, this paragraph (chapter) describes “the restoration of Hosea’s marriage” as a picture of how “the LORD’s relationship to Israel will be restored” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., 2001, on Hos. 3:1-5). Gregory also notes that this account is in the first person, whereas the initial narrative section, (1:2-2:1) is in the third person, about Hosea, rather than from him. Because Gomer is not named here, Ehud Ben Zvi says, “Scholars disagree on whether it refers to Gomer (1:3) or to another woman. The text leaves her unnamed and by doing so leaves both options open. Clearly though, Hosea’s relationship to this woman symbolizes again God’s relationship to Israel” (The Jewish Study Bible, 2004, on Hos. 3:1). For our purposes, the paragraph provides a transition from the focus on the marriage and divorce metaphor in chapters one to three to the body of prophetic announcements which comprise the bulk of the book. There will be brief allusions to this metaphor later, for example, “Though you play the whore, O Israel, / do not let Judah become guilty” (4:13a), and “O Ephraim, you have played the whore; / Israel is defiled” (5:3b, c; cf. 5:10). But specific references to improper worship also occur, for example, “When Ephraim multiplied altars to expiate sin, / they became to him altars for sinning” (8:11).

Today’s reading (from the Book of Common Prayer references) begins this body of prophetic announcements with “an indictment” (byr9, rîv Hos. 4:1b, cf. the imperative verb form Ubyr9, rîvû, 2:2, Heb. 2:4). “There is no faithfulness or loyalty, / and no knowledge of God in the land” (4:1c, d). The indictment includes a short catalog of offenses: “Swearing, lying, and murder, / and stealing and adultery break out; / bloodshed follows bloodshed” (v. 2). Mobley notes that “a full five of the Ten Commandments are listed” (op. cit., on Hos. 4:2). The consequences of these offenses are introduced by “therefore” (NK2-lf1 , ‘al-kēn): “the land mourns, / and all who live in it languish; / together with the wild animals / and the birds of the air, / even the fish of the sea are perishing” (v. 3).

The prophet zeroes in on the priests: “Yet let no one contend (br2y!, yārēv), / and let none accuse, / for with you is my contention, O priest” (v. 4). There appear to be textual problems with the last part of verse four, but the suggested emendations (BHS) include either br! (rāv, “I am contending”) or yb9yr9 (rîvî, “my contention”) continue the use of the language about disputes including legal disputes (words related to the verb byr, r-y-b). “Legally,” says Mobley, “there are no grounds for a counterclaim against God” (ibid., on v. 4). The priest will “stumble by day,” and the prophet with him “by night” (v. 5a, b). He adds that two lines here “build on the foundation of 1:2-3:5” (ibid., on vv. 5-6), that is on the references to Hosea’s family: “I will destroy your mother” (v. 5c), and “I also will forget your children” (v. 6e). A key to the problem is lack of knowledge, for “My people (ym09f1, ‘ammî, cf. 1:8; 2:1, 23) are destroyed for lack of knowledge” (v. 6a), a lack which Hosea lays at the feet of the priests. It is “because you have rejected knowledge” (v. 6b), with the consequence that “I reject you from being a priest to me” (v. 6c). The knowledge which is lacking is knowledge of “the law of your God” (v. 6d). As he blames the priests for the corruption, the intensity increases. “The more they increased, / the more they sinned against me; / they changed their glory into shame” (v. 7). “They feed on the sin of my people,” says the LORD; “they are greedy for their iniquity” (v. 8). Mobley says, “the priests depend on the sacrificial system for food. Since more sins require more sacrifices, Hosea accuses the priests of a debased relationship in their role in the process of atonement” (ibid., on v. 8). This corruption will spread to the people, who will be like the priests (v. 9); they will “play the whore, but not multiply,” says the LORD (v. 10b). The reason is that “they have forsaken the LORD / to devote themselves to whoredom (v. 10c, d and the first word of v. 11 [the verse and line division of NRSV, TNIV, cf. NJPS; BHS varies a little, putting “whoredom,” tUnz@, z^enûth, and “wine,” Ny9y1, yayin, at the end of the line]). According to Mobley, “The corruption, detailed here in terms of drunkenness, sexual activity, and divination, spreads from priests to the rest of Ephraimite society” (ibid., on vv. 9-14).

Hosea 2:16-23 (Presbyterian and Lutheran traditions–for comments on Hosea 2:14-23, see yesterday’s comments.)

Acts 21:1-14

Paul’s Journey to Jerusalem

21:1 When we had parted from them and set sail, we came by a straight course to Cos, and the next day to Rhodes, and from there to Patara. 2 When we found a ship bound for Phoenicia, we went on board and set sail. 3 We came in sight of Cyprus; and leaving it on our left, we sailed to Syria and landed at Tyre, because the ship was to unload its cargo there. 4 We looked up the disciples and stayed there for seven days. Through the Spirit they told Paul not to go on to Jerusalem. 5 When our days there were ended, we left and proceeded on our journey; and all of them, with wives and children, escorted us outside the city. There we knelt down on the beach and prayed 6 and said farewell to one another. Then we went on board the ship, and they returned home.

7 When we had finished the voyage from Tyre, we arrived at Ptolemais; and we greeted the believers and stayed with them for one day. 8 The next day we left and came to Caesarea; and we went into the house of Philip the evangelist, one of the seven, and stayed with him. 9 He had four unmarried daughters who had the gift of prophecy. 10 While we were staying there for several days, a prophet named Agabus came down from Judea. 11 He came to us and took Paul’s belt, bound his own feet and hands with it, and said, “Thus says the Holy Spirit, ‘This is the way the Jews in Jerusalem will bind the man who owns this belt and will hand him over to the Gentiles.’” 12 When we heard this, we and the people there urged him not to go up to Jerusalem. 13 Then Paul answered, “What are you doing, weeping and breaking my heart? For I am ready not only to be bound but even to die in Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus.” 14 Since he would not be persuaded, we remained silent except to say, “The Lord’s will be done.” (Acts 21:1-14, NRSV)

On August 14, 2007 (Tuesday in the week of the Sunday closest to August 10, Year One), comments were repeated with editing and supplement from October 3, 2006 (Tuesday in the week of the Sunday closest to September 28, Year Two), when comments were repeated from August 9, 2005 (Tuesday of the week of the Sunday closest to August 10, Year One); the comments are repeated again here:

Paul is determined to go to Jerusalem to deliver the collection for “the saints” (Rom. 15:25-27; cf. Gal. 2:10; 1 Cor. 16:1-4; 2 Cor., chaps. 8-9) as a symbol of the unity between the Jewish Christian and Gentile Christian parts of the church (cf. Gal. 3:28; Eph. 2:14-16). He is aware of possible danger to himself in this journey, and so has bid farewell to the Ephesians elders, having said “that they would not see him again” (Acts 20:38). Luke, who has been with Paul since his departure from Philippi (20:6), except that Paul remained behind at Troas and rejoined Luke and the others at Assos (vv. 13-14), reports that, in taking leave of the Ephesian elders and setting sail, “we came by a straight course to Cos, and the next day to Rhodes, and from there to Patara” (21:1), that is, “around the southwestern perimeter of Asia Minor” (Beverly Roberts Gaventa, HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Acts 21:1-3). After their finding a ship at Patara, their journey continues (v. 2), passing Cyprus, to the Syrian coast, landing “at Tyre, because the ship was to unload its cargo there” (v. 3).

At Tyre, Paul, Luke and their company look up the disciples and stay their seven days (v. 4a). “Nothing has been said of a mission in Tyre to account for the disciples,” says Gaventa, “but see 11:19; 12:20; Luke 6:17; 10:13-14” (on v. 4). No Christian prophet is named from the group at Tyre, but, says Luke, “Through the Spirit they [i.e., the believers at Tyre] told Paul not to go on to Jerusalem” (v. 4b). The farewell scene (vv. 5-6) reminds us of the farewell to the Ephesian elders (20:36-38). In both instances, Paul’s group is escorted to the ship by the group sending them off (20:38; 21:5a). In both instances there is prayer by the group (20:36; 21:5b). In parting from the Ephesian elders there was “much weeping among them all; they embraced Paul and kissed him” (20:37). Similar emotional expressions are not reported in the departure from Tyre, but some emotion and concern for Paul’s welfare is indicated by their prophetic warning.

From Tyre they proceed by ship to Ptolemais, about twenty-five miles down the coast, where, says Luke, “we greeted the believers and stayed with them for one day” (v. 7). Gaventa notes here, as in the case of Tyre, that “nothing has been said of a mission there [i.e., at Ptolemais], [but] see 11:19” (on v. 7). On the next day they come to Caesarea, thirty miles further down the coast (v. 8a), where they meet one whose name is familiar to us. Luke says, “we went into the house of Philip the evangelist, one of the seven [6:1-7], and stayed with him” (v. 8b). Earlier, Luke has told us that after his meeting with the Ethiopian eunuch on the road to Gaza, and the eunuch’s conversion and baptism (8:26-40), Philip “proclaimed the good news to all the towns until he came to Caesarea” (v. 40), where we now learn that he apparently settled. Philip “had four unmarried daughters,” says Luke, “who had the gift of prophecy” (21:9; cf. 2:17). But it was the prophet Agabus from Judea (v. 10) who acted out his prophecy by binding himself with Paul’s belt, saying, “Thus says the Holy Spirit, ‘This is the way the Jews in Jerusalem will bind the man who owns this belt and will hand him over to the Gentiles’ ” (v. 11). Agabus’ prediction profoundly affects the group, including Luke, who says, “When we heard this, we and the people there urged him not to go up to Jerusalem” (v. 12). If we count the implied warning in the concern of the Ephesian elders for Paul (20:36-38), this makes three, including prophetic warnings at each stop on the Mediterranean coast of Israel. But Paul was not to be deterred from his purpose. “What are you doing, weeping and breaking my heart?” he asks. “For I am ready not only to be bound but even to die in Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus” (v. 13). “Since he would not be persuaded,” says Luke, “we remained silent except to say, ‘The Lord’s will be done’ ” (v. 14). As events would have it–better, in the providence of God–his desire to go to Rome (Rom. 15:22-24) is eventually fulfilled, though in chains (Acts 21:33; 26:29). But Paul’s commitment shines through in his response (21:13, cited above).

Luke 5:12-26

Jesus Cleanses a Leper (Mt 8.1-4; Mk 1.40-45)

12 Once, when he was in one of the cities, there was a man covered with leprosy. When he saw Jesus, he bowed with his face to the ground and begged him, “Lord, if you choose, you can make me clean.” 13 Then Jesus stretched out his hand, touched him, and said, “I do choose. Be made clean.” Immediately the leprosy left him. 14 And he ordered him to tell no one. “Go,” he said, “and show yourself to the priest, and, as Moses commanded, make an offering for your cleansing, for a testimony to them.” 15 But now more than ever the word about Jesus spread abroad; many crowds would gather to hear him and to be cured of their diseases. 16 But he would withdraw to deserted places and pray.

Jesus Heals a Paralytic (Mt 9.2-8; Mk 2.1-12)

17 One day, while he was teaching, Pharisees and teachers of the law were sitting near by (they had come from every village of Galilee and Judea and from Jerusalem); and the power of the Lord was with him to heal. 18 Just then some men came, carrying a paralyzed man on a bed. They were trying to bring him in and lay him before Jesus; 19 but finding no way to bring him in because of the crowd, they went up on the roof and let him down with his bed through the tiles into the middle of the crowd in front of Jesus. 20 When he saw their faith, he said, “Friend, your sins are forgiven you.” 21 Then the scribes and the Pharisees began to question, “Who is this who is speaking blasphemies? Who can forgive sins but God alone?” 22 When Jesus perceived their questionings, he answered them, “Why do you raise such questions in your hearts? 23 Which is easier, to say, ‘Your sins are forgiven you,’ or to say, ‘Stand up and walk’? 24 But so that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins”-he said to the one who was paralyzed-“I say to you, stand up and take your bed and go to your home.” 25 Immediately he stood up before them, took what he had been lying on, and went to his home, glorifying God. 26 Amazement seized all of them, and they glorified God and were filled with awe, saying, “We have seen strange things today.” (Luke 5:12-26, NRSV)

On April 27, 2007 (Friday in the week of the Third Sunday of Easter, Year One), comments were repeated from October 3, 2006 (Tuesday in the week of the Sunday closest to September 28, Year Two), when they were repeated from April 15, 2005 (Friday in the week of the Third Sunday of Easter, Year One). They are repeated again here with editing and supplement::

Luke’s two miracles reported here have parallel accounts in Mark and Matthew, though Matthew separates them by including seven episodes between them the Centurion of Capernaum (Mt. 8:5-13f; Lk. 7:1-10; cf. Jn. 4:46b-54; Mk. 2:1; 7:30), the Healing of Peter’s Mother-in-Law (Mt. 8:14-15; Mk. 1:29-31; Lk. 4:38-39), the Sick Healed at Evening (Mt. 8:16-17; Mk. 1:32-34; Lk. 4:40-41), On Following Jesus (Mt. 8:18-22; Mk. 4:35; Lk. 9:57-62), Stilling the Storm (Mt. 8:23-27; Mk. 4:35-41; Lk. 8:22-25), and the Gadarene Demoniacs (Mt. 8:28-34; cf. the Gerasene Demoniac Mk. 5:1-20; Lk. 8:26-39) (cf. Kurt Aland, ed., Synopsis of the Four Gospels, 1982, rev. printing 1985, secs. 85-91, 137, pp. 73-80, 123-125). Parallel texts for today’s reading are in the separate file, Leper and Paralytic.

The first of these accounts, the Cleansing of the Leper (Mk. 1:40-45; Lk. 5:1-12; Mt. 8:1-4) is an example of Jesus’ compassion for and ministry to people who were on the outskirts of society. The leper would be shunned, not permitted to socialize with other people, much less to approach the synagogue or temple for worship. This reminds us of Jesus’ ministries to the Samaritan woman (Jn. 4), the widow’s son at Nain (Lk. 7), the woman with the hemorrhage (Mt. 9, Mk. 5, Lk. 8), and so forth. “Once when he [Jesus] was in one of the cities,” says Luke, “there was a man covered with leprosy” (Lk. 5:12a). The reference to “one of the cities” (cf. “other cities,” 4:43) is rather indefinite, as is the time reference “once” (NRSV), added as part of the rephrasing of the Greek idiom: Kai; ejgevneto ejn tw:/ ei\nai aujto;n ejn mia:/ tw:n povlewn (Kai egeneto en tō(i) einai auton en mia(i) tō n poleōn). A rather literal translation would be, “And it happened in his being in one of the cities”; cf. “While Jesus was in one of the towns, . . .” (v. 12a TNIV). For Mark, the context is a preaching tour as Jesus “went through Galilee” (Mk. 1:39; cf. Mt. 4;23; Lk. 4:44). For Matthew, the Sermon on the Mount (chaps. 5-7) has just ended, and “when Jesus had come down from the mountain, great crowds followed him; and there was a leper who came to him” (Mt. 8:1, 2a). In Matthew and Mark the “man full of leprosy” (ajnh;r plhvrhV levpraV, anēr plērēs lepras, Lk. 5:12) is simply “a leper” (leprovV, lepros, Mt. 8:2; Mk. 1:40). Luke has him fall “on his face” before Jesus where Matthew and Mark have him kneel, and Matthew and Luke begin the supplication with “Lord,” but the three have, “if you choose (qevlh/V, thelē(i)s [cf. ‘are willing’ TNIV], you can make me clean” (Mk. 1:40b; Mt. 8:2b; Lk. 5:12b).

In response, Mark notes that Jesus was “moved with pity,” and all say that Jesus “stretched out his hand and touched him,” saying “I do choose (qevlw, thelō [‘I am willing’ TNIV). Be made clean!” (Mk. 1:41; Mt. 8:3a; Lk. 5:13a). “Jesus’ touching this man,” says Marion Lloyd Soards, “countered the common religious assumption that such contact rendered a person unclean. The healing demonstrates the power of God in Jesus overcoming that which was deemed unclean” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., 2001, on Lk. 5:14). And the result was immediate. “Immediately the leprosy left him,” says Mark, “and He was made clean” (Mk. 1:42; cf. Lk. 5:13b, omitting “and he was made clean,” perhaps considered obvious in light of the request. Matthew condenses the two clauses into one, “Immediately his leprosy was cleansed” (Mt. 8:3b). The three Gospels report Jesus instruction to tell noone, “after sternly warning him” (Mk. 1:43). “See that you say nothing to anyone; but go, show yourself to the priest and offer for your cleansing what Moses commanded, as a testimony to them” (Mk. 1:44; cf. Mt. 8:4). According to Richard A. Horsley, “Since Jesus has already made the man clean, his instructions must be intended either as a demonstrative testimony or ‘witness’ against the priest and the costly offerings required by their code (Lev. 14:10-32) or as a facetious remark (the now-clean man does pointedly disobey the instructions)” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., 2001, on Mk. 1:44). Mark and Luke report that the man goes out and tells so many people about his cleansing that Jesus’ fame greatly increased. “But he went out and began to proclaim it freely, and to spread the word, so that Jesus could no longer go into a town openly, but stayed out in the country; and people came to him from every quarter” (Mk. 1:45). Luke says that, “now more than ever the word about Jesus spread abroad; many crowds would gather to hear him and to be cured of their diseases” (Lk. 5:15). And he adds that Jesus “would withdraw to deserted places to pray” (v. 16). Matthew has already emphasized the spreading of Jesus’ fame and the gathering of crowds (Mt. 4:24-25; cf. Mk. 3:7;-8), which set the situation for the Sermon on the Mount (Mt. 5-7).

The ancient Christian theologian Origen asks “Why did Jesus Touch the Leper?” (Mk. 1:41; Lk. 5:13)

Origen: And why did he touch him, since the law forbade the touching of a leper? He touched him to show that “all things are clean to the clean” [Tit. 1:15]. Because the filth that is in one person does not adhere t others, nor does external uncleanness defile the clean of heart. So he touches him in his untouchability, that he might instruct us in humility; that he might teach us that we should despise no one, or abhor them, or regard them as pitiable, because of some wound of their body or some blemish for which they might be called to render an account. . . . So, stretching forth his hand to touch, the leprosy immediately departs. The hand of the Lord is found to have touched not a leper, but a body made clean! Let us consider here, beloved, if there be anyone here that has the taint of leprosy in his soul, or the contamination of guilt in his heart? If he has, instantly adoring God, let him say: “Lord, if you will, you can make me clean.” (Origen, SSGF 1:301-02, cited by Thomas C. Oden and Christopher Hall, Mark, Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture, New Testament, II, 1998, p. 26).

In Mark the report of the healing of the paralytic, which follows the report of the healing of the leper, is connected to it. “When he [Jesus] returned to Capernaum after some days,” says Mark, “it was reported that he was home” (Mk. 2:1; cf. 1:21, “they went to Capernaum,” and 1:35, where Jesus “got up and went out to a deserted place”). Luke, who follows Mark’s sequence here, has put Jesus “in one of the cities” (Lk. 5:12), but now his reference to the setting is nonspecific. “One day, while he was teaching, Pharisees and teachers of the law were sitting near by (they had come from every village of Galilee and Judea and from Jerusalem); and the power of the Lord was with him to heal” (Lk. 5:17). Matthew, apparently by his practice of topical arrangement, as noted above, has inserted seven episodes between the two healing miracles, as part of a section Elwyn E. Tilden and Bruce M. Metzger have called “Events in Galilee” (NOAB, 2^nd ed., 1994, on Mt. 8:1-9:38; compare their subheadings for the next two collections of narrative reports, “Narratives Illustrating the Authority Claimed by Jesus,” 11:2-12:50, and “Events of Decisive Acceptance or Rejection of Jesus,” 13:53-17:27).

Mark is graphic in his description of the crowd and the difficulty it presented to the “people [who] came, bringing to him [Jesus] a paralyzed man, carried by four of them” (Mk. 2:3). Luke, who emphasizes the presence of “Pharisees and teachers of the law” (Lk. 5:17), says, “Just then some men came, carrying a paralyzed man on a bed” (v. 18a; cf. Mt. 9:2a with “lying on a bed”). “So many gathered around,” says Mark, “that there was no longer room for them, not even in front of the door; and he was speaking the word to them” (v. 2). And he tells us that “when they [the men carrying the paralytic] could not bring him to Jesus because of the crowd, they removed the roof above him; and after having dug through it, they let down the mat on which the paralytic lay” (v. 4). Horsley says, “Houses often had a flat roof consisting of mud plaster over a wood framework” (op. cit., on 2:4). Luke recognizes the same difficulty in getting the paralytic to Jesus, but has a different conception of the materials used to construct the roof. “They were trying to bring him in and lay him before Jesus; but finding no way to bring him in because of the crowd, they went up on the roof and let him down with his bed through the tiles into the middle of the crowd in front of Jesus” (Lk. 5:18b, 19). According to Soards, “through the tiles is Luke’s adjustment of Mark’s story to present a tiled roof rather than the mud-plaster roof in which Mark’s account says the people ‘dug’ a whole through which to lower the paralytic” (op. cit., 2001, on Lk. 5:19). Matthew omits reference to the difficult access to Jesus, and proceeds immediately to Jesus’ response to the situation. The three Gospels note his reference to their “faith”: “When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, ‘Son [“Take heart, son” Mt., “Friend” Lk.], your sins are forgiven” (Mk.2:5; Mt. 9:2b; Lk. 5:20). Soards says, “The connection here between forgiveness of sins and healing reflects an ancient belief that sickness resulted from sin (see Ex. 34:7; Jn. 9:2)” (ibid., on v. 20). Jesus here apparently acknowledges the cultural understanding of this connection, but elsewhere to his disciples, he says, “Neither this man nor his parents [have sinned]; he was born blind so that God’s works might be revealed in him” (Jn. 9:3). Obery M. Hendricks says, “Suffering was attributed to sin, either of the parents (Ex. 20:5) or of the man before birth (Gen. Rab. [an ancient Rabbinical commentary on Genesis] 63: [39c] on Gen. 25:22; Wis. 8:190-20). Jesus denies this explanation and shifts attention from cause to purpose; this is an opportunity for God to act” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., 2001, on Jn. 9:1-3).

Some scribes present on this occasion take umbrage at Jesus’ reference to forgiveness. “Now some of the scribes were sitting there, questioning in their hearts, ‘Why does this fellow speak in this way? It is blasphemy! Who can forgive sins but God alone?” (Mk. 2:6-7; cf. Mt. 9:3, and Lk. 5:21; Luke includes “the Pharisees”). According to the three Gospels, Jesus knows what they are thinking (Mk. 2:8a; Mt. 9:4a; Lk. 5:22a), and his rhetorical question amounts to a rebuke. “Why do you raise such questions in your hearts,” he asks (Mk. 2:8b; Lk. 5:22b). In Matthew, Jesus’ first question is even sharper. “Why do you think evil in your hearts?” (Mt. 9:4). “Which is easier,” continues Jesus, “to say to the paralytic, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Stand up and take your mat and walk’?” (Mk. 2:9). Both Matthew and Luke shorten the last clause, “Stand up and walk” (Mt. 9:5; Lk. 5:23). As this story was told in Christian preaching, in the traditions used by the Evangelists who wrote it down, the main point was Jesus’ authority to forgive sins. “But so that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins” he says, “I say to you [i.e., to the paralytic], stand up, take your mat (kravbattoV, krabattos) go to your home” (Mk. 2:10-11; cf. Mt. 9:6; Lk. 5:24). For “mat” (kravbattoV, krabattos) in Mark (2:4, 9), Matthew (9:2, 6) and Luke (5:18) have “bed” (klivnh, klinē); but Luke also has “bed” (klinivdion, klinidion, vv. 19, 24, cf. “what he had been lying on,” v. 25). Mark’s term kravbattoV (krabattos) is defined as “mattress, pallet, the poor man’s bed Mk. 2:4; 6:55”; Matthew’s and Luke’s term klivnh (klinē) as “bed, couch Mk. 4:21; 7:30; Lk. 8:16; 17:34,” and more specifically as “pallet, stretcher on which a sick man was carried . . . prob. not differentiated from ‘bed’ Mt. 9:2, 6; Lk. 5:18)” (Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich [BDAG], A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and other Early Christian Literature, 3^rd ed., 2000, s.v. kravbattoV, krabattos, and klivnh, klinē). Luke’s other term, klinivdion (klinidion), is a diminutive of klivnh (klinē), defined as “small bed pallet, stretcher, Lk. 5:19” (BDAG, s.v. klivnh, klinē ). The second century A.D. Greek grammarian Phrynichus, who sought to restore earlier Attic Greek (i.e. the Greek of Athens’ golden age, thought Mark’s term kravbattoV (krabattos) was crude (cf. the Encyclopedia Britannica, 14^th ed., 1929, s.v. Phrynichus [as I remember]). It would be better, perhaps, to call it “main-street Greek” as opposed to “literary” or “university level Greek.”

In any event, the paralytic followed Jesus’ instruction. “And he stood up, and immediately took the mat and went out before all of them” (Mk. 2:12a; cf. Mt. 9:7). In Luke’s version he “went to his home, glorifying God” (v. 25). The three Gospels also note the crowd’s amazement. “Amazement seized all of them, and they glorified God and were filled with awe, saying, ‘We have seen strange things today’ ” (Lk. 5:26; cf. Mk. 2:12b; Mt. 9:8).

For this episode, Oden and Hall have collected comments of several church fathers:

Overview of comments by several Church Fathers: Jesus charged the paralytic to perform an action of which health was the necessary condition (Ambrose). One need not be paralyzed bodily, however, to be paralyzed inwardly (Augustine). The healing of body and soul occurs interconnectedly (Clement of Alexandria). The ministry of forgiveness is not the exercise of an independent power or right but points to God’s own saving work (Ambrose). The administration of forgiveness, which according to the scribes is the office of God alone, acutely raised the question of Jesus’ identity. Being God incarnate, of the same nature as God, he had authority on earth to act as God (Chrysostom). If Christ forgives sins, he must be truly God, for no one can forgive sins but God (Irenaeus, Novatian). (op. cit., p. 27)

Ronald D. Worden, Ph.D.

rdworden@hgst.edu

deanworden@comcast.net