2 Samuel 5:1-12

David Becomes King of Israel, Takes Jerusalem, and Receives Building Materials from Hiram of Tyre

5:1 Then all the tribes of Israel came to David at Hebron, and said, “Look, we are your bone and flesh. 2 For some time, while Saul was king over us, it was you who led out Israel and brought it in. The LORD said to you: It is you who shall be shepherd of my people Israel, you who shall be ruler over Israel.” 3 So all the elders of Israel came to the king at Hebron; and King David made a covenant with them at Hebron before the LORD, and they anointed David king over Israel. 4 David was thirty years old when he began to reign, and he reigned forty years. 5 At Hebron he reigned over Judah seven years and six months; and at Jerusalem he reigned over all Israel and Judah thirty-three years.

6 The king and his men marched to Jerusalem against the Jebusites, the inhabitants of the land, who said to David, “You will not come in here, even the blind and the lame will turn you back”–thinking, “David cannot come in here.” 7 Nevertheless David took the stronghold of Zion, which is now the city of David. 8 David had said on that day, “Whoever would strike down the Jebusites, let him get up the water shaft to attack the lame and the blind, those whom David hates.” Therefore it is said, “The blind and the lame shall not come into the house.” 9 David occupied the stronghold, and named it the city of David. David built the city all around from the Millo inward. 10 And David became greater and greater, for the LORD, the God of hosts, was with him.

11 King Hiram of Tyre sent messengers to David, along with cedar trees, and carpenters and masons who built David a house. 12 David then perceived that the LORD had established him king over Israel, and that he had exalted his kingdom for the sake of his people Israel. (2 Samuel 5:1-12, NRSV)

The following comments are repeated here with some editing from August 3, 2007 (Friday in the week of the Ninth Sunday after Pentecost, references for the week of the Sunday closest to July 27, Year One):

David, no longer facing potential rivals, is ready to become king over all Israel. The murders of Abner (2 Sam. 3:22-30) and Ishbaal (Ish-bosheth) (4:1-3, 5-8), both publicly mourned by David and in the end given proper burials, clear the way. So we are told that “all the tribes of Israel came to David at Hebron, and said, ‘Look, we are your bone and flesh. For some time, while Saul was king over us, it was you who led out Israel and brought it in. The LORD said to you: It is you who shall be shepherd (hf,r4t9, tir‘eh, verb, ‘to tend, keep [flocks], shepherd’) of my people Israel, you who shall be ruler (dyg9n!, nāgîd) over Israel’ ” (2 Sam. 5:1-2). Steven L. McKenzie points out that “Shepherd [is] a common metaphor for kings” and that “Ruler [dyg9n!, nāgîd], ‘king designate’ [is] translated ‘prince’ in 7:8” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on 2 Sam. 5:2). This offer is clearly accepted and ratified by a covenant: “So all the elders of Israel came to the king at Hebron; and King David made a covenant (tyr9B4, b^erîth) with them at Hebron before the LORD, and they anointed David king over Israel” (v. 3). “Without effort on his part,” says Shimon Bar-Efrat, “the kingdom of Israel is offered to David, just as the kingdom of Judah was seven years earlier. The account emphasizes, right from its beginning, that all the tribes favored David” (The Jewish Study Bible, 2004, p. 627, on 2 Sam. 5:1-3). In reference to the statement that David “led out Israel and brought it in” (v. 2), P. Kyle McCarter Jr. explains, “he led the army (see Num. 27:17; 1 Chr. 2:11; cf. 1 Sam. 18:13, 16; 29:6)” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on 2 Sam. 5:1-2).

The author briefly summarizes the chronology of David’s reign. “David was thirty years old when he began to reign, and he reigned forty years. At Hebron he reigned over Judah seven years and six months; and at Jerusalem he reigned over all Israel and Judah thirty-three years” (2 Sam. 5:4-5). McCarter says, “These chronological notices belong to the Deuteronomistic framework of the narrative . . . Biblical scholars generally date David’s reign to the first half of the tenth century, ca. 1000-960 BCE” (op. cit., on 2 Sam. 5:4-5). According to McKenzie, “The actual length of David’s reign is not certain, but scholars have proposed ca. 1005-965 BCE as likely dates” (op. cit., on 2 Sam. 5:4; cf. the Chronological Table of Rulers, NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, p. 531 ESSAYS).

Apparently, the first item on David’s agenda now as king over all Israel is the need for a capital city, and he has his eye on the Jebusite city of Jerusalem. The list of the towns of Judah in the book of Joshua (Josh. 15:30-63) ends with the admission that “the people of Judah could not drive out the Jebusites, the inhabitants of Jerusalem; so the Jebusites live with the people of Judah to this day” (Josh. 15:63; cf. Judg. 1:21 and McCarter’s ref., op. cit., on 2 Sam. 5:6). Situated on the northern border of Judah’s territory adjacent to Benjamin, Jerusalem was surely a tempting target, but for some time a major frustration. Israel’s preoccupation with the domination of the Philistines and the civil war that followed Saul’s death had kept them from attacking Jerusalem.

But now David undertakes the capture of Jerusalem. “The king and his men marched to Jerusalem against the Jebusites, the inhabitants of the land, who said to David, ‘You will not come in here, even the blind and the lame will turn you back’–thinking, ‘David cannot come in here’ ” (2 Sam. 5:6). According to McCarter, “There have been many attempts to explain the role of the blind and the lame in this account. The present translation [i.e. NRSV] reflects the interpretation that the Jebusites are taunting David: ‘We are so much stronger than you that even our blind and lame can keep you out’ ” (loc. cit.). Another interpretation is offered by Bar-Efrat, who says the function of “the blind and the lame . . . is not clear. Perhaps they were part of a magical procedure or served as living illustration of a curse, expressing: Whoever enters here shall become like them. The Hittites, to whom the Jebusites were possibly related, used to parade a blind and a deaf person before their soldiers, proclaiming: Whoever does evil to the king [and] the queen, let them make him blind, let them make him [deaf]” (op. cit., p. 627, on v. 6).

Whether the Jebusites were taunting, invoking magic, or just threatening, the defense didn’t work. “Nevertheless,” says our author, “David took the stronghold of Zion, which is now the city of David” (v. 7). McCarter says, the “Stronghold of Zion [was] a fortified hilltop on the southeast corner of the later city. In the strict sense, then, Zion, and the city of David refer only to this hill (see 1 Kings 8:1), but both terms were extended to mean the city as a whole” (op. cit., on v. 7). David had instructed his men, “Whoever would strike down the Jebusites, let him get up the water shaft (rUn0c09Ba fGay9v4, w^eyigga‘ batstsinnôr) to attack the lame and the blind, those whom David hates” (v. 8a NRSV). The New Jewish Publication Society translation (NJPS 1985, 1999) reads as follows: “Those who attack the Jebusites shall reach the water channel and [strike down] the lame and the blind, who are hateful to David” (v. 8a NJPS). Bar-Efrat says that for the words “shall reach,” the literal meaning is “and touch” (op. cit., on v. 8). William L. Holladay lists both meanings (and also “touch = hurt,” Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon, s.v. fgan! [nāga‘]). The word translated water channel [NJPS, water shaft NRSV] occurs only twice in the Hebrew Bible, and has various suggested translations, “Ps. 42:8 water-spout? cataract? trident? thunderbolt?; 2 S 5:8 water-shaft?” (Holladay, s.v. rOn>c9, tsinnôr). Bar-Efrat says, “The meaning of the Heb. word translated water channel [NJPS] is unclear. It may refer to the tunnel (known today as Warren’s shaft) that connected the city on the hill with the spring in the valley. In that case, the target may have been cutting off the water supply or entering the city through that tunnel. Cf. 1 Chron. 11:4-6, where neither the blind and the lame nor the water channel are mentioned” (loc. cit.). McCarter considers the above meaning but offers “another possible translation of the Hebrew word rendered water shaft [NRSV], [as] ‘windpipe’; David might be telling his troops to strike at the windpipe, dealing only fatal blows so as not to leave the city full of maimed people (the lame and the blind).” “Therefore,” says the narrator, “it is said, ‘The blind and the lame shall not come into the house’ ” (v. 8b). McCarter explains: “The narrator uses the story to explain a rule excluding the lame and blind from the house, i.e., the temple (cf. Lev. 21:16-23; Deut. 23:1)” (Ibid.).

The narrator repeats his summary: “David occupied the stronghold, and named it the city of David” (v. 9a, cf. v. 7). But he adds, “David built the city all around from the Millo (xOl>m90ha, hammillô’) inward” (v. 9b). The word “Millo” means “‘fill(ing),’ construction built out on an (artificial) terrace for various purposes” (Holladay, s.v. xOl>m9, millô’). The word “apparently refers to a landfill or artificial platform created near the stronghold” (McKenzie, on v. 9). McCarter notes that “Solomon amplified or rebuilt it (1 Kings 19:15, 24; 11:27)” (op. cit., on v. 9). And the narrator reminds us of David’s increasing greatness: “And David became greater and greater, for the LORD, the God of hosts, was with him” (v. 10).

As if to underscore this grandeur, the narrator tells us that King Hiram of Tyre takes notice of David. He “sent messengers to David, along with cedar trees and carpenters and masons who built David a house” (v. 11). While the emphasis here is on recognition of David by Hiram, whose “reign was long and productive,” says McCarter, “according to extrabiblical sources” (ibid., on v. 11). We are also given a hint of the materials and workers that Hiram will provide for the building of Solomon’s temple (1 Kgs. 5:1-10). Hiram provides David with a certain sense of satisfaction. “David then perceived that the LORD had established him king over Israel, and that he had exalted his kingdom for the sake of his people Israel” (v. 12). The capture of Jerusalem was a significant event. And David’s making it his capital proved to be a wise decision. It lay on the border between Judah and Benjamin and, like Washington, D.C., occupied a neutral position between territories.

Acts 17:1-15

Paul at Thessalonica, Beroea and Athens

17:1 After Paul and Silas had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where there was a synagogue of the Jews. 2 And Paul went in, as was his custom, and on three sabbath days argued with them from the scriptures, 3 explaining and proving that it was necessary for the Messiah to suffer and to rise from the dead, and saying, “This is the Messiah, Jesus whom I am proclaiming to you.” 4 Some of them were persuaded and joined Paul and Silas, as did a great many of the devout Greeks and not a few of the leading women. 5 But the Jews became jealous, and with the help of some ruffians in the marketplaces they formed a mob and set the city in an uproar. While they were searching for Paul and Silas to bring them out to the assembly, they attacked Jason’s house. 6 When they could not find them, they dragged Jason and some believers before the city authorities, shouting, “These people who have been turning the world upside down have come here also, 7 and Jason has entertained them as guests. They are all acting contrary to the decrees of the emperor, saying that there is another king named Jesus.” 8 The people and the city officials were disturbed when they heard this, 9 and after they had taken bail from Jason and the others, they let them go.

10 That very night the believers sent Paul and Silas off to Beroea; and when they arrived, they went to the Jewish synagogue. 11 These Jews were more receptive than those in Thessalonica, for they welcomed the message very eagerly and examined the scriptures every day to see whether these things were so. 12 Many of them therefore believed, including not a few Greek women and men of high standing. 13 But when the Jews of Thessalonica learned that the word of God had been proclaimed by Paul in Beroea as well, they came there too, to stir up and incite the crowds. 14 Then the believers immediately sent Paul away to the coast, but Silas and Timothy remained behind. 15 Those who conducted Paul brought him as far as Athens; and after receiving instructions to have Silas and Timothy join him as soon as possible, they left him. (Acts 17:1-15, NRSV)

On September 19, 2008 (in the week of the Sunday closest to September 14, Year Two), comments were repeated from August 3, 2007 (Friday in the week of the Sunday closest to July 27, Year One), when comments were repeated from September 22, 2006 (Friday in the week of the Sunday closest to September 14, Year Two); they are repeated again here editing and supplement:

As Paul’s second missionary journey continues, after they departed from Philippi (Acts 16:1), he and Silas “passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia [and] came to Thessalonica, where there was a synagogue of the Jews” (17:1). According to Beverly Roberts Gaventa, they “travel the Via Egnatia, the main east-west road across Macedonia” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Acts 17:1). According to Karl Paul Donfried, Thessalonica was

a city in Macedonia (Modern Thessaloniki), located at the head of the Thermaic Gulf. . . . The city was founded in 316 B.C. by Cassander, a general in the army of Alexander the Great, who gave the city its name in honor of his wife, Thessalonikeia, the daughter of Philip II and the half-sister of Alexander. . . . [But] when Macedonia became a Roman province in 146 B.C., Thessalonica was made the capital and thus the center of Roman administration. (Harper’s Bible Dictionary, rev. ed., 1996, s.v. Thessalonica)

Luke tells us that “Paul went in [i.e., into the synagogue], as was his custom, and on three sabbath days argued with them from the scriptures” (v. 2). According to Christopher R. Matthews, “his custom, the pattern of starting a new mission in a synagogue (vv. 1, 10, 17) is explicitly stated (see 13:5n.; 14:1n)” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on 17:2). In his earlier reference, Matthews lists Acts “13:14; 14:1; 17:1, 20, 17; 18:4, 19; 19:8” and 9:20 (ibid., on Acts 13:5). In the synagogue, says Luke, Paul was “explaining and proving that it was necessary for the Messiah to suffer and to rise from the dead, and saying, ‘This is the Messiah, Jesus whom I am proclaiming to you’ ” (17:3). Gaventa points out the words, “it was necessary,” and adds, “Luke often draws attention to divine necessity (see e.g., 1:16; 3:21; 9:16; Lk. 2:49; 24:7, 26, 46)” (op. cit., on 17:3). They had some success. “Some of them [i.e., those in the synagogue] were persuaded and joined Paul and Silas, as did a great many of the devout Greeks and not a few of the leading women” (v. 4). “As earlier (13:43, 50; 14:1-2),” says Gaventa, “both Jews and Greeks are among those who respond to the gospel and among those who reject it” (ibid., on vv. 4-5). But these results angered some in the city, for “the Jews became jealous,” and some also probably including some of the husbands of these leading women, so “with the help of some ruffians in the marketplaces they [i.e., the Jews] formed a mob and set the city in an uproar” (v. 5a). Paul’s later letter to the Thessalonians refers to their suffering “the same things from your own compatriots (uJpo; tw:n ijdivwn sumfuletw:n, hypo tōn idiōn sympphyletōn) as they [i.e. the churches of Judea] did from the Jews” (1 Thess. 2:14, cf. v. 15). This would imply that the opposition, or at least the noticeable opposition, that of the ruffians, was mainly from Gentiles, the Thessalonians’ “compatriots.” But opposition by Jews of Thessalonica continues later in Beroea (v. 13). “The ruffians,” says Gaventa, “who are deployed here reveal the irony of the charge that it is Paul and Silas who are disturbing the peace [cf. 6]” (ibid.).

In any case, the opponents, “while they were searching for Paul and Silas to bring them out to the assembly . . . attacked Jason’s house” (v. 5b). When the opponents “could not find them [i.e., Paul and Silas], they dragged Jason and some believers before the city authorities (politavrcai, politarchai), shouting, ‘These people who have been turning the world upside down have come here also, and Jason has entertained them as guests. They are all acting contrary to the decrees of the emperor, saying that there is another king named Jesus’ ” (vv. 6-7). Later, Paul will be hauled before Gallio in Corinth, only to be released (18:12-16), but “Sosthenes, the official of the synagogue” is beaten, “but Gallio paid no attention to any of these things” (v. 17). Matthews comments on “city authorities, i.e., politarchs,” which he says is “a Macedonian title for non-Roman magistrates.” And he adds, “Serious charges of activities that threaten Roman order are advanced; cf. Lk. 23:2” (op. cit., on vv. 6-7). Similarly, Gaventa explains“turning the world upside down” as “disturbing the peace, it was a highly inflammatory charge in the context of the Roman Empire” (op. cit., on Acts 17:6, with ref. to 16:20; 24:5, 12). But the city officials let Jason and the others off with the payment of bail (to; iJkanovn, to hikanon, v. 9).

So it was apparently prudent for Paul and Silas to leave Thessalonica. “That very night,” says Luke, “the believers sent Paul and Silas off to Beroea; and when they arrived, they went to the Jewish synagogue” (v. 10). “Beroea, says Gaventa, was “a city of Macedonia, 58 km (36 mi) west-southwest of Thessalonica” (ibid., on v. 10). The apostles repeat the same pattern, but with different results. The Jews in the synagogue at Beroea “were more receptive than those in Thessalonica, for they welcomed the message (to;n lovgon, ton logon) very eagerly and examined the scriptures every day to see whether these things were so” (v. 11). “Many of them,” we are told, “therefore believed, including not a few Greek women and men of high standing” (v. 12). As before, the result in Beroea is a number of believers. “Jews and Gentiles believe,” says Matthews, adding that the inclusion of “Greek women and men of high standing” means that “Christianity is attracting people with status” (op. cit., on vv. 11-12). But the apostles’ success attracts opposition again, this time from the previous city. For “when the Jews of Thessalonica learned that the word of God had been proclaimed by Paul in Beroea as well, they came there too, to stir up and incite the crowds” (v. 13). And the believers of Beroea respond to opposition as did those of Thessalonica; they “immediately sent Paul away to the coast, but Silas and Timothy remained behind” (v. 14). “To the coast,” says Matthews “where he would take a ship to Athens (v. 15)” (ibid. on v. 14). So Paul comes to Athens alone (v. 15a), where he will speak to “some Epicurean and Stoic philosophers” in tomorrow’s reading (v. 18). On his departure from Beroea, he leaves instructions for Silas and Timothy to “join him as soon as possible” (v. 15b), which they will eventually do when they catch up with him in Corinth (Acts 18:5).

Gaventa says, “The conflicting responses to Christian preaching in two cities prepare for Paul’s important speech in Athens” (op. cit., on Acts 17:1-15).

Mark 7:24-37

Jesus Ministers in Gentile Territory: the Region of Tyre and the Decapolis

24 From there he set out and went away to the region of Tyre. He entered a house and did not want anyone to know he was there. Yet he could not escape notice, 25 but a woman whose little daughter had an unclean spirit immediately heard about him, and she came and bowed down at his feet. 26 Now the woman was a Gentile, of Syrophoenician origin. She begged him to cast the demon out of her daughter. 27 He said to her, “Let the children be fed first, for it is not fair to take the children’s food and throw it to the dogs.” 28 But she answered him, “Sir, even the dogs under the table eat the children’s crumbs.” 29 Then he said to her, “For saying that, you may go-the demon has left your daughter.” 30 So she went home, found the child lying on the bed, and the demon gone.

31 Then he returned from the region of Tyre, and went by way of Sidon towards the Sea of Galilee, in the region of the Decapolis. 32 They brought to him a deaf man who had an impediment in his speech; and they begged him to lay his hand on him. 33 He took him aside in private, away from the crowd, and put his fingers into his ears, and he spat and touched his tongue. 34 Then looking up to heaven, he sighed and said to him, “Ephphatha,” that is, “Be opened.” 35 And immediately his ears were opened, his tongue was released, and he spoke plainly. 36 Then Jesus ordered them to tell no one; but the more he ordered them, the more zealously they proclaimed it. 37 They were astounded beyond measure, saying, “He has done everything well; he even makes the deaf to hear and the mute to speak.” (Mark 7:24-37, NRSV)

On February 2, 2009 (Monday in the week of the Fourth Sunday after the Epiphany, Year One), comments were used from March 3, 2008 (Monday in the week of the Fourth Sunday of Lent, Year Two), when comments were repeated from August 3, 2007 (Friday in the week of the Sunday closest to July 27, Year One), when comments were used with revision and supplement on January 29, 2007 (Monday in the week of the Fourth Sunday after the Epiphany, Year One), comments which were repeated from earlier as noted there. On January 27, 2008 (Sunday in the week of the Third Sunday of Epiphany, Year Two), comments on a portion of today’s reading, Mark 7:31-37, were repeated from earlier, as noted there. The combined comments are used again here with some editing..

As noted Wednesday and Thursday of this week (July 29 and 30, 2009), Luke’s narrative ceases to follow the order of Mark for several episodes. The parallel passages in Matthew and Mark for today’s reading are in the separate file, the Syrophoenician Woman.

Jesus leaves Galilee for “the region of Tyre” (Mk. 7:24a), or “the district of Tyre and Sidon” (Mt. 15:21), which amounts to the same thing. According to Thomas L. McClellan,

Tyre [was] the leading city of Phoenicia during much of the first millennium B.C. . . . located on a small island that has been connected to the mainland since the construction of a siege ramp to it by Alexander the Great (late fourth century B.C.). . . . [It] emerges as an important Phoenician city in the tenth century B.C. when we learn that King Hiram supplied David with cedars and craftsmen (2 Sam. 5:11; 1 Chron. 14:1; 22:4). Harper’s Bible Dictionary, rev. ed., 1996, s.v. Tyre)

As we know, Tyre is mentioned again and again in the biblical narrative. “Sidon,” says McClellan, was “one of the two leading cities (with Tyre) of ancient Phoenicia. . . . located twenty-two miles north of Tyre on the Mediterranean coast of modern Lebanon” (Harper’s Bible Dictionary, rev. ed., 1996, s.v. Sidon). We may note that recently, the modern city of Sidon was mentioned in news reports about the confrontation between Lebanon, or more precisely, Hezbolah, and Israel in the summer of 2006.

The purpose of Jesus’ trip north was apparently something of a retreat, for Mark says, “He entered a house and did not want anyone to know he was there. Yet he could not escape notice” (Mk. 7:24b), “but a woman whose little daughter had an unclean spirit immediately heard about him, and she came and bowed down at his feet” (v. 25). Matthew doesn’t mention the retreat aspect, or the house, but after reporting Jesus coming, says “Just then a Canaanite woman (gunh; Cananaiva, gynē Chananaia) from that region came out and started shouting, ‘Have mercy on me, Lord, Son of David; my daughter is tormented by a demon’” (Mt. 15:22). Mark identifies the woman as “a Gentile (  JEllhnivV, Hellēnis, feminine), of Syrophoenician (S;urofoinivkissa, Syrophoinikissa, feminine) origin (Mk. 7:26a), and reports her plea with indirect quotation: “She begged him to cast the demon out of her daughter” (v. 26b). According to Philip L. Shuler,

The term ‘Syrophoenician’ indicates that this woman was from Phoenicia, located in the Roman province of Syria, or, more specifically, from the area of the old cities of Tyre and Sidon. In the parallel passage (Matt. 15:22), the woman is called a ‘Canaanite [gunh; Cananaiva, gynē Chananaia],’ an ancient geographical designation that would have included this area. (Harper’s Bible Dictionary, rev. ed., 1996, s.v. Syrophoenician)

Dennis C. Duling says that “Canaanite [is] a scriptural term for ancient Israel’s pagan enemies (see, e.g., Deut 7:1; cf. Mk. 7:26) here used to designate a Gentile” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Mt. 15:22). The term translated “Gentile” in Mark 7:26 is literally “a Greek woman” (  JEllhnivV, Hellēnis, feminine), but the point, of course, is that she is not a Jew. Matthew reports that at first, Jesus “did not answer her at all,” adding that “his disciples came and urged him, saying ‘Send her away, for she keeps shouting after us’” (Mt. 15:23). In Mark he responds to her directly, saying “Let the children be fed first, for it is not fair to take the children’s food and throw it to the dogs” (Mk. 7:27; cf. Mt. 15:26). By children, Jesus means the Jewish people, as reflected in Matthew’s pointed statement, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel” (Mt. 15:24; cf. 10:5-6, in the instructions for the mission of the Twelve). One would like to think that Jesus speaks of throwing the children’s food to the dogs (Gentiles) with a twinkle in his eye. His last words in Matthew’s Gospel call for the disciples to “make disciples of all nations” (pavnta ta; e[qnh, panta ta ethnē, a term often translated “Gentiles”), and in Matthew’s Gospel the first persons to recognize the newborn Jesus and “pay him homage” (Mt. 2:1) are “wise men (mavgoi, magoi, sometimes ‘Magi’ in English) from the East” (2:1), that is, Gentiles. The Gentiles are clearly not forgotten in this most Jewish of Gospels.

Her rejoinder accepts the “dog” label, but continues to plea for help. “Sir, even the dogs under the table eat the children’s crumbs” (Mk. 7:28; cf. Mt. 15:27). Vincent Taylor suggests that the woman’s reply was in kind,

for some encouragement must have been given to prompt her witty reply in [v.] 28, and for this purpose, the forbidding words of 27b [“it is not fair to take the children’s food and throw it to the dogs”] are not adequate. ‘Let the children first be fed’ [not included in Matthew’s version of the story, cf. Mt. 15:26], supplies just what is necessary. (The Gospel According to St. Mark, 1975, p. 350, on Mk. 7:27-28)

Jesus responds, by noting her persistence and giving the woman her request. He says, “For saying that, you may go–the demon has left your daughter” (Mk. 7:29). Matthew’s version perhaps compensates for the earlier negative view of this “Gentile woman”: “Woman, great is your faith! Let it be done for you as you wish” (Mt. 15:28a). And both Gospels report the essentially instant exorcism at a distance. “And her daughter was healed instantly,” says Matthew (Mt. 15:28b). Mark reports that “she went home [and] found the child lying on the bed, and the demon gone” (Mk 7:30).

Jesus returns by way of Sidon (Mk. 7:31a; cf. Mt. 15:21, “Tyre and Sidon” where Mark mentions only Tyre, Mk. 7:24). The return is “towards the Sea of Galilee, in the region of the Decapolis” (Mk. 7:31b). Where Matthew generalizes about a number of healings (Mt:15:30-31), Mark reports the healing of a specific individual. “They brought to him a deaf man who had an impediment in his speech; and they begged him to lay his hand on him” (Mk. 7:32). It is interesting that Jesus was “begged” to perform both healings (vv. 26, 32). The Greek verbs are different (hjrwvta, ērōta, Mk. 7:26; parakalou:sin, parakalousin, v. 32), but both are translated as “begged” (NRSV, TNIV) or with forms of “beseech” (KJV). Jesus responds immediately in this instance–still apparently in Gentile territory. “He took him aside in private, away from the crowd, and put his fingers into his ears, and he spat and touched his tongue. Then looking up to heaven, he sighed and said to him, ‘Ephphatha,’ that is, ‘Be opened’” (vv. 33-34). Taylor comments on these methods.

The putting of the fingers into the man’s ears, the spitting, and the touching of the tongue powerfully suggest to him [the deaf mute] the possibility of a cure. Such actions are common to the technique of Greek and Jewish healers . . . A well-known story connected with Vespasian (Tacitus, Hist. iv. 81, Suetonius, Vesp. 7) records how he healed a man with spittle. Its use by Jews with incantations was condemned by the Rabbis. Only here, in the story of the cure of the Blind Man [Mk. 8:22-26], and in the Johannine narrative of the Man born Blind [John, chap. 9], is Jesus recorded to have used spittle in his healings. . . . So incidental is the reference in the present narrative that we cannot be wholly certain how it was used. (ibid., p. 354, on Mk. 7:33-34)

The word “ephphatha” (ejffaqa, ephphatha), translated as “Be opened” (dianoivcqhti, dianoichthēti, imperative), is an “Aramaic word . . . a contraction of the form of the ethpeel (Ht1P4t4x@ , [’ethp^ethach] )” (Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich [BDAG], A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and other Early Christian Literature, 3^rd ed., 2000, s.v. ejffaqa, ephphatha). It occurs only here in the New Testament. The healing again is immediate (v. 35), and Jesus orders them “to tell no one” (v. 36a) but, almost as though in reference to the many healings reported by Matthew (15:30-31), Mark adds, “the more he ordered them [to be silent], the more zealously they proclaimed it” (v. 36). Mark’s report that the people “were astounded beyond measure, saying, ‘He has done everything well; he even makes the deaf to hear and the mute to speak’ ” (v. 37), suggests that this healing is typical, representing many others, as Matthew reports. Matthew’s report that the crowd “praised the God of Israel” (Mt. 15:31) suggests the Gentile context that is more clearly indicated in Mark’s version (“the Decapolis,” Mk. 7:31).

For the woman, and for the caretakers of the man who was deaf and had a speech impediment, the problems were serious. Jesus responded to their needs, and he will respond to ours.

Ronald D. Worden, Ph.D.

rdworden@hgst.edu

deanworden@comcast.net