Healing of the Paralytic

NA27 Matthew 9:1-8 B Mark 2:1-12 T Mark 2:1-12 P88 Mark 2:1-12 D Mark 2:1-12 W Mark 2:1-12 D Luke 5:17-26 T Luke 5:17-26 B Luke 5:17-26
1Kai embaV eiV ploion
dieperasen kai hlqen
eiV thn idian polin
.
 
 
 
 
 
 
2Kai idou proseferon

autw paralutikon
epi klinhV beblhmenon.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Kai idwn o IhsouV thn pistin
autwn eipen tw paralutikw,
Qarsei, teknon, afientai
sou ai amartiai.
3Kai idou
tineV twn grammatewn
eipan
en eautoiV,
OutoV
blasfhmei.
 
 
4Kai idwn o IhsouV
 
taV enqumhseiV autwn
eipen,
Inati enqumeisqe ponhra
en taiV kardiaiV umwn;
5Ti gar estin eukopwteron
eipein
afientai sou ai amartiai
h eipein egeire
 
kai peripatei;


6Ina de eidhte oti
exousian ecei
o UioV tou Anqrwpou
epi thV ghV
afienai amartiaV
tote legei tw paralutikw,
EgerqeiV
aron sou thn klinhn
kai upage eiV ton oikon sou.
7Kai egerqeiV
 
 
aphlqen eiV ton oikon autou.
8IdonteV de oi ocloi
efobhqhsan

kai edoxasan ton Qeon
 
ton donta exousian
toiauthn toiV anqrwpoiV
.
1Kai
eiselqwn palin
eiV Kafarnaoum di hmerwn
hkousqh oti en oikw estin
.
2Kai sunhcqhsan polloi
wste mhketi cwrein mhde
ta proV thn quran kai
elalei autoiV ton logon
.
 
3Kai ercontai feronteV

proV auton paralutikon
airomenwn upo tessarwn.
 
4Kai mh dunamenoi
prosenegkai autw
dia ton oclon

apestegasan thn steghn
opou hn kai exoruxanteV
calwsi ton krabatton opou
o paralutikoV katekeito
.
5Kai idwn o IhsouV thn pistin
autwn legei tw paralutikw,
Teknon, afientai
sou ai amartiai.
6Hsan de
tineV twn grammatewn ekei
kaqhmenoi kai dialogizomenoi

en taiV kardiaiV autwn,
7Oti outoV outwV lalei;
Blasfhmei.
TiV dunatai afienai
amartiaV ei mh eiV o QeoV
;
8Kai euquV epignouV o IhsouV
tw pneumati autou oti [outwV]
dialogizontai en eautoiV
,
legei [autoiV],
Ti tauta dialogizesqai
en taiV kardiaiV umwn;
9Ti estin eukopwteron
eipein tw paralutikw
afientai sou ai amartiai
h eipein egeirou
kai aron ton krabatton sou
kai peripatei;


10Ina de eidhte oti
exousian ecei
o UioV tou Anqrwpou
afienai amartiaV
epi thV ghV
legei tw paralutikw,
11Soi legw egeire
aron ton krabatton sou
kai upage eiV ton oikon sou.
12Kai hgerqh
kai euquV
araV ton krabatton
ex
hlqen emprosqen pantwn
wste
exi
stasqai pantaV
kai doxazein ton Qeon

oti
OutwV oudepote eidomen
.
1Kai
eiselqwn palin
eiV Kafarnaoum di hmerwn
hkousqh oti en oikw estin
.
2Kai sunhcqhsan polloi
wste mhketi cwrin mhde
ta proV thn quran kai
elalei autoiV ton logon
.
 
3Kai ercontai feronteV

proV auton paralutikon
airomenon upo tessarwn.
 
4Kai mh dunamenoi
prosenegkai autw
dia ton oclon

apestegasan thn steghn
opou hn kai exoruxanteV
calwsi ton krabakton opou
o paralutikoV katekeito
.
5Kai idwn o IhsouV thn pistin
autwn legei tw paralutikw,
Teknon mou, afewntai
sou ai amartiai.
6Hsan de
tineV twn grammatewn ekei
kaqhmenoi kai dialogizomenoi

en taiV kardieV autwn,
7Ti outoV outwV lalei;
Blasfhmei.
TiV dunatai afienai
amartiaV ei mh eiV o QeoV
;
8Kai euquV o IhsouV epignouV
tw pneumati autou oti outwV
dialogizontai en eautoiV
,
legei autoiV,
Ti tauta dialogizesqe
en taiV kardieV umwn;
9Ti estin eukopwteron
eipein tw paralutikw
afientai sou ai amartiai
h eipein egeire
kai aron ton krabakton sou
kai upage;


10Ina de eidhte oti
exousian eci
o UioV tou Anqrwpou
epi thV ghV
afienai amartiaV
legei tw paralutikw,
11Egeire soi legw
aron ton krabakton sou
kai upage eiV ton oikon sou.
12Kai hgerqh
kai euquV
araV ton krabakton
ex
hlqen emprosqen pantwn
wste
exi
stasqai pantaV
kai doxazin ton Qeon

legontaV oti
OutwV oudepote
[efanh
en tw Israhl*]
.
1{Kai
eiselqwn palin
eiV Kafarnaoum di hmerwn
hkousqh oti
} en oikw estin.
2Kai sunhcqhsan polloi
wste mhketi cwrein mhde
ta proV thn quran kai
elalei autoiV ton logon
.
 
3Kai ercontai feronteV

proV auton paralutikon
airomenon upo tessarwn.
 
4Kai mh dunamenoi
prosenegkai autw
dia ton oclon

apestegasan thn steghn
opou hn kai exoruxanteV
calwsin ton krabakton opou
o paralutikoV katekeito
.
5Kai idwn o IhsouV thn pistin
autwn legei tw paralutikw,
Teknon, afewntai
sou ai amartiai.
6Hsan de
tineV twn grammatewn ekei
kaqhmenoi kai dialogizomenoi

en taiV kardiaiV autwn,
7Ti outoV outwV lalei;
Blasfhmei.
TiV dunatai afienai
amartiaV ei mh eiV o QeoV
;
8Kai euquV epignouV o IhsouV
tw pneumati autw oti outwV
dialogizontai en eautoiV
,
legei autoiV,
Oti tauta dialogizesqe
en taiV kardiaiV umwn;
9Ti estin eukopwteron
eipein tw paralutikw
af[ie]ntai sou ai amartiai
h eipein
egeire
kai aron ton krabakton sou
kai upage;


10Ina de eidhte oti
exousian ece
o UioV tou Anqrwpou
epi thV ghV
afiene amartiaV
legei tw paralutikw,
11Egeire soi legw
aron ton krabakton sou
kai upage eiV ton oikon sou.
12Kai hgerqh
kai euquV
araV ton krabakton
ex
hlqen emprosqen pantwn
wste
exi
stasqe pantaV
kai doxazein ton Qeon

legontaV oti
OutwV oudepote eidomen
.
1Kai
eiselqwn palin
eiV Kafarnaoum di hmerwn
kai hkousqh oti en oikw estin
.
2Kai euqewV sunhcqhsan polloi
wste mhketi cwrein mhde
ta proV thn quran kai
elalei proV autouV logon
.
 
3Kai ercontai proV auton

feronteV paralutikon
airomenon upo tessarwn.
 
4Kai mh dunamenoi
prosengeisai autw
apo tou oclou

apestegasan thn steghn
opou hn o IhsouV kai
calwsi ton krabatton opou
o paralutikoV katekei
menoV.
5Eidwn de o IhsouV thn pistin
autwn legei tw paralutikw,
Teknon, afewnte
sou ai amartiai.
6Hsan de
tineV twn grammatewn ekei
kaqhmenoi kai dialogizomenoi

en taiV kardiaiV autwn legonteV,
7Ti outoV outwV lalei;
Blasfhmei.
TiV dunatai afienai
amartiaV ei mh o QeoV
;
8Kai epignouV o IhsouV
tw pneumati oti outwV
dialogizontai en eautoiV,
eipen autoiV
,
Ti tauta dialogizesqai
en taiV kardiaiV umwn;
9Ti estin eukopwteron
eipein tw paralut[ik]w

*egeire
aron ton krabatton sou
kai upage eiV ton oikon sou*
h eipein
afaiwntai sou ai amartiai
;
10Ina de eidhte oti
exousian ecei
o UioV tou Anqrwpou
epi thV ghV
afienai amartiaV
legei tw paralutikw,
11Soi legw *egeire
aron ton krabatton sou
kai upage eiV ton oikon sou.*
12Kai euqewV hgerqh
kai
araV ton krabatton
ex
hlqen enantion pantwn
wste
exi
stasqai pantaV
kai doxazein ton Qeon

kai legein oti
OutwV oudepote eidomen
.
1Kai
palin ercetai
eiV Kafarnaoum
kai hkousqh oti en oikw estin
.
2Kai sunhcqhsan polloi
wste mhketi cwrein
kai
elalei proV autouV ton logon
.
 
3Kai idou andreV ercontai
bastazonteV en krebattw
paralutikon.

 
4Kai mh dunamenoi
proselqein autw
apo tou oclou

apestegasan thn steghn
opou hn kai
calwsin ton krabatton eison
*o paralutikoV katekeito*
.
5Idwn de o IhsouV thn pistin
autwn legei tw paralutikw,
Teknon, afewntai
sou ai amartiai.
6Hsan de
tineV twn grammatewn ekei
*kaqhmenoi* kai dialogizomenoi

en taiV kardiaiV autwn legonteV,
7Ti outoV outwV lalei
blasfhmiaV;
TiV dunatai afienai
amartiaV ei mh eiV o QeoV
;
8Kai epignouV o IhsouV
tw pneumati oti [outwV]
dialogizontai
,
legei autoiV,
Ti dialogeizesqai
en taiV kardiaiV umwn;
9Ti gar estin eukopwteron
eipein
afewntai sou ai amartiai
h eipein egeire

kai peripatei;


10Ina de eidhtai oti
exousian ecei
o UioV tou Anqrwpou

afeienai amartiaV
legei tw paralutikw,
11Egeire
kai aron ton krabatton sou
kai upage eiV ton oikon sou.
12O de egerqeiV
kai
araV autou ton krabatton

emprosqen pantwn aphlqen
wste
qaumazein autouV
kai doxazein ton Qeon

oti
OutwV oudepote eido
n.
17{Kai egeneto en mia twn
hmerwn autou didas-
kontoV sunelqein touV
FarisaiouV kai nomodidaska-
louV,} hsan de sunelhluqoteV ek
pashV kwmhV thV GalilaiaV
kai IoudaiaV

tou iasqai autouV
.
18Kai idou andreV feronteV
epi kleinhV anqrwpon
oV hn
paralelumenoV.
Kai ezhtoun eisenegkein auton
kai qeinai enwpion autou
.
19Kai mh euronteV
poiaV eisenegkwsin auton
dia ton oclon
anabhsan epi to dwma kai
apostegasanteV touV keramouV

opou hn kaqhkan ton krabatton
sun tw paralutikw eiV to meson
emprosqen tou Ihsou
.
20Idwn de IhsouV thn pistin
autwn legei tw paralutikw,
Anqrwpe, afaiwntai
sou ai amartiai.
21Kai hrxanto
dialogizesqai oi
grammateiV
kai oi Farisaioi

en taiV kardiaiV autwn legonteV,
Ti outoV lalei
blasfhmiaV;
TiV dunatai amartiaV
afeinai ei mh eiV o QeoV
;
22EpignouV de o IhsouV
 
touV dialogismouV autwn
legei autoiV,
Ti dialogizesqai
en taiV kardiaiV umwn pornhra;
23Ti estin eukopwteron
eipein
afaiwntai sou ai amartiai
h eipein egeire
 
kai peripatei;


24Ina de eidhte oti
exousian ecei
o UioV tou Anqrwpou
epi thV ghV
afinai amartiaV
legei tw paralutikw,
Soi legw egeire
kai aron ton krabatton sou
kai poreuou eiV ton oikon sou.
25Kai paracrhma
anastaV enwpion autwn

araV thn kleinhn
aphlqen eiV ton oikon autou
doxazwn ton Qeon.
26Kai


eplhsqhsan qambou
legonteV oti
Eidomen
paradoxa shmeron
.
17{Kai egeneto en mia twn
hmerwn kai autoV hn didas-
kwn kai hsan *kaqhmenoi*
Farisaioi kai nomodidaska-
loi,} hsan elhluqoteV ek
pashV kwmhV thV GalilaiaV
kai IoudaiaV kai Ierousalhm
kai dunamiV kuriou hn
eiV to iasqai auton
.
18Kai idou andreV feronteV
anqrwpon epi klinhV beblh-
blhmenon
oV hn paralelumenoV.
Kai ezhtoun auton eisenegkein
kai qeinai enwpion autou
.
19Kai mh euronteV
poiaV eisenegkwsin auton
dia ton oclon
anabanteV epi to dwma dia
twn keramwn
kaqhkan auton
sun tw klinidiw eiV to meson
emprosqen tou Ihsou
.
20Kai idwn thn pistin
autwn eipen,
Anqrwpe, afewnte
sou ai amartiai.
21Kai hrxanto
dialogizesqe oi
grammatiV
kai oi Farisaioi
legonteV

TiV estin outoV oV lalei
blasfhmiaV;
TiV dunatai afeinai
amartiaV ei mh monoV o QeoV
;
22EpignouV de o IhsouV
 
touV dialogismouV autwn
apokriqeiV eipen proV autouV,
Ti dialogizesqe
en taiV kardieV umwn;
23Ti estin eukopwteron
eipein
afewntai sou ai amartiai
h eipein egeire
 
kai peripati;


24Ina de eidhte oti
exousian ecei
o UioV tou Anqrwpou
epi thV ghV
afienai amartiaV
eipen tw paralutikw,
Soi legw egeire
kai aron to klinidion sou
kai poreuou eiV ton oikon sou.
25Kai paracrhma
anastaV enwpion autou
araV *ef o katekeito*

aphlqen eiV ton oikon autou
doxazwn ton Qeon.
26Kai
ekstaseiV elaben a
pantaV
kai edoxazon ton Qeon
kai eplhsqhsan fobou
legonteV oti
Eidomen
paradoxa shmeron
.
17{Kai egeneto en mia twn
hmerwn kai autoV hn didas-
kwn kai hsan kaqhmenoi oi
Fareisaioi kai oi nomodidaska-
loi,} oi hsan elhluqoteV ek
pashV thV kwmhV thV GaleilaiaV
kai IoudaiaV kai Ierousalhm
kai dunamiV kuriou hn
eiV to iasqai auton
.
18Kai idou andreV eferonteV
epi kleinhV anqrwpon
oV hn
paralelumenoV.
Kai ezhtoun auton eisenegkein
kai qeinai auton enwpion autou
.
19Kai mh euronteV
poiaV eisenegkwsin auton
dia ton oclon
anabanteV epi to dwma dia
twn keramwn
kaqhkan auton
sun tw kleinidiw eiV to meson
emprosqen
pantwn.
20Kai idwn thn pistin
autwn eipen,
Anqrwpe, afewntai
soi ai amartiai sou.
21Kai hrxanto
dialogizesqai oi
grammateiV
kai oi Fareisaioi
legonteV
,
TiV estin outoV oV lalei
blasfhmiaV;
TiV dunatai amartiaV
afeinai ei mh monoV o QeoV
;
22EpignouV de o IhsouV
 
touV dialogismouV autwn
apokriqeiV eipen proV autouV,
Ti dialogizesqe
en taiV kardiaiV umwn;
23Ti estin eukopwteron
eipen
afewntai soi ai amartiai sou
h eipen egeire
 
kai peripatei;


24Ina de eidhte oti
o UioV tou Anqrwpou
exousian ecei
epi thV ghV
afienai amartiaV
eipen tw paralelumenw,
Soi legw egeire
kai araV to kleinidion sou
poreuou eiV ton oikon sou.
25Kai paracrhma
anastaV enwpion autwn
araV ef o katekeito

aphlqen eiV ton oikon autou
doxazwn ton Qeon.
26Kai
ekstasiV elaben a
pantaV
kai edoxazon ton Qeon
kai eplhsqhsan fobou
legonteV oti
Eidomen
paradoxa shmeron
.

Notes:

Here are a few comments about the Healing of the Paralytic pericope. I have inserted an extra "guest column" for the next four pericopes from papyrus P88 to provide additional information about the structure.

1. This pericope is the first controversy story in Mark. It has a complex envelope structure typical of Mark's editorial style. A healing miracle in Mk 2:1-5a,11-12 contains a controversy story over who has the authority to forgive sin in Mk 2:5b-10. The healing is explicitly linked to the faith of the men carrying the paralytic and occurs in public. In the controversy section in Mk 2:8, Jesus knows the thoughts of the scribes. This is the first example of a story with this characteristic. Another example occurs in the Beelzebub controversy in Matthew 12:25. Both are likely to derive from the same source. Mk 2:10 is also the first time Jesus uses the self-referential title Son of Man as a Messianic claim. Bruce Brooks has conjectured that the material in Mark 2:1 to 3:6 and synoptic parallels came from a Jewish-Christian "Son of Man" source that was overlaid onto an older Pauline "Son of God" layer of miracle stories. The stories are all controversies with various adversaries that involve disputes over ritual practices or make Messianic claims about Jesus. There is no Messianic Secret in evidence here. The healings are public and occur at a distance.

2. The setting of the story in Mark 2:1 has Jesus returning to Capernaum. The same setting is implied in Matthew 9:1 where Jesus returns to thn idian polin (his own city). Luke leaves the setting more undefined. Lk 5:18-19 has Jesus in a house, presumably in "his own city".

3. The large number of minor agreements between Matthew and Luke have been discussed elsewhere. Perhaps the most obvious is that the paralytic is lying on a krabatton (mat) in Mark and a klinhV (bed) in Matthew and Luke. It would be difficult to explain Luke's editing process based on Mark alone. Luke 5:19,24 describes the bed of the paralytic as a klinidion (little bed). The same verses in D Luke have krabatton (mat). Is krabatton a harmonization to Mark or is klinidion a recension to make the description more consistent with klinhV in Lk 5:18? It's difficult to explain why a redactor would "improve" the text by mixing references to a mat and a bed.

4. This pericope is a good example of the editorial characteristics of W Mark. W Mark is lacking many words and phrases unique to Mark. Some examples are Mk 2:1 di hmerwn (after many days), Mk 2:2 mhde ta proV thn quran (even at the door), Mk 2:3 airomenon upo tessarwn (carried along by four men), and Mk 2:9 kai aron ton krabatton sou (and pick up your mat). Is this a redaction to simplify the text or is the shorter version more original?

5. D Luke, on the other hand, is more expansive in some verses. This pericope clearly shows that D Luke shares more readings with Mark than does Alexandrian Luke. D Luke 5:19, 24b are examples of what seems to be a mixed text of Mark and Luke. Is Mark harmonized with Luke here or were Mark and Luke once closer together? The evidence seems to be explained best by D Luke as a harmony. Could Alexandrian Luke also be a recension? Possibly, although the evidence is less clear. In Lk 5:17 kai dunamiV kuriou hn eiV (and power of the Lord was in), "power of the Lord" could be a later addition. Luke 5:26 has a double ending, kai ekstasiV elaben apantaV kai edoxazon ton Qeon (and excitement seized everyone and they were glorifying God), that is missing in D Luke. This could be a harmonization to Matthew 9:8. In Mark, it is ambiguous whether it is the paralytic or the crowd glorifying God.

6. All three gospels use Ti (Why) in this pericope. This is an unusual practice for Matthew and Luke, who tend to prefer Dia Ti. Some 4th century texts of Mark have the more ambiguous Oti (what/that) as in Mk 2:7 for Codex B and Mk 2:8 for P88. Oti is the more difficult reading and is probably original. The different interrogatives imply there is more than one Alexandrian version or a conflated doublet of Mark's sources. This is supported by two different spellings for mat, krabatton in Codex B, D, and W and krabakton in Codex and P88, and by the command to the paralytic to peripatei (walk) in Codex B and W or upage (go) in Codex and P88. Codex D has a longer version upage eiV ton oikon sou (go to your house).

7. Luke 5:17a {in curly braces} mentions the nomodidaskaloi (teachers of the law) for the first time. This introduction was probably taken from Luke's L source. There is no obvious reason why an editor would mix lawyers in the introduction with scribes in the main body of the story. D Luke 5:17b has hsan de sunelhluqoteV ek pashV kwmhV thV GalilaiaV kai IoudaiaV tou iasqai autouV (and they were coming out of every village of Galilee and Judea to be healed by him). The "they" refers back to the ocloi polloi (many crowds) in Lk 5:15. The substitution of an oi (who) for de in Alexandrian Luke changes the meaning. It is now the Pharisees and teachers of the law who are coming from every village.

8. B Mark 2:5 has afientai (are forgiven) against afewntai (have been forgiven) for , P88, D, and W. B Mark agrees with Mt 9:2 while the others align with Luke 5:20. This is more likely to be a harmonization of B to Matthew than all the other text types to Luke. Mark 2:11 has a difference in word order among the witnesses. B and D have Soi legw egeire in agreement with Luke 5:24 while and P88 have Egeire soi legw. This is another example of an agreement between B and D across text types.

9. B Mark has two interesting omissions that agree with W. In Mk 2:8, outwV (in this manner) is missing from both texts as is legontaV (saying) in Mk 2:12.

10. For the ending of Mark 2:12, Codex * originally had outwV oudepote efanh en tw Israhl (the like has never been seen in Israel) similar to Mt 9:33. It's hard to believe this was a scribal blunder when the two pericopes aren't even the same. It's more likely they share a formulaic ending from a common source.

11. Luke has three agreements with D against B at 5:20, 5:23, and 5:24, which also agree with Mark and Matthew. and D have sou ai amartiai at 5:20 and 5:23 against soi ai amartiai sou in B. and D have tw paralutikw and aron against tw paralelumenw and araV in B. While it's easy to attribute these differences to harmonizations, and D almost never agree against B, and when they do it's usually quoting the words of Jesus. This creates a chicken and egg problem. While these passages are more likely to be harmonized, they are also more likely to be preserved as original readings.

12. There may be two interesting harmonizations of Mark to Alexandrian Luke: o paralutikoV katekeito in Mk 2:4 and ef o katekeito in Lk 5:25 and ekei kaqhmenoi in Mk 2:6 and hsan kaqhmenoi in Lk 5:17. Neither of these are present in D Luke.

13. D Mark 2:12 has euqewV and and B Mark 2:12 have euquV (immediately) in agreement with paracrhma (at once) in Luke 5:25.