(b) The Gerasene Demoniac: the Subduing of the Demonic. Ch. 5:1–20
1And they came to the other side of the sea into the country of the Gerasenes.
2And when he came out of the boat, straightway1 there met him out of the tombs a man with an unclean spirit,
3who had his dwelling in the tombs: and no man could any more bind him, no, not with a chain;
4because that he had been often bound with fetters and chains, and the chains had been rent asunder by him, and the fetters broken in pieces: and no man had strength to tame him.
5And always, night and day, in the tombs and in the mountains, he was crying out, and cutting himself with stones.
6And when he saw Jesus from afar, he ran and worshipped him;2
7and crying out with a loud voice he saith, What have I to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of the Most High God? I adjure thee by God, torment me not.
8For he said unto him, Come forth, thou unclean spirit, out of the man.
9And he asked him, What is thy name? And he saith unto him, My name is Legion; for we are many.
10And he besought him much that he would not send them away out of the country.
11Now there was there on the mountain side a great herd of swine feeding.
12And they besought him, saying, Send us into the swine, that we may enter into them.
13And he gave them leave. And the unclean spirits came out, and entered into the swine: and the herd rushed down the steep into the sea, in number about two thousand; and they were drowned in the sea.
14And they that fed them fled, and told it in the city, and in the country. And they came to see what it was that had come to pass.
15And they come to Jesus, and behold him that was possessed with demons sitting, clothed and in his right mind, even him that had the legion: and they were afraid.
16And they that saw it declared unto them how it befell him that was possessed with demons, and concerning the swine.
17And they began to beseech him to depart from their borders.
18And as he was entering into the boat, he that had been possessed with demons besought him that he might be with him.
19And he suffered him not, but saith unto him, Go to thy house unto thy friends, and tell them how great things the Lord hath done for thee, and how he had mercy on thee.
20And he went his way, and began to publish in Decapolis how great things Jesus had done for him: and all men marvelled.
The account of the Gerasene demoniac is elaborately told. The vivid details appear to reflect in part eyewitness report and in part the explanation supplied by townspeople long familiar with the history of the violent man of the tombs.3 Mark has not included the narrative in his Gospel merely because he delights in a well-told story. This account, more graphically than any other in the Gospels, indicates that the function of demonic possession is to distort and destroy the image of God in man.4 The subordinate detail of the destruction of the herd of swine has bearing upon this fact. For this very reason Jesus could not avoid a significant confrontation with demonic possession. His sovereign authority and the quality of the salvation that he brings finds graphic illustration in this historic account.
1 It would normally take two hours or so to cross the lake, but it is impossible to know whether Jesus and the disciples arrived in the evening or morning.5 The point of arrival is indicated in a general way as the district of the Gerasenes, most probably in reference to a town whose name is preserved in the modern Kersa or Koursi.6 At the site of Kersa the shore is level, and there are no tombs. But about a mile further south there is a fairly steep slope within forty yards from the shore, and about two miles from there cavern tombs are found which appear to have been used for dwellings.
2–5 The man who was demon-possessed is elaborately introduced, perhaps in a manner reflecting the excited report of townsmen who had long been familiar with his existence. His dwelling in the midst of the tombs and the inability of chains and fetters to bind him is especially stressed, but every word emphasizes his pathetic condition. The people of the town undoubtedly felt that the man was mad, for his appearance and behavior conformed to the popular diagnosis of insanity.7 In accordance with the practice of the day they had attempted to bind him by chains to protect themselves from his violence. When this proved to be futile, they had driven him off to wander restlessly in the wild hill country and to dwell in the subterranean caves which served as tombs and dwellings for the poorest people of the district.8 At intervals during the night and the day he would be seen among the tombs or on the mountains, wildly shrieking, cutting his flesh with sharp stones,9 attempting to destroy himself and bring to an end the torment of an unbearable existence. In the several features of the description the purpose of demonic possession to distort and destroy the divine likeness of man according to creation is made indelibly clear. The attitude and actions of the people of the town were an added cruelty based on popular misunderstanding. But ultimate responsibility for the wretchedness of the man and the brutal treatment he had endured rested with the demons who had taken possession of the center of his personality.
6–8 The movement of the story, which had been momentarily interrupted by verses 3–5, is now resumed. What had been summed up in Mark’s phrase in verse 2 (“there met him … a man with an unclean spirit”) is now related in more detail. The man had seen Jesus from a distance, and running he fell upon his knees before him. Shrieking with a loud voice the demoniac uttered an adjuration that was violent and fierce.10 Its purpose is entirely defensive; sensing the identity of a dangerous opponent, the unclean spirit raises its voice to defend itself against him.11 The first phrase in this address to Jesus could be rendered “What have I and you in common?” or “Why do you interfere with me?”12 It is surprising to find the demon addressing Jesus by his personal name, although it is possible that he had heard one of the disciples use this form of direct address. What is more noticeable is that the demon is fully aware of Jesus’ divine origin and dignity. “Son of the Most High God” is not a messianic designation but a divine one,13 in spite of the syncretistic associations that gather around the term “Most High.”14 The full address is not a confession of Jesus’ dignity but a desperate attempt to gain control over him or to render him harmless, in accordance with the common assumption of the period that the use of the precise name of an adversary gave one mastery over him. The very strong adjuration “by God” has a strange, ironic ring in the mouth of the demoniac. He senses that he is to be punished and employs the strongest adjuration that he knows. He invokes God’s protection, but the adjuration is without force, for Jesus is the Son of God.15 In the act of kneeling, the defensive use of the divine name and the violent invocation of God to strengthen the plea that Jesus would not torment him, there is the full recognition of Jesus’ superior power on the part of the demon. On this understanding verse 8 is in its original position.16 Jesus is sufficiently powerful that the demon at once understands that it must now leave its victim. An explicit command is scarcely necessary, and comes almost as an after-thought. It is put in the form of a subordinate clause, and Mark’s historic imperfect may be translated “For he had said to him, Unclean spirit, come forth out of the man.”
9–10 Jesus now demands to know the demon’s name, and for the first time there is indicated the full degree of distortion to which the man was subjected: not one but a multitude of alien forces had taken possession of the volitional and active ego of the man (“My name is Legion, for we are many”). The term “Legion” is not strictly a Latinism (legio); like other military and governmental terms, it had entered the language and is found not only in Hellenistic Greek but in Aramaic as well. It is difficult to know what meaning to place upon the term.17 The answer may express the man’s sense of being possessed by an aggregate of uncoordinated impulses and evil forces which have so impaired his ego that the spirits speak and act through him. If so, this response may be an appeal for compassion. It is a pathetic admission of the loss of all sense of identity. On the other hand, the answer may be evasive, the demons desiring to withhold their true names from Jesus in a desperate attempt to thwart his power.18 It is also possible that the name may have been selected to invoke the fear of a powerful name. It is probable that the many demons can be referred to as a single being because they are in common possession of the same victim, but it is not possible to ascertain the exact nuance expressed in the term “Legion.”19 The demoniac made repeated requests that he not be sent out of the district, a conception which has parallels elsewhere.20
11–13 The reference to the herd of swine grazing on the mountainside is not strange in a narrative which takes place in the Decapolis, with its predominantly Gentile population. It is simply another indication of the pagan environment. The demons made a specific request to enter into the swine, and when Jesus complied, the demons left the man and entered their new hosts. In panic the herd rushed down the slope into the sea and drowned. This element in the narrative has invited special attention and varied conjectures, which need not be reviewed here.21 What must be seen above all else is that the fate of the swine demonstrates the ultimate intention of the demons with respect to the man they had possessed. It is their purpose to destroy the creation of God, and halted in their destruction of a man, they fulfilled their purpose with the swine.
The drowning of the swine was not an unforeseen consequence in Jesus’ concession; it was the express purpose which lay behind the request of the demons. Accordingly, the question why Jesus allowed them to enter the swine must be faced. The answer would seem to have two elements. First, Jesus recognized that the time of the ultimate vanquishment of the demons had not yet come; his encounter and triumph over the demonic does not yet put an end to Satan’s power. It is the pledge and the symbol of that definitive triumph, but the time when that triumph will be fully realized is yet deferred. It must await the appointment of God.22 Therefore, Jesus allows the demons to continue their destructive work, but not upon a man.23 The second element is related to this: Jesus allowed the demons to enter the swine to indicate beyond question that their real purpose was the total destruction of their host. While this point may have been obscured in the case of the man, there was the blatant evidence in the instance of the swine. Their intention was no different with regard to the man whom they had possessed.
14–15 The herdsmen who had tended the swine fled the scene and hastened to the town and the small hamlets surrounding it24 to report the loss to the owners. As a result people came quickly together to see what had happened. By a series of three participles Mark emphasizes the features which must have gripped the attention of those who came: they saw Jesus and the man who had been possessed seated, clothed and restored to wholeness of mind.25 Mark adds with emphasis, “the one who had been possessed by the legion.” The man whom neither chains nor men could restrain was sitting in a docile manner before Jesus; he who had terrified others as he ran naked among the tombs was now clothed; the one who had shrieked wildly and behaved violently was now fully recovered. So radical was the transformation that the townspeople were stunned and frightened.
16–17 In the lively discussion which followed, the herdsmen told their story once again. To them the one who had been possessed was doubtless no stranger, and they made mention of him. But Mark indicates that they had not forgotten the swine, and the emphatic position of the phrase “and concerning the swine” suggests that this was foremost in their thought. The consequence was the pathetic request of the inhabitants that Jesus leave them. Their motive may well have been that they were afraid to have in their midst one whose power was as great as that which Jesus had demonstrated.26
18–20 In sharp contrast to the fear of the inhabitants is the devotion of the man who formerly had been possessed. As Jesus entered the boat the man begged Jesus that “he might be with him.” Mark’s formulation appears to be a technical one for discipleship.27 The desire of the man to accompany Jesus is the response of gratitude, and indicates that Jesus is not some strange divine-man who is to be feared. He is the one who bestows healing that is redemptive, and who calls forth the devotion of those who have received his benefactions. Jesus refused the man permission to accompany him, but instructed him to return to the circle of family28 and friends from whom he had been estranged and to declare29 all that the Lord had done in extending mercy to him. In obedience30 the man went his way and began to publish in the Decapolis31 the outstanding things which Jesus had done for him, so that men marvelled. It was natural that he should have spoken openly of Jesus, for God had extended his mercy to him through Jesus.
It is striking that no restriction is placed upon the man by Jesus, in contrast to the injunctions to silence found in other instances of healing. The accent falls upon apprehension of the divine action and declaration in a manner which anticipates the primitive Christian mission rather than upon secrecy and silence. This may be due to the fact that the man was a Gentile and his proclamation is confined to a predominantly Gentile area. It is, nevertheless, an exception to the more usual pattern observed by Jesus in Galilee. It should also be observed that the object of the man’s declaration was not the person of Jesus directly, but what Jesus had done in restoring him to wholeness. Thus in the midst of the Gentiles, the God of Israel was glorified through the proclamation of what Jesus had accomplished.
The story was remembered in the tradition because of the dramatic evidence it offered of the purpose of demonic possession and of the full deliverance brought by Jesus. It declared that the victory of Jesus over evil forces is a reality in which the liberating power of the Kingdom of God is manifested in an extension of the saving mercy of God.
(c) The Plea of Jairus. Ch. 5:21–24
21And when Jesus had crossed over again in the boat32 unto the other side, a great multitude was gathered unto him; and he was by the sea.
22And there cometh one of the rulers of the synagogue, Jairus by name;33 and seeing him, he falleth at his feet,
23and beseecheth him much, saying, My little daughter is at the point of death: I pray thee, that thou come and lay thy hands on her, that she may be made whole and live.
24And he went with him;34 and a great multitude followed him, and they thronged him.
The narrative of the radical healing of Jairus’ daughter is presented in two parts (Ch. 5:21–24, 35–43) which are separated by the account of the healing of the woman who had lived with a hemorrhage for twelve years. The two incidents may have become associated in this way merely because there was an interruption to the journey which proved disastrous for the young girl. But it is possible that Mark saw more in this association: the healing of a woman who has lived with the impingement of death anticipates the healing of a girl who has actually experienced death. The structural device of intercalating one incident within another is paralleled by other instances in which Mark uses the device of anticipation. The detail with which Mark recalls the woman with the hemorrhage indicates that his concern extends beyond the mere passage of time. The healing experienced by the woman is itself a reversal of death and a pledge of the raising of Jairus’ daughter.35
21–24 Jesus returned to the western shore of the lake, perhaps to Capernaum,36 and a multitude gathered around him while he was yet by the Sea. No indication is given whether the crowd came together as soon as he arrived or after an extended period of time; it is simply the first fact that Mark records, offering a contrast to Jesus’ experience on the eastern shore where the inhabitants urged him to depart. All of the interest is focused upon Jairus37 and his urgent appeal to Jesus. He may have had contact with Jesus previously, since as synagogue-ruler he was a lay official responsible for supervision of the building and arranging the service.38 His request that Jesus should come and lay hands in healing upon his daughter reflects a common practice of the day.39 What was unusual was his confidence that if Jesus would come, his daughter’s life would be saved. Jesus went with him, followed by the crowd. Mark’s reference to the fact that they were pressing all around him prepares for the following account of the woman who touched Jesus in order to be healed.
(d) The Woman with the Hemorrhage. Ch. 5:25–34
25And a woman, who had an issue of blood40 twelve years,
26and had suffered many things of many physicians, and had spent all that she had, and was nothing bettered, but rather grew worse,
27having heard the things concerning Jesus, came in the crowd behind, and touched his garment.
28For she said, If I touch but his garments, I shall be made whole.
29And straightway the fountain of her blood was dried up;41 and she felt in her body that she was healed of her plague.
30And straightway Jesus, perceiving in himself that the power proceeding from him had gone forth, turned him about in the crowd, and said, Who touched my garments?
31And his disciples said unto him, Thou seest the multitude thronging thee, and sayest thou, Who touched me?
32And he looked round about to see her that had done this thing.
33But the woman fearing and trembling, knowing what had been done to her, came and fell down before him, and told him all the truth.
34And he said unto her, Daughter, thy faith hath made thee whole; go in peace, and be whole of thy plague.42
25–27 The woman who unobtrusively touched Jesus had experienced a flow of blood for a period of twelve years. It is common to think of chronic hemorrhaging from the womb,43 but from Mark’s description it is not possible to know the cause for her loss of blood.44 She had consulted a number of physicians, had endured a wide variety of treatments, and had spent all of her money in a desperate attempt to better her condition. All this was in vain; in fact, her condition grew worse. Her existence was wretched because she was in a constant state of uncleanness and would be generally shunned by people since contact with her rendered others unclean.45 What she had experienced from the doctors may be estimated from the Talmud, which has preserved a record of the medicines and treatments applied to an illness of this nature.46 None of these remedies had benefited the woman. Having heard reports of the healing power of Jesus, she determined her course of action. Despite her ritual uncleanness she entered the crowd behind him and reached out to his garment. The desire to touch Jesus’ clothing probably reflects the popular belief that the dignity and power of a person are transferred to what he wears.47 On this understanding, her touch combined faith with quasi-magical notions which were widespread in that day.
28–29 The intense conviction that if she could only touch Jesus’ garments she would be made whole was undoubtedly part of “the whole truth” which the woman declared before Jesus (verse 33). She may have known that others had touched him and had been made well (cf. Ch. 3:10; 6:56). At the moment she had fulfilled her intention she experienced the cessation of her hemorrhage, and knew that she had been healed.
30–32 Concurrent with the moment of healing, Jesus knew that “power” had gone forth from him. This unusual expression, which occurs only here in Mark’s Gospel, must be interpreted from the context of “the power of God” in the Scripture. Power is a constitutive element in the biblical concept of the personal God.48 Jesus possesses the power of God as the representative of the Father. Nevertheless, the Father remains in control of his own power. The healing of the woman occurred through God’s free and gracious decision to bestow upon her the power which was active in Jesus. By an act of sovereign will God determined to honor the woman’s faith in spite of the fact that it was tinged with ideas which bordered on magic.
Jesus’ question “Who touched my garments?” seemed pointless to the disciples since he had been jostled and touched by a host of individuals. Their impatience with the Lord reflects an awareness that their immediate mission was to assist a girl who was dying, and delay could be fatal. It also betrays that they had no understanding of what had taken place. Certainly not every contact with the person of Jesus resulted in a transmission of power. Involved in the situation was not a unilateral event in which touch released power, but a mutual event in which the personal relationship between Jesus and the woman released power.49 Jesus, therefore, could not allow the woman to recede into the crowd still entertaining ideas tinged with superstition and magic. He stopped and looked intently upon the people surrounding him in order to see who50 had touched him with an expectation of salvation.
33–34 With fear and trembling the woman acknowledged all that had happened. Her action in making herself known indicates both courage and gratitude, and it is here that the accent should fall rather than upon her fear. Mark places all of the emphasis upon the fact that she knew she had experienced the healing of her person. With awe, and only partial understanding of what had taken place, she declared the truth to Jesus.
Jesus’ insistence that the woman identify herself, together with his gentle correction of any erroneous ideas she may have had, calls attention to the essential aspect of her experience. It was the grasp of her faith rather than her hand that had secured the healing she sought. Her touch had brought together two elements—faith and Jesus—and that had made it effective.51 Power had gone forth from Jesus to the woman for the precise reason that she sought healing from him.52 The woman’s faith that Jesus could make her well expressed an appropriate decision with respect to his person.
The final words spoken to the woman, “Go in peace,” are a traditional valediction,53 but here are informed by her entire experience. The peace with which she departed signified more than release from agitation over a wretched existence or from fear of recrimination for having touched Jesus. It was the profound experience of well-being which is related to salvation from God. When Jesus declares, “Be whole from your affliction,” he confirms that her healing was permanent and affirms his active participation with the Father’s will to honor the woman’s faith.
Later tradition embellished the Gospel account, seeking to answer the questions asked by generations of people. In the Greek tradition the anonymous woman was given the name Berenice, while in the Coptic and Latin tradition she received the related name Veronica.54 Eusebius states that she was from Caesarea Philippi, and that by the door of her home there was erected on a high stone a copper statue of a woman kneeling, her hands outstretched before her, entreating one purported to resemble Jesus. At the feet of the male figure a “strange sort of herb” is said to grow on the column which possessed medicinal powers against a wide variety of diseases.55 In this way the evangelical tradition was embellished. What was not appreciated was that the woman had experienced an aspect of salvation in anticipation of the more radical healing to be experienced by the daughter of Jairus. From Mark’s perspective, the entire incident is a call for radical faith.
(e) The Raising of Jairus’ Daughter: the Subduing of Death. Ch. 5:35–43
35While he yet spake, they came from the ruler of the synagogue’s house, saying, Thy daughter is dead: why troublest thou the Teacher any further?
36But Jesus, not heeding the word spoken,56 saith unto the ruler of the synagogue, Fear not, only believe.
37And he suffered no man to follow with him, save Peter, and James, and John the brother of James.
38And they come to the house of the ruler of the synagogue; and he beholdeth a tumult, and many weeping and wailing greatly.
39And when he was entered in, he saith unto them, Why make ye a tumult, and weep? the child is not dead, but sleepeth.
40And they laughed him to scorn. But he, having put them all forth, taketh the father of the child and her mother and them that were with him, and goeth in where the child was.
41And taking the child by the hand, he saith unto her, Talitha cumi;57 which is, being interpreted, Damsel, I say unto thee, Arise.
42And straightway the damsel rose up, and walked; for she was twelve years old. And they were amazed straightway58 with a great amazement.
43And he charged them much that no man should know this: and he commanded that something should be given her to eat.
35–37 The healing of the woman with a chronic hemorrhage resulted in a delay which was catastrophic for the young girl. A party from the home informed the synagogue official that his daughter had died; any further disturbance of Jesus was futile. Jesus heard what they said but deliberately ignored its import. His response, “fear not, only believe,” was a call for intense faith. Jairus had exercised faith when he came to Jesus in the confidence that he could save his daughter. He had witnessed the healing of the woman which demonstrated the relationship between faith and divine help. But he was now asked to believe that his child would live even as he stood in the presence of death. Such faith is radical trust in the ability of Jesus to confront a crisis situation with the power of God.59
Jesus would not allow any of those who had accompanied him to continue with him except the father and the three disciples who sustained a more intimate relationship to him, Peter, James and John. The seriousness of the situation demanded that only those whom Jesus chose as witnesses60 should know what really took place.
38–39 Arriving at the house Jesus saw that preparations had been made already for the funeral. The minstrels and professional mourners were performing their duties as the first part of the mourning ceremony.61 The wailing consisted of choral or antiphonal song accompanied by handclapping. Since even the poorest man was required by common custom to hire a minimum of two fluteplayers and one professional mourner in the event of his wife’s death,62 it is probable that one who held the rank of synagogue-ruler would be expected to hire a large number of professional mourners.63 It was necessary to remove the mourners from the girl’s room. Jesus rebuked their noisy tumult and declared, “the child is not dead, but is sleeping.” His statement is ambiguous,64 and could allow the interpretation that the girl was in a state of very deep unconsciousness that is to be distinguished from death itself. Jesus demonstrated his mercy to the girl at a highly critical moment when he healed her.65 It is certain, however, that this is not Luke’s understanding of what took place because he speaks of resuscitation.66 It is probable that Mark intended his account to be understood in the same way.67 Jesus’ statement means that in spite of the girl’s real death, she has not been delivered over to the realm of death with all of its consequences. Mourning is inappropriate because she experiences a sleep from which she will soon awake.
40–42 The mourners were absolutely certain that the girl was dead, and responded to Jesus’ words with scornful laughter.68 The fact that wailing and tears could be exchanged so quickly for laughter indicates how conventional and artificial the mourning customs had become.69 Jesus cast the scoffers out of the house, and allowing only the parents of the girl and his three disciples to accompany him, entered the room where the young girl lay. Taking hold of her hand he spoke the Aramaic words Talitha cumi, “Little girl, arise.” The girl rose up and walked about, for she was already a “young daughter” according to Jewish classification.70
The retention of Aramaic formulae in Marcan healing contexts (Chs. 5:41; 7:34) has led to the conjecture that, analogous to pagan custom, the early Christians commonly believed in the efficacy of esoteric utterances composed of foreign or incomprehensible words.71 There is no support for this proposal either in Mark or in the subsequent tradition. The evangelist retains Aramaic with translation in other contexts unrelated to healing.72 Moreover, there is no evidence that “Talitha cumi” or “Ephphatha” were ever used by Christian healers as a magic spell.73 Their presence in the narrative reflects a faithfulness to the tradition that Jesus had actually spoken these words on specific occasions.74
The unpreparedness of the parents and the disciples for what they had witnessed is expressed with emphatic language. There was, apparently, no doubt in their minds that they had stood in the presence of death. God had intervened so dramatically they were left speechless with utter amazement.
43 Mark records that Jesus strictly charged those present not to disclose to others what had happened. This injunction to silence has attracted particular attention, for it is alleged to be impracticable. It was widely known that the girl had died; it would be impossible to keep her in isolation for an extended period of time. Accordingly, William Wrede and others75 have found in Ch. 5:43 strong confirmation that the secrecy phenomena in the Gospel is a theological construction for which Mark himself is responsible.
It is clear, however, that this context lends no support to the theory of secret messiahship, as Wrede conceived it. Fundamental to the narrative is the remarkable disclosure of Jesus’ authority made to the parents of the girl and the disciples. These five received the privilege of a special revelation which they were not to share with others. The secret is, accordingly, “a witnessed secret” which is to be kept from others whom Jesus had excluded. The accent of the narrative alternates between disclosure of the messiahship and veiling. Special motivation for the injunction to silence may be found in the rank unbelief of those who had ridiculed Jesus with their scornful laughter. It is clear throughout Mark that Jesus revealed his messiahship only with reserve. It is appropriate to this consistent pattern of behavior that he was unwilling to make himself known to the raucous, unbelieving group that had gathered outside Jairus’ house.76 He did not permit them to witness the saving action by which the girl was restored to her parents, and he directed that it should continue to remain unknown to those outside. He recognized that the responsibility of the parents in this regard could not continue indefinitely. When the child appeared in public the facts would speak for themselves. The parents could, however, withhold what had happened and thus fulfill the intention of Jesus.77 Before it was known that the girl was yet alive, the purpose for which the charge had been given would have been fulfilled; Jesus would have departed and could no longer be subject to ostentatious acclaim.78
There is a fine human touch in Mark’s final note, that in the midst of the excitement and confusion Jesus realized that the girl would need food.
The resuscitation of Jairus’ daughter is both a deed of compassion and a pledge of the conquering power of Jesus over the combined forces of death and unbelief, in which the Kingdom of God was disclosed as a saving reality. It is precisely in deliverance from death that the salvation which Jesus brings finds its most pointed expression.79