Healing of the Paralytic

NA²⁷ Matthew 9:1-8	B Mark 2:1-12	À^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	À^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 exhlqen emprosqen pantwn wste existasqai 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 exhlqen emprosqen pantwn wste existasqai 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 exhlqen emprosqen pantwn wste existasqe 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 katekeimenoV. 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 exhlqen enantion pantwn wste existasqai 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 eidon.	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 apantaV 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 apantaV 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 À and P⁸⁸, and by the command to the paralytic to peripatei (walk) in Codex B and W or upage (go) in Codex À 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 À, 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 À 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 À^* 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. À Luke has three agreements with D against B at 5:20, 5:23, and 5:24, which also agree with Mark and Matthew. À and D have sou ai amartiai at 5:20 and 5:23 against soi ai amartiai sou in B. À and D have tw paralutikw and aron against tw paralelumenw and araV in B. While it's easy to attribute these differences to harmonizations, À 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 À and B Mark 2:12 have euquV (immediately) in agreement with paracrhma (at once) in Luke 5:25.