Five-minute study · Day 182 · Mark 1
Mark 1:41
A word worth stopping on: moved with compassion σπλαγχνίζομαι splanchnizomai
A leper kneels in front of Jesus. Under Levitical law, this man should not be anywhere near a crowd. He is ritually unclean, socially dead, required to shout 'Unclean!' as a warning to anyone who comes close. He has broken every boundary to get to Jesus. And the Greek word that describes Jesus' response is splanchnizomai. Most manuscripts say 'moved with compassion.' One ancient manuscript, Codex Bezae, says something different. It says Jesus was angry.
Word study: moved with compassion
- Greek
- σπλαγχνίζομαι
- Pronounced
- splanchnizomai
- Strong's
- G4697
- Definition
- To be moved in the inward parts, to feel compassion in the viscera. From splanchna, the entrails, the guts.
Splanchnizomai is a word rooted in the body. BDAG defines it as 'to have pity or compassion,' but the etymology is blunter: it comes from splanchna, the internal organs, specifically the intestines, liver, and lungs. In Greek thought, the splanchna were the seat of deep feeling, the way English speakers locate emotion in the heart. To be splanchnizomai is to feel something so deeply that your guts clench.
The Synoptic Gospels use this word twelve times, and only for Jesus or for characters in Jesus' parables. The father in the Prodigal Son story is splanchnizomai when he sees his son coming home (Luke 15:20). The Good Samaritan is splanchnizomai when he sees the beaten man on the road (Luke 10:33). Jesus is splanchnizomai when he sees the crowds like sheep without a shepherd (Matthew 9:36), when he encounters the widow of Nain walking behind her dead son (Luke 7:13), when he looks at the hungry multitude (Matthew 14:14).
The textual variant in Mark 1:41 is one of the most debated in New Testament scholarship. Most manuscripts read splanchnizomai. Codex Bezae (D), a fifth-century manuscript with a reputation for unusual readings, has orgistheis, 'angered' or 'becoming angry.' Metzger's Textual Commentary notes that the harder reading (anger) may be original, since later scribes would naturally soften anger to compassion, while there is no obvious reason a scribe would change compassion to anger.
Ehrman's 'Orthodox Corruption of Scripture' argues the anger is directed at the disease itself, or at the social system that marginalized the leper. Jesus is angry that this man has been forced to live outside the community, angry at what the illness has stolen from him. If orgistheis is original, the compassion is still there. It is the compassion of someone furious at what has been done to the person standing in front of him.
Historical context · Second Temple Judaism, first century AD
Life Outside the Camp
Leviticus 13-14 lays out the regulations for tzara'at, the skin disease commonly translated 'leprosy.' The affected person was declared unclean by a priest, required to wear torn clothes, leave their hair unkempt, cover their upper lip, and cry 'Unclean, unclean!' as they walked (Leviticus 13:45). They lived outside the camp, separated from family, community, and worship.
The social death was comprehensive. The Mishnah (Negaim 13:7) specifies that a person with tzara'at could not enter any walled city. In the first century, lepers formed small communities outside towns, dependent on whatever food and charity reached them. They could not enter the synagogue. They could not participate in festivals. They could not touch or be touched.
The leper in Mark 1 has violated the boundary. He has entered a space where people are gathered, approached Jesus directly, and knelt before him. Mark does not record the crowd's reaction. The social violation would have been shocking. Everyone within several feet of this man was now ritually contaminated.
Jesus' response breaks the boundary in the other direction. Mark 1:41 says he 'put forth his hand, and touched him.' The verb is haptomai. Jesus could have healed with a word. He chose physical contact. In the purity system of Second Temple Judaism, the touch should have made Jesus unclean. Mark's narrative reverses the flow: the cleanness moves from Jesus to the leper. The touch does not contaminate Jesus. It heals the man.
The instruction in verse 44, 'show thyself to the priest, and offer for thy cleansing those things which Moses commanded,' sends the healed man back through the official reintegration process of Leviticus 14. Jesus does not bypass the system. He fulfills it.
For reflection
Jesus touched the man before healing him. The word came after the hand. Think about someone in your life who is isolated, cut off from community for any reason. What would it look like to reach toward that person before you have a solution to their problem?
The touch was the point. The healing could have happened without it. Jesus chose contact.
Sources: BDAG; Metzger, 'Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament'; Ehrman, 'Orthodox Corruption of Scripture'; Mishnah Negaim 13:7