Yahoo Canada Web Search

Search results

      • After Jesus “had spit [ptusas, temporal participle] on [or, into] his eyes and put His hands on him, He asked him if he saw anything” (Mark 8:23). The man answers that he can only see in an incomplete manner: “I see men like trees, walking” (Mark 8:24). The Lord then lays His hands on him again and then he is completely healed of his blindness.
      faithalone.org/journal-articles/jesus-use-of-spittle-in-mark-822-26/
  1. Jan 4, 2022 · To heal a man born blind, Jesus “spit on the ground, made some mud with the saliva, and put it on the man’s eyes” (John 9:6). Certainly, Jesus, the divine Son of God, does not need physical props to work miracles.

  2. Dec 14, 2010 · Jesus takes his spit and rubs it on the blind man’s eyes. This is a bit odd, don’t you think? Jesus takes spit from his own mouth and applies it to the one who is so severely afflicted by the venom of sin’s curse.

    • I. Introduction
    • II. The Use of Spittle in The Ancient World
    • III. Spittle in Jewish Sources
    • IV. Mark 8 and The Synoptic Problem
    • V. Jesus’ Use of The Spittle
    • VI. Jesus’ “Disgraceful” Teaching
    • VII. A Call to Follow Christ
    • VIII. The Meaning of Discipleship
    • IX. Conclusion

    Recently, I read a thesis done in 1999 on Jesus’ use of spittle in the healing of the blind man in Mark 8:22-26. The author of the thesis is Sarah Bourgeois and it was completed at Dallas Theological Seminary.1 This healing in Mark is interesting for a couple of reasons. One is that this is the only place where Jesus heals a person in a two-stage p...

    Bourgeois devotes a chapter to how spittle was viewed by the ancient world.4 She discusses the topic from a variety of sources, including Persian, Greek, and Jewish writers that date from the sixth century BC through NT times. Some of these sources indicate that spitting in public was considered impolite and beneath the dignity of somebody in leade...

    Bourgeios has a fairly lengthy discussion on how Jewish sources, such as the OT and Apocrypha, treat spittle.12 An important point to notice is that at the time of Christ, there is no evidence that the Jews saw spittle as having healing properties. It is only in later writings, such as the Talmud, that one finds instances of using spittle to heal. ...

    As Bourgeois points out, this account of Jesus’ healing by using spittle is sometimes used in the Synoptic debate.18 Some who believe that Mark was written first argue that Jesus’ action of spitting in the man’s face was seen as offensive. The account (as well as the account in Mark 7:33-36) is not found in Luke and Matthew supposedly because Luke ...

    As stated above, particularly in Jewish writings, spittle was not used for healing purposes. In none of the ancient literature do we find a parallel with Jesus’ healing here in Mark 8. It also needs to be noted that the text itself suggests that the spittle was not what healed the man. Jesus spit once, but laid hands on the man twice. It seems that...

    Bourgeois’s thesis does an outstanding job of pointing out that the spitting in this man’s face is best understood as a disgraceful and disgusting act. It also contributes to the idea that this is a picture of the disciples’ understanding of Jesus. After the healing of the blind man at Bethsaida, Jesus begins His journey to Jerusalem. In Jerusalem,...

    After telling the disciples that He is going to suffer and die, the Lord then gives them the opportunity of following Him (8:34-38). Since He is going to the cross in the supreme act of self-denial, He tells them that if they follow Him they must also take up their crosses and deny themselves. Like Him, they must give up their lives. In other words...

    In Mark 8, Jesus not only makes a startling statement about what awaits Him in Jerusalem, He also makes a startling statement about what it means to follow Him (Mark 8:34-38). It is a serious mistake to equate following Jesus with becoming a believer. When one believes in Jesus for eternal life they receive it as a free gift. The NT makes this clea...

    Bourgeois makes an important contribution to the meaning of the whole discipleship section of Mark. When Jesus spit into the eyes of the blind man at Bethsaida such actions would have stood out. It was not the normal practice of Jews in the first century to spit in the eyes of a blind person to heal such blindness. There is not a single parallel in...

  3. In His miracles, Jesus usually just touched a person with His hands. For this man who was born blind, Jesus uses His spit and mud applied to the man’s eyes in order to restore the man’s sight. It is interesting that the man has been in darkness from birth. He has never seen the light of day.

  4. Jul 7, 2010 · He looked up and said, "I see people; they look like trees walking around." Once more Jesus put his hands on the man's eyes. Then his eyes were opened, his sight was restored, and he saw everything clearly. (Mark 8:24-25)

  5. Christ's taking the blind man by the hand, and leading him out or the town, and spitting on his eyes, and putting his hands upon him, and then asking him if he saw ought, are emblematical of what he does in spiritual conversion, when he turns men from darkness to light: he takes them by the hand, which expresses his condescension, grace, and ...

  6. People also ask

  7. Feb 5, 2020 · The early church father Papias affirmed that Mark carefully wrote down the apostolic preaching of Peter. We read of a two-step healing because Jesus, historically, in space and time, healed the man in two stages. Looking back to the actual historical event, though, why did Jesus heal in this way?

  1. People also search for