In this “Synoptic Sequences” series, we are working through some of the sequential differences which one finds when comparing Matthew’s Gospel to Mark’s Gospel, with the hope that the differences can be explained in a way that is consistent with my early Matthew proposition. Therefore, we’re approaching these sequential differences with the following assumptions:
- Matthew was published coincident with the events in Acts 10–11 and Mark shortly thereafter, with full knowledge of Matthew’s text.
- Because Matthew wrote within a decade of the resurrection, his Jewish audience would expect for his account to be chronologically and sequentially accurate, consistent with their knowledge of Jesus.
- Mark worked from Peter’s teachings, which Papias says Peter adapted to meet the needs of his audiences, and therefore the stories in Mark’s Gospel are sometimes arranged topically.
The problem statement
Matthew and Mark do not align, with regard to when the hemorrhaging woman was healed. In Matthew, the woman is healed after Jesus speaks to her. In Mark, the woman is healed after she touches his garment.
And behold, a woman … touched the fringe of his garment … Jesus turned, and seeing her he said, “Take heart, daughter; your faith has made you well.” And instantly the woman was made well. (Matthew 9:20–22 ESV).
And there was a woman who had had a discharge of blood for twelve years … [she] came up behind him in the crowd and touched his garment. And immediately [Mark: euthus; Luke: parachrēma] the flow of blood dried up … And Jesus, perceiving in himself that power had gone out from him, immediately turned about in the crowd and said, “Who touched my garments?” (Mark 5:25–30 ESV)
The NASB, NIV, NLT, LSB, CSB, and NRSB offer similar translations, implying that the the healing instantly followed the dialog.
Resolving the problem
This is a discrepancy which is introduced by the above English translations. It is not a discrepancy if the underlying Greek text of Matthew is considered. In this instance the KJV is actually better than many of our modern translations.
But Jesus … said, “Daughter …” And the woman was made whole from that hour (apo tēs hōras ekeinēs). (Matt. 9:22 KJV)
The BSB, NKJV, NET, and Young’s offer similar translations, using the more general “from that hour,” which allows for the healing to have happened at the time that the woman touched the garment, rather than following Jesus’s statement. Accordingly, let this be a warning that translators must be aware of the collateral impacts of their translation decisions. In this case, they created an unnecessary contradiction with a parallel Gospel passage.
There are two other passages in Matthew where a similar translation choice was made for handling apo tēs hōras ekeinēs; however, I don’t believe that either of these create sequential difficulties with parallel accounts:
- Matthew 15:28, with the healing of the demon possessed daughter of the Canaanite woman (or Syrophoenician, in Mark 7:24–30) .
- Matthew 17:18, with the healing of the demon possessed boy.
