Matthew 9:35: Jesus Heals Every Disease and Sickness
Hover over the references to see the Biblical text
Matthew 9:35
What I am about to say will annoy some Christians (I know this because it would have incensed the younger me).
Sometimes the Bible uses hyperbole.
That idea is relevant when reading Matthew 9:35 because the Greek word pas, which means all (see Mounce), is used twice in the verse. The text tells us, in effect, that Jesus visited all the Jewish settlements, large and small, and healed every sickness. If we read this literally, it tells us Jesus went to absolutely every Jewish settlement, at least in the Galilean region, and healed every last, single, individual, sick person.
The issue with an absolutely literal translation is that it does not make sense in the larger narrative. For example, just a few verses further on (Matthew 10:1), Jesus gives the twelve disciples authority "over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal every kind of disease and every kind of sickness" (Matthew 10:1) and sends them out with instructions to visit only the Jewish settlements (Matthew 10:6), specifically telling them to heal the sick (and raise the dead, cleanse lepers, and cast out demons) (Matthew 10:8). But what sick people are they to heal if Jesus just visited all those locations and already healed everyone?
The crippled beggar in Acts 3 becomes problematic too. The text there tells us the man was crippled from birth and brought to the temple gate in Jerusalem every day to beg. If Jesus went to all the settlements and healed all the sick, how do we account for a cripple living in Jerusalem (the most Jewish of settlements) and present every day at the temple, but who remains unhealed during Jesus earthly ministry?
Furthermore, right after Jesus sends out the twelve, he returns to itinerant preaching and, when John the Baptist sends his disciples to ask Jesus for reassurance that he really is the messiah, Jesus instructs them to “Go back and tell John what you hear and see: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosy are cured, the deaf hear, and the good news is preached to the poor” (Matthew 11:5). Is it really reasonable to assume that all the sick people Jesus is now healing (in addition to the sick his disciples have been sent to heal) have just immigrated to the area or have only become sick since Jesus’ last visit?
In contrast, given that Matthew 9:35 comes at the end of the last major section of Matthew’s gospel devoted to miraculous signs and wonders1, I think it is reasonable to see the verse as a summary statement about Jesus' ministry intended to emphasize—through hyperbole—that a lot of miracles accompanied his preaching of the Kingdom.
Now, if we read the verse as a hyperbolic summary of Jesus ministry as a healer and miracle worker, we do not need to read it as saying Jesus visited absolutely every Jewish settlement or that he healed absolutely every sick person. Although I favor the hyperbolic reading of Matthew 9:35, things become problematic for me at this point. Am I now to allow for a reading of Matthew (possibly of all the Gospels) that allows for Jesus failing to heal some people? I see no verses that directly support that idea. Even when Jesus visits his own home town and is appalled by their lack of faith, Matthew only tells us Jesus “did not do many miracles there,” not that he tried but failed. In fact, nowhere in the New Testament is there any suggestion that Jesus was ever unable to heal someone.
My conclusion, then, is that Jesus traveled widely and visited a great many villages and towns/cities, and that wherever he went he healed all the sick that came to him asking for help. I think this fits the literal narrative while acknowledging the use of hyperbole. A literal reading does not fit the broader narrative, but applying the hyperbole too generally also fails us because we end up with a Jesus who sometimes finds himself unable to perform miracles, and that would be reading into the text something that it never even suggests.
FOOTNOTES: 1. While there are a few miracles recounted later in the gospel, those are presented sporadically rather than grouped as in chapters eight and nine. In fact, those two chapters contain nine specific healing accounts (including the raising of the dead girl and the exorcism of the Gadarene demoniacs) and two mentions of Jesus healing multitudes. There is a subsequent smaller grouping (two specific accounts and one of multitudes healed) in chapter 12. The remaining four miraculous healing accounts (three specific and one of multitudes healed) appear individually. See Miracles' Characteristics Tabulated page for a list of miraculous healings in Matthew.
Matthew 9:35
What I am about to say will annoy some Christians (I know this because it would have incensed the younger me).
Sometimes the Bible uses hyperbole.
That idea is relevant when reading Matthew 9:35 because the Greek word pas, which means all (see Mounce), is used twice in the verse. The text tells us, in effect, that Jesus visited all the Jewish settlements, large and small, and healed every sickness. If we read this literally, it tells us Jesus went to absolutely every Jewish settlement, at least in the Galilean region, and healed every last, single, individual, sick person.
The issue with an absolutely literal translation is that it does not make sense in the larger narrative. For example, just a few verses further on (Matthew 10:1), Jesus gives the twelve disciples authority "over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal every kind of disease and every kind of sickness" (Matthew 10:1) and sends them out with instructions to visit only the Jewish settlements (Matthew 10:6), specifically telling them to heal the sick (and raise the dead, cleanse lepers, and cast out demons) (Matthew 10:8). But what sick people are they to heal if Jesus just visited all those locations and already healed everyone?
The crippled beggar in Acts 3 becomes problematic too. The text there tells us the man was crippled from birth and brought to the temple gate in Jerusalem every day to beg. If Jesus went to all the settlements and healed all the sick, how do we account for a cripple living in Jerusalem (the most Jewish of settlements) and present every day at the temple, but who remains unhealed during Jesus earthly ministry?
Furthermore, right after Jesus sends out the twelve, he returns to itinerant preaching and, when John the Baptist sends his disciples to ask Jesus for reassurance that he really is the messiah, Jesus instructs them to “Go back and tell John what you hear and see: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosy are cured, the deaf hear, and the good news is preached to the poor” (Matthew 11:5). Is it really reasonable to assume that all the sick people Jesus is now healing (in addition to the sick his disciples have been sent to heal) have just immigrated to the area or have only become sick since Jesus’ last visit?
In contrast, given that Matthew 9:35 comes at the end of the last major section of Matthew’s gospel devoted to miraculous signs and wonders1, I think it is reasonable to see the verse as a summary statement about Jesus' ministry intended to emphasize—through hyperbole—that a lot of miracles accompanied his preaching of the Kingdom.
Now, if we read the verse as a hyperbolic summary of Jesus ministry as a healer and miracle worker, we do not need to read it as saying Jesus visited absolutely every Jewish settlement or that he healed absolutely every sick person. Although I favor the hyperbolic reading of Matthew 9:35, things become problematic for me at this point. Am I now to allow for a reading of Matthew (possibly of all the Gospels) that allows for Jesus failing to heal some people? I see no verses that directly support that idea. Even when Jesus visits his own home town and is appalled by their lack of faith, Matthew only tells us Jesus “did not do many miracles there,” not that he tried but failed. In fact, nowhere in the New Testament is there any suggestion that Jesus was ever unable to heal someone.
My conclusion, then, is that Jesus traveled widely and visited a great many villages and towns/cities, and that wherever he went he healed all the sick that came to him asking for help. I think this fits the literal narrative while acknowledging the use of hyperbole. A literal reading does not fit the broader narrative, but applying the hyperbole too generally also fails us because we end up with a Jesus who sometimes finds himself unable to perform miracles, and that would be reading into the text something that it never even suggests.
FOOTNOTES: 1. While there are a few miracles recounted later in the gospel, those are presented sporadically rather than grouped as in chapters eight and nine. In fact, those two chapters contain nine specific healing accounts (including the raising of the dead girl and the exorcism of the Gadarene demoniacs) and two mentions of Jesus healing multitudes. There is a subsequent smaller grouping (two specific accounts and one of multitudes healed) in chapter 12. The remaining four miraculous healing accounts (three specific and one of multitudes healed) appear individually. See Miracles' Characteristics Tabulated page for a list of miraculous healings in Matthew.
Comments
Post a Comment
Thank you for taking the time to comment. I'm looking forward to reading what you wrote!