Mark 7:31
And again, departing from the coasts of Tyre and Sidon,; And again he
set out from the borders of Tyre, and came through Sidon--ASV; On
his return journey from Tyrian territory he went by way of
Sidon--NEB; he came into the sea of Galilee, through the midst of
the coasts of Decapolis.; through the region of the...--RSV;
crossing the district of the Ten Towns--Gspd;
And <again coming forth out of the bounds of Tyre> he came unto the sea
of Galilee, through the midst of the bounds of Decapolis.
And again, having gone forth from the coasts of Tyre and Sidon, he came
unto the sea of Galilee, through the midst of the coasts of
Decapolis,

TRNTyeagerV554,5 - Kai palin exelthwn ek twn horiwn Turou Althen

dia Sidwnos eis tAn Thalassan tAs Galilaias ana meson twn

horiwn Dekapolews.

Kai (continuative conjunction).
palin (adverbial).
exelthwn (aor.part.nom.sing.masc.of exerchomai, adverbial,
temporal).
ek (preposition with the ablative of separation).
twn (abl.pl.neut.of the article in agreement with horiwn).
horiwn (abl.pl.neut.of horion, separation).
Tuirou (gen.sing.masc.of Turos, definition).
Althen (3d.per.sing.aor.ind.of erchomai, constative).
dia (preposition with the genitive, "through" in a spatial
sense).
Sidwnos (gen.sing.masc.of Sidwn, "through" in a spatial sense).
eis (preposition with the accusative of extent).
tAn (acc.sing.fem.of the article in agreement with thalassan).
thalassan (acc.sing.fem.of thalassa, extent).
tAs (gen.sing.fem.of the article in agreement with Galilaias).
Galilaias (gen.sing.fem.of Galilaia, definition).
ana (preposition with the accusative of extent).
meson (acc.sing.neut.of mesos, extent).
twn (gen.pl.neut.of the article in agreement with horiwn).
horiwn (gen.pl.neut.of horion, definition).
Dekapolews (gen.sing.of Dekapolews, definition).
Translation: "And again He left the territory of Tyre and
came through Sidon to the Sea of Galilee and up into the midst of
Decapolis country."
COMMENT: His path led out of Tyre country, by way of
Sidon to the Sea of Galilee, across the Jordan River eastward into
the heart of the territory of Decapolis. Thus He travelled up the
coast north of Tyre to Sidon before He turned back to the southeast
to the northern tip of Galilee, after which He continued south and
east into Decapolis - a total distance of approximately 75 miles.
M67 - Generally the phrase ana meson means "among" or "in the midst,"
but this verse is problematic: does it mean "right through"? [Ed.
In this context, the phrase has the meaning of "through the
region."]
BW48,9 - Adverbial Accusative. Adverbial Accusative of Measure. The
substantive indicates how far the action of the verb extends.
Indeed, some grammarians call this category the accusative of
extent of time and space. ... A specialized use of the adverbial
accusative of measure is found when the prepositions ana and kata
convey the distributive idea (how many to each one?). ... (2) The
substantive with the Preposition ana. Althen...ana meson twn horiwn
Dekapolews. "He went through the center of the region of
Decapolis." (here). --DM99
MARKitGNTwuest154 - The Greek text here reads as follows: "And again,
having gone out of the regions of Tyre, He went through Sidon to
the Sea of Galilee, in the midst of the regions of Decapolis." A
glance at the map shows that Phoenicia is north west of the Sea of
Galilee. Our Lord thus went south east, and skirted the eastern
shore of this sea to reach the region of Decapolis, which was on
the south eastern shore.
TCGTC-MARKcranfield250 - The verse is editorial, connecting this section
with the last. palin refers back to v.24. A journey northward from
the neighbourhood of Tyre to Sidon and the south-eastward past
Caesarea Philippi and through Philip's territory to a point on the
eastern shore of the Lake of Galilee within the territory of the
Decapolis is certainly roundabout, but there is no particular
reason why Jesus should not have made it. It is not absolutely
necessary to take dia Sidwnos to imply that Jesus actually entered
the city of Sidon. The v.l. kai Sidwnos in p45 A W f1 f13 pl sy sa
(most MSS.) ... is of course easier, but is probably an early
attempt to lessen the difficulty. Wellhausen's conjecture that dia
Sidwnos represents a mistranslation of an original which should
have been rendered eis BAsaidan (i.e. Bethsaida--it is so spelt in
D at vi. 45) is hardly to be accepted--though it would certainly
make a more obvious journey. ana meson + genitive (=`in the midst
of') is rare in classical Greek, but is used in the LXX and is
common in the papyri. If the neighbourhood of Hippos is intended,
as it seems to be, the use of ana meson is a little surprising. It
is possible that this verse reflects a certain vagueness on Mark's
part about the geography of northern Palestine.
NTC-MARKhendriksen302 - How long Jesus remained in the vicinity of Tyre
is not stated. Even the place to which he now wended his way is
not exactly indicated. Nevertheless, the situation is not nearly
as hopeless as some would have us believe. We know the following:
a. Jesus traveled via Sidon.
b. He went right through the heart of Decapolis.
c. He probably reached the Sea of Galilee or that
general neighborhood. Cf. 7:31 with 8:10.
See the map on p. 295 for his possible route; also the
map on p. 199 for a more detailed view of The Ten Cities.
TNICotNT-MARKlane265,6 - The episode of the healing of a man with
defective hearing and speech is recorded only by Mark. The
significance the evangelist finds in this incident is apparent when
the account is seen in its larger context. In Ch. 6:31-7:37 Mark
has presented a cycle of tradition which includes the feeding of
the multitude, the encounter with Pharisaic unbelief and acts of
healing. With Ch. 8:1 a new cycle is introduced, which follows a
similar pattern, climaxed by the confession of Ch. 8:27-30. The
recognition of this parallel in structural arrangement sheds light
on the function of Ch. 7:31-37 in the Marcan outline. It serves to
bring the first cycle of tradition to a close on a doxological
note. The focus of the entire account is on the confession that
Jesus does all things well.
The Phoenician republic of Sidon was located on the coast
some twenty miles north of Tyre. Jesus apparently journeyed
northward to the district of Sidon and then turned southeastward
through Philip's territory region of the Decapolis. The route
followed is only vaguely indicated and cannot be retraced now, but
it may have been designed to preclude the necessity of entering
Galilee. Jesus remained in territory with strong Gentile
associations. The location of the episode in the Decapolis,
however, proves nothing as to the participants since there were
sizeable colonies of Jews in nearly all of the cities. It is
difficult from the text to determine whether the crowd which
approached Jesus was Jewish or Gentile in complexion.
MARKj&d208,9, 10 - COMMENT
TIME - Summer A.D. 29.
PLACE - Tyre - Sidon - Decapolis.
PARALLEL ACCOUNTS - Only Mark records this incident.
OUTLINE - 1. The place of the healing, vs. 31. 2. The
man to be healed, vs. 32. 3. Preparations for healing, vs. 33,
34a. 4. The healing and results, 34b-37.
ANALYSIS
I. THE PLACE OF HEALING, VS. 31.
1. Journeyed from the borders of Tyre and Sidon.
2. Through Sidon to the shore of Galilee.
3. Into the midst of the district of Decapolis.
II. THE MAN TO BE HEALED, VS. 32.
1. Brought by his friends.
2. Deaf with a serious speech impediment.
3. Begged Jesus to lay His hands upon him.
III. PREPARATIONS FOR HEALING, 33-34a.
1. Jesus took him aside from the multitude unto himself.
2. Jesus placed His fingers in the ears of the man.
3. Spat on the ground and touched the man's tongue.
4. Looked up to heaven and sighed.
IV. THE HEALING AND RESULTS, 34b-37.
1. He was healed when Jesus said "Ephphatha" or "Be
opened."
2. Ears were opened-tongue was loosened-he spoke
plainly.
3. Jesus strongly urged them to tell no man about
this-the more He urged them the more they did publish it.
4. They were beyond measure astonished and said, "He
hath done all things well."
EXPLANATORY NOTES
I. THE PLACE OF HEALING.
According to the text adopted by the revisers, the course
of the journey is here quite definitely marked out: "And again he
went out from the borders" (region) "of Tyre, and came through
Sidon unto the sea of Galilee, through the midst of the borders"
(region) "of Decapolis." That he visited the city of Tyre itself
is not affirmed, but from the course of the journey it seems
probable. He did pass through Sidon, which lay, like Tyre, on the
shore of the Mediterranean. From Capernaum to Tyre may have been
thirty English miles, and from Tyre to Sidon twenty more. Between
the two cities were Zarephath (called Sarepta in Lk. 4:26), where
Elijah was preserved alive in famine and restored the widow's son
to life (I Kings 17). His alluding to the event in the synagogue
at Nazareth is enough to assure us that our Lord did not pass the
spot without remembering again how it was a Gentile widow to whom
the prophet was sent. From Sidon he turned south-eastward, and
crossed the upper Jordan, and came down on the eastern side. But
he did not merely make the journey downward along the river; he
appears to have extended his tour still eastward - we cannot tell
how far - through some part of the region known as Decapolis,
probably visiting some of the cities from which that region took
its name. The reasons that determined the route, of course, cannot
be ascertained. Thus he made his way down to the Sea of Galilee,
reaching it somewhere on the eastern side. The limits of Decapolis
are somewhat uncertain, but its extent was such that his journey
may have taken him farther south than his destination; so that it
is impossible to tell from what direction he approached the lake or
what point of its shore he probably first touched. Of course the
length of the journey cannot be measured; but it can scarcely have
been, from Capernaum back to the lake, less than one hundred and
fifty English miles, and it may have been more. On the east as
well as on the north this was a tour into heathen territory, but in
no part, so far as we can judge, was it a tour of missionary
activity. It was rather an episode in his ministry when he was
alone with his disciples. By comparison with Matthew it appears
that this miracle was wrought, most probably, on some "mountain"
near the lake, where many were gathered about him.


Mark 7:32
And they bring unto him one that was deaf,; And they brought to him a
man who...--Gspd; and had an impediment in his speech;; and hardly
able to speak--Gspd; and unable to speak intelligibly--Phi; who
stammered--Mof; and they beseech him to put his hand upon him.; and
they implored him to put his hand upon him--Phi;
And they bring to him one deaf and stammering, and beseech him that he
would lay upon him his hand.
and they bring to him a deaf, stuttering man, and they call on him that
he may put the hand on him.

TRNTyeagerV555,6 - kai pherousin autw kwphon kai mogilalon, kai

parakalousin auton hina epithA autw tAn cheira.

kai (continuative conjunction).
pherousin (3d.per.pl.pres.act.ind.of pherw, historical).
autw (dat.sing.masc.of autos, indirect object of pherousin).
kwphon (acc.sing.masc.of kwphos, direct object of pherousin).
kai (adjunctive conjunction joining substantives).
mogilalon (acc.sing.masc.of mogilalos, direct object of
pherousin).
having an impediment in one's speech - Mk.7:32.
Meaning: - mois plus lalew. Hence, hardly able to speak
- Mk.7:32.
kai (continuative conjunction).
parakalousin (3d.per.pl.pres.act.ind.of parakalew, historical).
auton (acc.sing.masc.of autos, direct object of parakalousin).
hina (final conjunction introducing a purpose clause).
epithA (3d.per.sing.aor.act.subj.of epitithAmi, purpose.
autw (loc.sing.masc.of autos, place where).
tAn (acc.sing.fem.of the article in agreement with cheira).
cheira (acc.sing.fem.of cheir, direct object of epithA).
Translation: "And they brought to Him a deaf man who also
was hardly able to speak and they begged Him to lay His hand on
him."
COMMENT: Cf.#833 for the meaning of kwphos. It is the
context that tells us that this particular affliction was deafness.
kwphos does not in itself mean "deaf." He also had an impediment in
his speech. We need not translate pherw as "bear" or "carry" since
the man could walk. Those who brought him to Jesus spoke for him
since he was unable to speak clearly for himself.
The healing ministry of Jesus was effective, whether the
patient was present or absent, whether it was carried out by a word
or a touch, whether the patient was ill physically or mentally,
whether he was Jew, Gentile, black or white and was always
available to those who could believe. Mark here centers his
attention upon a specific case. Matthew describes our Lord's
healing in behalf of many patients, with differing ailments, who
needed Jesus' help (Mt.15:30). In the case before us Jesus was
neither unwilling nor unable to deliver the man from his malady.
MARKitGNTwuest154 - "An impediment in his speech". This is the
translation of mogilalos, mogi "with difficulty," and lalos
"speaking." He was not absolutely dumb.
Translation: And they bring to Him one who was deaf, and
who spoke with difficulty. And they beg Him to place upon him His
hand."
TCGTC-MARKcranfield250,1 - The story of the cure of the deaf-mute begins
with this verse. No note of time or place is contained in it, but
Mark's editorial link (v.31) suggests that it occurred in
Decapolis.
kwphon. The word means `blunt', `dull': so it can mean
both `deaf' and `dumb', and can also be used with regard to sight
or intelligence. Here it meas `deaf'.
mogilalon. An extremely rare word. It occurs in the NT
only here and in the LXX only in Isa.35:6; besides, it occurs in
three other places in other Greek versions of the OT and (rarely)
in late Greek writers. Strictly it should mean `speaking with
difficulty', `having an impediment in speech'; this meaning is
perhaps supported here by elalei orthws in v.35, but alalous in
v.37 supports the meaning `dumb'. In view of the rareness of the
word, it is almost certain that Isa.35:6 was in Mark's mind. (The
v.l. moggilalon (`hoarse of speech'), though found in a number of
MSS., is hardly likely to be right: it is a word that is not given
by L. & S. at all, but see Bauer s.v.).
NTC-MARKhendriksen302,3 - It is clear from verses 32, 36, 37 that Jesus
is surrounded by a crowd. Matt.15:29-31 describes the many
miracles he performed among these people. From all of them Mark
selects just this one, which he, he alone, describes.
"They" brought him a man. This "they" is an impersonal
plural. The clause means, "A man was brought to him." Cf. "They
shall drive you from men," meaning, "You shall be driven from men"
(Dan. 4:32).
The man that was brought to Jesus suffered from a double
handicap. First, he was deaf. Secondly, he spoke with difficulty;
at best, he stammered. So the people who brought him asked Jesus
to lay his hand on the man. It is probable that in other cases of
healing they had seen Jesus do this. Cf. 6:5. And that was not
the last time the Master would do it. Cf. 8:23. Now placing his
hand on people was fine, indeed. Did it not mean that something
from him was being transferred, or at least applied, to them? See
I Tim. 4:14; 5:22; II Tim. 1:6; and for a decidedly different
transference see Lev. 16:21.
But these people were to discover that the Master has his
own way of doing things. Thus, for example, Jairus, who made a
similar request (Mk. 5:23), saw the Great Physician do something
else, something probably even more expressive of tender, personal
love (5:41). And so it was going to be also in the present case.
In dealing with people the Lord chooses his own methods. Naaman
had to learn this lesson (II Kings 5:10-14). So did Jacob, much
earlier (Gen. 42:36; 45:25-28). So did also Joseph and his
brothers (Gen. 50:15- 21). And so, later, did Paul (II Cor.
12:7-10). We should never try to tell God what methods he should
use in answering our petitions...just where he should place his
hand! His own way is always best. He loves people not only in the
mass, but also individually. His heart goes out not only to a
multitude (Mk. 6:34) but also to a man, this particular man, whom
he treats differently than he would have treated anyone else.
TNICotNT-MARKlane266 - A crowd brought to Jesus a man with defec-
tive hearing and speech. He was deaf and had a speech impediment
so severe he could not articulate his words. He apparently
suffered from a spasmodic condition of the tongue which can extend
to the facial muscles as well. If the man had been born deaf and
mute he would not have learned to speak and would possess no
concept of language. This was not the situation. He had become
deaf later in life apparently as a result of disease or injury and
could speak only with great effort. Mark's use of an extremely
rare word to describe the man's speech defect is almost certainly
an allusion to Isa. 35:5f. which celebrates God as the one who
comes in order to unstop the ears of the deaf and to provide song
for the man of inarticulate speech. The fulfillment of the
prophecy was expected in the Days of the Messiah in the exegetical
tradition of the rabbis. By means of the biblical allusion Mark
provides his readers with a sign that the promised intervention of
God took place in the ministry of Jesus. The reference points
forward to the confession of faith in verse 37.
The request for the laying on of hands (cf. Chs. 5:23;
6:5) indicates the presence of Jews or of Gentiles who were
familiar with this Jewish practice in connection with blessing and
healing. The great surprise exhibited by the people when the
afflicted man spoke clearly suggests that they had not expected
healing, but had brought the man to Jesus for his blessing.
MARKj&d210 - II. THE MAN TO BE HEALED.
"They bring unto him one that was deaf." The adjective
literally means "stricken," or "smitten" (kophos, from the verb
kopto, "to strike"); the thought is that the person has been
smitten in some of the organs of sensation, so as to be deprived of
power. Sometimes it is the organs of speech that are thus
conceived of as smitten, and the word then means "dumb;' sometimes
it is the organs of hearing, and it then means "deaf," as here.
The other descriptive word (mogilalos) means "speaking with
difficulty;" not "speechless" (alalos) as in verse 37. It is used
here alone in the New Testament. It cannot be smoothly rendered
without paraphrase, and had an impediment in his speech represents
it well. Yet the word is used broadly for "dumb' in the LXX.
(Isa. 35:6). The great healer was asked to put his hand on the
man; so Matt. 9:18: "But come and lay they hand upon her, and she
shall live." But now, as then, the great Healer had a way of his
own.



Mark 7:33
And he took him aside from the multitude,; and he took him aside
privately--ASV; He took the man away from the crowd by
himself--Rieu; and put his fingers into his ears,; ...in the man's
ears--Gspd; and he spit, and touched his tongue;; and touched his
tongue with saliva--Ber;
And <taking him away from the multitude apart> he thrust his fingers
into his ears, and, spitting, touched his tongue;
And having taken him away from the multitude by himself, he put his
fingers to his ears, and having spit, he touched his tongue,

TRNTyeagerV556,7 - kai apolabomenos auton apo tou ochlou kat'

idian ebalen tous daktulous autou eis ta hwta autou kai

ptusas hAphato tAs glwssAs autou,

kai (continuative conjunction).
apolabomenos (aor.mid.part.nom.sing.masc.of apolambanw,
adverbial, temporal).
auton (acc.sing.masc.of autos, direct object of apolabomenos).
apo (preposition with the ablative of separation).
tou (abl.sing.masc.of the article in agreement with ochlou).
ochlou (abl.sing.masc.of ochlos, separation).
kat' (preposition with the accusative, adverbial).
idian (acc.sing.fem.of idios, general reference, adverbial).
ebalen (3d.per.sing.aor.act.ind.of ballw, constative).
tous (acc.pl.masc.of the article in agreement with daktulous).
daktulous (acc.pl.masc.of daktulos, direct object of ebalen).
autou (gen.sing.masc.of autos, possession).
eis (preposition with the accusative of extent).
ta (acc.pl.neut.of the article in agreement with wta).
wta (acc.pl.neut.of wtion, extent).
autou (gen.sing.masc.of autos, possession).
kai (adjunctive conjunction joining verbs).
ptusas (aor.act.part.nom.sing.masc.of ptuw, adverbial, temporal).
spit - Mk.7:33; 8:23; John 9:6.
Meaning: To spit; expectorate. With reference to Jesus'
healing ministry - speech impediment - Mk.7:33; blindness -
Mk.8:23; John 9:6.
hAphato (3d.per.sing.aor.mid.ind.of haptw, constative).
tAs (gen.sing.fem.of the article in agreement with glwssAs).
glwssAs (gen.sing.masc.of autos, possession).
autou (gen.sing.masc.of autos, possession).
Translation: "And having taken him aside from the crowd,
by himself, He put His fingers into His ears, spat and touched His
tongue."
COMMENT: The idiom kat' idian is really redundant, since
apolabomenos...apo tou ochlou means "having taken him away from
(separate from) the crowd. "By himself" (kat' idian) is therefore
not necessary. But that is the way Mark wrote it and that is how we
translate it. The text does not tell us why Jesus isolated the man
before He healed him. Perhaps it was because of the unusual manner
in which the healing was effected. The Greek does not make clear
that Jesus spat upon the man's tongue or placed saliva upon it with
His finger. The precise manner in which the healing was carried out
is not important. The important thing is that Jesus healed him. The
time of action of ebalen is not necessarily simultaneous with that
of Aphato, though ptusas is prior to Aphato. Jesus could have (a)
placed His fingers into the patient's ears; (b) then withdrawn
them; (c) then spat, and (d) touched the man's tongue, either with
His fingers or with saliva. Montgomery translates "...put his
finger in the man's ears and moistened his tongue with saliva...".
Goodspeed's rendering is similar - "...touched his tongue with
saliva." These translations are possible by inference only. If that
is what Mark intended to convey he had at his disposal the Greek
grammar and syntax to make it clear. daktulous is plural, a point
that Montgomery misses and ptusma ("spittle") in John 9:6, does not
occur in the passage, though Montgomery and Goodspeed translate as
though it were. There is nothing to say that the saliva came in
contact with the man's tongue. Since Jesus had both His fingers in
the man's ears, He could not have applied spittle to the man's
tongue with His finger, without first withdrawing one of them. The
grammar allows this but Mark could have made it clear by writing
ballousas (aor.act.part.of ballw) instead of ebalen (aor.act.ind.)
It is a small point but it is better to translate what is there and
only what is there and leave the exact procedure unrevealed.
In view of the contentious nature of some church
congregations this passage could become the grounds for a
denominational separation with names like "The spit (or no spit)
Church." If congregations split over a piano, a tuning fork or
whether the Lord served wine or grape juice, why not over a bit of
saliva?!
...
MARKitGNTwuest154 - "He took him aside from the multitude." The word
"aside" is the translation of kat' idian, the latter word speaking
of privacy. The reason for this was most probably that our Lord did
not want to encourage a wide healing ministry. The latter was only
incidental to His preaching and teaching, and could assume such
proportions that it would interfere seriously with His ministry to
the spiritual needs of the multitude.
"Put His fingers into his ears." The verb is ballw "to
throw," here, "to thrust." He put one finger of His right hand into
one ear, and one finger of His left hand into the other. He spat
and touched his tongue. The deaf person could not hear anything our
Lord would say, and He took this means of arresting his attention
and encouraging his faith. Mark gives us no explanation of the
particular meaning of the acts to the first-century person.
Translation: "And having taken him away from the crowd,
in private He put His fingers into his ears, and having spit, He
touched his tongue."
kai apolabomenos auton apo tou ochlou kat' idian. Cf.
8:23: exAnegken auton exw tAs kwmAs. Presumably to be connected
with the injunction to tell no one in v.36 (and also 8:26?). See on
1:25. Is it perhaps also to be connected with the special
difficulties which this cure seems to have presented? For the use
of apolambanw of drawing a person aside privately cf. II Macc.
6:21, .....
ebalen tous daktulous autou eis ta hwta autou kai ptusas
hApsato tAs glwssAs autou. `Such actions are common to the
technique of Greek and Jewish healers' (Taylor). For the touching
of the part requiring healing cf. the example from j Ket. quoted in
S.-B. II, p. 15; and see also on 1:41 (hApsato). For the use of
spittle cf. 8:22-26, Jn.9:1-7; ...
Spittle was used in ancient magic along with incantations with
a view to driving away the demon held responsible for the
particular malady that needed curing. it was also used as a natural
remedy. There is no question of the magical use here; but whether
Jesus made use of spittle simply in order to indicate to the man
that he was to expect a cure and so to awaken faith on his part, or
whether he also had in mind any natural effect of the spittle, it
is difficult to decide.
The variant readings in this verse seem to have origi-
nated from the wish to be less vague about the use of the spittle;
but the text printed above is probably original.
MARKj&d210,11 - III. PREPARATIONS FOR HEALING.
Three peculiarities appear in this act of healing - the
privacy of the transaction, the use of signs and physical media,
and the unusual vocal utterances of the Healer. These
peculiarities all appear again in the other miracle in chap.
8:22-26, already alluded to. In studying them in this case it is
to be remembered that this is the only detailed report that we
possess of the healing of a deaf man; and, although we may not be
justified in inferring that all healings of the deaf resembled
this, we may find in the peculiar method now adopted a special
significance in connection with the nature of the affliction that
was to be removed. In healing the blind, Jesus, so far as we know,
always made some appeal to the senses and powers of which the
afflicted ones were possessed, drawing out their faith by word or
touch or by requiring the performance of some act. (See Matt.
9:29; Mk. 8:23; 10:49; Jn. 9:6). So, usually, in healing the lame
and helpless. (See Jn. 5:6-8; Mk. 3:3; Lk. 17:14). In the case of
a deaf man words would be of no avail; and if any such appeal was
to be made, it must be done by signs. In the present case Jesus
probably saw in the man himself some reason for judging it best
that the cure should be private. The withdrawal from the crowd
would impress him, though he could not hear its tumult, with a
sense of solemnity. Perhaps Jesus saw in him a vanity that would
render anything like a public act of healing hurtful to him. In
any case, it was a solemn and touching experience to be alone, or
almost alone, with Jesus to be healed. As for the signs and the
physical media, they were such as he could well understand. Jesus
"put his fingers into his ears." Not a mere touch, but an
insertion - a sign of the impartation or transference of something
from one person to the other, with reference now to the powerless
organs of hearing. This was the laying on of his hand that had
been asked for, made definite, appropriate, and instructive by his
wisdom. Then "he spit, and touched his tongue" - i.e. touched the
man's tongue with a finger perhaps moistened with his own saliva -
another sign of the transference of something from himself to the
afflicted man, this time with reference to his injured organs of
speech. Then he stood "looking up to heaven', to indicate that
this was an act that depended upon a heavenly power - an act,
indeed, of Heaven upon the earth. Of course there had been no
opportunity, because no possibility, of preaching to the man, and
in his ignorance he may easily have supposed that this was some
influence of a magical kind. He may not have known to what power
he was submitting himself, and the reverent heavenward look of
Jesus may have been intended silently to lift his heart and faith
to God. How better could he show a deaf man that he was receiving
a gift from above? Then "he signed", or rather, "groaned." The
word is not used elsewhere of him, but it is found in Rom.8:23 and
2 Cor. 5:2, where evidently no less a word than "groan" is needed
to represent its meaning. This was no artificial utterance
intended for effect: it was a spontaneous utterance of genuine
sorrow in sympathy with human suffering. It came from the same
source as the tears at the grave of Lazarus. Although the man
could not hear the groan, he might be aware of it, for doubtless
his eyes were busy in observing what his Benefactor was doing; and
if he was aware of it, he must have felt, however dimly, that there
was a deep and genuine sympathy in the Healer's heart. This could
be no magician's performance to him: this was a deed of love. And
then at last he spoke; and, though the man might not hear the word
he may have known, as before, that it was spoken."


Mark 7:34
And looking up to heaven, he sighed,; Then, looking up toward heaven, He
sighed--Ber; Then, looking up to Heaven, he gave a deep sigh--Phi;
and saith unto him,; and said to him--RSV; Ephphatha, that is, Be
opened.; Ephphatha! which means Be opened--TCNT;
and /looking up into the heaven\ sighed deeply, and saith unto
him--
Ephphatha! that is, Be opened!
and having looked to the heaven, he sighed, and saith to him,
`Ephphatha,' that is, `Be opened;'

TRNTyeagerV558,9 - kai anablephas eis ton ouranon estenaxen, kai

legei autw, Ephphatha, ho estin, DianoichthAti.

kai (continuative conjunction).
anablephas (aor.act.part.nom.sing.masc.of anablepw, adverbial,
circumstantial).
eis (preposition with the accusative of extent).
ton (acc.sing.masc.of the article in agreement with ouranon).
ouranon (acc.sing.masc.of ouranos, extent).
estenaxen (3d.per.sing.aor.act.ind.of stenazw, constative).
groan - Rom.8:23; 2 Cor.5:2,4.
grudge - Jam.5:9.
sigh - Mk.7:34.
with grief - Heb.13:17.
Meaning: To sign; not to groan necessarily, as a result
of suffering physical pain. The expression of discontent or
displeasure. An expression of desire to be relieved of some
unpleasantness. With reference to the Christian who is wearied with
the fight against the flesh, who longs for glorification with its
release from temptation - Rom.8:23; 2 Cor.5:2 (where it is
associated with baroumenoi); of one Christian's impatient complaint
against another - James 5:9. The opposite of meta charas in
Heb.13:17, i.e. with discontented resignation. With reference to
Jesus, Who was physically tired and wanted rest - Mk.7:34.
kai (adjunctive conjunction).
legei (3d.per.sing.pres.act.ind.of legw, historical).
autw (dat.sing.masc.of autos, indirect object of legei).
Ephphatha.
Ephphatha - Mk.7:34.
Meaning: An Aramaic word, the ethpaal imperative of the
Hebrew verb "to open." "Be opened." With reference to the ears of
the deaf man - Mk.7:34.
ho (nom.sing.neut.of hos, subject of estin).
estin (3d.per.sing.pres.ind.of eimi, aoristic).
DiawoichthAti (2d.per.sing.aor.act.impv.of dianoigw, command).
Translation: "And having looked up into the sky He signed
and said to him, `Ephphtha' which translates `Be opened.'"
COMMENT: "Groan" is too strong. Some expression of
discontent or resignation to the rigor's of one's position is what
is in view. Jesus was expressing in an anthropomorphic way His
physical fatigue. He needed physical rest and for the most part
sought unsuccessfully as the events of vs.32 indicate. He was often
vexed at the visible results of sin, in this case the patient's
pitiable condition.
WMitNTearle144 - Ephphatha. This Aramaic word means "Be opened" or "Be
released." C.E.B.Cranfield comments: "The idea is not of the
particular part of the person being opened, but of the whole person
being opened or released.... One whom Satan has kept shut up and
bound is being released" (Mark, CGTC, p.252).
MARKitGNTwuest154,5 - "Looking up to heaven, He sighed." The latter word
is stenazw "to sign or to groan." Expositors has a helpful note:
"Jesus looked up in prayer, and signed or groaned in sympathy. In
this case a number of acts, bodily and mental, are specified. Were
these peculiar to it, or do we here get a glimpse into Christ's
modus operandi in many unrecorded cases? On the latter view one can
understand the exhausting nature of the healing ministry. It meant
a great mental strain."
Translation: "And having looked up into heaven, He
groaned, and says to him, Ephphatha, which is, Be opened."
TCGTC-MARKcranfield252 - estenaxen. In 8:12 anastenazw is used. Taylor
rightly rejects the suggestion that this signing or groaning is
connected with the technique of magic. Cf. Jn.11:32,38. Schniewind
comments that stenazw `is a strong expression, which Paul uses for
the inmost wrestling of the Christian (Rom.8:22f,26; II
Cor.5:2,4)', and sees it use here as congruous with the fact that
the disablement is thought of as the result of demonic activity (as
is indicated by Ephphatha and desmos). It indicates the strong
emotion of Jesus as he wages war against the power of Satan, and
has to seed divine aid in urgent prayer.
Ephphatha. For the use of the Aramaic word see on 5:41.
Ephphatha represents 'etpattah or contracted eppattah, from the
verb petah, and means `be opened' or `be released'. S.- B., n, pp.
17f., give examples of the verb being used in connection with the
curing of blindness. The idea is not of the particular part of the
person being opened, but of the whole person being opened or
released. Cf. Lk.13:16 and, in Mk., the sue of desmos in the next
verse, and also 3:27. One whom Satan has kept shut up and bound is
being released. To liken the command to the `verbal encouragement'
used in modern psychotherapy, as Taylor does, is not very helpful.
It is rather the command that shatters the fetters by which Satan
has held his victim bound.
DianoichthAti. Dianoigw means `open completely'.
MARK-hendriksen303,4 - Note the six actions:
a. He took him aside by himself, away from the crowd.
He probably did this so that the deaf stammerer would feel more at
ease (cf. Mk. 5:37; Lk. 8:51) and would be able to concentrate all
his attention on his Benefactor.
b. He put his fingers into the man's ears. Unless the
man was a lip reader he would have been unable to hear any
preliminary questions Jesus might have asked him (cf. Mk. 10:51;
cf. Matt. 9:28). So Jesus accords him the special treatment he,
this deaf-mute, needs. What Jesus did meant, "Something will be
done for your ears...and I will do it."
c. He spat, probably on his own finger, and with that
wet finger touched the man's tongue. The meaning was, "Something
will be done for your tongue...and I will do it." In support of
this interpretation see the analogous passage Jn. 9:6 (in
connection with restoration of sight). And cf. Mk. 8:23.
d. He looked up to heaven, indicating that his help came
from above; in other words, that in prayer he was "taking hold of"
his heavenly Father. Cf. Isa. 64:7. In this connection see also
Ps. 25:15; 121:1; 123:1,2; 141:8; 145:15; Jn. 11:41; 17:1; Acts
7:55. For different prayer postures mentioned in Scripture consult
N.T.C. on I Tim. 2:8.
e. He sighed. See also on 8:12. With him, that is,
with the Sympathizing Jesus, this was entirely natural. It showed
that he was taking the man's condition to heart. So also Calvin on
this passage. The sorrows of this man were his sorrows. Jesus
never healed anyone half-heartedly. He always put everything he
had into his work of mercy. See Matt. 8:17; 9:36; 14:14; 15:32;
18:27; 20:34; Mk. 1:41; 6:34; Lk. 7:13; 8:46; Jn. 11:33; Heb.
4:14-16. Each of these passages should be carefully pondered.
f. He said, "Ephphatha!" This, too, was natural for
him, for Aramaic was the Master's mother tongue. For his
non-Jewish readers Mark translates the term, informing them that
this means, "Be opened." It probably applied to the entire man;
both ears and tongue, both reception and response.
MARK-j&d212 - IV. THE HEALING AND RESULTS.
"Ephphatha, that is, Be opened. Here, as in chap. 5:41,
Mark has preserved the very word in the Aramaic tongue that fell
from the lips of Jesus. No other evangelist has done this, except
in the case of the utterance on the cross, "Eli, Eli, lama
sabachthani." In the other case (chap. 5:41) the Aramaic words
that Mark preserves were spoken when of the disciples only Peter,
James, and John were present; and it is not unlikely that the same
special three were the only auditors at this time also. Whether
others were present or not, this must certainly have come down to
us from one who heard it. The Ephphatha, Be opened, was addressed
to the man with reference to his organs of sense, which are
conceived of as closed.




Mark 7:35
And straightway his ears were opened, and the string of his tongue was
loosed,; and the bond...--ASV; and his tongue was released--Gspd;
...was untied--Wms; the impediment to his speech was removed--Tieu;
and he spake plain.; and he began to talk plainly--TCNT;
and his ears opened, and the string of his tongue was loosed,-- and he
was speaking correctly.
and immediately were his ears opened, and the string of his tongue was
loosed, and he was speaking plain.

TRNTyeagerV559 - kai (euthews) AnoigAsan autou hai akoai, kai

eluthA ho desmos tAs glwssAs autou, kai elalei orthws.

kai (continuative conjunction).
(euthews) (adverbial).
AnoigAsan (3d.per.pl.2d.aor.pass.ind.of anoigw, culminative).
autou (gen.sing.masc.of autos, possession).
hai (nom.pl.fem.of the article in agreement with akoai).
akoai (nom.pl.fem.of akoA, subject of AnoigAsan).
kai (continuative conjunction).
eluthA (3d.per.sing.aor.pass.ind.of luw, culminative).
ho (nom.sing.masc.of the article in agreement with desmos).
desmos (nom.sing.masc.of desmos, subject of eluthA).
tAs (gen.sing.fem.of the article in agreement with glwssAs).
glwssAs (gen.sing.fem.of glwssa, description).
autou (gen.sing.masc.of autos, possession).
kai (continuative conjunction).
elalei (3d.per.sing.imp.act.ind.of lalew, inceptive).
orthws (adverbial).
Translation: "And his ears were opened and that which
bound his tongue was broken and he began to enunciate correctly."
COMMENT: Ears opened and tongue set free. Whatever held
his ability to articulate in check, whether it was anatomical or
psychological, lost its power. The word means "that which binds."
Modern speech therapists should not take the KJV's "string of his
tongue" as a serious translation of the Greek. desmos does not mean
"string" or anything else necessarily physical. The verb eluthA
means "broken" or "loosed." The man was totally healed. Hearing was
restored and his speech impediment, of whatever source, lost its
power to annoy and impede him further. The result that he began
(inceptive imperfect) to chatter like a magpie, but with a correct
enunciation. Cf.#1888 for Jesus' ability to open what should be
opened but it closed - hearts, minds, ears, understanding.
R838 - In the latter part of this verse the aorist lifts the curtain and
the imperfect continues the play (with an inchoative imperfect,
"began"--R885).
WMitNTearle145 - String. The Greek noun desmos means "bond" or "fetter,"
from the verb dew, "bind." Not only were his ears opened, but the
fetter that bound his tongue was broken, and he was released. Then
"he began to speak plainly" (NIV), his speech impediment gone.
MARKitGNTwuest155 - "His ears." The word in the Greek is akoA "hearing,
sense of hearing." "String of his tongue," is literally "that which
bound his tongue." The word is desmos, "a band or bond."
"He spake plain." The verb is the inchoative imperfect,
"He began to be speaking." "Plain" is orthws "rightly." He had
heretofore been able only to make inarticulate sounds.
Translation: "And his ears opened, and immediately that
which bound his tongue was loosed, and he began to speak rightly."
TCGTC-MARKcranfield252,3 - ... elalei: `he began to speak'.
orthws suggests that he had been suffering from a defect
in his speech rather than from dumbness. But contrast alalous in
v.37.
NTC-MARKhendriksen304,5 - His ears were opened completely. This
happened at once. He probably heard the very word Ephphatha as it
was being spoken by the Lord.
His ears were opened. His tongue was released. More
literally, "the bond" - that is, whatever it was that hindered the
tongue from functioning properly - all at once came loose, so that
suddenly the former mumbler or stammerer was speaking distinctly,
clearly. The recounting of these various vivid details shows that
the story of an eye-witness (probably Peter) is being transmitted
here by Mark.
TNICotNT-MARKlane266,7 - Jesus took the man aside from the crowd in
order to establish contact with him. He regarded the personal
relationship between himself and the sick to be of supreme
importance, and in this instance all of his actions are
intelligible in the light of the necessity of communicating with a
person who had learned to be passive in life. Through touch and
the use of spittle Jesus entered into the mental world of the man
and gained his confidence. He stretched open his ears and made it
clear to him that he wished to make his tongue alive with his own
life. Jesus prayed with him and for him and openly expressed the
strong emotion he seems to have always felt in the presence of the
ravages of demonic possession and disease. This sequence of
actions indicated to the man that he was to expect healing from the
one who stood before him. The act of healing itself was
accomplished with the word of liberation addressed not to the
defective auditory organs but to the man as a whole person: "Be
opened."
The results of Jesus' actions are simply described: the
ears were opened, the tongue was loosened, and the man began to
speak clearly. The loosening of the tongue followed immediately
upon the opening of the ears. There are parallels in Hellenistic
texts to the statement that "the tongue was loosened" which have
prompted the suggestion that this affliction was due to demonic
possession; Jesus liberated the man from the fetters of the demon
responsible for his severe condition. There is nothing in the
Marcan text, however, to support this proposal and it is better to
regard the phrase as a figurative description of the cure. Mark
has stressed Jesus' encounter with the demonic thought the first
half of the Gospel and it can be presumed that he would have stated
that the man was possessed by a deaf and dumb spirit if this were
the case.
The healing did not consist in the fact that the man
spoke, but that he spoke without defect. His command of language
confirms that he had not been born deaf and dumb. His normal
speech formed the surprising contrast to his former stammering.
MARKj&d212 - It would seem that the moment of the Ephphatha was the
moment of the change. Of course we know that the preceding parts
of the transaction were in no sense necessary to the cure, and were
introduced for the sake of the man himself; and we may judge that
he received no new power of speech or hearing until the symbolic or
pictorial part was finished and the word was spoken. - The cure
itself is detailed in Mark's peculiar way. The revisers omit
straightway, and thus represent the result: "And his ears were
opened, and the bond of his tongue was loosed, and he spake plain,"
or rightly, normally. - The string of his tongue is an unfortunate
phrase, from which a reader might suppose that the man was in some
way tongue-tied. But the reference is merely to the bond or
restraint that was upon his powers of speech, and there is no
indication as to the nature of that restraint. - But now the organs
of sense were opened, and henceforth all was done (orthos) in the
natural or normal way.
It is worth while to look back at this act and observe
how beautifully our Lord brought to light all that was essential in
a work of healing. Perhaps the symbolic action was all the more
beautiful, because it must be made to do the whole work of words.
Two signs of the transferring of power from himself to the
afflicted - the upward look to heaven, to indicate the source of
power; the deep sigh or groan of genuine sympathy with the
suffering that is to be removed - and the word of power by which
the deed is done, and the bond is broken. A beautiful story for
deaf-mutes.



Mark 7:36
And he charged them that they should tell no man;; Jesus forbade them to
tell anyone--NEB; but the more he charged them,; ...forbade
them--Mof; ...insisted--TCNT; so much the more a great deal they
published it;; the more abundantly they published it--ABUV; ...they
spread the news far and wide-- Gspd;
And he charged them that they should be telling /no one\, but <as much
as /to them\ he gave charge> //they\\ /exceeding more abundantly\
were making proclamation.
And he charged them that they may tell no one, but the more he was
charging them, the more abundantly they were proclaiming it,

TRNTyeagerV559,60 - kai diesteilato autois hina mAdeni legwsin,

hoson de autois diestelleto, autoi mallon perissoteron

ekArusson.

kai (continuative conjunction).
diestelleto (3d.per.sing.imp.ind.of diastellomai, progressive
duration).
autois (dat.pl.masc.of autos, indirect object of diesteilato).
hina (final conjunction introducing a purpose clause).
mAdeni (dat.sing.masc.of mAdeis, indirect object of legwsin).
legwsin (3d.per.pl.pres.act.subj.of legw, purpose).
hoson (acc.sing.neut.of hosos, indefinite relative pronoun,
degree).
de (adversative conjunction).
autois (dat.pl.masc.of autos, indirect object of diestelleto).
autoi (nom.pl.masc.of autos, subject of ekArusson).
mallon (comparative adverb).
perissoteron (acc.sing.neut.comparative of perissos).
ekArusson (3d.per.pl.imp.act.ind.of kArussw, progressive
duration).
Translation: "And He began to admonish them that they
tell no one, but the more He continued His remonstrance the more
they reported it."
COMMENT: Jesus began to forbid the people to tell about
the miracle (ingressive aorist), but they disobeyed. He continued
to demand that they remain silent, but it was to no avail. The more
He pleaded with them the more they published it far and wide. Who
is they, since the healing had been effected in private? (vs.33).
Obviously when the patient returned to society, hearing distinctly
and speaking perfectly the healing became apparent to all.
Note hoson with mallon - "the more...even more" modified
by the comparative perissoteron. It is awkward Greek, in Mark's
fashion, but we know what the means.
Why did Jesus try to avoid the publicity? The text does
not tell us but the context indicates that He needed physical and
mental rest. One recalls estenaxen in vs.34. On hoson... mallon
perissoteron, Meyer says, "They exceeded the degree of the
prohibition by the yet far greater degree in which they made it
known. So transported were they by the miracle, that the
prohibition only heightened their zeal and they prosecuted the
kArussen with still greater energy than if He had not interdicted
it to them." perissoteron intensifies mallon.
The measure of their enthusiasm is explained in the next
verse.
T29 - The comparative is doubled here for emphasis (cf. BD246).
BD154 - The relative hoson has the sense of "the more," properly "as
much as."
DM121 - ...Occasionally we find a double comparison where mallon or
pollw is used with the comparative form of the adjective (here).
Cham111 - The Uses of the Adverb. ... 3. The adverb may modify another
adverb: mallon perissoteron (here), `more exceedingly.'
MARKitGNTwuest155 - "He charged them". The verb is diastellw. It means
first "to separate;" then "to define or distinguish," and as that
which is separated or distinguished is emphasized, "to command or
straightly charge." It is in the middle voice, showing the charge
was given with the personal interest of Jesus in view. It was for
His sake and the future welfare of His ministry, that the command
was given.
"So much the more a great deal." This is the A. V.,
rendering of a double comparative in the Greek. The word
perissoteron means "more abundantly," the word mallon, "more, to a
greater degree."
"They published it." The verb is kArussw "to make a
public proclamation."
Translation: "And He in His own interest commanded them
to be saying not even one thing. But the more He kept on commanding
them, they themselves kept on proclaiming it publicly so much the
more to a greater degree."
TCGTC-MARKcranfield253 - diesteilato...legwsin. ... it is noteworthy
that the Gentile demoniac is not told to be silent (5:19), and the
implication of Mark's editorial ling in v.31 is that this healing
also took place on Gentile soil.
mallon perissoteron is pleonastic.
NTC-MARKhendriksen305,6 - At first this prohibition seems rather
strange, and this for two reasons: a. Jesus is not in Judea with
its bitter enemies who are determined to kill him; in fact, he is
not even on the western side of the Sea of Galilee; and b. that
being the case, would we not rather expect that the Master would
have ordered the man to proclaim throughout Decapolis what great
things the Lord had done for him? Was that not exactly what had
happened previously in the case of another person belonging to this
general region, a man sorely in need of help and then graciously
and fully restored? See 5:19,20.
To reach a fully satisfactory solution is perhaps
impossible. There are, nevertheless, two considerations that may
be of some help. First, after the event related in Mk. 5:1-20 much
time has elapsed. Not many days are left, and the enemies are now
more determined than ever to bring about Jesus' death.
Nevertheless, the Father's program for the Son must be carried out
in full. The day of the crucifixion must not be hastened. Also,
as that day draws nearer, Jesus is going to place more emphasis on
the spiritual, the redemptive, import of his mission. See 10:45;
14:24. He did not come into this world to be the Thaumaturgist
(Miracle Worker) but the Savior. It is that which requires
emphasis, now more than ever.
The charge was not heeded. The intensity and frequency
of the disobedience was keeping pace with the intensity and
frequency of the charge: the two remained side by side. How
emphatically the obstinacy and perversity of sinful human nature is
here revealed. It reminds one of the mother who knew that the only
way she could get Johnnie to run an errand was to say to him,
"Don't you dare go to the store to get me five pounds of sugar!"
Boys pass an apple orchard a hundred times without attempting to
pick one from the tree's overhanging branches. But let a sign be
put up, "Those who steal apples will be prosecuted," and see if
the pockets of these boys do not begin to bulge with apples. Did
not Mark Twain mention "Swimming pools which were forbidden us and
therefore much frequented"? However, these people who resolutely
disobeyed Christ's command were no boys. For the most part they
must have been grown-ups. For their defiant and persistent
disobedience to his specific and repeated order there was no excuse
whatever. Even their admiration for what Jesus had done was no
atonement for their recalcitrant behavior.
They did, however, show admiration. Verses 36, 37 show
that it takes more than admiration and enthusiasm to be a true
follower of Christ. Many Christ-admirers are lost. The true mark
of discipleship is revealed in Jn. 15:14, "You are my friends if
you do what I bid you." Cf. Jn. 8:31,32. These people were doing
just the opposite.
Yet, so marvelous were the deeds of Jesus that even these
disobedient people were astonished, knocked out of their senses
(cf. 1:22; 6:2), and this "beyond all measure," so that they had to
exclaim, "How excellently has he done all things!" They pointed
especially to the fact that those who had previously been deaf were
now hearing, and those previously speechless were now speaking.
This also shows that Mark was conscious of the fact that the
incident he has just recorded was only one out of many, a fact
stated definitely by Matthew in his parallel passage.
Above all, it must not be overlooked that by means of the
event here described (Mk. 7:31 f.) and by those similar to it
prophecy was being fulfilled. See Isa. 35:5,6.
"How excellently he has done all thing." R.A. Cole, in
his commentary very appropriately calls attention to the fact that
all God's creative works are perfect. Not only God saw that they
were good (Gen. 1:4, 10, 12, 18, 21, 25, 31), but so also, on this
occasion (Mk. 7:37), does man.
SUMMARY OF CHAPTER 7:24-37
This section consists of two paragraphs: a. verses 24-
30; and b. verses 31-37.
As to the first, here begins the Retirement Ministry.
Jesus and The Twelve wend their way toward the region of Tyre. He
enters a house, seeking seclusion. But, as happened before (6:34),
when Jesus is confronted with human need he goes into action. A
woman from the Gentile world falls at his feet and keeps urging him
to deliver her daughter from an unclean spirit. He tells her,
"First let the children eat all they want, for it is not proper to
take the children's bread and toss it to the house dogs," meaning,
"The Messianic blessing must be bestowed first on the Jews, then on
the Gentiles." Her answer, "Lord, even the house dogs under the
table eat some of the children's scraps," results in the rewarding
reply, "Because of this statement of yours, go your way; the demon
has left your daughter." Arriving home the woman finds her little
daughter lying quietly in bed, the demon gone.
From Sidon Jesus travels to Decapolis, to a place
somewhere near the eastern shore of the Lake of Galilee. Thus,
from a woman urging him to rescue her child he turns to a
handicapped man, one afflicted with deafness and a speech
impediment. From healing at a distance he makes the transition to
healing at close quarters. Those who bring the man to Jesus ask
him to lay his hand on him. But Jesus has his own way of dealing
with each individual case. He removes the man from the crowd, puts
his fingers into the man's ears, and then a wet (with saliva)
finger on the man's tongue. Then, lifting up his eyes in prayer,
Jesus heaves a deep sign of genuine, tender compassion. Finally he
utters the word "Ephphatha," which, as Mark explains, means "Be
opened." Immediately the man's speech and hearing are completely
restored. Jesus strictly forbids the crowd to give any publicity
to the miracle, a command which is as thoroughly and repeatedly
disregarded as it is issued. Nevertheless, the miracle elicits
from the astonished multitude the exclamation, "How excellently he
has done all things! Why, he even causes the deaf to hear and the
speechless to speak."
Matthew (15:29-31) in a roughly parallel passage shows
that in this same place and at this same time Jesus healed many
other handicapped individuals. Those who saw what was happening
"glorified the God of Israel," a statement which is most naturally
interpreted to mean that they ascribed honor to the God who
originally was not their God. Accordingly, if we combine Matthew's
account with that of Mark we reach the conclusion that the two
events - the one near Sidon and the other in Decapolis - herald the
wide- opening of the kingdom's door to the Gentiles. Thus the Lord
who according to Mk. 7:1-23 (see especially verse 19) was erasing
the line of demarcation between clean and unclean foods, soon
afterward started to remove the barricade between unclean and
(supposedly) clean people. That these two are closely related was
made very clear to Peter. See Acts 10:1-11:18.



Mark 7:37
And were beyond measure astonished, saying,; People were absolutely
amazed, and kept saying--Phi; He hath done all things well:; How
perfectly he has done everything!--Rieu; How wonderfully...!--Phi;
Everything He does is wonderful-- Tay; he maketh both the deaf to
hear, and the dumb to speak.; he maketh even...--ASV; He actually
makes the deaf hear and the dumb speak--Mof; He even corrects
deafness and stammering!--Tay;
And /superabundantly\ were they being struck with astonishment, saying--
//Well\\ hath he /all things\ done,--
Both /the deaf\ he causeth to hear, and /the dumb\ to
speak.
and they were being beyond measure astonished, saying, `Well hath he
done all things; both the deaf he doth make to hear, and the dumb
to speak.'

TRNTyeagerV560,1 - kai huperperissws exeplAssonto legontes,

Kalws panta pepoiAken, kai tous kwphous poiei akouein kai

(tous) alalous lalein.

kai (causal conjunction).
huperperissws (adverbial).
beyond measure - Mk.7:37.
Meaning: A combination of huper and perissos. Hence a
doubly strengthened superlative. As modern parlance has it, "Out of
sight!"
exeplAssonto (3d.per.pl.imp.ind.of ekplAssomai, progressive
description).
legontes (pres.act.part.nom.pl.masc.of legw, adverbial,
temporal).
Kalws (adverbial).
panta (acc.pl.neut.of pas, direct object of pepoiAken).
pepoiAken (3d.per.sing.perf.act.ind.of poiew, consummative).
kai (adjunctive conjunction).
tous (acc.pl.masc.of the article in agreement with kwphous).
kwphous (acc.pl.masc.of kwphos, general reference).
poiei (3d.per.sing.pres.act.ind.of poiew, static).
akouein (pres.act.inf.of akouw, substantival, direct object of
poiei).
kai (adjunctive conjunction).
alalous (acc.pl.masc.of alalos, general reference).
dumb - Mk.7:37; 9:17,25.
Meaning: a privative plus lalew. Hence dumb; unable to
speak. Speechless. As a noun in Mk.7:37; as an adjective with
pneuma in Mk.9:17,25.
lalein (pres.act.inf.of lalew, substantival, object of poiei).
Translation: "And they were amazed beyond measure as they
repeated over and over, `He has done everything well. He makes both
the deaf to hear and the dumb to speak.'"
COMMENT: It is difficult to translate the literal Greek
into smooth English, so we have left the precise meaning to the
Comment. They continued (progressive duration in the imperfect
exeplAssonto) in an unusually high state of excitement, so much so
that they continued to repeat (present tense in legontes) what is
recorded. Their amazement was "beyond measure." This is they only
place in the NT where huperperissws occurs. Note the consummative
force of the perfect pepoiAken. "Everything He attempts is done
with a continuous consistency of excellent performance."
There are three grammatical principles not often seen in
the NT. Note the kai...kai sequence, in an adjunctive sense.
-"both...and." Also note the static present tense in poiei. "The
present tense may be used to represent a condition which is assumed
as perpetually existing, or to be ever taken for granted as a
fact." (Mantey, Manual, 186). 2 Peter 3:4; John 15:27 and I John
3:8 are other examples. Note also the noun use of the two
infinitives as objects of the finite verb poiei with kwphous and
alalous adjoined as accusatives of general reference.
Thus the people in Decapolis sang His praises! Cf.
Mt.15:31. The speechless speak, the deaf hear, the lame walk. The
God of Israel was present. When we compare Mk.5:17 we note that the
people in the region have had a change of attitude toward Jesus.
This time they did not lose their pigs.
T26 - The idiomatic plural occurs here; a single case seems to be
in mind, "the deaf...the dumb." [Ed. Actually the people appear to
be making a generalized statement.]
MARKitGNTwuest155,6 - "Were beyond measure astonished." The verb is
ekplAssw "to strike one out of self-possession," in the passive,
"to be struck with astonishment." The words "beyond measure" are
the translation of huperperissws, a double superlative, perissws
meaning, "in superabundance," and huper "above." Their astonishment
at the miracle was so great that it almost deprived them of their
self-possession, and it was in superabundance, and then some on top
of that.
"He hath done all things well." The verb is in the
perfect tense, showing the settled convictions of the people as to
the mentorious work of our Lord.
"He maketh." The verb is present in tense. The reference
is to the miracle which just had taken place.
"To speak" is lalew, emphasizing, not the matter, but the
fact of speech. The crowd was not interested in what the man was
saying but in the fact that he was able to express himself
articulately.
Translation: "And they were completely flabbergasted, and
that in a superabundant degree which itself was augmented by the
addition of yet more astonishment, saying, He has done all things
well. He makes both the deaf to be hearing, and the dumb to be
speaking."
TCGTC-MARKcranfield253,4 - huperperissws only occurs here: it must mean
`exceedingly'.
Kalws panta pepoiAken. Perhaps an echo of Gen.1:31: kai
eiden ho theos ta panta, hosa epoiAse kai idou kala lian. ... If
so, we might compare Jn.5:17, where the working of the Son is
associated with that of the Father.
It is better to place a colon after pepoiAken than a
comma.
kai tous kwphous...lalein. Probably an echo of Isa.35:5f.
Perhaps these words and the preceding kalws panta pepoiAken reflect
Christian meditation on the incident.
This narrative forms a pair with 8:22-26, 7:31-37
concluding the complex containing the Feeding of the Five Thousand,
and 8:22-26 the complex containing the Feeding of the Four
Thousand. The two miracles have a notable feature in common. In
both cases the narrative suggests that the cure was accomplished
with difficulty and not instantaneously. So here Jesus prays
(anablepsas eis ton ouranon) and groans (estenaxen) and makes use
of physical manipulations and spittle (v.33), and it is implied
that the cure took some time (euthus in v.35 only indicates that
the loosing of the tongue followed immediately on the opening of
the ears). This contrasts strikingly with such miracles as the
healing of the leper (1:41) and that recorded in
Mt.8:5ff.=Lk.7:1ff. It is noticeable that neither the healing of
the deaf-mute nor the healing of the blind man of Bethsaida is
reproduced in Mt. and Lk. The later Synoptists apparently preferred
to dwell on miracles which more obviously illustrated the power of
Jesus' word.
As the two miracles are closely similar and Mark seems to
underline their similarity--both concern healings that figure in
Isa.35:5f, and he has placed them in parallel positions in relation
to the two feeding-miracles--it is probable that Mark regarded them
as a pair. He has placed the second member of the pair immediately
before Peter's Confession (8:27ff.). So it seems likely that he was
aware of the illuminating parallel between these two healings and
Peter's Confession, and that he intended his readers to see in
these healing miracles not only signs for faith that the promised
intervention of God of Isa.35 had taken place in the ministry of
Jesus (we saw above the evidence that he had this chapter in
mind--see on vs.32), but also an instructive comment upon the
apostles's recognition of Jesus as the Christ. This is confirmed by
the fact that in 8:18 Jesus refers to the blindness and deafness of
the Twelve. The Twelve had been deaf to the Word of God (it is
interesting to notice how often there are references to hearing in
Mk: e.g. 4:3,9,12,15,18,20,23,24,33; 7:14,[16]; 8:18; 9:7); but
Jesus had taken them apart (did Mark see in apolabomenos auton apo
tou ochlou kat' idian a picture of the calling and training of the
Twelve? Cf. 1:16-20; 2:13f.; 3:13-19; 4:10- 20; 6:31; 7:17-23;
8:14-21,27), and at last he had opened their ears--by a miracle
which had been costly and gradual. They had been blind, but the had
opened their eyes, so that they recognized him as the Christ. They
had been dumb, but he had loosed their tongues so that they were
enabled at last to confess him.
If what has just been said is right, it is not improbable
that Mark also saw in these miracles a reminder for the
contemporary Church that all true faith and all true confession of
Christ is miracle. We may well also see in the order here (first
ears, then tongue) a reminder that it is only as the Church hears
the Word of God that it has anything worthwhile to say.
TNICotNT-MARKlane267,8 - Jesus' repeated injunctions to be silent
concerning what had taken place were immediately disregarded; those
who had witnessed the healing were exuberant and engaged in
kerygmatic activity (cf. Chs. 1:45; 5:20). The parallel with
Ch.1:44f. is particularly close since the violation of the
injunction is described in both places as "proclamation," the
technical designation for preaching the gospel. The identical
language in Ch. 1:44f. and Ch. 7:36 suggests that the purpose of
the injunction was to avoid a recurrence of the situation which
developed subsequent to the healing of the leper when the presence
of crowds in each town clamoring for Jesus' healing touch hindered
his movement and interrupted his preaching mission. It was ap-
parently Jesus' intention to remain in the region of the Decapolis
for a period of time and he did not wish to be regarded as a
Hellenistic wonder-worker.
The narrative concludes with a confession of faith which
focuses on the messianic significance of the incident. In their
excitement the crowd generalized the healing, perhaps with
reference to what they had previously heard (cf. Chs. 3:8; 5:20)
and was now confirmed by what they had seen. But Mark intends an
allusion to Isa. 35:5f. The choral exclamation of the crowd is the
response of faith which recognizes in all the works of Jesus the
promised intervention of God.
MARK-j&d212,3 - He charged them. Not merely the man himself, but the
people who were around. Of course they would quickly know what had
been done, and must be included in his prohibition. Often did he
thus plead for silence about his works (as in chap. 3:12 and 5:43),
and now, while he was in search of retirement and quietness, the
request was especially to be expected. But, as usual, it was all
in vain: the gratitude of the healed and the wonder of the
spectators were too strong, and the story must be told. It seems
probable that this miracle was the means of bringing on the great
period of thronging that is described in Matt. 15:30, 31. Mark's
expressions in description of the abundant proclamation and the
excessive amazement are of the very strongest character. - The
final testimony of praise seems to have been called out by the many
healings that took place, though first suggested by the one. He
hath done all things well (perfect tense) - he has been gracious
everywhere and successful in everything - he maketh (perfect tense)
both the deaf to hear, and the dumb to speak. - The dumb. The
stronger word than in verse 32."
MARKbarclay1183,4,5 - This story begins by describing what is on the
face of it an amazing journey. Jesus was going from Tyre to the
territory around the Sea of Galilee. That is to say, He was going
from Tyre, in the north, to Galilee in the south and, according to
this story, He started by going to Sidon. That is to say, He
started going due south by going due north! As one scholar has put
it, it would be like going from London to Cornwall via Manchester;
or it would be like going from Glasgow to Edinburgh via Perth.
Because of that difficulty some people have thought that the text
is wrong, and that Sidon should not enter into it at all. But
almost certainly the text is correct as it stands. Another great
scholar thinks that this journey took no less than eight months,
and that, indeed, is far more likely. It may be that this long
journey is the peace before the storm; it is the long communion
with the disciples before the final storm breaks. In the very next
chapter Peter makes the great discovery that Jesus is the Christ
(Mk. 8:27-29), and it may well be that it was in this long, lonely
time together that that impression became a certainty in Peter's
heart. Jesus needed this long time with His men before the storm
and tension of the approaching end.
When Jesus did arrive back in the regions of Galilee, He
came into the district of the Decapolis, and there they brought to
Him a man who was deaf and who had an impediment in his speech. As
Tyndale vividly translates it the man was "deffe and stambed in his
speech." No doubt the two things went together; it was the man's
inability to hear which made his speech so imperfect. There is no
miracle which so beautifully shows Jesus' way of treating people.
(i) Jesus took the man aside from the crowd, all by
himself. Here is the most tender considerateness. Deaf folk are
always a little embarrassed. In some ways it is more embarrassing
to be deaf than it is to be blind. A deaf person knows he cannot
hear; and when someone in a crowd shouts at him and tries to make
him hear, in his excitement, he becomes all the more helpless.
Jesus shows the most tender consideration for the feelings of a man
for whom life was very difficult.
(ii) Throughout the whole miracle Jesus acted what He
was going to do in dumb-show. He put His hands in the man's ears.
In those days people believed that spittle had a curative quality.
Suetonius, the Roman historian, tells of an incident in the life of
Vespasian, the Roman Emperor. "It fortuned that a certain mean
commoner stark-blind, another likewise with a feeble and lame leg,
came together unto him as he sat upon his tribunal, craving that
help and remedy for their infirmities which had been shown unto
them by Serapis in their dreams; that he should restore the one of
his sight, if he did but spit into his eyes, and strengthen the
other's leg, if he vouchsafed only to touch it with his heel. Now
when as he could hardly believe that the thing any way would find
success and speed accordingly, and therefore durst not so much as
put it to the venture, at the last, through the persuasion of his
friends, openly before the assembly he assayed both means, neither
missed he of the effect." (Suetonius, Life of Vespasian 7.
Holland's translation.) Jesus then looked up to heaven to show
that it was from God that help was to come. Then He spoke the word
and the man was healed. The whole story shows us most vividly that
Jesus did not consider the man merely a case; He considered him as
an individual. The man had a special need and a special problem,
and with the most tender considerateness Jesus dealt with him in a
way that spared his feelings, and in a way that he could
understand.
When it was done the people declared that He had done all
things well. That is none other than the verdict of God upon His
own creation in the very beginning (Gen. 1:31). When Jesus came,
bringing healing to men's bodies and salvation to their souls, He
had begun the work of creation all over again. In the beginning
everything had been good; man's sin had spoiled it all; and now
Jesus was bringing back the beauty of God to the world which man's
sin had rendered ugly.