All Faith Is Good? (Titus 2:10)

By Kenneth Yates

[Editor, Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society, Columbia, SC]

I. Introduction

Recently, I was studying the book of Titus and came upon an interesting discussion of Titus 2:10 in the book on Greek grammar that I used in seminary. This discussion was valuable because it challenged the common translation of this verse.

The book suggested that the proper translation of this verse would support a Lordship view of salvation. The author maintains that Paul is saying that true faith results in good works that are demonstrated in the life of a genuine believer. I had never heard Titus 2:10 used in the debate between Lordship salvation and the Free Grace perspective. As such, I believe a closer look at it would be beneficial for the readers of the JOTGES. Certain lessons can also be learned from such a study.

In this article, I will discuss the common translation and interpretation of Titus 2:10. Then, I will look at the argument for a different way of translating it. Finally, I will discuss how it applies to the issue of saving faith and the lessons we can learn from this example.

II. The Common View Of Titus 2:10

When we look at Titus 2:10 and how it is understood, we find that there is a general consensus. This consensus is based upon an almost universally accepted translation of the verse.

A. The Translation

The KJV is representative of how this verse is commonly translated. It reads:

Not purloining, but shewing all good fidelity; that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour in all things. (emphasis added)

The part of the verse in question involves the words, “shewing all good fidelity.” The Greek word for “fidelity” is the common word for “faith” in the NT (pistin). According to the leading Greek lexicon of the NT, one of the major meanings of the word is “the state of being one in whom confidence is placed.” It speaks of that person’s faithfulness, reliability, or fidelity in doing what is required or expected of them.[1]

The word “good” in the Greek (agathēn) is an adjective. Even though it is separated from the word “faith,” the KJV translates it as modifying the word. Hence, we have the translation “all good fidelity.”

Other translations follow this translation. Both the NET and NASB translate it “all good faith.” The HCSB takes the words “all good faith” to mean “utter faithfulness.” The NIV says the words refer to one who is “fully trusted.”

In summary, if we pick up any English translation of the NT, we find that the words “good” and “faith” go together. They describe one who is reliable or faithful. That is the way commentaries understand the words as well.

B. A Survey Of Commentaries

Titus 2:10 is found in a discussion by Paul on the topic of slaves who are Christians and how they should conduct themselves. In v 9, the Apostle says that slaves are to be obedient to their own masters. They are to please their masters in all things, and not talk back to them.

As with the case of the translation of v 10, there is basic uniformity as to what this verse means.[2] Taking 2:9–10 together, Hiebert maintains that v 9 deals with the attitude of the slave. They are to have a good attitude towards their station in life, and adopt this attitude voluntarily.[3]

This attitude makes grumbling unacceptable, as well as a sullen disposition. Such an attitude makes one eager to please, regardless of one’s status.[4]

In v 10, Paul moves to the actions of the slave. They are not to steal or use any “tricks of the trade” to hurt their owner financially. They are to show “good faith” by being trustworthy in every matter trusted to them, as long as what their master wants them to do is not sinful. This kind of action and attitude makes the message of grace attractive to those who observe the slaves doing them.[5]

Quinn says that v 9 deals with verbal opposition to the master, while v 10 addresses concrete actions. He cites Pliny the Elder, among others, to show that it was common for slaves to steal from their masters in the first century. Onesimus, in the book of Philemon, is a Biblical example of such a practice.[6]

The point of these verses is that Christian slaves should not follow this common practice. The word “faith” means reliable. Such reliability is described as “good” because as Christian slaves they are not to do anything sinful while being reliable slaves.[7] They are not to use the idea of being reliable slaves as an excuse for doing evil. In other words, the adjective “good” places a limit on their reliability.

In a similar vein, Stott says that the verbal aspect of obedience in v 9 refers to being respectful. “Good faith” is equivalent to showing they can be trusted.[8]

Whatever Paul is saying to slaves, such exhortations apply to all areas, as v 9 indicates.[9] When it comes to stealing from your master, a slave could easily justify doing so. As a general rule, the financial rewards of being a slave did not reflect the amount of work done. In addition, a slave could conclude that the master had more than he needed or could ever use. Anything the slave pilfered would not be missed.[10]

A believing slave could also justify having a negative attitude, particularly if the master is also a believer. Such a slave would be taught about Christian liberty and equality within the Body of Christ. He could argue that willingly submitting to a Christian master as a slave would contradict such teaching.[11] Guthrie points out that a believing slave on the island of Crete may have difficulty not stealing because, as Paul says, they came from an immoral background (Titus 1:12). Such a background might contribute to a new Christian who was a slave taking advantage of a believer’s freedom in Christ.[12]

III. Titus 2:10 Does Not Teach A Lordship View Of Faith

In light of the way Titus 2:10 is translated in all English versions, it is difficult to see how this verse could be used to argue a Lordship view of faith. Such a view says that true Christian faith in Christ is demonstrated by obedience to Christ as Lord. A survey of the authors cited above, all of whom are more or less sympathetic with Lordship Salvation, bears this out. None of them see this verse as supporting such a view.

In Titus 2:1–10, Paul is giving instructions to Christians. He is not giving tests by which we can determine who is eternally saved or not. Hiebert points out that Paul is talking about the Christian life being a process, and not saying what will automatically happen.13 Knight says these slaves are indeed Christians, as are the others discussed in chapter two, but have a choice on how they conduct themselves.14 Stott also believes that these Christian slaves have a choice. Their lives can either add luster to the Gospel or not. The life of a Christian can either bring adornment to the Gospel or discredit it. If a Christian discredits the Gospel by how he lives, he gives no evidence of salvation, but that is possible for a Christian to do.[15]

Both Knight and Mounce agree the point here is not to demonstrate that one is genuinely saved, but to make the gospel attractive to others. The instructions to slaves deal with the issue of evangelism.[16] Christian slaves have a responsibility to witness to others, especially their masters. They can possibly be used to lead them to Christ.[17] Their behavior can assist in this area. But their behavior is changed, not because they are genuine believers, but through the “doctrine of God” as taught by the church (2:10).[18]

Of course, if the masters in question here are already believers, their salvation is not the goal of the slave’s Christ like behavior. By his exemplary conduct a slave can make Christian doctrine appear beautiful in the eyes of other onlookers.

Throughout chapter two, as Paul addresses different groups within the church, he gives admonitions and urges these believers to act in a certain way. He “exhorts” them to do so (v 6). This exhortation is implied throughout the chapter.[19] They are commanded to do these things because such actions are not automatic.

In the verses that follow Titus 2:10 it is also clear that the behavior demanded of those in the church, including slaves, is not automatic. Believers have to be taught these things, and must deny what they naturally want to do (v 12). A Christian slave will not do what Paul exhorts him to without such teachings and self-denial.

Regardless of how v 10 is translated and understood, the context certainly favors the view that Paul is telling Christians how they should act. It will involve sound teaching within the church so that they know how to do that. He is not telling them how they will act. Even those who hold to a Lordship view of salvation do not see this context supporting that idea.

However, it has been held that the Greek of Titus 2:10 leads to a different translation. This translation, it is held, teaches the Lordship salvation view of the inevitability of good works.

IV. A Different Translation Of Titus 2:10

In his popular NT Greek grammar, Daniel Wallace argues that Titus 2:10 should be translated in a different way.[20] He does so because of two grammatical points. The first issue is whether the verse has a double accusative of object-complement. The second involves the relation of an adjective to a noun in an anarthrous construction.

A. Double Accusative Of Object-Complement

The point of contention involves the four words “showing all good fidelity” (NKJV). In the original Greek, there are four words as well. They appear in a different order:

Pasan (all) pistin (faith) enkeiknumenous (showing) agathēn (good)[21]

The words “faith” and “good” are in the accusative case. The common way of translating these words is to treat the word “good” as an adjective, modifying the word “faith,” since both are in the same case. This leads to the translation, “good faith” and thus, “showing all good faith.”

However, Wallace argues that the word “good” should not be treated as an adjective that modifies the word “faith.” Instead, it is part of a double accusative of object-complement construction. This construction is one in which a noun in the accusative (in this case “faith”) is the direct object of the verb (in this case “showing”). The other accusative (in this case “good”) complements the first accusative (“faith”). The second accusative can be a noun or, as in this case, an adjective. The second accusative says something about the first accusative, often with the verb “to be,” which must be supplied. This leads to the following translation:

Showing all faith to be good.[22]

On this grammatical point, Wallace offers a number of arguments.[23] The first is that the Greek word “showing” takes an object-complement in Romans 2:15.[24] In fact, it is an example of a verb that frequently takes an object-complement.

Another argument Wallace makes is that the word “good” is separated from the word “faith” by the verb/participle “showing.” It is extremely rare in the NT for an adjective to be positioned this way. But this is the normal position for a predicate adjective.[25] Very simply, if the translation was “good faith” in Titus 2:10 we would expect the word “good” to be closer to the word “faith,” and not after the word “showing.”

Some say that because the word “faith” does not have an article (usually the English word “the”) it cannot be the object of the verb “showing” in a double accusative construction. However, Wallace points out that there are other examples in the NT where there is an object of the verb that does not have an article and still has an adjective that says something about that object, as Wallace argues here in Titus 2:10. And example would be John 9:1, where Jesus “saw a man which was blind from his birth.” The word “man” and “blind” are both in the accusative and “man” does not have an article.[26] The verb “was” needs to be added between these accusatives.

On this last argument, Wallace has more to say. The fact that the word “faith” does not have an article is significant.

B. The Anarthrous Noun-Adjective Construction[27]

Titus 2:10 makes a nonequative statement. This simply means that the main verb is not “to be.” The main verb is “showing.”

In this verse, the anarthrous noun “faith” has the adjective “all” in front of it.[28] The order in Titus 2:10 is: an adjective (all); followed by an anarthrous noun (faith); followed by another word (showing); followed by a second adjective (good). Wallace says that there are no instances where this order occurs in the NT where the second adjective modifies the anarthous noun. In other words, there are no examples in the NT where Titus 2:10 would lead to the translation “good faith.”[29] This leads to the second option, which is, that the word “good” acts as a predicate: “faith that is good.”

When one considers that the verb “showing” does use accusative adjectives this way, the traditional way of translating Titus 2:10 needs to be questioned. Wallace states that the burden of proof is on those who would translate it “good faith.”[30]

V. Evaluation Of A Different Translation

Anytime one is confronted with a new way of looking at something, there is at first a reluctance to accept the new point of view. Many of us have quoted or read from Titus 2:10 and have become accustomed to the phrase “showing all good faith.”

However, all within the Free Grace movement have learned that sometimes our traditional way of seeing things are not Biblical. We need to be willing to let the text of the Bible speak for itself. Titus 2:10 may be such a case.

Wallace’s discussion on the grammatical points of the verse is enlightening. Even if one does not know Greek, the simple order of the words in the original would suggest that perhaps Wallace is correct.

The Greek grammatical arguments would at least lead one to conclude that the new translation is possible. In fact, one might conclude it is probable.

The most important question is: How would this new translation affect our interpretation of Titus 2:10? It is interesting that Mounce, himself a Greek scholar, makes note of Wallace’s translation. In Mounce’s commentary on Titus he follows the traditional understanding of the verse. He seems to consider the new translation a possibility but does not engage with it.[31] Perhaps he did not see the differences as significant. However, for the readers of JOTGES, Wallace’s interpretation of the new translation is very significant.

VI. Titus 2:10 Doesn’t Support Lordship Salvation

After suggesting a new translation for Titus 2:10, Wallace gives a reason why this new translation is important. He feels it supports a Lordship Salvation view of saving faith.

Wallace argues that the word “all” can be translated “genuine.” He holds that the word can have this meaning with abstract nouns, such as faith, and that Greek lexicons list this as a possibility.[32] Paul, then, is speaking about what a “genuine” faith looks like.

For Wallace, a genuine faith is good in the sense that it is productive. He seems to be saying that “good” and “productive” are synonymous. The end of v 10 restates it in another way. Genuine faith results in adorning the doctrine of God. Wallace sees the two halves of the verse as being parallel. Both halves would be saying that slaves are to demonstrate that their faith is real and results in good behavior. Wallace maintains that this supports the idea that “saving faith does not fail, but even results in good works.”[33]

Using the context of the Pastoral Epistles as a whole, Wallace says that the use of the word “faith” in these books supports this. When faith is said to be genuine it is a faith that produces good works. He cites 2 Tim 3:15–17 and Titus 1:13–16 as examples.

This, however, is a little confusing. The lexicon he cites does not say the word “all” can mean “genuine.” Instead, it can signify the highest degree of something. If that is the meaning here it would mean not “genuine” faith, but “greatest” faith.

In addition, the word “good” and “productive” are not synonyms. Something can be productive but not necessarily good. One can easily think of things that are good but not necessarily productive.

It also is clear that in coming to his theological conclusion Wallace is not using grammatical arguments. He mainly argues from the context, but it is far from clear that that context supports a Lordship Salvation view of faith. To live in such a way that “adorns the doctrine of God” does not mean that such a life is automatic.

The use of the word “faith” in the Pastoral Epistles, as will be discussed below, can certainly be understood in a Free Grace context. Wallace argues that the “flow” of the argument of Titus 2:10 argues for a faith that automatically results in good works. But, it appears that the flow of the chapter strongly suggests something else.

All of the commentaries discussed above, even though they are generally agreeable with the tenets of Lordship Salvation, do not see the context of Titus 2 as discussing the automatic results of saving faith. Instead they all see it as one of exhorting what Christians should do.

For example, Paul tells slaves here that they should be “subject” to their masters (2:9). The same verb is used in reference to wives. They are to be subject to their husbands (2:5). This involves being “discreet, chaste, homemakers, good, and obedient.” To say that all Christian wives are automatically going to be these things strains credulity. To say that all Christian slaves will automatically serve their masters with a pleasant attitude, not talk back, and please their owners in every way strains it as well.

The context of chapter two deals with Christian living. The purpose of such living is not to show proof that one is eternally saved. There are other benefits when a Christian “adorns” his life in this way (2:10). Masters see the truth of Christian doctrine. Such living keeps the “word of God” from being “blasphemed” by others. In addition, others will have “no evil thing to say” about Christians (2:5, 8, 10). In other words, in Titus 2 Christian living has an impact on others.[34]

VII. Practical Application

If, as Wallace suggests, Titus 2:10 teaches that true saving faith results in a persevering faith that produces good works, there is a troubling application. One of the most disturbing aspects of Lordship Salvation is that it makes assurance of salvation impossible. It maintains that a true Christian cannot continue living a life of sin. However, since every Christian sins, there is always a question of how many sins it takes to “continue” in sin.

Even though Paul is talking about slaves in Titus 2:9–10, it is recognized that what he has to say applies to employees in general. It is very easy to apply Paul’s teaching and conclude that Christians should be good employees, regardless of their social status. To find support for Lordship Salvation in Titus 2:10 means that if a person is a true Christian, he will demonstrate it by how he performs at his job.

A “true” Christian, then, will have a good attitude about his work. A true Christian will not say bad things about his boss. A true Christian will not pilfer from his boss by coming in late, or leaving early. Many other examples could be given of what it means to be a good employee based upon what Paul says here. And of course, it does not matter what kind of boss the believer has or in what kind of employment situation he finds himself.

How many Christians can feel good about these tests of assurance? How many of us could be better employees in all of these areas? Particularly, how many young Christians, even teenagers, fail miserably in this area of Christian living? If one believes that Titus 2:10 is a test by which we can determine if we have “genuine” faith, and that we base the genuineness of that faith on our performance at our place of employment, this will result in a further reason to lose assurance of our eternal salvation.

Fortunately, even if we accept the new translation proposed by Wallace, there is no need to accept the idea it supports Lordship Salvation. The key is found in looking at the meaning of the word “faith” in the Pastoral Epistles.

VIII. Faith In The Pastoral Epistles

The word faith occurs 33 times in the Pastoral Epistles. A quick review of these occurrences indicate that perhaps five could refer to the faith that leads to eternal life, that is, the faith in Christ by which the Christian life begins. But even in these instances such an understanding is not clear (1 Tim 2:7; 1 Tim 5:8; 2 Tim 3:8; Titus 1:1, 4). However, in the vast majority of instances the word “faith” occurs in contexts in which it is clear that Paul is talking about faith as it relates to Christian living. This kind of faith is the faith that lives in such a way that the Christian believes in what the Word of God teaches.

Examples of this use of faith include 1 Tim 2:15, where Paul is talking about children. They are to “continue” in faith. In 1 Tim 3:13, deacons who serve well within in the church obtain great confidence in the “faith.” Paul wants Timothy to feed on sound doctrine in order to be nourished in the faith (1 Tim 4:6). In doing so, Timothy can be an example of faith (1 Tim 4:12).

From these examples we see that Paul speaks of a faith that involves obeying God’s Word, and of a faith that can grow. It is a faith that gets the believer through difficult times, as it believes in what God has said.

The question in Titus 2:10 is: What kind of faith is Paul referring to? Is it the faith that begins the Christian life, or is it the faith by which a Christian lives?

As stated above, Wallace believes that verses such as 2 Tim 3:15–17 and Titus 1:13–16 show that in the Pastoral Epistles when faith is genuine it produces good works. He takes the word faith in these instances as referring to the initial act of faith in Christ. He then says that Paul means basically the same thing in Titus 2:10 when he refers to faith. A genuine faith is “good” in that it produces works.

It is not clear, however, that the verses Wallace cites use the word faith in this way. In 2 Timothy 3, this faith is intimately related to the Word of God. The Word of God teaches, rebukes, and trains the Christian in order to do good works. It seems that Paul is talking about a faith that uses what God has revealed in that Word. In fact, Paul is talking about a faith he wants Timothy to have. Timothy was already a believer.

Titus 1 is less clear. But even here, Paul talks about being sound, or healthy, in faith (1:13). This faith is not referring to the initial act of faith. Therefore, there is no need to conclude from these verses, as

Wallace does, that the initial act of faith always produces a life of enduring good works. The whole passage can certainly be understood in a Free Grace perspective.[35]

The real question, as far as this article is concerned, is what kind of faith Paul is describing in Titus 2. It is significant that in verse two Paul urges elderly Christian men to be “sound in faith.” They are encouraged to manifest love and patience in their lives as well. This clearly refers to living by faith. The significance lies in the fact that the word “faith” here does not refer to the initial act of faith in a Christian’s life. Titus 2:1–10 forms a unit. The next occurrence of the word faith occurs in the same section, in v 10.

IX. Interpreting Titus 2:10

In Titus 2:1–10, Paul addresses different groups within the church. He tells each group how they are to conduct themselves. In order, he gives instructions to old men, old woman, young women, young men, and then to Titus, his lieutenant on the island of Crete. At the very beginning of these instructions Paul summarizes their goal. He wants the lives of each of these groups to display “sound doctrine” (v. 1).

The last group Paul deals with is slaves. They also are to live by certain standards. If we accept Wallace’s translation, he wants them to show that “all faith” is “good.”

As with the large majority of the occurrences of the word “faith” in the Pastoral Epistles, including the only other occurrence in this section (v. 2), Paul is talking about living by faith. Living by faith in what God’s Word teaches, or sound doctrine, is difficult. Perhaps it can be said that among the groups Paul addresses, it was particularly difficult for slaves.

Slaves were at the lower rung of society. They were often at the mercy of bad masters. It would be easy to resent their station in life. It would be easy to take advantage of any personal benefit a slave could acquire.

But Paul is telling them to conduct themselves by having faith in sound doctrine. They are to live their lives based upon what the Word of God says, and not in light of their current plight. In Eph 6:5–8, Paul gives very similar instructions to slaves. In those verses, Paul explains what is involved in a life of faith by a slave. A slave can conduct himself in this way, even in spite of life’s seeming injustice, because he knows that he will be rewarded by Christ when Christ returns.

The Christian slave who served his master in this manner would demonstrate that a life of such faith produces what is good. Others would be able to see the good that adorns such a life. His deeds would be like jewels that reflect the sound teachings of Christ. No doubt, some would be attracted to Christ by seeing such a life. A life of faith, even by a slave, shows what is good. It would also result in eternal rewards.

X. Conclusion

Anything that helps us understand God’s Word is welcomed. Often, such things challenge our traditions, such as how we translate a verse. Wallace’s grammatical discussion on Titus 2:10 is a case in point. In my opinion, Wallace accurately shows that Paul is not talking about a “good faith.” Instead, he is talking about a life of faith that demonstrates what is good.

That being said, one does not have to conclude that if a person is genuinely saved he will automatically live that kind of life. All the groups in Titus 2 are being exhorted to live that way because it is not automatic. But Paul sees all of them as Christians. Immediately before discussing Christian slaves, Paul exhorts Titus. Clearly, Paul saw Titus as a believer.

Whatever “group” we might find ourselves in, we should seek out sound doctrine from God’s Word. Such doctrine tells how we should conduct ourselves. We should then, through the power of the Spirit, live in light of that teaching. Every such life of faith shows forth what is good.

To an unbeliever, such a life is good because the unbeliever can see the doctrine of God’s Word at work right before their eyes. This could be used by the Spirit of God to draw such an unbeliever to faith. Titus 2 speaks of different groups within the church. If slaves trusted in God’s Word to live in the way Paul exhorts, other believers would see Christ at work in such lives and be encouraged. For the slaves themselves, such obedience would result in rewards in the Kingdom of God.

Such living is living by faith in what God reveals in His Word. It is far from automatic. However, all such faith is certainly good for everyone concerned.

Notes

1. Walter Bauer, W. F. Arndt, and F. W. Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and other Early Christian Literature, ed. F. W. Danker (Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press, 2000), 818.
2. One area of disagreement is whether the “masters” in question are believers or nonbelievers. See A. T. Hanson, The Pastoral Epistles, The New Century Bible Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1982), 182 and Donald Guthrie, The Pastoral Epistles, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1976), 196. Hanson says the masters are not believers and Guthrie takes the opposite view. However, this does not impact the theme of this article.
3. D. Edmond Hiebert, Titus and Philemon (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1957), 54. Mounce agrees with this voluntary attitude and points out that the verb “submit” in verse nine is in the middle voice. See William D. Mounce, Pastoral Epistles, Word Biblical Commentary, vol. 46 (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 2000), 415.
4. William Hendriksen, Exposition of the Pastoral Epistles (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1957), 369.
5. Ibid., 55.
6. Jerome D. Quinn, The Letter to Titus, Anchor Study Bible (New York, NY: Doubleday, 1988), 144-49. He cites Pliny the Elder, Naturalis historia 33.6.26-27.
7. Ibid.
8. John R. W. Stott, The Message of 1 Timothy and Titus: Guard the Truth (Downers Grove, IL: Inter-Varsity Press, 1996), 191.
9. George W. Knight III, The Pastoral Epistles: A Commentary on the Greek Text (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1992), 314.
10. Ibid., 313.
11. Gordon H. Clark, The Pastoral Epistles (Jefferson, MD: The Trinity Foundation, 1983), 219.
12. Guthrie, Pastoral Epistles, 196
13. Hiebert, Titus, 58.
14. Knight, Pastoral, 313.
15. Stott, Titus, 192.
16. Knight, Pastoral, 316; Mounce, Pastoral, 416; Hanson, Pastoral, 182.
17. R. Kent Hughes and Bryan Chapell, 1 & 2 Timothy and Titus: To Guard the Deposit (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2000), 333-34.
18. Clark, Pastoral, 219.
19. Hendrikson, Pastoral, 368.
20. Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar: Beyond the Basics (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1996), 188-89, 312-13. He calls Titus 2:10 a “debatable” passage in regards to these grammatical issues, but it seems fairly clear that he thinks the English versions have mistranslated the verse.
21. Not all Greek manuscripts have this order. Wallace says that the other options, however, are not viable as reflecting the original. For readers of the JOTGES it might be of interest that the Majority Text, which Wallace does not accept, reverses the order of “faith” and “all”: “faith all showing good.” Even if this order of the words was accepted by Wallace, it would have little impact on his view. See Wallace, Grammar, 188 and Zane C. Hodges and Arthur L. Farstad, eds., The Greek New Testament According to the Majority Text (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 1985).
22. Wallace, Grammar, 188.
23. Ibid., 188-89.
24. Rom 2:15: “they show the work of the law written in their hearts,” where the words “work” and “written” are the two accusatives. They show the work of the law to be written in their hearts. The translation is not, “they show the ‘written word’ in their hearts.”
25. Wallace, Grammar, 188-89. An example is Acts 4:16, where the Jewish leaders say, in reference the healing of a paralyzed man by Peter, “for that indeed a notable miracle hath been done by them is manifest.” The word “manifest” is an accusative predicate adjective, occurring after the verb “done” and associated with the word “miracle.”
26. Ibid., 189.
27. An anathrous noun is one that does not have an article in front of it, often translated by the word “the” in English.
28. Wallace is using the order found in the Critical Text of the NT. As noted in footnote 21, the word order changes slightly in the Majority Text. But it is doubtful that the word order would substantially change Wallace’s argument here.
29. Wallace, Grammar, 312.
30. Ibid.
31. Mounce, Pastoral, 416.
32. Wallace, Grammar, 313. He cites BDAG, s.v. pas, 1.a.d.
33. Ibid
34. Knight, Pastoral, 316.
35. Zane C. Hodges, The Gospel Under Siege: Faith and Works in Tension (Dallas, TX: Redencion Viva, 1992), 105, 111; Robert N. Wilkin, “Titus,” in The Grace New Testament Commentary (Denton, TX: Grace Evangelical Society, 2010), 2:1016-17.

The Healing Of Bartimaeus (Mark 10:46–52), Part 2

By Kenneth Yates

[Editor, Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society, Columbia, SC]

I. Introduction

In Part 1, I argued that Mark’s so-called discipleship section (Mark 8:22–10:52) is addressed to believers. The section begins and ends with the healing of two different blind men. Both men are a picture of the disciples. The disciples were believers. They had eternal life. But they were still blind. They needed their eyes opened as to the costs of following Jesus. Jesus teaches them about those costs in the discipleship section of Mark.[1] All of this indicates that there is a difference between being a believer in Jesus Christ, and thus having eternal life, and being a follower or disciple of Jesus.

In Part 2, I will argue that Bartimaeus is a picture of what a disciple is. A disciple is one who understands what it means to follow Christ, and where that path leads.

The account of the healing of Bartimaeus can be broken down into two sections. The first section is Bartimaeus’ call to the Lord (vv 46–48). The second is the Lord’s call to Bartimaeus (vv 49–52).

II. Bartimaeus’ Call To The Lord (Mark 10:46–48)

In Part 1, I argued that Bartimaeus is a picture of a believer before he is healed. The fact that his name is given in the account strongly suggests that he was known to the early church. He knew that Jesus was the Christ, and in vv 46–48 he twice calls Jesus by the Messianic title “Son of David.” But believers also need to see what following Jesus means.[2]

But these verses do not just deal with Bartimaeus’ spiritual condition (i.e., that he was a believer). They also are part of the picture of what a disciple is. A translation would be helpful in discussing these issues:

And they came to Jericho. And as He was going out from Jericho, along with His disciples and a large crowd, the son of Timaeus, Bartimaeus, a blind man begging, was sitting by the road.

And having heard that it was Jesus the Nazarene, he began to cry out and to say, “Son of David, Jesus, have mercy on me.”

And many were rebuking him, in order that he might be silenced. But he cried out much more, “Son of David, have mercy on me” (vv 46–48).

A. The Persistence Of Bartimaeus

As pointed out in part one of this two-part article, many have noted that the actual miracle of the healing of Bartimaeus is not what is emphasized in this account. Instead, a major emphasis is on the character of Bartimaeus.[3] A positive character trait of the blind beggar is his persistence.

We are told in v 46 that Jesus came to Jericho. The healing takes place when Jesus was coming out of the city.

The problem, however, is that Luke says that the healing took place as the Lord was approaching (en tō engizein auton) Jericho (Luke 18:35). As will be discussed later, this makes it appear that Mark may have redacted the account in order to make a theological point about discipleship.

A number of solutions have been offered for the supposed discrepancy. Lenski suggests that Luke’s account has to take into account that the Lord, after leaving the city, went back into Jericho due to His meeting with Zacchaeus, and that the healing of Bartimaeus occurred as the Lord went back into Jericho after leaving it.[4] Porter seems to support this view by saying that the verb used by Luke simply means “in the vicinity of” and speaks of location, not movement.[5]

Plummer offers the idea that there were two healings. Jesus healed one blind man when He entered Jericho and another one (Bartimaeus) when He left.[6] A very common view is that there were two cities named Jericho, an old one and a new one, and that Bartimaeus was healed between them. France, however, points out that both cities were occupied in the first century and were about a mile apart. It is unlikely that both would be called by the same name.[7]

Calvin and Hodges appear to have a better solution. Both say that Bartimaeus was sitting at the exit of the city and heard the noise of the crowd that was following Jesus when He entered into the city. Bartimaeus tried to get the Lord’s attention and began to cry out when he heard the uproar, not knowing when the Lord would pass by him. He kept crying out until the Lord reached him as He left the city.[8]

This seems to be the preferred solution for at least two reasons. The account in Mark shows all the evidence of an eyewitness. The name of the blind man is specified. Mark records in great detail how Bartimaeus refers to Jesus. There is, as we shall see, vividness in describing the actions of Bartimaeus in the following verses as well. An eyewitness would have not only known all these details, he would have known where Bartimaeus was located at the time.

This solution to the “problem” shows the persistent faith of Bartimaeus. He heard the coming of the Lord, while Jesus was on the other side of the city, and he kept yelling even though he could not see where the Lord was or when He would pass by. In fact, he was not sure the Lord would even come by him. He wanted to be in the presence of the Lord. He had to ask a bystander what all the noise meant. When he found out he did not relent in his quest.

The people want Bartimaeus to be silent, but not because he has called Jesus the Son of David. Bartimaeus, as a blind beggar, is a nuisance. They do not feel that he merits the attention of One so important.[9] We are reminded that a similar thing occurred in another teaching moment in the discipleship section of Mark when the disciples rebuked those who brought children to Jesus because children did not merit His attention (10:13).[10]

Nothing, however, can stop Bartimaeus. The fact that he could not see when Jesus passed by him did not stop him. Now, the crowds cannot stop him. His lowly social status cannot stop him either. He continues to “cry” out “much more.” The verb is in the imperfect and reflects a continuous crying out. He continues to cry out the whole time Jesus is passing through the city, until He reaches Bartimaeus on the other side. His faith in Christ is consistent, fearless, and overcomes the obstacles placed in front of him.[11] Bartimaeus, in the face of opposition, publicly calls Jesus the Son of David—the Messiah—a second time.

Such persistent faith is important when one discusses the topic of discipleship. Such a picture of faith would be expected in a section of what discipleship means. It also provides an illustration of discipleship.

B. Jericho And Discipleship

The city of Jericho is important in the discussion of discipleship for a number of reasons. Throughout this section of Mark, the Lord has been on His way to Jerusalem (10:32). Jericho, approximately 15 miles northeast of Jerusalem, was the last major city before He reached His destination. He was about to complete His journey.[12]

Even though Jericho was the last major city, the trip was not over. It would still be an arduous task to arrive. Jericho was 840 feet below sea level and Jerusalem was 3500 above sea level. Edwards calls the walk from Jericho to Jerusalem 15 “tortuous” miles.[13] If somebody was going to follow Jesus on the “road” to Jerusalem from Jericho, he could expect a difficult road. As Jesus teaches throughout the section of discipleship, that is what the disciple will indeed experience.

The combination of Jesus and Jericho reminds the reader of the OT “Jesus” (Joshua) and Jericho. Bartimaeus will experience the salvation of regaining his sight from Jesus just as Joshua brought salvation to the Jews at Jericho many years earlier.[14] The reminder of Joshua, the Jews, and the battle at Jericho also remind the readers that the Jews engaged in warfare. Discipleship is like warfare.

As mentioned above, Bartimaeus meets the Lord as He is leaving Jericho. If there is a connection between Jesus going to Jerusalem and discipleship, the fact that the Lord was going out of Jericho towards Jerusalem fits Mark’s theme better than if the Lord was approaching Jericho when this healing took place. The next stop for the Lord is the city where He will lay down His life for others. A disciple needs to follow Him there.

C. Jesus The Nazarene

In v 47 we are told that Bartimaeus is told that Jesus is a “Nazarene.” This is the One Bartimaeus calls out for. Lenski feels the title “Nazarene” is neither derogatory nor an honor. It simply distinguishes this Jesus from others since it was a common name.[15]

However, there is at least the possibility the title is negative in Mark. He only uses it in three other places. In two of those places there may be negative connotations. In Mark 14:67, Peter is questioned by a girl when he denied the Lord. The girl calls Jesus “the Nazarene Jesus,” and places the designation in the emphatic position (“Kai su meta tou Nazarēnou Iēsou ēstha”). She and her companions did not have a high view of Jesus as He was on trial for blasphemy. The denial of Peter also shows a failure in discipleship that occurred when a follower of the Lord did not want to be associated with “the Nazarene.”

A second occurrence of the word Nazarene is at the end of the Gospel of Mark. The angel at the tomb identifies the Lord as the Nazarene that was crucified. There was a strong negative stigma attached to being crucified. All throughout 8:27–10:45 Jesus says to follow Him on the road to crucifixion. Discipleship is difficult because following Christ leads to a cross. It was a Nazarene that was nailed to the cross.

It is difficult to determine if there is a negative connotation with the third occurrence of the word in Mark, but even there it is a possibility. Demons state that Jesus is a Nazarene (Mark 1:24).

Outside of Mark, we see at least one instance where Nazareth has a negative connotation. When told by Philip that the Messiah was a man who came from Nazareth, Nathanael said, “Can there any good thing come out of Nazareth?” (John 1:46).

Peter did not want to be associated with a Nazarene. Bartimaeus did. Nathanael wondered if anything good could come from that place. Bartimaeus publicly proclaimed that the Messiah Himself came from there.

In the first part of this pericope, Bartimaeus calls out to the Lord. In vv 49–52 Mark tells of Jesus’ call and encounter with Bartimaeus and his response to that encounter.

III. The Lord’s Call And Encounter With Bartimaeus (Mark 10:49–52)

The following is a translation of this call and encounter:

And Jesus, after stopping, said, “Call him.” And they called the blind man saying to him, “Be cheerful,[16] rise up, he is calling you.”

And casting aside his outer garment,[17] he jumped up and came to Jesus.

And Jesus answered him and said, “What do you want me to do[18] for you?” And the blind man said to Him, “Rabboni, let me receive my sight.”[19]

And Jesus said to him, “Go, your faith has saved you.” And immediately he gained sight, and was following him on the road (vv 49–52).

The persistent faith of Bartimaeus does not escape the notice of the Lord. Not only is there no rebuke from the Lord when Bartimaeus calls Him the “Son of David,” but He notices the blind man because he calls Him by that title.[20] He then calls Bartimaeus to Himself.

A. The Call Of The Lord

In v 49, France points out that it is significant that Christ stops on the road to Jerusalem. At this point in the Gospel He is near His destination. In 10:32, He was leading the way to Jerusalem. He has set His face on the city and the picture is one of destiny and resolve to get there.[21] However, even though He is determined to reach Jerusalem He stops at the cries of this blind man.

The verb phōneō (to call) occurs three times in the verse. Jesus calls for Bartimaeus. The verb probably suggests discipleship. The Lord called the disciples to Him in 9:35 (in the discipleship section) to teach an important truth about discipleship. Although a different verb is used, Jesus called four of the twelve in 1:16–20 to follow Him and the same thing could be said of Levi in 2:14.[22] In 8:34, the Lord called the crowds to follow Him, not just the twelve. Bartimaeus is an example of the fact that Christ opens discipleship to all people.[23]

The crowd tells Bartimaeus to be glad. This imperatival verb is only found on the lips of Jesus in the Synoptics, except for here. In the other instances, a miracle occurs (Matt 9:2, 22; 14:27; Mark 6:50). It is always associated with good news.[24] This anticipates a favorable outcome of the meeting between Jesus and Bartimaeus.

Bartimaeus is told that Jesus is calling him. His response is both emotional and vivid.

B. The Response Of Bartimaeus

Mark is the only Synoptic Gospel that describes the physical activities of Bartimaeus when the Lord calls him. He casts aside his outer garment and jumps up. Culpepper says that the mention of the garment by Mark has symbolic significance and relates to discipleship.[25]

The outer garment would have been a very valuable possession for Bartimaeus. In the OT, such a piece of clothing was important for a poor person (cf., Exod 22:26–27; Deut 24:12–13). As a beggar, it would have been used to collect alms and would represent his means of livelihood.[26]

Bartimaeus was either wearing the garment or had it spread before him as a means of collecting the money for which he begged.[27] If the former, he cast it aside so that nothing would impede him in his quest of getting to Jesus as it might get entangled in his legs. If the latter, he threw it aside with whatever money was in it. Either way, it showed an eagerness to get to the Lord.[28] As a blind person, we can picture him stumbling as he “came to Jesus.”

The casting aside of the garment is a picture of leaving what is valuable to follow the Lord. In Mark, including in the discipleship section, the Lord called for those who followed Him to leave things behind (1:18, 20; 2:14; 10:21, 28).[29] After Jesus’ first prediction of His death to the disciples, He told them that if they were to follow Him they needed to forsake their lives (Mark 8:35).

Olekama comments that the actions of Bartimaeus picture the reckless response of Bartimaeus to the call of Christ. He sees a parallel with the woman at the well in John 4 who leaves the water pot behind when she went into the city to tell others about Christ.[30] The woman did this after she had believed that Jesus was the Messiah. If Mark is emphasizing discipleship in this section of the Gospel, it would explain why he included the mention of the garment when Matthew and Luke did not.

C. The Request Of The Lord And The Request Of Bartimaeus

Jesus asks Bartimaeus what he wants from Him. The question immediately reminds us of the same question that the Lord asked James and John a few verses earlier (10:36).[31] The response of James and John and the rebuke by the Lord that follows James and John’s answer show that Bartimaeus is an example in contrast. The Lord does not rebuke Bartimaeus. James and John did not know what following the Lord entailed. Bartimaeus, however, wanted his sight with the result that once he obtained it he immediately follows the Lord to Jerusalem.[32]

The verb thelō used by the Lord in His question seems to indicate a connection between this healing and discipleship. It is used extensively in the longer section of 8:22–10:52 concerning instruction of discipleship (8:34–35; 9:35; 10:35–36; 43–44).

The Lord’s question to Bartimaeus is also a demonstration of the fact that He is a servant.[33] He had just spoken of the fact that He came to serve others (10:45). Jesus, as the Son of David, stops to meet the need of a lowly beggar who was in need of mercy. The King reaches out to him. He puts into practice what He had just taught about discipleship. A disciple is a servant and Jesus is the Servant par excellence.

Bartimaeus asks to be healed of his blindness. He addresses the Lord by the rare title of Rabboni. Edwards points out that the title is seldom used in the extant Jewish literature to refer to a human, and frequently was used as an address to God in prayer.[34] This literature, however, is much later than the time of Christ. The word occurs in John 20:16 where the interpretation of the word is given. It means “teacher.” While it may carry with it a slightly more respectful tone, there is little difference between it and the variant “rabbi.” Even though it does not indicate that Bartimaeus recognized Jesus’ Deity, it did signify that Bartimaeus recognized in Christ a teacher and somebody to be respected. The title intimated a master/disciple relationship, which fits into Mark’s purpose nicely. Bartimaeus not only recognizes Jesus as the Messiah, he recognizes that he himself is the Lord’s disciple.[35]

D. The Miracle And Aftermath

In v 52 the Lord tells Bartimaeus to hupage (“go” or “go your way”) and that his faith has “saved” him (made him well). The Lord had told others to go after experiencing a healing before in Mark (1:44; 2:11; 5:19, 34; 7:29). However, as we shall see in the last part of this verse, Bartimaeus is different than others who have been healed.

It seems clear that the verb sōzō has a dual meaning. Bartimaeus certainly experienced physical salvation in this healing. But there is a spiritual deliverance here as well.[36]

Bartimaeus, because he believes that Jesus is the Messiah, has received eternal life. Earlier in the chapter, in 10:26, the verb “saved” is used in this sense. In addition, immediately before the account of Bartimaeus, Jesus had taught about His substitutionary atonement (10:45).[37] But there is another aspect of salvation. Once a person has eternal life, as Bartimaeus did, he can enter into the privilege of discipleship. This is how Edwards and Best see the salvation spoken of here.[38] It certainly fits the context. That is the whole point of Mark 8:22–10:52. Bartimaeus had been saved from a life lived on the “side of the road” as an outcast. He could now pick up a cross and follow Christ and experience the salvation of his very life—a life of true meaning (Mark 8:35).

As mentioned above, the actual healing is briefly stated. The healing confirmed that Jesus was indeed the Son of David.[39] This is true even though He was near Jerusalem, the place where He would suffer and die. The important point for Mark, however, is that after Bartimaeus was healed, he followed (ēklouthei) Jesus on the road (en tē hodō). Both the verb and the prepositional phrase describe Christian discipleship in Mark (1:2–3, 18; 2:14–15; 6:1; 8:27, 34; 9:33–34, 38; 10:21, 28, 32).[40]

France points out the very important point that the entire phrase is prominently placed at the end of the pericope and concludes the whole section of Mark on discipleship. Discipleship is the central theme of 8:22–10:52. Mark is the only Synoptic to mention the road.[41] The road, of course, is the way of suffering and rejection that leads to Jerusalem (8:27, 34; 10:32). The uniqueness of Bartimaeus is seen in the fact that Jesus had told others to “go” after being healed in Mark, but Bartimaeus alone “follows” Him on the “road.”

The verb “to follow” here also suggests the ongoing nature of discipleship. It is in the imperfect tense. We could take it as an ingressive imperfect, which would mean that Bartimaeus has begun his ongoing journey of discipleship.[42] When one looks at the ongoing journey of the twelve disciples in Mark, with all their failures, the verb reminds all would-be disciples that it is an ongoing process.

Just as the verb sōzō had a dual meaning, so does the verb anablepō (“to see”). Clearly Bartimaeus now sees physically. But he also “sees” metaphorically as it relates to discipleship and following Christ. He is a picture of one that follows Christ on the road of suffering and to the cross. Before receiving his sight, Bartimaeus was by the road, now he is on it with the Lord.[43] He is one who “sees” and follows Christ on that road in contrast to the partial blindness of the disciples that was described at the beginning of the section on discipleship. The previous healing of the blind man at Bethsaida was also a metaphorical picture of the disciples (8:22–25).[44] Bartimaeus, in leaving everything behind to follow Jesus, does what the Lord said a believer must do if they would follow Him (Mark 8:34ff).

IV. Conclusion

The account of the healing of Bartimaeus occupies a critical place in the Gospel of Mark. It occurs immediately before the entrance of the Lord into Jerusalem where He will undergo His crucifixion. It also concludes a long section on discipleship, forming an inclusio with the healing of another blind man that began the section (8:22–10:52).

The initial healing of the blind man is a picture of the partial blindness of the disciples. Peter confesses that Jesus is the Christ, but he and the other disciples are blind to what it means to follow Him, even though they are believers. The Lord teaches the disciples that following Him involves hardship and suffering. Throughout the whole section, however, the disciples fail to understand.

Bartimaeus is a foil for the disciples.[45] He too proclaims that Jesus is the Christ with the title “Son of David,” which he cries out twice. He “sees” clearly, and does not need a two-stage healing as the previous blind man. He follows Christ on the “road” to Jerusalem. He becomes a picture of those who take up their cross and follow Him in spite of the difficulties and cost.

From the beginning, it was difficult for Bartimaeus to follow the Lord. He left behind his valuable outer garment. He had to overcome many obstacles. He could not see when the Lord passed him by, so he had to keep crying out. He had to overcome the attempts of the crowd to silence him. He was a lowly beggar that by human standards had no business bothering the Son of David. It is possible that we could add that he did not mind being associated with a Nazarene and any stigma that might be attached to it. He was not ashamed to follow Him on the path He was on (8:38). He willingly followed Christ on the tortuous uphill road from Jericho to Jerusalem. Edwards is correct when he says that Bartimaeus is the sum and center of all that Mark desires to convey about discipleship.[46]

The reader is invited to emulate Bartimaeus. In 8:34, Christ had opened up the opportunity for anybody to take up their cross and follow Him on the road to Jerusalem. Discipleship is not limited to the twelve.[47]

As Christ nears Jerusalem, Bartimaeus is one that affirms that the One who is to die on the cross is indeed the Messiah, the Son of David. This is a major thrust on discipleship in the Gospel of Mark with its three predictions of the crucifixion after Peter’s confession of Christ in chapter eight. In the section from 8:22–10:52, Bartimaeus provides the picture of what it means to be a disciple and where the road of discipleship leads to in chapters 11–16.

From all of this it is clear that there is a difference between salvation and discipleship. Eternal life is given as a free gift through faith in Jesus as the Christ who gives it. Discipleship involves extreme costs. One must be humble, take up his cross, and give up his life.

The disciples fail repeatedly on the “road” of discipleship even though they have eternal life. This failure continues even after Jesus reaches Jerusalem. During the Passion Week, they desert Him. But at the end of the book He meets them in Galilee. This is where His ministry started. They will have the opportunity to follow Him in spite of their previous blindness and failures.

How appropriate that Mark’s Gospel talks about discipleship and uses two blind men to illustrate it. The disciples were “blind.” They did not know what following Christ involved. And there is a blindness among many believers today on the subject as well.

Most Christians today have never been taught discipleship truths. They do not see a difference between being a believer and being a disciple. They have never been taught that being a disciple is very costly but has nothing to do with receiving eternal life. It has everything to do with rewards. Throughout the section on discipleship Jesus spoke about these rewards (8:35; 9:35; 10:21, 29–31, 44). Many Christians today need to have their eyes opened, just like the original disciples did. Bartimaeus is a great illustration for all of us.

Notes

1. Kenneth Yates, “The Healing of Bartimaeus (Mark 10:46-52), Part 1,” JOTGES (Spring 2016).
2. Ibid.
3. Robert H. Stein, Mark, Baker Exegetical Commentary, ed. Robert W. Yarbrough and Robert H. Stein (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2008), 491; Paul J. Achtemeier, “And He Followed Him: Miracles and Discipleship in Mark 10:46-52, ” Semeia 11 (1978): 115.
4. R. C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of Mark’s Gospel (Columbus, OH: Wartburg Press, 1946), 468.
5. Stanley E. Porter, “Luke 18:35 in the Light of Its Synoptic Parallels,” Bulletin for Biblical Research 2 (1992): 104.
6. Alfred Plummer, The Gospel According to Luke (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1901), 429-30.
7. R. T. France, The Gospel of Mark, NIGTC (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2002), 421.
8. John Calvin, A Harmony of the Gospels of Matthew Mark and Luke, trans. T. L. Parker, vol. 2, ed. D. W. Torrence (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1972), 278; Zane C. Hodges, “The Blind Men at Jericho,” Bibliotheca Sacra 33, no. 2 (1965): 327-29.
9. C. E. B. Cranfield, The Gospel According to Mark, Cambridge Greek Commentary, ed. C. F. D. Moule (Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1972), 345; Darrell L. Bock, The Gospel of Mark, Cornerstone Biblical Commentary, ed. Philip W. Comfort (Carol Stream, IL: Tydale House, 2002), 495.
10. Adelo Y. Collins, Mark: A Commentary, Hermeneia (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 2007), 510.
11. J. F. Williams, “Other Followers of Jesus: The Characterization of the Individual from the Crowd in Mark’s Gospel” (PhD diss., Marquette, 1992), 234.
12. Stein, Mark, 493.
13. James R Edwards, The Gospel According to Mark, New Pillar Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans), 329.
14. John N. Suggit, “Exegesis and Proclamation: Bartimaeus and Christian Discipleship,” JTSA 74 (1991): 58.
15. Lenski, The Interpretation of Mark’s Gospel, 469.
16. The verb only occurs in the imperative in the NT. Perhaps it can be translated “do not be afraid” (i.e. that He has not heard you). Walter Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, ed. Frederick W. Danker, 3rd ed. (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago, 2000), 352.
17. The word can mean either the inner or outer garment. The context makes it clear that it refers to the outer, and not the inner. Ibid., 376.
18. Poiēsō is in the future indicative (and not the subjunctive), and is used for volitive expressions following thelō. This is a common expression in classical Greek. F. Blass and A. Debrunner, A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, trans. Robert W. Funk (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago, 1961), 185.
19. This is the imperatival use of hina. W. G. Morrice, “The Imperatival Hina,” Bible Translator 23 (1972): 327. Also see Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar: Beyond the Basics (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1996), 228.
20. I. V. Olekama, The Healing of Bartimaeus in the Markan Context (New York, NY: Peter Lang, 1999), 71.
21. France, The Gospel of Mark, 424.
22. Mary Ann Tolbert, Sowing the Gospel: Mark’s World in Literary-Historical Perspective (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1989), 190.
23. Christopher D. Marshall, Faith as a Theme in Mark’s Narrative (Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1989), 143.
24. Evans, Mark 8:2-16:20, 132.
25. R. A. Culpepper, “Why Mention the Garment,” JBL 101 (1982): 132.
26. Marshall, Faith as a Theme in Mark’s Narrative, 141.
27. Evans, Mark 8:27-16:20, 133.
28. Collins, Mark: A Commentary, 510.
29. Culpepper, “Why Mention the Garment,” 131-32.
30. Olekama, The Healing of Bartimaeus in the Markan Context, 82.
31. Stein, Mark, 496; Williams, “Other Followers of Jesus: The Characterization of the Individual from the Crowd in Mark’s Gospel,” 235.
32. Vernon K. Robbins, “The Healing of Blind Bartimaeus,” JBL 92 (1973): 231.
33. Evans, Mark 8:27-16:20, 131.
34. Edwards, The Gospel According to Mark, 331.
35. France, The Gospel of Mark, 424; Achtemeier, “And He Followed Him: Miracles and Discipleship in Mark 10:46-52, ” 124; Cranfield, The Gospel According to Mark, 346.
36. Ernest Best, Following Jesus: Discipleship in the Gospel of Mark, Journal for the Study of the New Testament (Sheffield, 1981), 141; Edwards, The Gospel According to Mark, 331; E. S. Johnson Jr., “Mark 10:46-52: Blind Bartimaeus,” CBQ 113 (1978): 200.
37. Stein, Mark, 489.
38. Best, Following Jesus, 141; Edwards, Mark, 331. Neither Best nor Edwards makes the clear distinction between discipleship and eternal salvation that is made in this present article.
39. Olekama, The Healing of Bartimaeus in the Markan Context, 73.
40. Marshall, Faith as a Theme in Mark’s Narrative, 142.
41. France, The Gospel of Mark, 425.
42. Suggit, “Exegesis and Proclamation: Bartimaeus and Christian Discipleship,” 61.
43. Ibid., 59.
44. Best, Following Jesus, 141.
45. David Rhoads and Donald Michie, Mark as a Story: An Introduction to the Narrative of a Gospel (Philadelphia, PA: Fortress Press, 1982), 130.
46. Edwards, The Gospel According to Mark, 411.
47. Suggit, “Exegesis and Proclamation: Bartimaeus and Christian Discipleship,” 29.

The Healing of Bartimaeus (Mark 10:46–52), Part 1

By Kenneth Yates

[Editor, Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society, Columbia, SC]

I. Introduction

In a recent article in this journal, I argued that when Jesus used spittle to heal a blind man in stages in Mark 8:22–26, it was a picture of the “blindness” of the disciples. They did not understand what following Jesus meant. The use of the spittle indicated that what Jesus was about to say to them about this topic was disgraceful and disgusting in their eyes. That is the only miracle in the NT where Jesus spits in the face of a person. Such actions, in the first century, were shocking.[1]

That is also the only healing Jesus performs in stages. The man is not healed all at once, but in stages. The eyes of these disciples would also be opened in stages.[2]

The spittle healing of Mark 8:22–26 also begins what can be called the discipleship section of Mark, which runs through Mark 10:52.[3] The ending of this section also involves the healing of a blind man—Bartimaeus. Both healings are illustrations of discipleship.

It is not surprising that blindness would be used to describe the disciples in a spiritual sense. In Mark 4:11–12 the Lord uses lack of sight to describe spiritual blindness. Immediately before the healing at Bethsaida the Lord tells the disciples that they are blind. Clearly this is a metaphorical blindness. It will be maintained that the two healings that begin and end the discipleship section are pictures of the metaphorical blindness of the disciples.

Understanding these two healings as having metaphorical significance is not reading one’s theology into the text. Jesus used miracles to teach deeper spiritual realities. In the Gospel of John the Lord tells us specifically that a healing of blindness had that very purpose. After healing a blind man in John 9, at the conclusion of the chapter Jesus gives the significance of that healing. He has a conversation with the Pharisees:

And Jesus said, “For judgment I have come into this world, that those who do not see may see, and that those who see may be made blind.”

Then some of the Pharisees who were with Him heard these words, and said to Him, “Are we blind also?”

Jesus said to them, “If you were blind, you would have no sin; but now you say, ‘We see.’ Therefore your sin remains” (John 9:39–41).

Here, the reader sees that the healing of this blind man is an illustration of the fact that there are people who are blind, that is, they do not “see.” But Christ came so that they might see. This is a clear reference to coming to faith in Him as the Messiah. In addition, there are those who think they see (in this context the Pharisees), but in reality are blind. There is a spiritual blindness on all unbelievers (2 Cor 4:4). When a person comes to faith in Jesus Christ for eternal life, that blindness is removed. In John 9 Jesus was telling the Pharisees they were blind because they thought they had spiritual sight in trying to receive eternal life through good works. They needed to recognize their blindness by seeing who He was and believe in Him.

It is also not surprising that in John’s Gospel the blindness in question is one addressed to unbelievers. John’s Gospel was written to unbelievers for the purpose that they would look at the miracles Jesus performed, see that He is the Christ, and come to faith (John 20:30–31). The healing of this blind man is the sixth sign in the book. The unbeliever could say, when considering what Jesus did, that he had been blind about who Jesus is.[4]

It will be argued below that Mark is written to believers. If that is the case, and John is written to unbelievers, it is completely expected that pictures of blindness can refer to different types of blindness. Believers can also be blind to spiritual realities.

In the discipleship section Jesus tells the disciples three times what following Him involves (8:31; 9:31; 10:33–34). The things Jesus says are shocking. The idea that Jesus was going to be crucified was unacceptable. Each time, the disciples are “blind” to what he is saying. They need to have their eyes opened. The healing of the two blind men form an inclusio and ties the section together.

A number of questions need to be asked about these things. What does discipleship mean? Is it the same thing as being eternally saved? If the blind man in Mark 8 is a picture of the disciples, were they saved? Is the teaching in the discipleship section addressed to believers or unbelievers?

II. The Spiritual Condition Of The Disciples

When we try to determine the spiritual condition of the disciples, we must ask if they knew if Jesus was the Messiah. John tells us that the one who believes that Jesus is the Christ (the Messiah) has eternal life (John 20:30–31). As the Christ, He is the one who gives that life to all who believe in Him for it.

Some maintain that in the Gospel of Mark we are told that the disciples did not know that Jesus was the Messiah until Peter’s confession in 8:29. It is held by many that the disciples were not believers through much of the Gospel. For example, their fear and ignorance about the identity of Christ during the storm on the sea in Mark 4:35–41 leads some to say they were not believers at this stage of Jesus’ ministry.[5] They are still “blind” about these things immediately before Peter’s confession, and are even described as having hearts that are hardened (8:17–18). Throughout the discipleship section they only gradually begin to understand who Jesus is. The more radical holders of this view would go as far as to say that Jesus Himself only gradually understood this fact.[6]

Related to this line of thought was the idea expressed by the famous work of William Wrede at the beginning of the 20th century. He suggested that the identity of Jesus’ Messiahship in the Gospel of Mark cannot be determined by the historical veracity of Mark’s account, but by the thought-world of Mark. Mark wants to say that the Messiahship of Jesus can only be understood after the cross. Therefore, it was a “secret” until then.[7] So, for Wrede, even after the confession of Peter in 8:29, the disciples do not understand that Jesus is the Christ.[8]

This, however, is not Mark’s view of the disciples. Even in the beginning of the book we see that the disciples believed that Jesus was the Messiah and followed Him (1:14–20). He gave them authority over demons (3:15) and sent them out to preach the coming of the kingdom and to heal (6:7–13). The Lord also made a distinction between the Twelve and those who were “outside” (4:11).

The disciples knew that Jesus was the Messiah. Peter’s confession simply vocalizes what they have known for some time. The Gospel of John makes it clear that the disciples believed in Him as the Messiah very early in Jesus’ ministry (John 1:42–49). In other words, they were believers and had eternal life. This is critical. If the discipleship section, which begins with the blind man at Bethsaida and ends with the healing of blind Bartimaeus, is directed to the disciples, and if these healings of the blind are a picture of the disciples, the whole section is addressed to people who already have eternal life. Believers can be “blind.” To put it another way, Mark is writing to believers. Discipleship is not the same thing as “becoming a believer.” There is a difference between having eternal life and being a disciple of Christ. This should prevent us from being inconsistent in understanding the teachings found in this section and the two healings.

III. Inconsistencies In Mark 8–10?

Some writers exhibit inconsistencies in interpreting the discipleship section of Mark. Part of this inconsistency, no doubt, arises from the fact that many do not make a distinction between believing in Jesus Christ for eternal life and following Him in discipleship. However, if there is a distinction, the disciples do not need to “see” that Jesus is the Messiah. They already see that. They do need to see what following Him means.

This inconsistency causes some to see in this section of Mark some teachings addressed to unbelievers, and some teachings as addressed to believers. The same thing is true in regard to the healing of the blind men. Grassmick, for example, believes that the healing of the two blind men are pictures of the disciples, but that at least in the case of Bartimaeus the healing illustrates how one obtains eternal life.[9] When the Lord teaches about what it means to follow Him in 8:31, it refers to how one obtains eternal life. However, in the other two instances (9:33–35; 10:41–44) it is addressed to believers and deals with greatness in the kingdom.[10]

Lane and Hiebert show the same inconsistency in regards to Jesus’ teaching about His crucifixion and the cost of following Him. The same is true concerning the two healings. The blind man at Bethsaida is a picture of the disciples (believers). Bartimaeus is an illustration of the unbelieving religious leaders.[11]

Ryle shows the implications of this inconsistency. He also believes that in the discipleship section sometimes Jesus is telling the unbelieving readers the requirements for eternal life and sometimes he is telling believers how to be great in the coming kingdom. He maintains that both healings deal with how to obtain eternal life. Bartimaeus is an illustration of the fact that obtaining eternal life involves the unbeliever recognizing their deplorable state and the need to persevere.[12]

One can see here that how one interprets the healing of Bartimaeus can impact how he presents the gospel. Does a person have to be aware of his “deplorable state” in order to obtain eternal life. Does one have to persevere in order to obtain it? If one sees Bartimaeus as such an illustration it is easy to come to these conclusions. Eternal life is not received as a free gift by faith in Christ alone, but by our willingness to follow Christ in discipleship.

However, there is no need to hold to these inconsistencies. It is much better to see the teachings of Christ on the cost of following Him, in all three instances, as being addressed to believers and not as the cost for obtaining eternal life. Bartimaeus, like the blind man at Bethsaida, also is a picture of what the believing disciples need to “see.” To argue these points, one must look at the context.

IV. Context

The first eight chapters of Mark contain many miracles. Starting in 8:22, however, the number of miracles decreases substantially. The healing of Bartimaeus is the last healing in Mark. In the section from 8:22–10:52 teaching, and not miracles, is the emphasis.[13] Specifically, it deals with teaching on discipleship. Best makes the comment that everything in the section relates either to the Person of Christ or discipleship.[14]

It is noteworthy that the two miracles that begin and end this section of diminishing healings both involve the healing of a blind man. Not only do these similar healings form an inclusio, certain words are found in both and tie the healings and unit together. Both begin with the words “kai erchontai eis” and contain the words tuphlos and anablepō.[15]

These two healings also both function as transitional hinges in Mark’s Gospel. The first healing marks the transition from Christ’s ministry in Galilee to His journey to Jerusalem. The healing of Bartimaeus marks a transition from the journey itself to His entry into the city.[16]

Between the two healings, Jesus is on the way (on the “hodon”) to Jerusalem. As mentioned above, He is on His way to die, and three times He tells His disciples this fact. Within the section, there are instructions to the disciples concerning Christ’s fate. There are three predictions of the passion (8:31; 9:31; 10:33–34) and instructions to the disciples on how they should respond in light of it, and what discipleship looks like. Five times before the healing of Bartimaeus, Mark tells us Jesus is on the hodon to this destiny (8:32; 9:33, 34; 10:17; 10:32). In the last instance, Mark specifically states He is on the “road” going up to Jerusalem. Being on the “road” is connected with each of the three times Jesus says He will be crucified.[17] As Jesus rides the donkey into Jerusalem, Mark tells us that the people were throwing branches and their clothes on the “road.”

As will be seen, the word “road” occurs twice in the healing of Bartimaeus. Being on the road with Jesus, in the context of discipleship, is connected with this blind beggar.

Connected with this is the idea of “following” Christ. The concept, and the very word itself (akoloutheō) is also often repeated in the section [8:34 (twice); 9:38; 10:21, 28, 32). It also occurs in the healing of Bartimaeus (10:52).

Mark, then, relates discipleship to the passion of Christ. Discipleship means “following” Christ on the “road” to the cross. These ideas are found in the healing of Bartimaeus. This healing occurs at the end of the section of discipleship, immediately before the Lord enters Jerusalem to meet that fate.[18]

Specifically, the Lord wants the disciples to understand that the “road” of discipleship and “following” Jesus involve a life of hardship and is costly. A disciple must be willing to give up everything, including his own life (8:35; 10:19). He must become like a child in status, and not seek greatness as defined by the world, in order to serve others (9:35; 10:44). Much confusion and inconsistency in interpreting this section of Mark would be avoided if we simply realized that these things cannot refer to receiving eternal life. The reception of eternal life is free and costs nothing (Eph 2:8–9; John 4:10). In this section of Mark, which deals with discipleship, Jesus is instructing His disciples about something that is extremely costly.

It is noteworthy that the two healings of the blind men, healings that begin and end this section on discipleship, occur after the Lord rebukes His disciples. Both in 8:17–21 and 10:42–45 the disciples do not have a clear understanding of what discipleship means. One might say they were “blind.”

Specifically, in the verses immediately before the healing of Bartimaeus, the Lord tells the disciples they need to serve others, just like He came to do (10:42–45). The reason He gives them this instruction is because they were trying to be great by taking advantage of each other. They were seeking others, even within the group of disciples, to serve them. Christ’s first coming was characterized by humble submission to God and service to others. This submission led Him to the cross.[19] They will be asked to take the same attitude if they want to “follow” Him. Their path may take them to the same destination. This is a costly proposition indeed. As in the case with all Jesus’ predictions of His upcoming death, this teaching was shocking.

Even though they are believers and had eternal life, they were blind to these things. They thought they were going to Jerusalem to reign with Christ (10:37). They thought Jesus was going to be installed as the King. Instead, Jesus is talking about His crucifixion and the heavy costs of following Him on the path He is going. Like the healing of the blind man that begins the section, it was like they had been spit in the face.

Through the discipleship section of Mark, the Lord tries to cure the disciples of their blindness. These attempts end at the account of Bartimaeus. Bartimaeus is a picture of what the disciples need to see. He is one who clearly sees what discipleship means.

If the above discussion is correct, we would expect that Bartimaeus was a believer. In the first verses of the account, all indications point to this conclusion.

V. The Spiritual Condition Of Bartimaeus (Mark 10:46–48)

A. Introduction To The Account

Some form critics seem to recognize that the account of the healing of Bartimaeus is used by Mark to make a spiritual point. They point out that the healing itself is not the emphasis. Even though a miracle is clearly performed here, and form critics recognize the category of “miracle story,” this miracle is different. Usually there is a dramatic word spoken or some kind of gesture accompanying the miracle. In addition, there is often the mention of astonishment on the part of those who witness it. None of those things occur here. It seems that Bartimaeus, not the miracle, is the emphasis. Because of these things, Steinhauser refuses to even call it a miracle story.[20]

Achtemeier and Stein both agree that the miracle is not the main point and the emphasis is on the beggar. They label it a “call” story since Bartimaeus follows the Lord. Bartimaeus is specifically named. He is put forth as one of exemplary character.[21]

If indeed the point of the healing of Bartimaeus is to offer a picture of discipleship, all of these things would be expected. Mark wants his readers to consider what this man represents.

B. A Translation

In the first three verses of the account, the reader meets Bartimaeus. There are things in these verses which will be dealt with in part 2 of the article. Here, the emphasis will be on the picture of Bartimaeus’ spiritual condition. When he meets Jesus, is he a believer or not?

Verse 46: And they came to Jericho. And as He was going out[22] from Jericho, along with His disciples and a large crowd, the son of Timaeus,[23] Bartimaeus, a blind man begging,[24] was sitting by the road.

Verse 47: And having heard that it was Jesus the Nazarene,[25] he began to cry out and to say, “Son of David, Jesus, have mercy on me.”

Verse 48: And many were rebuking him, in order that he might be silenced. But he cried out much more,[26] “Son of David, have mercy on me.”

One could give a simple outline of the account of Bartimaeus. If so, verses 46–48 could be called “Bartimaeus’s call to the Lord.”

C. Bartimaeus’ Call To The Lord (10:46–48)

In these verses, the Lord enters Jericho. While He is leaving the city, Bartimaeus calls upon Him. If Mark is using Bartimaeus as an illustration, it is clear he is an illustration of one who believes in Jesus.

1. Verse 46.

The opening phrase kai erchontai eis Ierichō takes the reader back to 8:22 and the healing of the blind man at Bethsaida that begins with the same words. The account of Bartimaeus forms an inclusio with the previous healing and provides the conclusion of the section that began in 8:22.

Part of the vividness of Mark’s account is seen in the fact that Mark gives the name of the blind beggar. His name is given as huios Timaiou, Bartimaios. This is the only Gospel that names the blind man. In addition, this is the only time in Mark where the person who is healed is named. This may link Bartimaeus with discipleship because perhaps his name was known because he had become a disciple of the Lord.[27] In simple terms, this beggar was known in the early church. One could assume he was part of that church. He was not somebody who simply experienced a healing and was never heard of again.

If Mark’s main interest in this pericope is discipleship, it would also explain why neither Matthew nor Luke mention his name in the parallel passages. In addition, in Mark, disciples are named when Jesus calls them.[28]

Usually, when Mark uses an Aramaic name, he places it first. Here, he places it after the Greek phrase. The use of “bar” (=son of) suggests a Jewish and Palestinian context.[29] Johnson says this points to a very early oral tradition behind this account and supports its authenticity.[30] France suggests that there may even be a stronger emphasis on discipleship by the name given. The rare way of expressing the beggar’s name implies that the father of the beggar was known and may also have become a follower of the Lord.[31]

Mark tells us that Bartimaeus is a blind beggar that is sitting by the hodon. In one sense, the word is not figurative. Sitting by the road would have been a good place for a beggar to position himself as religious pilgrims would have been travelling that road. They were on their way to Jerusalem for the religious feast of Passover. In theory, they would have been in a generous mood towards the less fortunate.[32]

It is also true, however, that hodon in this verse has a figurative meaning. It forms an inclusio with the same word in the last verse of the pericope (v 52). At the end of the pericope it relates to following Christ—following Christ on the road to Jerusalem. Here, in v 46, Bartimaeus is sitting by the road. He is a marginalized member of society.[33] He is a blind beggar. People are passing him by. Christ has just said that He has come to serve others (vv 42–45). Bartimaeus is an example of such a person.

2. Verse 47.

While sitting by the road as it led out of Jericho, Bartimaeus hears the noise of the large crowd that is following Jesus as it enters the other end of the city. No doubt he asks a bystander what the noise means and is told that Jesus the Nazarene has entered into the city.

This verse and the ones that follow clearly show that Bartimaeus has heard of Jesus. He has heard of his healing abilities. A man in his physical condition would probably never have an opportunity to gain an audience with Him. This would be his only chance to be healed.[34] Bartimaeus cannot see Him and has no way of knowing when He will pass by.

As a result, he begins to cry out to get His attention. To get His attention, he calls him by the double vocative huie Dauid Iēsou, showing that he knows exactly who he is addressing. This is another example of the vividness of the account since the second vocative is unnecessary. It points to an emphatic, emotional address that an eyewitness would have remembered.[35]

There is wide disagreement among scholars as to the significance of the title “Son of David.” One issue is whether it was a messianic title. Another issue is what type of messiah the Jews in the first century anticipated.

Cranfield is one who holds that it was not a Messianic title but a polite address to somebody who was descended from David, or who was a devout Israelite. He feels the title only later became a Christian designation for the Messiah.[36] Chilton claims that in the first century one could be called “Son of David” without being considered the Messiah.[37] Duling maintains that for the first century Jew the title was ambiguous.[38] Achtemeier says that the title was unimportant for Mark’s purposes. It was simply a part of the original tradition the writer received. For Mark it simply meant that the person was worthy to follow.[39]

The pseudepigraphal Psalms of Solomon, which dates from the first century BC, contains the title “Son of David” as Messianic.[40] Lohse says that the title sprung from the OT titles “sprout of David” and “shoot of David” in Isa 11:10 and Jer 23:5. The idea of a future ruler from the lineage of David was indeed widely held among the Jews in the first century based upon 2 Sam 7:12–16.[41]

The title “Son of David” is also used in the OT Apocrypha as a designation for the Messiah.[42] Perhaps most importantly, in Mark 12:35, the Lord shows that at least the scribes of His day associated the Messiah with the title “Son of David”.

If Bartimaeus recognized Jesus as the Messiah, what kind did he expect Him to be? Some maintain the Jews of the first century looked for a miracle-working Son of David based upon certain beliefs concerning Solomon. Solomon was a son of David that performed miracles, especially exorcisms.[43] In contemporary literature Solomon is called the Son of David and called upon to have mercy on an elderly man who is being oppressed.[44] Josephus also records the idea that Solomon was known in Josephus’ day as a miracle worker.[45] Qumran literature also indicates that the Messiah would be a miracle worker that healed the wounded, gave sight to the blind, and even raised the dead.[46]

Based upon these references, Duling says that Bartimaeus’ cry of “Son of David” meant that he was calling for a great miracle worker like Solomon, who would have mercy upon him and cure his blindness.[47] In his cry, Bartimaeus was not thinking of a conquering Messiah or a Messiah that one was to follow.

The other view of the title “Son of David” refers to a nationalistic Messianic king. The Psalms of Solomon say that the Son of David will be a king who rules Israel, will judge the nations, and crush Israel’s enemies. This is the type of Messiah he would be.[48]

Based upon the strong emphasis on discipleship in this section of Mark, it is unlikely that Bartimaeus only looked for a healing from Jesus. Stein points out that the vocative “Jesus” in this account, Mark 1:1, and Peter’s confession in 8:29 equates the title “Son of David” with the title “Christ.”[49] There was clearly a Jewish expectation of a kingly Messiah. It is not surprising that Bartimaeus had heard of the healings that Jesus performed, since that knowledge was extensive among the Jews (1:32–34; 2:1–2; 3:20; 4:1–2, 36; 5:21–34; 7:24–30).[50] Bartimaeus’s request in this pericope shows he had indeed heard. If Bartimaeus saw Jesus as the kingly Son of David as well, it would not be a stretch for him to combine the idea of a kingly and miracle-performing Messiah. The OT speaks of the blessings of the kingdom, which includes the blind receiving their sight (Isa 29:18; 35:5; 61:1).[51]

When one considers the connection of this healing with Jesus’ immediate entry into Jerusalem that follows, the evidence strongly suggests that Bartimaeus’ address of Jesus as the “Son of David” means he believed Him to be the Christ. This is the first time in the Gospel of Mark that He is addressed by this particular title. When He arrives in Jerusalem the people proclaim the coming of the kingdom of David (11:10). The section of discipleship (8:22–10:52), which the healing of Baritmaeus concludes, begins with Peter proclaiming that Jesus is the Christ (8:29).

That proclamation was also tied with a healing of a blind man. It is not surprising that the end of the section would also involve a proclamation that Jesus is the Messiah. Evans and Edwards both conclude that the title has an unmistakable messianic ring.[52] Cranfield and Bock take this idea a step further. If the title “Son of David” was not a common title for the Messiah in the first century, then Mark’s point might be that Bartimaeus, even though blind, had more sight than those who could see.[53]

3. Verse 48.

In this verse, Bartimaeus calls Jesus the Son of David a second time. All the time, people are trying to silence him. It is significant that it is the crowds (polloi) and not Christ, that try to rebuke Bartimaeus in order to silence him. Previously in Mark, Jesus is the one who rebukes others and tells them to be silent. The verb epitimaō occurs in 1:25, where the Lord rebukes the demons and tells them to be silent. The demons call the Lord “Jesus,” the “Nazarene,” and the “holy one of God,” all of which have parallels with this passage. In 3:12, a demon calls Him the Son of God and Christ rebukes him and orders him not to make Him known. In 8:30, after Peter says He is the Christ, the Lord “rebukes” the disciples and tells them not to tell anybody about Himself. This, then, is the first time in Mark that Christ does not rebuke somebody who publicly says that He is the Messiah.[54]

We also see here, with Bartimaeus, that there is not a call to be silent about Jesus’ Messiahship. This is due to the fact that the Lord is approaching Jerusalem where He will declare Himself as the Messiah in the context of suffering.[55] In any event, Bartimaeus, in the Gospel of Mark is a blind man who sees better than anybody we meet in the Gospel. He knows that Jesus is the Son of David. If he is an illustration of anybody, he is an illustration of a believer.

VI. Conclusion

A believer is someone who believes that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of David. Bartimaeus believed that. He believed that before he was healed of his blindness. But there is a spiritual blindness, as it relates to discipleship, that a believer can have. The disciples in Mark had that problem. In the next article, it will be seen that Bartimaeus does not have that problem. Unlike the blind man at Bethsaida, and the disciples themselves, he is one who sees clearly.

Notes

1. Kenneth Yates, “Jesus’ Use of Spittle in Mark 8:22-26, ” JOTGES 54 (Spring 2015): 3-15.
2. Elliott S. Johnson, “Mark VIII.22-26: The Blind Man from Bethsaida,” NTS 25 (1978-79), 383; Adelo Y. Collins, Mark: A Commentary, Hermeneia (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 2007), 394.
3. John D. Grassmick, “Mark,” in The Bible Knowledge Commentary, eds. John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1983), 138.
4. Robert N. Wilkin brings up some interesting points about this healing in the Gospel of John. After Jesus heals the blind man and Jesus meets him after he was kicked out of the Sanhedrin, the two have a conversation (John 9:37-38). The man says that he believes in Jesus, but unlike in the evangelistic encounters in John, Jesus does not mention eternal life to this man. These verses are also the only place in John where anyone worships Jesus. These facts lead Wilkin to suggest this man was already a believer, before he met Jesus. He was an example of an OT saint who believed in the coming Messiah. See Robert N. Wilkin, “The Gospel According to John” in The Grace New Testament Commentary, vol. 1, ed. Robert N. Wilkin (Denton, TX: Grace Evangelical Society, 2010), 417. In any case, the blindness of this man and his subsequent healing is a picture of spiritual blindness in the Pharisees.
5. Jack D. Kingsbury, Conflict in Mark (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 1989), 105; Ernest Best, “Discipleship in Mark: Mark 8:22-10:52, ” SJT 23 (1981): 326; R. A. Culpepper, Mark, Smyth and Helwys Bible Commentary, ed. R. Scott Nash (Macon, GA: Helwys, 2007), 221.
6. Hiekki Raisanen, The Messianic Secret in Mark’s Gospel, trans. Christopher Tuckett (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1990), 39-41.
7. William Wrede, The Messianic Secret (Cambridge: James Clark, 1971), 129.
8. Ibid., 104, 113.
9. Grassmick, “Mark,” 155.
10. Ibid., 141-42, 146, 154.
11. William L. Lane, The Gospel According to Mark, NICNT (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1974), 287, 309, 382, 389; D. Edmond Hiebert, Mark: A Portrait of the Servant (Chicago: Moody Press, 1974), 201, 210, 256, 261, 265.
12. J. C. Ryle, Mark: Expository Thoughts on the Gospel (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 1993), 117, 124, 135, 159, 163.
13. Vernon K. Robbins, “The Healing of Blind Bartimaeus,” JBL 92 (1973): 224.
14. Ernest Best, “Discipleship in Mark: Mark 8:22-10:52, ” SJT 23 (1981): 324.
15. J. F. Williams, “Other Followers of Jesus: The Characterization of the Individual from the Crowd in Mark’s Gospel” (PhD diss., Marquette, 1992), 227.
16. Augustine Stock, “Hinge Transitions in Mark’s Gospel,” BTB 15 (1985): 27-29. Evans takes a different view and says that the healing of Bartimaeus begins the next section in the Gospel, where Jesus meets His fate. Even this view makes a connection between the healing of Bartimaeus and the Passion week. See Craig A. Evans, Mark 8:27-16:20, vol. 34A, Word Biblical Commentary, ed. Ralph P. Martin (Nashville, TN: Word, 2001), 126.
17. Best, “Discipleship in Mark: Mark 8:22-10:52, ” 328.
18. Paul J. Achtemeier, “And He Followed Him: Miracles and Discipleship in Mark 10:46-52, ” Semeia 11 (1978): 115.
19. David K. Lowery, “A Theology of Mark,” in A Biblical Theology of the New Testament, ed. Roy B. Zuck (Chicago, IL: Moody, 1994), 74.
20. Michael G. Steinhauser, “The Form of the Bartimaeus Narrative (Mark 10:46-52),” NTS 32 (1986): 583.
21. Robert H. Stein, Mark, Baker Exegetical Commentary, ed. Robert W. Yarbrough and Robert H. Stein (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2008), 491; Achtemeier, “And He Followed Him,” Semeia 11 (1978): 115.
22. The change from third person plural to singular is typical of Mark. Collins, Mark: A Commentary, 508.
23. It is not clear whether the name was originally Greek or Semitic. The common Greek name is accented on the first syllable, not the second. Henry Swete argues for a Semitic origin, The Gospel According to St. Mark: The Greek Text with Introduction, Notes and Indices (London: MacMillan, 1913), 242. Wellhausen, however, suggests that the origin is Greek and that timai is the Semitic abbreviation of the original timotheos, Julius Wellhausen, Das Evangelium Marci Ubersetzt Und Erklart (Berlin: G. Reimer, 1903), 85.
24. The majority of manuscripts have the participle prosaitōn instead of the noun prosaitēs. The Alexandrian witnesses support the noun. Metzger says that the participle replaced the noun because the noun is a rare and late Greek word. If one accepts the Majority Text he could easily argue here that the participle is the original. Here is an example where Metzger adopts the Alexandrian witness but not with a great deal of confidence. Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament (United Bible Societies, 1971), 108.
25. The article would normally go with the proper name, but with a substantive in apposition the article goes with the noun in apposition. A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research (Nashville, TN: Broadman, 1934), 760.
26. Pollō is a dative of measure, and when combined with mallon means “much more.” Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar: Beyond the Basics (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1996), 167.
27. I. V. Olekama, The Healing of Bartimaeus in the Markan Context (New York, NY: Peter Lang, 1999), 87.
28. Williams, “Other Followers of Jesus: The Characterization of the Individual from the Crowd in Mark’s Gospel”, 230.
29. Joachim Jeremias, New Testament Theology (New York, NY: Charles Scribner, 1971), 90. Jeremias states that the rare word for rabbi in v 51 and the use of the title “Son of David” in vv 47-48 point to the same conclusion.
30. Johnson, “Mark 10:46-52: Blind Bartimaeus,” 193.
31. France, The Gospel of Mark, 423.
32. Stein, Mark, 194.
33. Edwards, The Gospel According to Mark, 329.
34. Lenski, The Interpretation of Mark’s Gospel, 470.
35. Wallace, Greek Grammar: Beyond the Basics, 71.
36. C. E. B. Cranfield, The Gospel According to Mark, Cambridge Greek Commentary, ed. C. F. D. Moule (Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1972), 345.
37. Bruce D. Chilton, “Jesus Ben David: Reflections on the Davidssohnfrage,” JSNT 14 (1982): 99.
38. Dennis C. Duling, “Solomon, Exorcism, and the Son of David,” Harvard Theological Review 68 (1975): 235.
39. Achtemeier, “And He Followed Him,” 124.
40. Psalms of Solomon 17:21-32.
41. E. Lohse, “Son of David,” in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. Gerhard Friedrich, trans. Geoffrey W. Bromiley, vol. 8 (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1968), 480.
42. 2 Esdras 12:32.
43. Loren Fisher, “Can This Be the Son of David,” in Jesus and the Historian, ed. F. T. Trotter (Philadelphia, PA: Westminster, 1968), 85.
44. Testament of Solomon 20:1.
45. Josephus, Ant. 8.2.5.
46. Scroll 4Q521 (Messianic Apocalypse).
47. Duling, “Solomon, Exorcism, and the Son of David,” 246-48.
48. Psalms of Solomon 17:21-40.
49. Stein, Mark, 495.
50. Ibid.
51. Olekama, The Healing of Bartimaeus in the Markan Context, 71.
52. Edwards, The Gospel According to Mark, 330. See also Evans, Mark 8:27-16:20, 129.
53. Cranfield, The Gospel According to Mark, 346; Darrell L. Bock, The Gospel of Mark, Cornerstone Biblical Commentary, ed. Philip W. Comfort (Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House, 2002), 496.
54. John N. Suggit, “Exegesis and Proclamation: Bartimaeus and Christian Discipleship,” JTSA 74 (1991): 59.
55. France, The Gospel of Mark, 424.