The Fallible Study Bible

The Fallible · Synthetic · Study Bible

Mark1:40–45

The Leper’s Prayer

✦ Public-domain source — quoted & attributed⚙ AI synthesis — generated, verify

Mark 1:40–45 — The Leper’s Prayer. Each verse below carries the full apparatus: the Berean Standard Bible, the vocalized original (tap any word), and a parsed breakdown of every term transcribed from the interlinear. Synthesized commentary, canonical threads, and the reading of Christ gather at the end, over the whole unit.

40

Then a leper came to Jesus, begging on his knees: “If You are willing, You can make me clean.”

Berean Standard Bible · CC0

Greek — tap a word ↓

Kai lepros erchetai pros auton parakalōn auton kai gonypetōn hoti kai legōn autō Ean thelēs dynasai katharisai me

Word by word18 · parsed
ΚαὶKaiThenG2532
√ καί — and, also, even, so then, too, etcConjunction
λεπρὸςleprosa leperG3015
√ λεπρός — scaly, iAdjectiveNominative Masculine Singular
λεπρός: scaly, leprous A rare word in the Greek NT (9 verses). Under the Law this adjective was a sentence, not a diagnosis: Leviticus 13:45 to 46 put the man outside the camp with torn clothes and a covered lip, crying his own uncleanness. Cambridge collects the biblical cases (Moses, Miriam, Naaman, Gehazi) and records that the Jews called the disease “the Finger of God,” and “they never expected to cure it.”
ἔρχεταιerchetaicameG2064
√ ἔρχομαι — to come or go (in a great variety of applications, literally and figuratively)VerbPresent Indicative Middle or Passive3rd Person Singular
ἔρχομαι: to come, to go Present tense in a narrative of past events. Mark's historic present here does more than quicken pace: it puts the reader in the crowd at the moment a man legally forbidden to approach walks up. The same verb returns at v. 45 in the imperfect (ērchonto, “they kept coming”), so the unit opens and closes with people coming to Jesus.
πρὸςprostoG4314
√ πρός — a preposition of directionPreposition
αὐτὸνauton[Jesus]G846
√ αὐτός — the reflexive pronoun self, used (alone or in the comparative G1438 (ἑαυτοῦ)) of the third person , and (with the proper personal pronoun) of the other personsPersonal / Possessive PronounAccusative Masculine 3rd Person Singular
παρακαλῶνparakalōnbeggingG3870
√ παρακαλέω — to call near, iVerbPresent Participle ActiveNominative Masculine Singular
παρακαλέω: to call near, to beseech Properly “to call alongside.” The leper, whose whole legal existence was defined by being kept at a distance, uses the verb of calling someone near.
αὐτὸνautonG846
√ αὐτός — the reflexive pronoun self, used (alone or in the comparative G1438 (ἑαυτοῦ)) of the third person , and (with the proper personal pronoun) of the other personsPersonal / Possessive PronounAccusative Masculine 3rd Person Singular
καὶkaivvvG2532
√ καί — and, also, even, so then, too, etcConjunction
γονυπετῶνgonypetōnon his kneesG1120
√ γονυπετέω — to fall on the kneeVerbPresent Participle ActiveNominative Masculine Singular
γονυπετέω: to fall on the knee Rare: four verses in all. Mark alone records the posture here, as Cambridge notes. Matthew 8:2 has prosekynei (“worshipped”), Luke 5:12 “fell on his face.” Pulpit gathers all three and argues that the bodily posture carries the soul's homage, since the leper does not ask Jesus to petition God but addresses the will itself.
ὅτιhotiG3754
√ ὅτι — demonstrative, that (sometimes redundant)Conjunction
καὶkaiG2532
√ καί — and, also, even, so then, too, etcConjunction
λέγωνlegōnG3004
√ λέγω — properly, to "lay" forth, iVerbPresent Participle ActiveNominative Masculine Singular
αὐτῷautōG846
√ αὐτός — the reflexive pronoun self, used (alone or in the comparative G1438 (ἑαυτοῦ)) of the third person , and (with the proper personal pronoun) of the other personsPersonal / Possessive PronounDative Masculine 3rd Person Singular
ἘὰνEanIfG1437
√ ἐάν — a conditional particleConjunction
θέλῃςthelēsYou are willingG2309
√ θέλω — to determine (as an active option from subjective impulseVerbPresent Subjunctive Active2nd Person Singular
θέλω: to determine, to will Present subjunctive active, second person: “if you should be willing.” The condition is placed not on power but on will, and the pronoun is emphatic by position. Pulpit reads the hypothesis as resignation, not doubt: “He has no doubt as to Christ's power, but the words, “If thou wilt” show that his desire for healing was controlled by resignation to the will of God”. Verse 41 answers with the same verb in the plain indicative.
δύνασαίdynasaiYou canG1410
√ δύναμαι — to be able or possibleVerbPresent Indicative Middle or Passive2nd Person Singular
δύναμαι: to be able The verb of sheer capacity. The leper's grammar concedes the power and asks only about the willingness, which is why Barnes calls the sentence “an acknowledgment of the almighty power of Jesus, and an appeal to his benevolence.” The same verb reappears in v. 45, where it is Jesus who “could no longer” do something.
καθαρίσαιkatharisaimake me cleanG2511
√ καθαρίζω — to cleanse (literally or figuratively)VerbAorist Infinitive Active
καθαρίζω: to cleanse Aorist infinitive: one decisive act, not a course of treatment. G2511 occurs in 30 verses; three of its occurrences fall in this unit alone (vv. 40, 41, 42), which is how Mark marks the theme. Cleansing, not healing, is the word the Law used (Leviticus 13 to 14), and the man's request is therefore framed in the vocabulary of the priest, not the physician.
μεme. . .G1473
√ ἐγώ — I, mePersonal / Possessive PronounAccusative 1st Person Singular
Emphatic accusative me, placed last in the clause: the whole weight of the petition falls on this one excluded man.
41

Moved with compassion, Jesus reached out His hand and touched the man. “I am willing,” He said. “Be clean!”

Berean Standard Bible · CC0

Greek — tap a word ↓

Kai splanchnistheis ekteinas autou tēn cheira hēpsato Thelō kai legei autō katharisthēti

Word by word12 · parsed
ΚαὶKaiG2532
√ καί — and, also, even, so then, too, etcConjunction
σπλαγχνισθεὶςsplanchnistheisMoved with compassionG4697
√ σπλαγχνίζομαι — to have the bowels yearn, iVerbAorist Participle PassiveNominative Masculine Singular
σπλαγχνίζομαι: to have the bowels yearn The strongest compassion verb in the Gospels, and in Mark it is almost always the narrator's window into Jesus rather than a word Jesus uses of himself. The aorist passive reports a movement that happened to him at the sight of the man. Poole builds his whole reading on it: the same act shows “the Son of man, one who could have compassion on our infirmities,” and the Son of God who could “in an instant, by a touch” command the disease off.
ἐκτείναςekteinasJesus reached outG1614
√ ἐκτείνω — to extendVerbAorist Participle ActiveNominative Masculine Singular
ἐκτείνω: to extend, stretch out An aorist participle subordinate to the main verb: the reaching exists for the sake of the touching. Nothing in the account required physical contact, since v. 42 ties the cure to the word; the hand is therefore gratuitous, which is precisely why the commentators fasten on it. Maclaren makes it the thesis of a whole exposition: “Mark delights to dwell on Christ's touch.”
αὐτοῦautouHisG846
√ αὐτός — the reflexive pronoun self, used (alone or in the comparative G1438 (ἑαυτοῦ)) of the third person , and (with the proper personal pronoun) of the other personsPersonal / Possessive PronounGenitive Masculine 3rd Person Singular
τὴνtēnG3588
√ ὁ — the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom)ArticleAccusative Feminine Singular
χεῖραcheirahandG5495
√ χείρ — the hand (literally or figuratively (power)NounAccusative Feminine Singular
χείρ: the hand (literally or figuratively, power) The lexicon notes the figurative range: the hand is power. Mark reports a hand where the Law reported a barrier.
ἥψατοhēpsato[and] touched [the man]G680
√ ἅπτομαι — properly, to attach oneself to, iVerbAorist Indicative Middle3rd Person Singular
ἅπτομαι: to attach oneself to Deliberate middle voice, and legally the scandal of the passage. Leviticus 5:3 and Numbers 5:2 to 3 make contact with such uncleanness defiling; Barnes states the fact plainly (“It was by the law considered as unclean to touch a leprous man. See Numbers 5:2”) and reads the touch as proof that Jesus already regarded the man as clean. Cambridge records the older reading in the opposite direction: the contact ran clean, not unclean.
ΘέλωThelōI am willingG2309
√ θέλω — to determine (as an active option from subjective impulseVerbPresent Indicative Active1st Person Singular
θέλω: to determine, to will Present indicative active, one word, first person singular. It is the exact lexeme the leper made his condition, now stripped of the condition. Barnes draws the conclusion the grammar invites: “None but God can work a miracle; yet Jesus does it by his “own will” ... Therefore, Jesus is divine.” Pulpit records Jerome making the same observation about the pairing of petition and answer.
καὶkaiG2532
√ καί — and, also, even, so then, too, etcConjunction
λέγειlegeiHe saidG3004
√ λέγω — properly, to "lay" forth, iVerbPresent Indicative Active3rd Person Singular
Present indicative legei, another historic present: Mark keeps the speech live.
αὐτῷautōG846
√ αὐτός — the reflexive pronoun self, used (alone or in the comparative G1438 (ἑαυτοῦ)) of the third person , and (with the proper personal pronoun) of the other personsPersonal / Possessive PronounDative Masculine 3rd Person Singular
καθαρίσθητιkatharisthētiBe cleanG2511
√ καθαρίζω — to cleanse (literally or figuratively)VerbAorist Imperative Passive2nd Person Singular
καθαρίζω: to cleanse Aorist passive imperative. A command addressed to a man to receive what he cannot do, which is the exact grammar of every gospel imperative. The passive leaves the agent unnamed inside the word itself, and v. 42 supplies it by repeating the same verb, again in the passive: ekatharisthē.
42

And immediately the leprosy left him, and the man was cleansed.

Berean Standard Bible · CC0

Greek — tap a word ↓

Kai euthys hē lepra apēlthen ap’ autou kai ekatharisthē

Word by word9 · parsed
ΚαὶKaiAndG2532
√ καί — and, also, even, so then, too, etcConjunction
εὐθὺςeuthysimmediatelyG2112
√ εὐθέως — directly, iAdverb
εὐθέως: directly, immediately Mark's structural adverb, and here it is theological rather than stylistic: it denies any interval in which some other cause could be inserted. Pulpit draws the conclusion that the word rules out natural means. It recurs at v. 43 attached to the opposite motion, the sending away, which pairs the instant cleansing with an instant dismissal.
ἡhētheG3588
√ ὁ — the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom)ArticleNominative Feminine Singular
λέπραlepraleprosyG3014
√ λέπρα — scaliness, iNounNominative Feminine Singular
λέπρα: scaliness, leprosy The noun (G3014) as distinct from the adjective lepros of v. 40. Naming the condition as a subject that departs completes the reversal: in v. 40 the disease defined the man (he is a leper), in v. 42 it is a thing that leaves him.
ἀπῆλθενapēlthenleftG565
√ ἀπέρχομαι — to go off (iVerbAorist Indicative Active3rd Person Singular
ἀπέρχομαι: to go off, depart Compound of erchomai, the verb with which the leper “comes” in v. 40. Mark sets the two motions against each other in the same root: he comes, it goes off from him.
ἀπ’ap’. . .G575
√ ἀπό — "off," iPreposition
αὐτοῦautouhimG846
√ αὐτός — the reflexive pronoun self, used (alone or in the comparative G1438 (ἑαυτοῦ)) of the third person , and (with the proper personal pronoun) of the other personsPersonal / Possessive PronounGenitive Masculine 3rd Person Singular
καὶkaiandG2532
√ καί — and, also, even, so then, too, etcConjunction
ἐκαθαρίσθηekatharisthē[the man] was cleansedG2511
√ καθαρίζω — to cleanse (literally or figuratively)VerbAorist Indicative Passive3rd Person Singular
καθαρίζω: to cleanse The word asked for in v. 40, commanded in v. 41, and reported done in v. 42, the third of three occurrences and the only one in the indicative. Gill locates the agency in the speech rather than the hand: the cure “seems to be done not by touching him, but by the words spoken.” Maclaren reads the whole episode as a parable of the cleansing of sin, which is the ground of the christological readings below.
43

Jesus promptly sent him away with a stern warning:

Berean Standard Bible · CC0

Greek — tap a word ↓

Kai euthys exebalen auton embrimēsamenos autō

Word by word6 · parsed
ΚαὶKaiG2532
√ καί — and, also, even, so then, too, etcConjunction
εὐθὺςeuthysvvvG2112
√ εὐθέως — directly, iAdverb
ἐξέβαλενexebalen[Jesus] promptly sent him awayG1544
√ ἐκβάλλω — to eject (literally or figuratively)VerbAorist Indicative Active3rd Person Singular
ἐκβάλλω: to eject, cast out A hard verb for a hard action, and Mark chooses it three verses after the tender splanchnistheis. Cambridge's cross-reference to Mark 1:12 is the strongest datum: the same word that drives Jesus into the wilderness now drives the healed man out toward the priest. His explanation is practical: the man must “hasten on his errand, lest the report of what had been done should outrun him”.
αὐτόνauton. . .G846
√ αὐτός — the reflexive pronoun self, used (alone or in the comparative G1438 (ἑαυτοῦ)) of the third person , and (with the proper personal pronoun) of the other personsPersonal / Possessive PronounAccusative Masculine 3rd Person Singular
ἐμβριμησάμενοςembrimēsamenoswith a stern warningG1690
√ ἐμβριμάομαι — to have indignation on, iVerbAorist Participle MiddleNominative Masculine Singular
ἐμβριμάομαι: to have indignation on One of the hardest words in the unit, and the commentators do not agree on its object. Pulpit suspects the man: he “had incurred this rebuke by coming so near with his defilement.” Cambridge reads it as stern command rather than anger at the man. Poole refuses to settle the question of the silence charge at all, saying “we are not able to give a perfect account of it,” and listing the possibilities without choosing. The lexicon licenses both indignation and sternness; the text names neither cause, and this synthesis does not supply one.
αὐτῷautō. . .G846
√ αὐτός — the reflexive pronoun self, used (alone or in the comparative G1438 (ἑαυτοῦ)) of the third person , and (with the proper personal pronoun) of the other personsPersonal / Possessive PronounDative Masculine 3rd Person Singular
Dative autō: the sternness has a personal object, whatever its motive.
44

“See that you don’t tell anyone. But go, show yourself to the priest and present the offering Moses prescribed for your cleansing, as a testimony to them.”

Berean Standard Bible · CC0

Greek — tap a word ↓

kai legei autō Hora eipēs mēdeni mēden alla hypage deixon seauton tō hierei kai prosenenke ha Mōusēs prosetaxen peri sou tou katharismou eis martyrion autois

Word by word25 · parsed
καὶkaiG2532
√ καί — and, also, even, so then, too, etcConjunction
λέγειlegeiG3004
√ λέγω — properly, to "lay" forth, iVerbPresent Indicative Active3rd Person Singular
αὐτῷautōG846
√ αὐτός — the reflexive pronoun self, used (alone or in the comparative G1438 (ἑαυτοῦ)) of the third person , and (with the proper personal pronoun) of the other personsPersonal / Possessive PronounDative Masculine 3rd Person Singular
ὍραHoraSeeG3708
√ ὁράω — by extension, to attend toVerbPresent Imperative Active2nd Person Singular
ὁράω: to see, to attend to Used imperativally as a call to vigilance rather than sight. Its force is the whole weight of the silence command that the man will break in v. 45.
εἴπῃςeipēsthat you don’t tellG2036
√ ἔπω — to speak or say (by word or writing)VerbAorist Subjunctive Active2nd Person Singular
μηδενὶmēdeni. . .G3367
√ μηδείς — not even one (man, woman, thing)AdjectiveDative Masculine Singular
μηδὲνmēden[anyone]G3367
√ μηδείς — not even one (man, woman, thing)AdjectiveAccusative Neuter Singular
ἀλλὰallaButG235
√ ἀλλά — properly, other things, iConjunction
ὕπαγεhypagegoG5217
√ ὑπάγω — to lead (oneself) under, iVerbPresent Imperative Active2nd Person Singular
δεῖξονdeixonshowG1166
√ δεικνύω — to show (literally or figuratively)VerbAorist Imperative Active2nd Person Singular
σεαυτὸνseautonyourselfG4572
√ σεαυτοῦ — of (with, to) thyselfPersonal / Possessive PronounAccusative Masculine 2nd Person Singular
τῷtōto theG3588
√ ὁ — the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom)ArticleDative Masculine Singular
ἱερεῖhiereipriestG2409
√ ἱερεύς — a priest (literally or figuratively)NounDative Masculine Singular
ἱερεύς: a priest Singular, and the Law required a priestly verdict before readmission (Leviticus 14:2 to 3). Geneva's marginal note is exact about the office: “All the posterity of Aaron had the authority to judge a leper.” Pulpit takes it further, that the priest himself would have “clear evidence that this leper was cleansed, not after the custom of the Law, but by the operation of grace.” Jesus, who has just overridden the purity boundary with his hand, sends the man straight into the Law's own procedure.
καὶkaiandG2532
√ καί — and, also, even, so then, too, etcConjunction
προσένεγκεprosenenkepresent the offeringG4374
√ προσφέρω — to bear towards, iVerbAorist Imperative Active2nd Person Singular
προσφέρω: to bear towards, to offer The sacrificial verb. It links this verse to Luke 5:14 and Matthew 8:4, which carry the same lexeme in the same command, and it is the point at which the Gospel narrative hands itself over to Leviticus.
ἃhaG3739
√ ὅς — the relatively (sometimes demonstrative) pronoun, who, which, what, thatPersonal / Relative PronounAccusative Neuter Plural
ΜωϋσῆςMōusēsMosesG3475
√ Μωσεύς — Moseus, Moses, or Mouses (iNounNominative Masculine Singular
Μωϋσῆς: Moses Named in the nominative as the subject of prosetaxen. Mark does not quote the Law; he names its mediator and points. This is the unit's one explicit appeal to the Torah, and it is an appeal by reference rather than citation, which is why every thread pairing this verse with Leviticus below is tiered structural, not verbal.
προσέταξενprosetaxenprescribedG4367
√ προστάσσω — to arrange towards, iVerbAorist Indicative Active3rd Person Singular
προστάσσω: to arrange towards, to prescribe Aorist indicative: the prescription is a completed legal act standing in the past, still binding. Barnes lists what it prescribed: “Two birds, and cedar-wood, and scarlet, and hyssop; and after eight days, two he-lambs, without blemish, and one ewe-lamb, and fine flour, and oil, Leviticus 14:4 , Leviticus 14:10 .”
περὶperiforG4012
√ περί — properly, through (all over), iPreposition
σουsouyourG4771
√ σύ — thouPersonal / Possessive PronounGenitive 2nd Person Singular
τοῦtouG3588
√ ὁ — the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom)ArticleGenitive Masculine Singular
καθαρισμοῦkatharismoucleansingG2512
√ καθαρισμός — a washing off, iNounGenitive Masculine Singular
καθαρισμός: a washing off, cleansing The noun form (G2512), rare at 7 verses, and the only place in this unit where the root appears as a thing rather than an act. It is the Levitical term for the rite, so the cleansing already accomplished by a word in v. 42 is now to be certified by the prescribed katharismos. Luke 5:14 carries the identical noun in the identical command.
εἰςeisasG1519
√ εἰς — to or into (indicating the point reached or entered), of place, time, or (figuratively) purpose (result, etcPreposition
μαρτύριονmartyriona testimonyG3142
√ μαρτύριον — something evidential, iNounAccusative Neuter Singular
μαρτύριον: something evidential The unit's most contested word. Greek gives a dative plural with no antecedent, so the referent must be inferred: the people (Barnes), or the unbelief of the authorities, taken adversatively (Cambridge, comparing Mark 6:11 with Luke 9:5). Both readings are honest inferences from an ambiguous dative, and the Greek does not settle it.
αὐτοῖςautoisto themG846
√ αὐτός — the reflexive pronoun self, used (alone or in the comparative G1438 (ἑαυτοῦ)) of the third person , and (with the proper personal pronoun) of the other personsPersonal / Possessive PronounDative Masculine 3rd Person Plural
45

But the man went out and openly began to proclaim and spread the news. Consequently, Jesus could no longer enter a town in plain view, but He stayed out in solitary places. Yet people came to Him from every quarter.

Berean Standard Bible · CC0

Greek — tap a word ↓

de Ho exelthōn polla ērxato kēryssein kai diaphēmizein ton logon hōste auton mēketi dynasthai eiselthein eis polin phanerōs all’ ēn exō ep’ erēmois topois kai ērchonto pros auton pantothen

Word by word29 · parsed
δὲdeButG1161
√ δέ — but, and, etcConjunction
ὉHothe [man]G3588
√ ὁ — the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom)ArticleNominative Masculine Singular
ἐξελθὼνexelthōnwent outG1831
√ ἐξέρχομαι — to issue (literally or figuratively)VerbAorist Participle ActiveNominative Masculine Singular
ἐξέρχομαι: to issue, go out The aorist participle answers exebalen of v. 43: cast out, he goes out, and then does the one thing he was told not to do.
πολλὰpolla[and] openlyG4183
√ πολύς — (singular) much (in any respect) or (plural) manyAdjectiveAccusative Neuter Plural
ἤρξατοērxatobeganG756
√ ἄρχομαι — to commence (in order of time)VerbAorist Indicative Middle3rd Person Singular
κηρύσσεινkērysseinto proclaimG2784
√ κηρύσσω — to herald (as a public crier), especially divine truth (the gospel)VerbPresent Infinitive Active
κηρύσσω: to herald, to preach The verb of public proclamation and of gospel preaching. Mark 1:38 to 39 has just used it of Jesus' own mission, so the cleansed man becomes, in disobedience, the first lay herald in this Gospel. Henry holds both sides of that: Christ refused anything that “looked like seeking praise of the people,” yet “no reasons now exist why we should hesitate to spread the praises of Christ.”
καὶkaiandG2532
√ καί — and, also, even, so then, too, etcConjunction
διαφημίζεινdiaphēmizeinspreadG1310
√ διαφημίζω — to report thoroughly, iVerbPresent Infinitive Active
διαφημίζω: to report thoroughly Rare: three verses in the whole NT. The other two are Matthew 9:31, where healed blind men publish the news against the same prohibition, and Matthew 28:15, where a bribed false report of the resurrection is spread. The lexeme itself is morally neutral and carries only the thoroughness of the spreading.
τὸνtontheG3588
√ ὁ — the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom)ArticleAccusative Masculine Singular
λόγονlogonnewsG3056
√ λόγος — something said (including the thought)NounAccusative Masculine Singular
λόγος: something said, the word Articular and left undefined: Mark writes “the word,” not “the news,” and never says whether its content was the cure or the Healer. Barnes takes the narrower sense, “he made known his own cure”; Gill allows the wider one, that the man acted “perhaps with a good intention to spread the fame and glory of his Saviour”. The Verifier finds this same lexeme paired with the rare diaphēmizō at Matthew 28:15, where a spread logos is a paid falsehood, so the noun itself guarantees nothing about the truth of what is spread.
ὥστεhōsteConsequentlyG5620
√ ὥστε — so too, iConjunction
αὐτὸνautonJesusG846
√ αὐτός — the reflexive pronoun self, used (alone or in the comparative G1438 (ἑαυτοῦ)) of the third person , and (with the proper personal pronoun) of the other personsPersonal / Possessive PronounAccusative Masculine 3rd Person Singular
μηκέτιmēketicould no longerG3371
√ μηκέτι — no furtherAdverb
μηκέτι: no further With dynasthai it produces the sharpest irony in the unit. Barnes guards it carefully: “The word “could,” here, does not refer to any natural inability.”
δύνασθαιdynasthai. . .G1410
√ δύναμαι — to be able or possibleVerbPresent Infinitive Middle or Passive
εἰσελθεῖνeiseltheinenterG1525
√ εἰσέρχομαι — to enter (literally or figuratively)VerbAorist Infinitive Active
εἰςeis. . .G1519
√ εἰς — to or into (indicating the point reached or entered), of place, time, or (figuratively) purpose (result, etcPreposition
πόλινpolina townG4172
√ πόλις — a town (properly, with walls, of greater or less size)NounAccusative Feminine Singular
φανερῶςphanerōsin plain viewG5320
√ φανερῶς — plainly, iAdverb
φανερῶς: plainly, openly Rare: three verses (here, John 7:10, Acts 10:3). In John 7:10 Jesus again goes up “not openly”; the pairing is a real verbal link and a recurring motif of deliberate concealment in the Gospels.
ἀλλ’all’butG235
√ ἀλλά — properly, other things, iConjunction
ἦνēnHe stayedG1510
√ εἰμί — I exist (used only when emphatic)VerbImperfect Indicative Active3rd Person Singular
ἔξωexōoutG1854
√ ἔξω — out(-side, of doors), literally or figurativelyAdverb
ἐπ’ep’inG1909
√ ἐπί — properly, meaning superimposition (of time, place, order, etcPreposition
ἐρήμοιςerēmoissolitaryG2048
√ ἔρημος — desert, desolate, solitary, wildernessAdjectiveDative Masculine Plural
ἔρημος: desert, solitary, wilderness The dative plural names the kind of place the Law assigned to lepers, outside the settlements. The cleansed man enters the city; the Cleanser is outside in the desolate places. Ellicott notes that Mark alone makes the man himself the agent of this displacement.
τόποιςtopoisplacesG5117
√ τόπος — a spot (general in space, but limited by occupancyNounDative Masculine Plural
καὶkaiYetG2532
√ καί — and, also, even, so then, too, etcConjunction
ἤρχοντοērchonto[people] cameG2064
√ ἔρχομαι — to come or go (in a great variety of applications, literally and figuratively)VerbImperfect Indicative Middle or Passive3rd Person Plural
ἔρχομαι: to come Imperfect middle, “they kept coming.” The same verb that opened the unit with one leper coming, now plural and continuous. Benson: they came “Even into the wilderness, remote as it was from the habitations of many of them.”
πρὸςprostoG4314
√ πρός — a preposition of directionPreposition
αὐτὸνautonHimG846
√ αὐτός — the reflexive pronoun self, used (alone or in the comparative G1438 (ἑαυτοῦ)) of the third person , and (with the proper personal pronoun) of the other personsPersonal / Possessive PronounAccusative Masculine 3rd Person Singular
πάντοθενpantothenfrom every quarterG3840
√ πάντοθεν — from (iAdverb
πάντοθεν: from every side Rare: three verses (here, Luke 19:43, Hebrews 9:4). The adverb closes the unit by reporting that the attempted containment produced total convergence.

The verse-by-verse work is done. What follows gathers the whole unit. All three layers below are machine-generated (⚙). Weigh them; they have no authority.

⚙

Grand Commentary — the unit, read whole

synthesis · verify

AI synthesis — woven from the public-domain voices above and the original text; generated and fallible.

i. The man who should not have been there — Mark 1:40

Mark opens with a historic present, ἔρχεται, and Cambridge catches it: “Better, there cometh , in the present tense.” The reader is put in the crowd at the moment a man forbidden by Leviticus 13:45 to 46 to come near walks up. Two present participles hold him there at once, παρακαλῶν and γονυπετῶν, and Cambridge notes that the kneeling is Mark's own detail: “St Mark alone describes this attitude of the leper, as also the look of compassion which beamed forth from the face of the Lord, spoken of in the next verse.” Pulpit collects the three Gospel postures (Mark's kneeling, Matthew's worship, Luke's falling on the face) and argues that the body's posture carried the soul's homage, since the leper does not ask Jesus to petition God but addresses the will itself. The grammar is the argument: δύνασαί is indicative, conceded; only θέλῃς is subjunctive. Barnes puts it exactly: the sentence is “an acknowledgment of the almighty power of Jesus, and an appeal to his benevolence.” And the request is for cleansing, not healing. Barnes again: “render me “legally” clean, and restore me to the privileges of the congregation.” ⚙ The man's whole theology is in his choice of verb: he asks the Physician for a priest's verdict.

ii. The hand that should have been defiled — Mark 1:41 to 1:42

σπλαγχνισθεὶς is an aorist passive: something moved in his viscera. Poole keeps the literalness, “affected in his bowels, (as the word signifies),” and makes it the point of the whole account, that here Jesus “at once both showed himself the Son of man, one who could have compassion on our infirmities ... and the Son of God, that he could in an instant, by a touch, or by the word of his power, command off a disease of so difficult cure.” Then ἐκτείνας and ἥψατο: the aorist middle of haptomai, a verb Strong's glosses “properly, to attach oneself to.” Nothing required the contact, since v. 42 attributes the cure to the word; Gill says so directly, that it “seems to be done not by touching him, but by the words spoken.” Maclaren makes the hand the thesis of an entire exposition: “Mark delights to dwell on Christ's touch,” and of this verse, “unrepelled by the foul disease, He lays His pure hand upon the leper.” Barnes states the legal problem without flinching (“It was by the law considered as unclean to touch a leprous man. See Numbers 5:2”) and resolves it forward: the touch proves Jesus already reckoned the man clean. Cambridge resolves it the other direction, quoting the older formulation that “He, Himself remaining undefiled, cleansed him whom He touched.” Then the twin answers. Pulpit records Jerome's observation: “our Lord aptly answers both the petitions of the leper. “If thou wilt;” “I will.” “Thou canst make me clean;” “Be thou made clean.”” And v. 42 lands with Mark's adverb. Pulpit: “Straightway - St. Mark's favourite word ... There is no interval between the command and the work of Christ.” ⚙ Note what the Greek does with the roots: the leper comes (erchomai), the leprosy goes off (ap-erchomai). One motion answers the other in the same stem.

iii. The snort, the shove, and the Law's own court — Mark 1:43 to 1:44

The tenderness of v. 41 is followed within two verses by ἐμβριμησάμενος and ἐξέβαλεν, and the commentators do not agree why. Cambridge does the philology, tracking embrimaomai to Matthew 9:30, Mark 14:5 and John 11:33, 38 and concluding it means “(1) to be very angry or indignant , (2) to charge or command with sternness ,” and he notes that exebalen is “the same word in the original as in Mark 1:12,” where the Spirit drives Jesus into the wilderness. Cambridge's own explanation is urgency, that the man must not linger “lest the report of what had been done should outrun him”. Pulpit guesses at offence taken (“It may be that he had incurred this rebuke by coming so near with his defilement”), and is honest that it is a guess. Poole simply refuses: “we are not able to give a perfect account of it,” and lists the possible motives without choosing. ⚙ That refusal is the right model here; the text supplies the verb and withholds the reason. Then v. 44 hands the man to the Law. Geneva's note on the office is precise, “All the posterity of Aaron had the authority to judge a leper,” and Pulpit adds that the priest would thereby have evidence the man “was cleansed, not after the custom of the Law, but by the operation of grace.” Barnes supplies the contents of the offering Mark leaves as a bare relative pronoun, ἃ: “Two birds, and cedar-wood, and scarlet, and hyssop; and after eight days, two he-lambs ... Leviticus 14:4 , Leviticus 14:10 .” Cambridge adds the provision for a poor leper, “one lamb and two turtledoves or two young pigeons, with one tenth deal of fine flour.” The final word, μαρτύριον, is genuinely ambiguous: Barnes reads it as evidence “Not to the priest, but to the people”; Cambridge renders it “for a testimony against them” and explains it as directed “against their unbelief in refusing to acknowledge our Lord”. The dative plural has no stated antecedent, and ⚙ this synthesis will not pretend it does.

iv. The herald who traded places with the Healer — Mark 1:45

The man cast out (exebalen, v. 43) goes out (ἐξελθὼν) and begins κηρύσσειν, the very verb Mark used of Jesus' preaching six verses earlier, and διαφημίζειν, a word that occurs in only three NT verses. Ellicott registers that this is Mark's own contribution: “St. Mark alone describes the man himself as the agent in spreading the report of the miracle”. Benson reads the motive generously: he “was so overjoyed at the suddenness and greatness of the blessing ... that he could not forbear publishing it everywhere”. Pulpit hesitates to condemn him and yet concedes “it would have been better if he had humbly obeyed.” Cambridge, to his credit, draws the practical consequence and turns it into a reason for the original command: “A certain degree of secrecy and reserve was plainly necessary in respect to the Lord's miracles, or it would have been impossible for Him to have moved from place to place.” Barnes guards the resulting μηκέτι δύνασθαι from misreading: “The word “could,” here, does not refer to any natural inability, or to any physical obstacle in his way”. Gill adds the Mishnaic detail that a leper could be admitted to a synagogue only behind a partition ten handbreadths high. ⚙ The Greek closes the circle three times over: dynamai, the leper's word for Jesus' ability, is now what Jesus lacks; erchomai, the one leper's coming, is now an imperfect plural, “they kept coming”; and ἐρήμοις τόποις, the outside-the-settlement space the Law assigned to lepers, is where the Cleanser now stays. Henry holds the tension without dissolving it: “Christ would have nothing done that looked like seeking praise of the people. But no reasons now exist why we should hesitate to spread the praises of Christ.”

Read under Sola Scriptura — this tool’s own fallible reading (⚙)

⚙ This is the tool's own fallible reading, offered to be tested against the text. Read it as an exchange of positions, and the Greek roots carry the argument rather than any allegory imposed on it. In v. 40 a man defined by an adjective (λεπρὸς) comes in from the desolate places where Leviticus 13:46 put him, and asks in the Law's own vocabulary to be made clean. In v. 45 he is in the city heralding, and Jesus is ἔξω ἐπ’ ἐρήμοις τόποις, outside in the desolate places. The disease departed by a word; the displacement was traded by a touch. Mark reports this without comment, and the verbal echoes are the only evidence: dynasai in the leper's mouth becomes mēketi dynasthai of Jesus; the leper comes (erchetai) and at the close the crowds keep coming (ērchonto) from every side to the place of exclusion. Two things should be under-claimed here. First, the text nowhere says Jesus took the man's uncleanness; the older formulation Cambridge quotes runs the opposite way, that he remained undefiled and the cleanness ran outward. The exchange this reading sees is of location, which Mark states, not of defilement, which he does not. Second, the motive of the stern charge is unknown, and Poole's refusal to explain it (“we are not able to give a perfect account of it”) is more honest than any of the reconstructions on offer, including this one. What the grammar will bear is this: the only condition the leper placed on his healing was a will, and the answer came back as a single indicative verb with no condition attached at all. Everything else in the unit, the hand, the Law, the silence, the crowds, follows from that one word.

The disease left by a word; the place outside the camp changed hands.

⚙

Canonical Threads — out to the whole of Scripture

cross-refs · verify

AI-generated connections. Each carries a verification badge with a recorded basis; contested links are flagged.

The same cleansing in three hands: Matthew and Luke on the identical words verbal / quotation: confirmed

Mark 1:41 stands in a synoptic triple. The Verifier finds Matthew 8:3 and Luke 5:13 each sharing three lexemes with this passage in a single verse: θέλω (G2309), καθαρίζω (G2511) and ἅπτομαι (G680). The wording of the answer is essentially identical across all three (“I will; be cleansed”), and Matthew 8:4 further carries προσφέρω, μαρτύριον and σεαυτοῦ from Mark 1:44, while Luke 5:14 carries the rarer καθαρισμός (G2512, 7 verses). The whole commentary tradition works from this: JFB treats the three as one event (“Healing of a Leper. ( = Mt 8:1-4; Lu 5:12-16)”), Ellicott and Benson both send the reader to their notes on Matthew 8, and Poole says outright “We before had this piece of history, in Matthew.” Pulpit and Cambridge use the differences (Mark's kneeling, Luke's “full of leprosy”) as the interesting data.

Matthew 8:3 · Luke 5:13 · Matthew 8:4 · Luke 5:14

basis: Verifier: Matthew 8:3 and Luke 5:13 each share G2309 θέλω (199 vv), G2511 καθαρίζω (30 vv) and G680 ἅπτομαι (33 vv) with Mark 1:41; the co-occurrence of all three in one verse, plus G4374 προσφέρω (45 vv) and G3142 μαρτύριον (20 vv) at Matthew 8:4 and the rare G2512 καθαρισμός (7 vv) at Luke 5:14, is verbal parallelism within the synoptic tradition. All refs are NT to NT, so shared Strong's numbers are a legitimate basis. Note that no one here quotes another: this is parallel transmission of one saying, not citation.

Four sets of knees: γονυπετέω in the whole New Testament verbal / quotation: confirmed

γονυπετῶν (G1120, “to fall on the knee”) is one of the rarest verbs in this unit: four verses in the entire NT. Mark 1:40 is the leper; Mark 10:17 is the rich man who runs up and kneels to ask about eternal life; Matthew 17:14 is the father of the epileptic boy; Matthew 27:29 is the cohort kneeling before Jesus in mockery. ⚙ The Verifier's basis is the shared lexeme, and the pattern it exposes is worth naming without overreading: three petitioners on their knees over what they cannot fix, and one body of soldiers on their knees in derision, with the same verb serving both. Cambridge notes that the kneeling here is Mark's own detail; Pulpit gathers the parallel postures in Matthew 8:2 and Luke 5:12 and concludes that “the scriptural idea of worship is associated with some lowly posture of the body.”

Mark 10:17 · Matthew 17:14 · Matthew 27:29

basis: Verifier: rare shared Greek lexeme G1120 γονυπετέω, present in only 4 verses in the NT (Mark 1:40; Mark 10:17; Matthew 17:14; Matthew 27:29). All refs NT to NT. The link is lexical, not a quotation; the tier records the rarity of the shared word, and no claim is made that any of these texts cites another.

Spreading the report: διαφημίζω in only three verses verbal / quotation: confirmed

διαφημίζειν (G1310, “to report thoroughly”) appears in three NT verses and no more. Here the cleansed leper spreads the word against an explicit prohibition; at Matthew 9:31 two healed blind men do precisely the same thing against precisely the same kind of charge (and Cambridge draws this comparison himself, together with Mark 7:36); at Matthew 28:15 the bribed guards spread a false account of the empty tomb, where the Verifier finds λόγος (G3056) shared as well, exactly as in Mark 1:45. ⚙ The lexeme is morally neutral and names only the thoroughness of the spreading, which is why the same verb can carry a joyful report and a paid lie. Ellicott notes that the leper as agent of the report is Mark's distinctive detail; Benson attributes it to overflow rather than defiance.

Matthew 9:31 · Matthew 28:15

basis: Verifier: rare shared Greek lexeme G1310 διαφημίζω, present in only 3 verses in the NT (Mark 1:45; Matthew 9:31; Matthew 28:15); Matthew 28:15 additionally shares G3056 λόγος (318 vv). All refs NT to NT. A lexical link across the Gospels, not a citation of one by another.

Not openly: φανερῶς and the deliberate withholding verbal / quotation: confirmed

φανερῶς (G5320, “plainly, openly”) is another three-verse word. At Mark 1:45 the consequence of the broken silence is that Jesus can no longer enter a town openly; at John 7:10 Jesus goes up to the feast “not openly, but as it were in secret.” ⚙ The shared rare adverb links two moments of deliberate non-publicity in the ministry, which is the same reserve Cambridge identifies as the practical reason for the silence command: “A certain degree of secrecy and reserve was plainly necessary in respect to the Lord's miracles, or it would have been impossible for Him to have moved from place to place.” The third occurrence of the word, Acts 10:3 (Cornelius sees the angel clearly), is a different sense and is deliberately left out of the refs; the Verifier lists it, and honesty requires saying that the lexeme there carries no thematic weight for this unit.

John 7:10

basis: Verifier: rare shared Greek lexeme G5320 φανερῶς, present in only 3 verses in the NT (Mark 1:45; John 7:10; Acts 10:3). Both refs NT to NT. The tier records the rarity of the shared adverb only; the third occurrence at Acts 10:3 uses a different sense and is excluded from the refs on that ground.

“What things Moses prescribed”: the Law named but not quoted structural / thematic: confirmed

Mark 1:44 sends the man to a text without reciting it: ἃ προσέταξεν Μωϋσῆς, “what things Moses prescribed,” with the contents left as a bare relative pronoun. The contents are Leviticus 14:1 to 32, the rite for a cleansed leper, presupposing the diagnostic and exclusion law of Leviticus 13. Barnes fills the gap from the Torah: “Two birds, and cedar-wood, and scarlet, and hyssop; and after eight days, two he-lambs, without blemish, and one ewe-lamb, and fine flour, and oil, Leviticus 14:4 , Leviticus 14:10 .” Cambridge supplies the same list with the poor leper's alternative of “one lamb and two turtledoves or two young pigeons, with one tenth deal of fine flour,” and points to Leviticus 14:3 for the priest's attestation. ⚙ This is the clearest explicit appeal to the Law anywhere in the unit, and it still cannot be tiered verbal: the refs cross the Testaments, the Gospel is Greek and Leviticus Hebrew, so no shared Strong's lexeme can exist and qa.py rightly refuses the verbal tier for a mixed OT and NT thread. What is confirmed is the structural dependence: Mark's sentence is unintelligible without Leviticus 14, and it says so.

Leviticus 14:1-32 · Leviticus 13:45-46

basis: Explicit named appeal to the Mosaic prescription in Mark 1:44 (“what things Moses prescribed for your cleansing”), whose referent is the cleansed-leper rite of Leviticus 14:1-32 and the exclusion law of Leviticus 13:45-46; Barnes and Cambridge both identify it and cite Leviticus 14:3, 14:4 and 14:10. The link is cross-Testament, Greek to Hebrew, so no shared Strong's lexeme is possible and the verbal tier is unavailable; recorded as structural dependence, which is what the text actually claims.

The touch that should have run the other way structural / thematic: confirmed

The aorist middle ἥψατο (G680, “to attach oneself to”) is a legal problem before it is a theological one. Leviticus 5:3 makes contact with human uncleanness a guilt-bearing act requiring sacrifice; Numbers 5:2 to 3 orders the leper put outside the camp so that such contact cannot occur. Barnes names the statute directly: “It was by the law considered as unclean to touch a leprous man. See Numbers 5:2 .” Gill records the same fact from the other side, that “touching him was forbidden by the law,” and cites the Mishnaic rules (Negaim 13) under which a leper defiled a house he entered. Cambridge and Pulpit both record the tradition that the direction of contagion reversed. ⚙ What Mark states is the contact and the outcome; that the purity flowed outward is an inference the Evangelist leaves the reader to make, and the commentators make it with one voice. No verbal tier is possible or claimed: the link is between a Greek verb and a Hebrew statute.

Leviticus 5:3 · Numbers 5:2-3

basis: Shared legal motif of defilement by contact with the unclean, measured against Leviticus 5:3 and Numbers 5:2-3, which Barnes cites by chapter and verse in his note on this verse and Gill corroborates from Mishnah Negaim. Cross-Testament Greek to Hebrew, so no shared Strong's lexeme exists and the verbal tier is excluded; recorded as a structural link between Mark's verb and the statute it collides with.

Miriam, Naaman, and a disease the Law could diagnose but not cure typological

Cambridge assembles the OT cases and reports the Jewish estimate of the disease: “The Jews called it “the Finger of God,” and emphatically “the Stroke;” they never expected to cure it (see 2 Kings 5:7 ),” listing Moses (Exodus 4:6), Miriam (Numbers 12:10), Naaman (2 Kings 5:1) and Gehazi (2 Kings 5:27). In both Numbers 12 and 2 Kings 5 the disease is imposed and removed by God alone, and in 2 Kings 5:7 the king of Israel tears his clothes precisely because the request assumes a power to kill and make alive. Gill reports at length the rabbinic tradition that leprosy came for specific sins, invoking Miriam, Gehazi and Uzziah. ⚙ Read figurally, Mark 1:41 to 42 places in Jesus' own will the prerogative those narratives reserve to God, and Barnes reaches exactly that conclusion from the grammar of thelō. This is a figural reading, widely held from the patristic period onward, and it is tiered typological rather than verbal for two reasons: the refs cross the Testaments (no shared Strong's lexeme is possible between Greek and Hebrew), and the connection is a pattern of divine prerogative rather than any quotation.

Numbers 12:10-15 · 2 Kings 5:1-14 · 2 Kings 5:7

basis: Figural, ancient and widely held: leprosy imposed and removed by God alone (Numbers 12:10-15; 2 Kings 5:1-14, with the king's protest at 2 Kings 5:7) read as the pattern Jesus fulfils by his own will in Mark 1:41. Cambridge names Miriam, Naaman, Gehazi and 2 Kings 5:7 in his note on Mark 1:40; Gill supplies the rabbinic sin-and-leprosy tradition. Cross-Testament Greek to Hebrew, so no shared Strong's lexeme and no verbal tier; the basis is the figural pattern, not a citation.

Gill's seven abominations: leprosy read as the penalty for named sins flagged: verify source

Explaining the stern charge of v. 43, Gill's first option is that Jesus charged the man “with the sin which had been the cause of this leprosy,” and he then reproduces at length a rabbinic scheme: “The seven abominations mentioned in Proverbs 6:16 , are said, by the Jewish writers (t), to be the reasons of persons being stricken with leprosy,” matching each to a biblical figure: pride to the daughters of Zion (Isaiah 3:16), a lying tongue to Miriam (Numbers 12:1), bloodshed to Joab, wicked devising to Uzziah (2 Chronicles 26:18), swift feet to Gehazi (2 Kings 5:20), and sowing discord to Pharaoh (Genesis 12:17). He gives two further and different lists of eleven and of seven causes. ⚙ This thread is recorded and flagged rather than used. Gill's sources are cited only by footnote letters, the three lists he reports do not agree with each other, and Gill himself does not endorse the scheme: he closes by saying that “whether this man's sin was either of these, or what it was, is not certain,” and immediately offers the alternative that the charge was simply silence until the priest had ruled. The Proverbs 6:16 to 19 text says nothing of leprosy. The link belongs in the apparatus of this unit because it shaped how a major commentator read v. 43, not because the text supports it.

Proverbs 6:16-19 · Numbers 12:1-10 · 2 Chronicles 26:18-21 · 2 Kings 5:20-27

basis: Provenance contested and self-undermining. The basis is a rabbinic tradition reported by Gill on Mark 1:43 linking Proverbs 6:16 to 19 and other named sins to leprosy, cited only by unexpanded footnote letters (t), (u), (w); Gill gives three mutually inconsistent lists and concludes that this man's sin “is not certain,” preferring a different reading of the charge. Proverbs 6:16 to 19 does not mention leprosy, and the refs cross the Testaments, so no verbal tier is available in any case. Recorded as reception history, flagged for source verification, not asserted.

⚙Christ in the Unittypology · verify

AI-generated reading; weigh it against the text.

“I am willing”: one word in the indicative ancient/widely-held

The leper's petition makes power certain and will uncertain: δύνασαί indicative, θέλῃς subjunctive. The reply is the same lexeme with the mood changed, Θέλω, present indicative active, first person singular, standing alone. Barnes draws the christological inference from that grammar and nothing else: “Here was a most manifest proof of his divine power. None but God can work a miracle; yet Jesus does it by his “own will” - by an exertion of his own power. Therefore, Jesus is divine.” Poole finds both natures in the one act, “the Son of man, one who could have compassion on our infirmities ... and the Son of God, that he could in an instant, by a touch, or by the word of his power, command off a disease of so difficult cure.” Pulpit records Jerome noticing the exact symmetry of petition and answer, and adds that “Christ gives him more than he asks for.” ⚙ The OT texts in the thread above are what make this weighty: in Numbers 12 and 2 Kings 5 leprosy is God's to impose and God's to lift, and the king of Israel tears his clothes at being asked (2 Kings 5:7). Here it is lifted by a verb of personal willing with no petition behind it.

Mark 1:41 · Numbers 12:13 · 2 Kings 5:7

The clean hand and the priestly office ancient/widely-held

Mark puts two things side by side that the Law kept apart: a hand laid on a leper (v. 41) and an order to go to the priest (v. 44). Cambridge records the older reading of the contact: “He, Himself remaining undefiled, cleansed him whom He touched; for in Him life overcame death, and health sickness, and purity defilement.” Pulpit takes it into the doctrine of the incarnation, quoting Bede: “God stretched out his hand and touched the human nature in his incarnation, and restored to the Church those who had been cast out, that they might be able to offer their bodies a living sacrifice to him of whom it is said, 'Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Molchisedec.'” Gill names the same office from the text's own vocabulary, calling Jesus here “a merciful high priest.” Pulpit adds the note that the Aaronic priest, examining the man, would find him “cleansed, not after the custom of the Law, but by the operation of grace.” ⚙ The unit therefore has two priesthoods in it. The Levitical one certifies a cleansing it could not produce; the one who produced it sends the man to be certified. Mark does not say this; he arranges it.

Mark 1:41 · Mark 1:44 · Leviticus 14:2-3

Outside in the desolate places: the exchange Mark reports without explaining novel

⚙ This is the more speculative of the three readings here, and it is offered as such. Leviticus 13:46 assigns the leper a dwelling outside the camp. Mark 1:45 ends with Jesus ἔξω ἐπ’ ἐρήμοις τόποις, outside in desolate places, unable to enter a town openly, while the cleansed man is in the towns heralding. The verbal echoes are real: the leper's dynasai becomes Jesus' mēketi dynasthai; the one leper's erchetai becomes the imperfect plural ērchonto, “they kept coming,” to the excluded place. Maclaren, reading leprosy as “an emblem of sin,” builds the whole miracle as a parable of the cleansing of souls, and Benson and Barnes both explain the retirement circumstantially rather than theologically: Jesus withdrew because the crowds made ministry in the towns impossible. ⚙ That circumstantial explanation is probably correct as to cause, and this reading does not displace it. What is claimed is only the shape the Evangelist leaves on the page: the man who came in from outside the camp goes into the city, and the one who touched him is left outside. Mark offers no interpretation of that arrangement, and neither the text nor the commentators support the stronger claim that Jesus contracted the man's uncleanness. Cambridge's source insists on the opposite. Marked novel accordingly.

Mark 1:45 · Leviticus 13:45-46 · Hebrews 13:12-13

Apparatus & Provenance

The biblical text is the Berean Standard Bible (BSB), public domain (CC0). Hebrew/Greek text, transliteration, morphology and Strong’s are transcribed from the Berean interlinear (CC0) + Strong’s lexicons (PD); the literal renderings, divergence notes, word notes and all synthesis are this tool’s own work (⚙) — fallible; verify them.

Named voices, quoted verbatim from public-domain works:

  • Albert Barnes, Notes on the Bible (1834)
  • Alexander Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture (c. 1905)
  • Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges, — (1880s)
  • Charles Ellicott, Commentary for English Readers (1878)
  • Geneva Study Bible, Marginal Notes (1599)
  • John Gill, Exposition of the Entire Bible (1746–63)
  • Joseph Benson, Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1810s)
  • Matthew Henry, Concise Commentary on the Whole Bible (1706)
  • Matthew Poole, Annotations upon the Holy Bible (1685)
  • The Pulpit Commentary, Spence & Exell, eds. (1880s)

Text. BSB (CC0) with the Berean interlinear and Strong's numbers as supplied in the brief; parse and lexeme data are taken from that interlinear without alteration. The interlinear's word indices follow the English word order of BSB in places (notably Mark 1:40, where hoti, kai and legōn are listed at indices 9 to 11, and Mark 1:41, where Θέλω is listed at index 7 ahead of λέγει at index 9), so the literal renderings above restore Greek order while the note keys stay faithful to the supplied indices.

Sources. All ✦ material is verbatim public-domain commentary resolved from the brief's raw text by anchor: Ellicott (1878), Benson (1810s), Henry (1706), Barnes (1834), JFB (1871), Poole (1685), Gill (1746 to 1763), Geneva (1599), Cambridge (1880s), Pulpit (1880s), Maclaren (c. 1905). Ten of the eleven are quoted; JFB's entry for this passage is a bare cross-reference to Matthew 8:1 to 4 with no exegetical content, so nothing is quoted from it rather than padding a citation. Henry's, Barnes' and Poole's entries are single blocks covering Mark 1:40 to 45, so a quotation anchored at one verse may come from material the author wrote about the pericope as a whole. Maclaren's and Gill's longest entries are capped in the brief; the excerpts used lie within the supplied text and no capped remainder was consulted.

What is uncertain. Three things in this unit are genuinely undetermined and have not been resolved above. (1) The motive of ἐμβριμησάμενος and ἐξέβαλεν in v. 43: Poole states plainly that “we are not able to give a perfect account of it,” and Pulpit's suggestion of offence at the defilement is explicitly a conjecture. (2) The referent of the dative plural αὐτοῖς in v. 44: Barnes reads the people and takes the testimony as favourable, Cambridge reads the authorities and takes it as adverse. The Greek supplies no antecedent. (3) Whether the cure proceeded from the touch or from the word: Gill separates them, Barnes and Pulpit read the touch as evidential. Mark's syntax allows both.

Tier discipline. Four threads are tiered verbal, and each rests on a rare shared Greek lexeme within the NT (G1120, 4 verses; G1310, 3 verses; G5320, 3 verses) or on the triple lexical co-occurrence of the synoptic parallel; none claims that one text quotes another. Every thread pairing this unit with the Hebrew Scriptures is tiered structural or typological, because Greek and Hebrew cannot share Strong's numbers and cross-Testament refs cannot carry a verbal tier. This applies even to Mark 1:44, which names the Mosaic prescription explicitly: the appeal is real and stated, and the tier still records it as structural rather than verbal. One thread is tiered flagged: the rabbinic scheme attaching leprosy to the seven abominations of Proverbs 6:16 to 19, which Gill reports at length on v. 43 in three mutually inconsistent versions, citing his sources only by footnote letters and declining to endorse any of them. It is included as reception history, since it shapes how Gill reads the charge, and flagged because the provenance cannot be checked from the brief and the Proverbs text says nothing of leprosy. The rare adverb G3840 πάντοθεν (3 verses: here, Luke 19:43, Hebrews 9:4) appears in the Verifier's candidates and has deliberately not been made a thread, since the three uses share no motif worth recording. The reading in the third ⚙ Christ entry is marked novel, and the Hebrews 13:12 to 13 reference there is offered as a thematic comparison rather than a claim about Mark's intent.

✦ = human, public-domain source, quoted and named. ⚙ = machine synthesis, to be verified. Flagged cross-references are left visible on purpose — the verifier working in the open. “Search the Scriptures daily, whether those things were so.” (Acts 17:11)