Smoodock's Blog

In my previous study I contended that Matthew’s and Luke’s centurion’s beloved servant (Matthew 8:5; Luke 7:2) was the same person as John’s nobleman’s beloved son (John 4:46). Yet, the nobleman’s son was near death, due to a fever (G4445; John 4:52), while the centurion’s servant was near death, due to palsy (G3885; Matthew 8:6). I don’t see much difference in the two explanations. If nobleman’s son was near death due to a fever, it stands to reason that he couldn’t move about. He would have been effectively just as paralyzed, as any man struck with paralysis in part or the whole of his body, as understood from the New Covenant text.

According to Smith’s Bible Dictionary, ‘palsy’ was “the loss of sensation, or the power of motion, or both in any part of the body.” He continues to list five forms of the illness and includes anything from affecting the whole body to a cramp in a limb. The point is that I believe the centurion’s beloved servant’s ailment was very similar to or the same as Peter’s mother-in-law’s ailment. The one was healed at a distance, while the other was healed with the touch of Jesus’ hand. Both were bedridden and near death.

Matthew tells us that Jesus had come to Peter’s home and found Peter’s mother-in-law sick with a fever (G4445; Matthew 8:14). Luke informs us that it was a great (megas, G3173) fever, and they asked Jesus to heal her (Luke 4:38). Mark, who wrote down Peter’s Gospel, adds that Jesus and four of his disciples (Peter, Andrew, James and John) had come out of the synagogue on the Sabbath (Mark 1:21, 29), and they told Jesus about her.

We need to keep in mind, if we compare the witness of each Gospel writer with the others, that the Gospel narrators each had a purpose in mind, as they wrote down what Jesus said and did. Matthew’s purpose concerned themes which he used to prove Jesus was the Messiah/Christ, especially for the Jews. Luke was concerned more about chronology and presented his narrative as an apology to Theophilus, the then current high priest (Luke 1:3). Mark’s Gospel narrative was what Peter preached, written down for the Roman church in the 60s AD. My point is that two of the three healing miracles, listed in Matthew 8, occur prior to the Sermon on the mount, vis-à-vis the healing of the leper (Matthew 8:1-4) and the healing of Peter’s mother-in-law (Matthew 8:14-15). Jesus’ healing of the centurion’s beloved servant was done after Jesus’ discourse on the mount.

We are told in the text that Jesus touched Peter’s mother-in-law’s hand (Matthew 8:15). Mark puts it: “He came and took her by the hand, and lifted her up…” (Mark 1:31). Immediately, she arose from the bed and served them, showing that the miracle was immediate and complete. In the case of natural cures of fever, the body gradually regains its strength, but this wasn’t so with Jesus’ miracles. The woman was completely and immediately cured.

Thus, we have come to see, that, just as it was so, when Jesus healed the leper, he did it by touching, which suggests that Jesus’ power was communicable, similar to the holiness of the Tabernacle, the Table of Shewbread and the Altar of Burnt Offering was communicable in that whatever touched them were made holy (cp. Exodus 29:37; 30:26-29). Whatever Jesus physically touched was made whole, clean and perfectly healthy in every way. So, the leper was healed, immediately, vis-à-vis all that pertained to his leprosy was gone in an instant. Thus, it was also true of Peter’s mother-in-law. She was immediately healed, and all her former strength returned in that very moment, and she was able to arise from her deathbed and serve Jesus and his disciples.