Plastering the Bruises (Mark 1:29-39)

In our previous presentation concerning the possessed man in the Capernaum assembly hall, we discussed how the origin of unclean spirits both embodied and disembodied is tied to the fallen angels throughout Scripture, whose fornication is described in Genesis and 1 Enoch. This must be true, because the other races are rejected based on their sperma and genos, and if God is the author of creation, then the only way for them to have an origin apart from Him is to be a corruption of that which He created. Their corrupt parentage is most explicitly uncovered in the Gospel and the Revelation of Yahshua Christ, who came to reveal the things kept hidden from the foundation of Society, and also in the epistles of His apostles, most notably Jude and 2 Peter.

Bastards are unclean vessels, as Scripture informs us, and to be unclean in this sense is a matter of genetics and not of deeds (which would be to be profane): therefore, similarly, bastardization can be the only source of unclean spirits in a world where everything Yahweh made is good. The pragmatic truth which this conveys is that the bastard races are embodied demons, and that demons are disembodied bastards. The origin of unclean spirits should not be perplexing to those who understand that the mystery of iniquity is rooted in racial corruption. 

Understanding that disembodied and embodied unclean spirits are tied in substance and origin, we can note where Christ said to His apostles in reference to the Edomite devil Judas, “And you are clean, but not all!” (John 13:10). And just as the disembodied demon in Capernaum shuddered and cried out to Christ, “What is there with us and with You, Yahshua the Nazarene?” (Mark 1:24), so did Yahshua Christ much later say concerning the collective body of the descendants of Cain among whom the Edomite High Priests belonged: “The ruler of Society comes, and he does not have anything in Me!” (John 14:30).

Of course, the unclean races cannot be “cleansed” in the way that the clean things which were simply made profane are, for it is an issue of corrupt origin. As Yahweh said concerning the racemixing fornication which degenerated much of the noble vine of Judah into a strange and degenerate plant in the days shortly preceding the Babylonian deportations: “For though thou wash thee with nitre, and take thee much soap, yet thine iniquity is marked before me.” (Jeremiah 2:22) Abominable genetic corruptions are living violations of Yahweh’s law of kind after kind, and there is no way for one to repent from their existence, except to receive destruction from the hand of God, which will certainly happen at the appointed time. Job expressed it simply where he said: “Who can bring a clean out of an unclean? Not one.” (Job 14:4)

The writings indicate that the axe is already laid to the root of the family tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, which is because the fate of the fallen angels and their descendants in the Lake of Fire is certain, and not a single one of the branches of their family tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil will be left remaining. The promised cleansing of the earth is a comforting anchor. The goat nations are unforgivable blasphemies against the Holy Spirit with a cursed origin, and Christ will say to the accursed seed in the Coming Day, “Go from Me, accursed, into the eternal fire which has been prepared for the False Accuser and his messengers!” (Matthew 25:41, cf. Wisdom 3:12, 12:11, 2 Peter 2:14) 

The goat nations are judged along with their patriarchs because origin is destiny, and with their uprooting the garden of God is rooted of its bastard weeds, and the wheat first planted with Adam are left alone to bask in the glory of their Father. In Christ is the entire family Tree of Life made alive, but in the Revelation the other family tree is absent in the Kingdom of God, as if it never existed (1 Corinthians 15:22, Revelation 22:2, Obadiah 1:16). In this the entire seedline of the serpent fallen angels is destroyed and its head crushed in the Second Coming of Christ, who said concerning the racial thorns among the party of the Pharisees, "Every plant which My heavenly Father has not planted shall be uprooted!” (Matthew 15:13) There will be no exceptions, as it is not a judgement of individuals, but of seeds. As Solomon said before Him, being inspired by His Spirit, bastard seedlings have “no hope, nor consolation in the day of decision. For grievous are the ends of an unrighteous race.” (Wisdom 3:18-19)

Their ends are grievous, but there is hope in the end of the children of Israel and the rest of Adam with them. A comfort to the children of Israel and a perturbation to His enemies: that was the principal theme of our previous presentation on Mark, and it is the testimony of the writings in their entire balance. Now as we continue with the gospel, we will see Christ bringing even more encouragement to the denizens of Capernaum, the village of comfort, with many marvels, miracles which show that He was sent by the Father, for as He said, “the works which the Father gave to Me in order that I shall complete them, those same works which I should do testify concerning Me, that the Father sent Me!” (John 5:36, also John 10:25, et al)

1:29 And immediately coming out from the assembly hall they went into the house of Simon and Andreas with Iakobos and Iohannes. 30 And the mother-in-law of Simon was laid down, being with fever, and right away they speak to Him about her. 31 And having gone forth, grasping her hand He raised her, and the fever left her, and she served them.

So far in the opening chapter of Mark we have only seen a small handful of details peculiar to the gospel, but now we are going to begin seeing entire accounts which are more richly descriptive. The healing of Peter’s mother-in-law is the first of these, and while it is recorded in all three synoptic gospels, the passage and its accompanying circumstances are longest and most descriptive in Mark, and such a thing is fitting, since this is Peter’s gospel, and we should not be surprised to see such a personal and important memory from his life recounted with vivid detail.

1:29 And immediately coming out from the assembly hall they went into the house of Simon and Andreas with Iakobos and Iohannes.

The way this account is presented in all three synoptic gospels strongly suggests that the house of Peter and Andrew is in Capernaum, even though John wrote that Bethsaida was “the city of Andreas and Petros” (John 1:44). It is not a discrepancy. According to modern estimates, these two towns were only a few miles distant from one another, and common sense informs us that men can move, that sometimes where you live is not where you work, that families can have many homes between all their relatives, and more.  

We have already discussed how Capernaum appears to have been a sort of base for the ministry of Christ, and the house of Peter and Andrew might have been a smaller base within that larger center, a familiar constant in a journey which was continuously in motion. If Yahshua settled in Capernaum, then the house of Peter and Andrew would have been a sensible place for Him to regularly sleep and eat, since these two apostles were among the very first of His followers. 

The Gospel subtly suggests that Christ and His students spent much time in the house of Peter and Andrew. For instance, Matthew records that while in Capernaum, Peter was asked by the collectors if Yahshua pays the tax, whom the apostle writes was “in the house”. The context suggests that the house is Peter’s, since he is the one being approached in town (Matthew 17:24-27). Then at Mark 9:33, we see it written “And they came into Kapharnaoum. And being in the house He questioned them: "Why did you dispute in the road?" Notice that both Matthew and Mark refer to a house in Capernaum with the definite article, writing “the house”, and what other house could this be? Even Luke, writing of Yahshua entering Capernaum, references “the house” (Luke 7:6).

There is no other house so regularly mentioned in the Gospel as this one in Capernaum, the very city which Matthew tells us that Yahshua settled in, and because Peter and Andrew had a home there, a home which we know Yahshua spent time in, then it is for this reason the most logical candidate for the regularly reoccuring "the house". Even Christ instructed the apostles to let their peace rest upon the homes which accepted them (Matthew 10:12-13, Luke 10:5-7). There are other times where the house of Peter and Andrew is possibly mentioned, some more arguable than others, such as Mark 2:1 and 3:20. [Note: I went on to discuss this in the commentary titled, Home is Where the Son of Man Is]

Speaking of a house in Capernaum, we actually have an idea of what the homes looked like, because around the (probable) black basalt foundation of the 1st century assembly hall located in what is believed to be Capernaum, there are excavations of contemporary houses built with the same local material. These modest homes were built in rows and arranged around shared courtyards, and they provide us a glimpse of domestic life, with grinding stones and fishing tools demonstrating a humble and hardworking people. They likely had roofs made of wooden beams covered with ceramic tiles and thatch, just as we read in Luke where he writes concerning the paralytic in Capernaum, “And not finding how they could bring him in because of the crowd, going up upon the roof through the ceramic tiles they lowered him with the cot into the midst before Yahshua.” (Luke 5:19)  Later in Mark we will read, "they had taken off the roof where He was, and digging through lowered the cot upon which the paralytic laid." (Mark 2:4) And as for how they would have gotten the paralytic onto the roof, it was not uncommon at this time for houses to have external staircases leading to their roofs. 

This is all very interesting and would normally be enough for our purposes here, but there is more:

There are many ancient tourist traps in Judaea, relics of a bygone era when Christian pilgrims desired set places to worship or sightsee the locations of the Gospel, even if they were not confident that the chosen landmark was actually accurate. As time passed, these ancient pilgrimage sites would be taken for granted simply on account of their age, and among them is an ancient designation of Peter and Andrew’s house in Capernaum, which the 4th century Iberian pilgrim Egeria allegedly mentioned in a letter to her lady friends, and it was also later mentioned by the Piacenza Pilgrim, an anonymous 6th century traveler from Italy.

If a 12th century quotation of a lost portion of her letter is to be trusted, then she allegedly wrote the following: "In Capernaum, the house of the prince of the apostles [Peter] has been transformed into a church, with its original walls still standing.” In the writing of the 6th century pilgrim, he wrote “Then we came to Capernaum, and the house of blessed Peter, which is now a basilica.” (The Piacenza Pilgrim, 7, translated by Andrew S. Jacobs - while the translator may be jewish, the translation itself is not very important)

There is only one surviving manuscript of Egeria’s letter, so it is impossible to tell if the proto-catholic delusions in the quotation attributed to her are from Egeria herself, from the relatively untrustworthy 12th century writer “Peter the Deacon” who provided this alleged quotation, or from the hand of another scribe.

While things like these are rarely worth mentioning, the landmark is slightly more credible than average. Both pilgrims describe a church or basilica in Capernaum attested to be built from the remains of the home of Peter and Andrew, and today, eighty four feet south of the site of the Capernaum assembly hall, lies the ruins of an octagonal building, a typical shape in which ancient basilicas would have been built. The excavation of an apse and baptistry in 1968 confirmed all suspicions.

Egeria allegedly wrote that the original walls were still standing in her day, and archaeologists have allegedly dated the central hall, which was originally part of the house that the basilica was built upon, to around 63 BC (the entirety of the house has apparently not been excavated). The walls of the home were built with the same plentiful black basalt of the region, they were modest, not plastered, and only the stones of the doors and jambs were pressed. The floor was paved with the same basalt stones and with gaps in-between.

To give a quick purview of its design: the original house was organized around two interior courtyards, and the artist’s rendition attached here is an attempt to show how this would have looked. The courtyard was probably a work area for the home’s family, and a round oven for cooking was found in the southwest corner of the courtyard. This design was apparently common during the Roman period, and was the theme throughout Capernaum, and so there is nothing remarkable about the home. But sometime around the middle of the 1st century, the purposes of the house changed. If the proposed dating is correct, then perhaps twenty or so years after the crucifixion of Christ, the floor, walls and ceilings of the home’s single large room were plastered, at a time when the only rooms which were plastered in such austere homes were the ones where large gatherings took place. And just as the home was repurposed, so did there come a change in pottery: the former vessels were those of domestic life, cooking pots, juglets, bowls, pitchers, some storage jars, but after the plastering, there were only storage jars and a few oil lamps. This was no longer a home in which a family cooked and lived, but a place in which people assembled.

There are over a hundred graffiti etched on the plastered walls indicating that the house was repurposed into a Christian gathering place. According to the reckoning at biblicalarchaeology.org, there are 111 Greek inscriptions (the lingua franca of the time), 9 Aramaic, 6 or perhaps as many as 9 Syriac [in the Estrangelo alphabet], 2 Latin, and at least 1 Hebrew inscription. There are also various forms of crosses, a boat, and possibly a monogram composed from the name of Christ. According to the Franciscan excavators, the name of Peter appears at least twice, but that is regarded as highly skeptical by many today. I do not have the resources to provide any informed opinion, but the publicly available photographs are apparently questionable.

None of this is particularly remarkable, and it is the dating alone which is intriguing. If it is correct, then for one reason or another - early Christians repurposed this humble house roughly twenty years after the crucifixion of Christ, at a time when Peter (and quite possibly Andrew) were still alive. We could imagine that they would have repurposed the correct house - as the locals would still be alive to remember its former inhabitants. But if the dating is off, then the novelty quickly fades. So then, are the archaeologists correct in their estimation? Perhaps. It is impossible to say, and for that reason we will end this with sobriety: it may only be the ruins of an ancient tourist trap. (The veracity is of little value for us apart from curiosity, it is unfortunate that these pilgrimage sites have been used for idolatry, worshiping the places where the Creator tread instead of the Creator Himself.)

As for its relevance concerning our examination of this account in Mark, if the excavated site is the home of Peter and Andrew, then being 84 feet south of the assembly hall it was only a thirty second walk away, and so this might be one of the few places in Mark's gospel where we can read his use of the word immediately in a more literal sense: “And immediately coming out from the assembly hall they went into the house of Simon and Andreas”.

There are two parts of the verse which are unique to Mark. The first is a personal detail which Peter here provides but that the other writers did not mention: which is that the house was also that of his brother Andrew, and of course we have seen how many of the houses excavated in Capernaum had several compartments built around a central courtyard, allowing extended families to live together. Andrew was the younger brother of Peter (John 1:41), and while we're not sure how much younger, the fact he was with John the son Zebedee at the beginning of Yahshua's ministry implies that he was very young (John 1:35, John 1:40)

Speaking of the sons of Zebedee, that brings us to another point. Mark mentions that the sons of Zebedee were present for this miracle, but that of course does not preclude the presence of other students. Notice that Mark writes here that "they" entered into the assembly hall, implying that there are more present than the five men who are explicitly mentioned. 

It is peculiar that the sons of Zebedee are mentioned, which we would assume was done in order to keep a flowing narrative with their calling by the sea of Galilee recorded only a few verses earlier. In the gospel of Matthew, who orders his gospel more thematically than chronologically, the calling of the sons of Zebedee by the sea of Galilee and the healing of Peter's mother-in-law are chapters apart (Matthew 4:21-22, Matthew 8:14-15), and Luke, who was not an eyewitness as Peter was, actually places this miracle before his record of the calling by the sea of Galilee. 

The sons of Zebedee being brought up here at Mark 1:29 may also be another example of the chiastic structure prevalent in this oral gospel, as it helps bookend the previous account.

(While later in the gospel we see three moments where Yahshua only allowed Peter and the sons of Zebedee to come with Him, namely when He healed Jahirus’ twelve year old daughter (Mark 5:37), during the Transfiguration on the Mount (Mark 9:2), and His suffering in Gethesmane (Mark 14:33), it is not written here in Mark that the sons of Zebedee were brought into the house privately. In fact, the use of the word they conveys otherwise, and after all, the apostles ostensibly spent much time in this home anyways!)

While the excavated house in Capernaum which we discussed is quite possibly not the home of Peter and Andrew, it is still indistinguishable from the rest of the village’s ancient homes, and for that reason we can form a more vivid picture in our minds of the miracle which is about to unfold:

1:30 And the mother-in-law of Simon was laid down, being with fever, and right away they speak to Him about her.

Peter, who was likely one of the oldest if not the oldest among the apostles, is the only one recorded in the Gospel as having had a wife. 

Around twenty-six years later, we see Paul of Tarsus mentioning the other apostles as having wives as well, in his first surviving epistle to the Corinthians, and he mentions Peter by name, whom he calls Kephas (the Aramaic / Hebrew equivalent to Petros):

1 Corinthians 9:5 Do we not have license to always have with us a kinswoman: a wife, as also the other ambassadors, and the brethren of the Prince [James and Jude], and Kephas?

Furthermore, the “elect woman” whom Peter mentions in the closing of his first surviving epistle is likely his wife, since the ostensibly orphaned assemblies of Paul of Tarsus whom he was writing to did not know him intimately, and the ambiguous language cannot be interpreted in any other way with the information we have. If he was speaking of anyone else, we would expect Peter to have named them.

1 Peter 5:13 The elect woman in Babylon and Markos my son [John Mark - the author of this gospel] greet you.

If the “elect woman” was Peter's wife, then we see that she was with him in Babylon, among the circumcised there, ostensibly thirty years or more after the events described here in Mark, unless Peter's wife died and he remarried. This dating is based on the presumption that Peter was writing to the orphaned assemblies of Paul of Tarsus, who was executed at Rome in 63 AD. This event in the gospel of Mark, can be estimated to have happened around 29-30 AD.

(We can add that Peter might not have been the only apostle who had a wife during the ministry of Christ. This is subtle, but if we read the 109th Psalm which Peter quotes at Acts 1:20 in reference to its prophecy of Judas, we can see that the Edomite devil might have also had a wife [Psalm 109:9]. If that detail of the prophecy is literal, then perhaps Peter and Judas were among the oldest of the original twelve apostles.)

Judging from our proposed dating of John the Baptist's arrest, which we presented in our commentary, Proclaiming the Message, this miraclous healing of Peter's mother-in-law likely transpired over a year into Yahshua’s ministry, and because He settled in Capernaum, we should not expect this to be the first time that Yahshua entered the house of Peter and Andrew, especially when the Gospel appears to indicate that He and His students spent time here often, and we should not expect it was the first time that He met Peter's mother-in-law either. 

While it is not clear in the text if Peter’s mother-in-law was a permanent resident of the house or if she was only visiting, it is explicit on the fact that she was in severe condition. Fevers could be death sentences in ancient times, often being caused by serious ailments and infections such as typhoid or pneumonia. We can see how close to death a fever may bring a man in the Gospel of John, where the son of a certain officer of the king was sick with fever:

John 4:46-52 Then He went again to Kana of Galilaia, where He had made the water wine. And there was a certain officer of the king whose son in Kapharnaoum was sick. He hearing that Yahshua had come from Judaea into Galilaia had gone after Him and requested that He would come down and heal his son, for he was about to die. Therefore Yahshua said to him: "Unless you could see signs and wonders, you shall not believe!" The officer of the king says to Him: "Master, You must come down, before my child dies!" Yahshua says to him: "You go, your son lives!" The man trusted in the word which Yahshua spoke to him and he went. And already going down his servants met with him saying that his child lives. Therefore he inquired about the hour from them, in which he had gotten better. So they said to him that "Yesterday at the seventh hour the fever had left him".

It is interesting how both these accounts of fevers occurred in Capernaum - perhaps there was an Edomite jew poisoning the well? We jest, but such crimes are to be expected of jews throughout history. Even Josephus wrote that he became feverish in Capernaum, though the circumstances were different, as he was injured after falling off his horse. (Josephus' Life, 72)

Regardless of what caused these two fevers, their purposes can be ascertained through the fact that they resulted in the honor of Yahweh, and the magnification of Himself in the form of Yahshua Christ. As Yahshua said concerning His friend Lazarus, "This sickness is not to result in death, but is for the honor of Yahweh, in order that the Son of Yahweh is magnified on account of it!" (John 11:4)

The chronology is often difficult, but John the Baptist was not yet arrested when Yahshua healed the officer’s son in Capernaum, which the apostle John wrote was “the second sign Yahshua made having come from Judaea into Galilaia” (John 4:54) The first sign was the turning of the water into wine at the wedding supper in Kana. The apostle John's chronological note places the healing of the officer’s son in John 4:54 before Mark 1:14, and therefore before the healing of Peter’s mother-in-law here also. 

The things which the apostles had seen and knew of Christ by this point in His ministry, and His healing of the officer's son, were enough for them to “right away” “speak to Him about her”, as it says here in Mark, for they knew firsthand that “the power of the Prince was in Him to heal” (Luke 5:17).

1:31 And having gone forth, grasping her hand He raised her, and the fever left her, and she served them.

Comfort had filled the house of Peter and Andrew! Nothing is impossible for Yahweh God. No matter how severe any ailment may be, there is always hope in Him.

The account is pragmatic, but if we want to search for a spiritual type, then there may a few aspects of it which can be compounded:

To begin with, we can interpret the mother of Peter here as a type for the nation, who is the collective “mother” of the children of Israel. This we read in Hosea, where Yahweh says “Plead with your mother, plead: for she is not my wife, neither am I her husband” (Hosea 2:2); and then in light of that announcement, Yahweh later said in Isaiah, “Where is the bill of your mother's divorcement, whom I have put away?” (Isaiah 50:1) The following chapter of Isaiah fittingly has a promise of comfort for the children of Israel.  

The mother is often a metaphor for the nation of the children of Israel, and the nation was subject to curses for their disobedience, ever since the time they were married to God at Sinai, and among these prescribed curses were fevers:

Deuteronomy 28:22 The LORD shall smite thee with a consumption, and with a fever [πυρετῷ in the LXX - the same word which is found here at Mark], and with an inflammation, and with an extreme burning, […]

Leviticus 26:16 I also will do this unto you; I will even appoint over you terror, consumption, and the burning ague, that shall consume the eyes, and cause sorrow of heart […]

These were literal curses which would be scourged upon the individuals among the children of Israel as a punishment for their sins and also for the sins of the nation. But in the prophets, sicknesses and ailments were often used as metaphors to describe the wounded and forlorn state of the people when they were disobedient and astray from God. An example of this is in the opening chapter of Isaiah:

Isaiah 1:5-6 Why should ye be stricken any more? ye will revolt more and more: the whole head is sick, and the whole heart faint. From the sole of the foot even unto the head there is no soundness in it; but wounds, and bruises, and putrifying sores: they have not been closed, neither bound up, neither mollified with ointment. 

It is evident then that the children of Israel were being stricken as punishment for their sin, as according to the curses of disobedience, and as a result of their wrongdoing they were sick from the head (the leaders of the nation) to the feet (the lowest of the nation). Paul of Tarsus later used this same metaphor of the body of the nation of Israel in his epistles, most notably at 1 Corinthians 12:12-27.

Because sickness is a metaphor for the children of Israel in a state of sin, David wrote in the Psalms:

Psalm 38:1-8 A Psalm of David, to bring to remembrance. O LORD, rebuke me not in thy wrath: neither chasten me in thy hot displeasure. For thine arrows stick fast in me, and thy hand presseth me sore. There is no soundness in my flesh because of thine anger; neither is there any rest in my bones because of my sin. For mine iniquities are gone over mine head: as an heavy burden they are too heavy for me. My wounds stink and are corrupt because of my foolishness. I am troubled; I am bowed down greatly; I go mourning all the day long.  For my loins are filled with a loathsome disease: and there is no soundness in my flesh. I am feeble and sore broken: I have roared by reason of the disquietness of my heart. 

Let us observe these symbols in this account of Mark: the mother (Israel) in the house (the house of Israel) is sick with a fever, one of the curses of disobedience (not that she herself was disobedient, but we can observe in her a type). Her healing then may be symbolic of the wider healing for the mother, the nation of the children of Israel, for as it is written in the prophets:

Jeremiah 30:12-13 For thus saith the LORD, Thy bruise is incurable, and thy wound is grievous. [Isaiah 1:6] There is none to plead thy cause, that thou mayest be bound up: thou hast no healing medicines. […] 17 For I will restore health unto thee, and I will heal thee of thy wounds, saith the LORD; because they called thee an Outcast, [the mother - see Isaiah 54:6 for example] saying, This is Zion [the mother - see Isaiah 1:26 of the LXX for example], whom no man seeketh after. 

We should also heed attention to how this healing of Peter's mother-in-law had taken place in Capernaum, the village of comfort:

Isaiah 57:17-18 For the iniquity of his covetousness was I wroth, and smote him: I hid me, and was wroth, and he went on frowardly in the way of his heart. I have seen his ways, and will heal him: I will lead him also, and restore comforts unto him and to his mourners. 

We can therefore interpret the healing of Peter’s mother-in-law as a spiritual type for the healing of the wounds and ulcers of Israel’s wrongdoing, which were wiped away at the cross, when Christ released the wife of Israel from the penalties of the law and accomplished for them a lasting propitiation for their errors. As Daniel was told, the Messiah was to make “an end of sins” (Daniel 9:24), and Yahweh Himself said in several places that He would cleanse the children of Israel “from all their iniquity” (Jeremiah 33:8) 

Therefore David prophetically wrote in the 103rd Psalm: “Bless the LORD, O my soul, and forget not all his benefits: Who forgiveth all thine iniquities; who healeth all thy diseases” (Psalm 103:2-3) Notice how the diseases in that passage act as a Hebrew parallelism for the iniquities. 

David then wrote later in the Psalm, “As far as the east is from the west, so far hath he removed our transgressions from us” (Psalm 103:12). This would represent how Christ healed the entirety of the house of Israel, with each of its lost sheep being cleansed from east to west, and this is what the mother-in-law of Peter being sick in the house can be interpreted as representative of also. Indeed, by His stripes the children of Israel were healed, as it was prophesied of in Isaiah, and as Peter quoted in his first surviving epistle (Isaiah 53:5, 1 Peter 2:24).

We can observe how after being healed, the mother-in-law of Peter is raised, and then serves the house (if she was a regular or permanent resident of the house then perhaps she served Christ and His students often). The word for raised is ἐγείρω (#G1453) and literally means to be lifted up, but it is often implicitly used in reference to resurrection, such as at Matthew 28:7, Mark 14:28, 16:6, Luke 24:6, 24:39, John 21:14, and other places. The mother-in-law of Peter was not dead, but in the use of the word ἐγείρω we can witness another type.

Perhaps we can compound the sequence of healing and then raising in Mark with the near vision of the following prophecy in Hosea, where the children of Israel are first healed, their wounds binded up (Isaiah 30:26), and then on the third day they are risen to live in His sight.

Hosea 6:1-2 Come, and let us return unto the LORD: for he hath torn, and he will heal us; he hath smitten, and he will bind us up. After two days will he revive us: in the third day he will raise us up, and we shall live in his sight.

In consideration of these three days spoken of in Hosea, we can remember that a day in prophecy is often a type for a year (Numbers 14:34). For instance, in the prophecy of Daniel’s 70 weeks, the Messiah confirms the covenant for half a week, after which He is cut off (but not for Himself), and renders the Levitical rituals mute. The midst of a prophetic week of seven years would be three and a half years, and that is the precise length of Christ’s ministry, as it can be discerned by comparing the feasts in John to the dating of Christ’s immersion in Luke. 

With that in mind, perhaps the near vision of the three days in Hosea 6:1-2 is a reference to the ministry of Christ, which revived Israel for two years and then raised them up in the third, when His crucifixion guaranteed their mutual attainment to the resurrection. It is a healing and then a raising - just like Peter’s mother-in-law here.

Grasping Peter’s mother-in-law’s hand is also significant, because we know that Yahshua was able to heal the officer’s son from a fever with a word (John 4:50). Taking her hand was not necessary, because Yahshua does not need to perform any action to heal. Why did it happen then and what does it represent? 

In the most pragmatic sense, the grasping of the woman’s hand may represent affection and familiarity between the two, though the Prince also grasped the hand of Jahirus’ twelve year old daughter, whom He ostensibly did not know (but she was a child and perhaps He was intentionally being tender).

But again, perhaps the actions are also symbolic of something greater, because the only two instances of Christ grasping the hand of another and then healing or raising them both involve females (Mark 1:31, Mark 5:41). It is Yahshua Christ who raises the woman of Israel up with His dead body (Isaiah 26:19). It is His “hand” which does it. As He said to Martha, "I am the Resurrection and the Life” (John 11:25), and then also to the Judaeans, “The hour comes in which all those in the tombs shall hear His voice, and they shall go forth: those having done good things to a resurrection of life, but those having practiced wicked things to a resurrection of judgment." (John 5:28-29)

Indeed, Yahshua is Yahweh in the flesh, and He grasped the hand of the mother-in-law of Peter and helped her, just as it was promised to the nation of Israel, who is our mother:

Isaiah 41:13-14 For I the LORD thy God will hold thy right hand, saying unto thee, Fear not; I will help thee. Fear not, thou worm Jacob, and ye men of Israel; I will help thee, saith the LORD, and thy redeemer, the Holy One of Israel. 

Indeed that prophecy of Isaiah has a much wider and ultimate fulfillment in the Wedding Supper of the Lamb, which is the future war against God’s enemies after the Second Coming, but a near vision still applies, for Yahshua redeemed Israel from the wounds of their iniquities as much as He will in the future redeem them from their enemies. 

Finally, after being raised by Christ (most literally, again, she was not dead) the mother-in-law of Peter serves those in the house. In Matthew we read that she also served Yahshua Himself, where the apostle wrote that “she arose and served Him.” (Matthew 8:15) Of course, whenever we serve our brethren, we also serve Christ in doing so, and so perhaps the difference in focus between Matthew and Mark is an elucidating reminder of that fact! As Christ says to the sheep nations, "Truly I say to you, for whomever of the least of My brethren have you done one of these things, you have done them for Me!" (Matthew 25:40)

Arising and serving the house…indeed, the Kingdom of Yahweh is not a place, but the obedient state of the house of the children of Israel, and therefore the Kingdom is manifest when the children of Israel serve the house of Israel by serving one another, and ultimately in doing so they serve God.

Romans 14:18-19 He who in this is serving the Anointed is acceptable to Yahweh, and esteemed by men. So then, we should pursue those things of peace, and those things for the building of one another.

We should always seek to put ourselves last for the sake of our brethren. Christ even illustrated the idea of His people serving Him with a parable of servants preparing a dinner for their Master after having already worked in the field, rhetorically explaining how those who do not seek out more in unfeigned love are as much as useless, similar to the wicked and timid slave who buried his talent:

Luke 17:7-10 "Who from among you having a servant plowing or tending sheep who coming in from the field, says to him 'Immediately, coming forth you recline!' Rather would you not say to him 'Prepare something that I may have dinner, and girding yourself serve me while I eat and I drink, and after these things you shall eat and drink'? Does he not have thanks for the servant that he do the things appointed? Thusly also you, when you have done all the things appointed to you, say that 'We are useless servants, who were obliged to do what we have done'?"

The children of Israel in the future will serve Christ in a most direct sense in the Resurrection, for we read in the Revelation:

Revelation 22:3 And there shall no longer be any curse [curses of disobedience - such as fever]. And the throne of Yahweh and of the Lamb shall be in her, and His servants [Isaiah 44:1-2, Isaiah 45:4, et al] shall serve Him and shall see His face, and His Name is upon their foreheads.

So they are risen and then serve. With these spiritual types hopefully thoroughly explored, there is one last thing which should be mentioned, which is that having healed Peter’s mother-in-law is a subtle nod to the fact that Yahshua is Yahweh God, for as He said in the song of Moses, “See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god with me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal: neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand” (Deuteronomy 32:29 - cf. to what we read in Hosea 6:1-2). 

Of course, Yahweh humbly coming to earth as an element of His own creation as the Son of Man, “taking a bondman’s form” (Philippians 2:7), the miracles simultaneously testify that He is approved by the Almighty God, and Christ in His perfection repeated that fact as an example to men. 

In Acts we read that Paul of Tarsus was shipwrecked on Malta while on route to Rome, and there through Christ he was able to heal the father of Poplios from a fever (Acts 28:8). Indeed, Paul was approved of by Yahweh (1 Thessalonians 2:4), and such approval was accompanied with signs and works and wonders of power (Hebrews 2:4 - see Acts 19:11, 2 Corinthians 12:12, et al), because as Christ said in reference to the early rain of the Holy Spirit: “he believing in Me the works which I do he also shall do” (John 14:12) We are currently in a drought, but a latter rain is promised for the children of Israel, and like the early rain, we should expect that it will pour upon those who separate themselves from wrongdoing (Acts 5:32). 

Just as the mother-in-law rose and served the house, so does the Prince Himself proceed to mercifully serve the lost sheep of the house of Israel:

1:32 And upon its becoming late, when the sun sank, they brought to Him all those having maladies and those being possessed by demons. 33 And the whole city was gathering together by the door. 34 And He healed many being ill with various diseases, and He cast out many demons, yet He did not allow the demons to speak, because they knew Him to be the Christ.

This is also recorded at Matthew 8:16-17 and Luke 4:40-41; each account providing different details and perspectives.

1:32 And upon its becoming late, when the sun sank, they brought to Him all those having maladies and those being possessed by demons.

We should presume that the people of Capernaum had entered the assembly hall for the reading of the law and prophets in the morning (Mark 1:21), and here, it is possibly now the end of that same day, which is how the account reads in both Mark and Luke (Matthew does not record the healing of the possessed man in Capernaum). If this is true, then it would mean that Yahshua had healed all of these people on a Sabbath day, and later in His ministry some of His enemies in Capernaum were watching Him closely on account of His reputation for doing such things (Mark 3:2). Mercy is the weightier matter of the law, and Christ was just in His actions.

What an incredible day for Peter, to have his mother-in-law healed and now all of these people crowding into his home! No wonder the account in the gospel of Mark is so much more richly detailed.

The language here where it reads “and upon its becoming late, when the sun sank” is perhaps redundant, but it is the exact type of pleonasm which we would expect to see in this evocative oral gospel. Depending on the time of the year, the sunset may have been anywhere from 4:45pm to 7:55pm.

No doubt the people would have been eager to bring those who were possessed by demons after hearing of what happened in the assembly hall, and we can see that there was much excitement, so as to have the whole city crowding by the door:

1:33 And the whole city was gathering together by the door.

This clause is unique to Mark.

We are still in the house of Peter and Andrew at the setting of the sun, and we could conjecture that Peter’s mother-in-law had spent the evening or late afternoon serving dinner, as the Greek word διακονέω certainly has that meaning, and it is certainly one of many ways in which one can serve or minister, an example is in John’s gospel where he wrote: “Therefore they made a dinner for Him there, and Martha served” (John 12:2). Having been served by Peter’s mother-in-law is a probable reason as to why Christ and His students are still in the house late in the day, and now with the entire city of Capernaum gathering by the door, we are seeing the results of the report which spread after the healing of the possessed man in the Capernaum (Mark 1:28). 

While Yahshua was already a good length of time into His ministry, the healing of the possessed man might have been His first public miracle in Capernaum, even though He settled there, the previous healing of the officer’s son recorded in John 4 was much more reserved). As a digression, when we read the Gospel more closely, it can appear from the scarce information which we have that the miracles of the Christ became more prevalent as His Ministry was coming closer to its end, and if that is the case, then it could have been a necessity to weave the circumstances which led to His willing death at the appointed hour.

Now, if the miracle in the assembly hall of Capernaum was Yahshua’s first public deed in this town in which He settled, then we can understand their fervent excitement. When the healing of the blind man at the pool of Bethzatha (Bethesda) was the only miracle which Yahshua publicly performed in Jerusalem, He said to the people "I have done one deed and you all marvel.” - and marvel they did - for they said “When the Christ comes shall He do greater signs than those which this man has done?" (John 7:21, 7:31)

Lastly, it is a fun but important observation that the city is gathering by the door, because they are knocking if you will, and we see that the Prince heals them, even if it late in the day. This brings to mind the parable which Christ provided as an example in His teaching of a certain vital lesson:

Luke 11:5-13 Then He said to them "Which of you has a friend and goes to him in the middle of the night and says to him 'Friend, lend to me three loaves, since my friend has arrived from a journey to me, and I have nothing which I may offer him.' And he inside replying says 'Do not cause me trouble! Already the door is bolted and my children are with me in the bed. I am not able rising to provide for you.' I say to you, even if he does not arise to give to him on account of being his friend, then on account of his impudence arising he will give to him as much as he may need. And I say to you: Ask and it shall be given to you; seek and you shall find; knock and it shall be opened for you. For all who are asking shall receive and he who is seeking shall find and to him knocking it shall be opened. Now from which father among you should a son request a fish, and instead of a fish would give to him a serpent? Or then should he request an egg, would give to him a scorpion? Therefore if you being base know to give good gifts to your children, how much more shall the Father who is from heaven give the Holy Spirit to those asking Him?

And what a beautiful gift it is to take His children’s weaknesses and to bear their diseases!

1:34 And He healed many being ill with various diseases, and He cast out many demons, yet He did not allow the demons to speak, because they knew Him to be the Christ.

Matthew understood that this fulfilled the word of the prophet Isaiah, where he quoted from its 53rd chapter in his record of the account:

Matthew 8:16-17 Then upon its getting late they brought to Him many who were possessed by demons, and He cast out the spirits with a word and healed all those having maladies, that the word would be fulfilled which through the prophet Isaiah says: "He has taken our weaknesses and bears our diseases." (Isaiah 53:4)

It may be late, but Christ labors for the sake of His people, for He said that "My Father labors until now, and I labor!" (John 5:16-17) Christ had said those words in response to His performing of works during the Sabbath, and it is ostensibly still the Sabbath day here in Mark (v.21).

This is the very definition of self-sacrifice, and it is indeed the meaning of "hating your life" (John 12:25), which is not a call for men to be miserable, but to put their supposed needs and progress in this world last so that they can put their kinsmen first, knowing that the Father will provide for them in turn. When all men live this way, then the Kingdom of Yahweh becomes manifest upon the earth.

We must love our kindred as Christ has loved us, and sometimes rest and even food has to be put aside, so that we can look after our brethren. We are indeed our brother’s keepers. When Christ was teaching the Samaritan woman by the well, who was an Israelite, presumably of Ephraim, a descendant of Jacob, the apostles said “Has anyone brought for Him to eat?" But then Christ responded in-part “"My food is that I shall do the will of He who has sent Me and that I shall finish His work.” (John 4:33-34)

Performing these great works, taking the weaknesses of His people and bearing their diseases, it all testified that Yahshua was sent by Yahweh. He said as it is recorded in John’s account, “But I have testimony greater than Iohannes, for the works which the Father gave to Me in order that I shall complete them, those same works which I should do testify concerning Me, that the Father sent Me!” (John 5:36)

While these works were a witness that could never be denied, we do see later in the Gospel that the people of Capernaum ultimately did not fully appreciate Yahshua’s comforting presence, as He eventually rebukes the city for their disbelief (Matthew 11:23, Luke 10:15). He then announces that Sodom will fare better in the judgement than they will, for as He Himself also said, “all to whom much is given, much shall be sought from him” (Luke 12:48). Having settled in Capernaum, He had given the people of the city a great opportunity, which they in the end had squandered.

But there were other towns to which Christ would proclaim, and they would be given the opportunity to do well with what they are given:

1:35 And in the morning, having arisen very late at night He went out and departed into a desert place and there He prayed. 36 And Simon and those with him pursued soon after Him, 37 and they found Him and say to Him that "They all seek You!" 38 And He says to them: "We should go elsewhere into the neighboring towns, in order that I shall proclaim there. For this reason have I come." 39 And He went proclaiming in their assembly halls and casting out demons in the whole of Galilaia.

In our previous presentation, we noted how the healing of the possessed man in Capernaum is the only account common to Mark and Luke, but not recorded by Matthew; but that is only the case if this account here is viewed as a separate and broader follow-up to Peter’s mother-in-law's healing. If you reckon this account of Christ rising early in the morning as a distinct account, then it is the second which is shared by Mark and Luke but not included in Matthew.  

Peter singles himself out where he mentions that he and those with him arose to seek after Christ, (just as he singles himself out at the end of the gospel). He is indeed the source of this account, and this is one of those places where his memories leap off the page. It is much more detailed here in Mark than it is in Luke.

1:35 And in the morning, having arisen very late at night He went out and departed into a desert place and there He prayed.

As we have said, we could imagine that Yahshua and His students lodged in Peter and Andrew’s house often, and while the previous day may have been long and tiring, our Prince arises very early in the morning to pray. He goes to a desert (solitary) place, which is important, for He said “But when you would pray, go into your closet and closing your door you shall pray to your Father who is in secret, and your Father who sees shall yield to you in secret." (Matthew 6:6) Elsewhere in the Gospel we see that Yahshua would at diverse times retreat to solitary places for prayer, such as where Luke writes, “And He was retiring into the deserts and praying.” (Luke 5:16)

The fact that Christ had risen up on this morning for the purpose of prayer is only recorded here in Mark, and it can remind us of the Psalms, where David, one of the pre-eminent types for Christ, wrote that “My voice shalt thou hear in the morning, O LORD; in the morning will I direct my prayer unto thee, and will look up” (Psalm 5:3). And then in a psalm which is in its near vision prophetic of the Passion, he wrote “Evening, and morning, and at noon, will I pray, and cry aloud: and he shall hear my voice.” (Psalm 55:17)

Prayer is an integral part of life, but it is not some ritual. Hannah’s prayers were heard and she did not speak a single word out-loud (1 Samuel 1:13-15). Prayers are the deepest desires of our hearts, and thus our thoughts are prayers. Furthermore, even when we cannot articulate or even understand what we need, “the Spirit itself intercedes with inexpressible utterances” (Romans 8:26). Yahweh does not need sound to hear you. He knows your mind and longing and necessities, and this was part of the reason as to why Paul urged men to take captive their thoughts to obedience (2 Corinthians 10:5-6).

It is written in Luke that Christ near the end of His ministry rose early to teach in the temple, where he writes “And all the people arose early for Him, to hear Him in the temple” (Luke 21:38). It is certainly good to rise early in the morning for the benefit of your people, just as Job and the prophets did (Job 1:5, Jeremiah 7:13, Jeremiah 7:25, Jeremiah 11:7, Jeremiah 25:3-4, Jeremiah 26:5, Jeremiah 29:19, Jeremiah 32:33, Jeremiah 35:14-15, Jeremiah 44:4)

Yahshua will shortly speak of how He came to proclaim to His people, but before the Shepherd goes out to seek after more of His lost flock, we first see some of His sheep seeking after Him:

1:36 And Simon and those with him pursued soon after Him, 37 and they found Him and say to Him that "They all seek You!"

These words said here by Peter and those with him are unique to Mark. They are summarized in Luke.

John 10:4 When all of his own go out, he goes before them and the sheep follow him, because they know his voice.

Hosea 3:5 Afterward shall the children of Israel return, and seek the LORD their God, and David their king; and shall fear the LORD and his goodness in the latter days.

The King James translation adds the word men to this verse, which is odd, and can make the clause appear to read as some sort of profound statement, but it is not at all what Peter said: he was ostensibly only referring to how others in the city and perhaps also in the house were searching for Christ, and anxious to know where He had went. This is more clear in the gospel of Luke.

The word which Peter (or Mark) uses is potent in how it helps visualize this account. καταδιώκω appears only here in the New Testament, and most literally means to follow hard upon. Once again, this is the evocative language of an oral gospel, and it shows how anxious Peter “and those with him” were in finding Yahshua, who was resting with them that night but then departed privately for prayer. 

These people with Peter were probably others of Yahshua’s students, as Christ tells them that they should accompany Him as He travels elsewhere:

1:38 And He says to them: "We should go elsewhere into the neighboring towns, in order that I shall proclaim there. For this reason have I come."

When Christ announced His ministry in Nazareth, He was handed the Isaiah scroll, and He found the place where it is written concerning Himself: “The Spirit of Yahweh is upon Me, because He has anointed Me to bring good news to the poor. He has sent Me to proclaim release to the captives, and a restoration of sight to the blind. To send off the broken with release. To proclaim a year acceptable by Yahweh!" (Luke 4:18-19, Isaiah 61:1-2 (LXX) […] and part of Isaiah 58:6)

It was necessary for Christ to proclaim these things unto Zion, and confirm the covenant with many, and spending His time exclusively in Capernaum would not have been appropriate. The Prince would continue to shine His Light elsewhere in Galilee, the land of Zebulun and Naphtali, circuit of the nations (Matthew 4:13-17).

1:39 And He went proclaiming in their assembly halls and casting out demons in the whole of Galilaia.

In Luke, we read that Christ went on to proclaim in Judaea, where he writes “And He was proclaiming in the assembly halls of Judaea” (Luke 4:44). This is not a discrepancy, for Yahshua would have ostensibly gone into Judaea after Galilee, and He would have traveled there often for the feasts alone.

It is hard not to notice chiastic structures and narrative pairing in Mark, and this clause here bookends what we read earlier in the Gospel, where it was written “And after the handing over of Iohannes, Yahshua had gone into Galilaia proclaiming the good message of Yahweh” It also bookends the casting out of the demon in Capernaum, as Yahshua continues on to do similar feats in other Galilean assembly halls. The narrative devices will continue throughout the gospel, and next we will see the healing of a leper and paralytic paired together by theme.

We will examine those accounts in our next presentation on Mark, Yahweh willing.