Jesus Remembered: Christianity in the Making, vol. 1

§15.7 Who Did They Think Jesus Was?
practice is unknown in biblical and post-biblical Judaism, though now attested in
lQapGen 20.28-29, where the exorcism is achieved by prayer and the laying on
of hands. 354 Perhaps, then, a spontaneous gesture of Jesus (of sympathy and personal
rapport?), when confronted with sickness, is recalled here. More to the
point, his success in healing is attributed to it (n. 353). We may deduce further
that the remembrance of this characteristic gesture influenced earliest Christian
practice. 355
More striking are the reports of Jesus using spittle in his healings. In the
case of the deaf-mute, Jesus 'put his fingers into his ears, and he spat and touched
his tongue' (Mark 7.33); and in the case of the blind man at Bethsaida, 'he spat
into his eyes, laid hands on him', and then 'again laid his hands on his eyes'
(8.23, 25). The Fourth Evangelist also records Jesus as spitting on the ground,
making clay of the spittle, and anointing the eyes of a blind man (John 9.6).
These reports easily lend themselves to the classification of 'magic'. 356 But as
Joel Marcus reminds us, spittle was a popular folk remedy in the ancient world
and was highly regarded by professional physicians like Galen. 357 The spittle of
famous personalities was highly prized. 358 And it was also thought to be effective
in Jewish circles. 359 It would be hardly surprising, then, if Jesus used such
means, either because he himself (or those whom he treated) shared the common
belief. The 'magic' may be only in the eye of the beholder. 360
In terms of physical contact the other striking case is the episode of the
'touch'; Mark 10.16/Matt. 19.15). See also epilabomenos, 'took hold of (Mark 8.23; Luke
9.47; 14.4).
354. See, e.g., E. Lohse, cheir, TDNT 9.428, who also notes that the LXX translates
epithesei ten cheira in 2 Kgs. 5.11 (n. 23). Aune notes that in Hellenistic traditions touch as a
healing rite is only rarely used by human miracle workers ('Magic in Early Christianity' 1533).
Apollonius, however, is described as 'touching' a girl seemingly dead (Philostratus, Life 4.45).
See also Eitrem, Notes 41-46; Theissen, Miracle Stones 62, 92-93; Yamauchi, 'Magic or Miracle?'
135-36.
355. Acts 3.7; (5.12); 9.12, 17, 41; (14.3; 19.11); 28.8; Mark 16.18.
356. Smith, Jesus the Magician 92, 118; Aune, 'Magic in Early Christianity' 1537-38;
some discussion in Meier, Marginal Jew 2.567-68 n. 54.
357. Marcus, Mark 1.473-74, citing Galen, Natural Faculties 3.7. Pliny the Elder also
commends the potency of saliva, the 'physic of the tongue' (Natural History 28.7.35-39; texts
in Cotter, Miracles 187-89). See also Eitrem, Notes 56-60, who observes that Jesus never made
use of the popular method of blowing a sickness away (47-49); Theissen, Miracle Stories 63;
Yamauchi, 'Magic or Miracle?' 137-41.
358. Tacitus (Histories 4.81) and Suetonius (Vespasian 7) both record a blind man begging
Vespasian to heal him with his spittle.
359. Marcus cites b. B. Bat. 126b, where R. Hanina sends people in need to his son, 'for
he is a first-born, and his saliva heals' (Mark 1.473).
360. A concern of this sort may have been a factor in Matthew's and Luke's decision to
omit the two Markan episodes.
691