Indignant or Compassionate

Indignant or Compassionate
Thoughts on Mark 1:41

In this verse nearly all Bible translations say that Jesus was moved with compassion. The NIV, however, says that Jesus was indignant. Having reviewed over a dozen translations, NIV appears to be alone in this rendering. Let’s have a closer look.

There are two major groupings of the original language manuscripts of the Bible. Older translations relied upon the manuscripts available at the time. This group of manuscripts is the Byzantine text-type and includes what is referred to as “the received text” or Textus Receptus. Most translations prior to 1900, including the King James Version, used this text form.

More recently, older manuscripts have been located. You might be aware, for example, of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Another group of manuscripts was found in an ancient library in Alexandria Egypt. These older manuscripts are newer to translators because they were discovered more recently. This makes some people feel they are less reliable, but having been penned earlier, most scholars believe them to be more reliable. This group is referred to as “the Alexandrian Text-type.”

Below is the verse from the New American Standard Bible, which, like the NIV, prioritizes the Alexandrian text and from the King James Bible, which uses the so-called Textus Receptus, which prioritizes the Byzantine text. Note that both of these translations indicate that Jesus was moved with compassion rather than that He was indignant.

Mark 1:41 (NASB 2020)
“Moved with compassion, Jesus reached out with His hand and touched him, and said to him, ‘I am willing; be cleansed.’”

Mark 1:41 (KJV 1900)
“And Jesus, moved with compassion, put forth his hand, and touched him, and saith unto him, I will; be thou clean.”

Given that translations based upon both of these major text-forms agree in translating this verse as saying the Jesus was moved with compassion, we can be sure that the choice by the translators of the New International Version (NIV) was not made simply because of a difference in the major manuscript groups. I point this out specifically because there are some who argue that the NIV is unreliable, at least in part, because of its use of the Alexandrian text-type as its primary source.

Given all this then, what is the explanation for the seemingly divergent translation in the NIV? Here it is again.

Mark 1:41 (NIV)
“Jesus was indignant. He reached out his hand and touched the man. ‘I am willing,’ he said. ‘Be clean!’”

Though it is a departure from their usual preference for the Alexandrian text-type in favor of the choice in the Latin Vulgate, the translators of the NIV decided to prefer manuscripts that have the Greek word 3710. ὀργίζω orgízō; (Strong’s 3710). This word comes from orgḗ (Strong’s 3709), wrath. To make angry, provoke. In the New Testament this word is used only in the middle or passive voice and thus carries a meaning of, “to be or become angry, provoked, indignant, stirred up, exasperated.”

The Greek used to translate the KJV, NASB (and every other translation I have available to me) has the word σπλαγχνίζομαι splagchnízomai; (Strong’s 4697). This comes from splágchnon (Strong’s 4698), bowel, and in this form means, “To feel deeply or viscerally, to yearn, have compassion, pity.”

If you’ve never checked out the NET Bible (New English Translation) I want to encourage you to do so. The great value of this resource lies in the over 60,000 translator comments and study notes it includes. I have found it to be an excellent resource when resolving puzzling texts.

The NET Bible translator notes on this verse are quite helpful. According to them, “The reading found in almost the entire New Testament manuscript tradition is σπλαγχνισθείς (splanchnistheis, “moved with compassion”). Codex Bezae (D), {1358}, and a few Latin MSS (a ff2 r1*) here read ὀργισθείς (ojrgistheis, “moved with anger”).”

They go on saying, “It is more difficult to account for a change from “moved with compassion” to “moved with anger” than it is for a copyist to soften “moved with anger” to “moved with compassion,” making the decision quite difficult. B. M. Metzger (TCGNT 65) suggests that “moved with anger” could have been prompted by 1:43, “Jesus sent the man away with a very strong warning.” It also could have been prompted by the man’s seeming doubt about Jesus’ desire to heal him (v. 40).”

Continuing on, they say, “As well, it is difficult to explain why scribes would be prone to soften the text here but not in Mark 3:5 or 10:14 (where Jesus is also said to be angry or indignant). Thus, in light of diverse manuscripts supporting “moved with compassion,” and at least a plausible explanation for ὀργισθείς (moved with anger/indignant) as arising from the other reading, it is perhaps best to adopt σπλαγχνισθείς (moved with compassion) as the original reading. Nevertheless, a decision in this case is not easy.”

Biblical Studies Press, The NET Bible First Edition Notes, (Biblical Studies Press, 2006), Mk 1:41.

This helps us understand the difficulty the translators faced when rendering the meaning of this verse. It presents a defensible argument for the text having been changed by early scribes.

I also find the explanation given in the Faithlife Study Bible helpful. They write of Mark 1:41, that “In a few ancient manuscripts, the Greek word splanchnizō, which refers to being moved with pity, replaces the term orgizō, which indicates anger. However, the substitution likely reflects a later change by a copyist, to avoid the difficulty of this verse. Jesus affirms His desire to cleanse the man, indicating He is not upset by the leper’s plea.”

They then conclude their comment saying, “He (that is Jesus) might be reacting in anger to the illness itself. The disease represents pain and suffering and also made a person unclean according to the law (see Leviticus 13). Jesus also might regard the man’s condition as caused by a demonic spirit.”

I favor this reasoning and agree that while “moved with compassion” is very likely the correct original phrasing, the righteous indignation of the Lord Jesus toward evil would necessarily result in His being moved with compassion toward the victim of that evil—in this case the disease of leprosy.