That strange healing at the Pool of Bethesda

[JimB]

In another thread the healing of the cripple at the pool of Bethesda came up. It caused me to think ...
​

For years, this passage troubled me. It seemed more superstition than truth and, in fact, contrary to the manner of healing in the Bible. In the story, the lame man lay at the poolside waiting for an angel to come down an trouble the water so that the first one in the pool would be healed and all others, I guess, would have to carry their illness home. The problem with this is that those least needing healing (e.g., the guy with the sniffles) would always beat the person most needing healing (e.g., the lame man) into the water. Seems rather unfair and unlike God to me.

Then, as I purchased newer, more modern translation of the Bible I discovered that this account has a parenthesis at the last part of vs.3 and all of verse 4 in post-KJV Bibles—the part that says, “waiting for the moving of the water. For an angel went down at a certain time into the pool and stirred up the water; then whoever stepped in first, after the stirring of the water, was made well of whatever disease he had” (see footnotes in these translations).
​

Since verse 4 is absent from older manuscripts (i.e., the ones closer to the original), it is generally believed that the verse was an explanatory footnote by a later copyist to explain the phrase “waiting for the moving of the water” (vs.3) that somehow crept into the text which may have added to explain been a superstition that was attached to the pool of Bethesda.

So, what do you think? Did an angel really come down and trouble the waters of the pool so that the first one in (and only the first one) would be healed or does that account as related in the good old KJV sound a little suspect to you?
​

~Fletcher Biceps

A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.​

 

[Yekcidmij]

My footnote:

The majority of later mss (C3 Θ Ψ 078 Ë1,13 Ï) add the following to 5:3: “waiting for the moving of the water. 5:4 For an angel of the Lord went down and stirred up the water at certain times. Whoever first stepped in after the stirring of the water was healed from whatever disease which he suffered.” Other mss include only v. 3b (Ac D 33 lat) or v. 4 (A L it). Few textual scholars today would accept the authenticity of any portion of vv. 3b-4, for they are not found in the earliest and best witnesses (Ì66,75 א B C* T pc co), they include un-Johannine vocabulary and syntax, several of the mss that include the verses mark them as spurious (with an asterisk or obelisk), and because there is a great amount of textual diversity among the witnesses that do include the verses. The present translation follows NA27 in omitting the verse number, a procedure also followed by a number of other modern translations.

I think the part about an angel stirring the waters was a superstition or tradition. If it was part of the original gospel of John, then it was only there to point out and explain why the people gathered at the pool, and that was because of the superstition/tradition. I don't think a real angel came down and stirred the waters so the first one in could be healed.

 

[SavedByGrace3]

One wonders if these comments are based on the beliefs of those present, and not the author. As in Job when the servant came back to and stated "fire from God" had killed the herds. That it was "from God" was the opinion of the servant, but not necessarily the absolute truth.
Of course if God wants to do such a thing He certainly can...
Kind of gives credence to all these "holy sites" around the world where such things are claimed to happen. Indirectly they are manifestations of faith toward God... and God is pleased by faith.
So it could be.

 

[enoch son]

God can do what ever He wants when ever He wants. What the problem! No matter how it was written.

 

[Yekcidmij]

God can do what ever He wants when ever He wants. What the problem! No matter how it was written.

Stating that God can do whatever He wants is only begging the question. Just because He can do anything doesn't mean He sent an angel down to stir the waters.

Evidence favors the passage being inauthentic. But, even if the passage is authentic, it doesn't mean that an angel went down to stir the waters. It would have been an explinatory note as to why people were lying around there in the first place and it would explain the mans comments in vs 7.

Think about it this way; does God operate by granting healing to the winner only? Because that is what would be the case here. God would have only healed the FIRST one in the pool, which would have often been the least in need. On the other hand, Jesus comes along and heals the most in need, not the winner of a contest.

 

[Always in His Presence]

For the new posters who have not seen the previous responses to this issue:

A little research from not commentaries, but theologians would show. That the verses were MISSING in the older scrolls, literally the section of the parchment that contained the verses had deteriorated. The reason why KJV uses both the oldest parchments and some a hundred years or so newer is because the newer scrolls contain the MISSING verses.

​

 

[Svt4Him]

I have a really old bible, and it has the comment in it. I don't know why it seems like it was a hidden fact, but as Balance said, it was missing, not added. Not something I'd die over, but not something I'd throw out either. What was the purpose of the story to me seems the germane issue.

 

[JimB]

*****

I think the part about an angel stirring the waters was a superstition or tradition. If it was part of the original gospel of John, then it was only there to point out and explain why the people gathered at the pool, and that was because of the superstition/tradition. I don't think a real angel came down and stirred the waters so the first one in could be healed.

Personally, I think it was a later addition but if it is part of the original manuscript it was probably John relating a current superstition that existed around the Pool of Bethesda which was, I understand, fed by an underground aquifer stream that occasionally sent air bubbles to the surface. Legend developed around this that it was an angel that troubled the water and the first one to jump into the pool (which, of course, would leave out the most needy, like the lame man, who were the least able to get to the pool first). Verse four that relates the superstition that explains the popular belief of why the people were gathered around the pool “waiting for the troubling of the water.”

For God to heal only the least needy based on their better physical ability to get to the place of healing and not based on their need, does not sound like the God of Jesus to me.

~Bjorn Free

A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.​

 

[Optimax]

How did Jesus respond to the man?
Verse 6. Jesus saw him lying there and knew he had been there a long time. Jesus did not say "you are wasting your time here, there are no Angels that come down and trouble the water".

He did ask "Will you be made whole"? or "Do you want to be healed"?

Verse 7. The man stated when the water is troubled ....etc.

Verse 8. Jesus did not respond with "Wouldn't do you any good anyway, it is only a superstition and tradition.

He responded as always with healing.

Jn 5:6-8

6 When Jesus saw him lie, and knew that he had been now a long time in that case, he saith unto him, Wilt thou be made whole?

7 The impotent man answered him, Sir, I have no man, when the water is troubled, to put me into the pool : but while I am coming, another steppeth down before me.

8 Jesus saith unto him, Rise, take up thy bed, and walk.
KJV

 

[gennaoanothen]

strange that people would try and discredit the Word of God to fit there way of thinking, goes to show there is something wrong with that thinking.

The people gathered around there because people actually got healed, just like the Word says.

 

[TasManOfGod]

The way I see the healing in the "pool" is the present day equivalent to somebody randomly being healed at a gathering of believers. It is like an experession of the compassion of God for His people despite the fact that they are "outside the temple" which equates to being outside of divine fellowship with the Father (1 John 1:9)

 

[Svt4Him]

strange that people would try and discredit the Word of God to fit there way of thinking, goes to show there is something wrong with that thinking.

The people gathered around there because people actually got healed, just like the Word says.

I don't think anyone is discrediting the Word of God, I have seen versions with the same note. I find it strange that it is brought up like it's a surprise to someone who owned a Christian bookstore, but I don't find the question as something as a discredit to the Word.

 

[JimB]

strange that people would try and discredit the Word of God to fit there way of thinking, goes to show there is something wrong with that thinking.

The people gathered around there because people actually got healed, just like the Word says.

So, which translation of the Bible do you prefer?

Let me guess: The Saint James Virgin of the Bible?

~Bjorn Free

A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.​

 

[JimB]

The way I see the healing in the "pool" is the present day equivalent to somebody randomly being healed at a gathering of believers. It is like an experession of the compassion of God for His people despite the fact that they are "outside the temple" which equates to being outside of divine fellowship with the Father (1 John 1:9)

TasMan, it was not “random”. The text says quite the contrary.

It was more like a race—the first one in (the one least needing healing, the most physically fit person) was the one who got healed. That was not random, that was a race. The disputed verse says so …

4 For an angel went down at a certain time into the pool and stirred up the water; then whoever stepped in FIRST, after the stirring of the water, was made well of whatever disease he had.
​

That was not random healing , that was a reward for the winner of a contest.

The rest of your post is what is known as “spiritualizing” the Bible, that is reading into the Bible those spiritual (allegorical) elements your mind can hatch up. IMO, this is more metaphysics than spirituality. You do not have to spiritualize the Bible to make it more, um, spiritual.

~Bjorn Free

A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.​

 

[JimB]

How did Jesus respond to the man?
Verse 6. Jesus saw him lying there and knew he had been there a long time. Jesus did not say "you are wasting your time here, there are no Angels that come down and trouble the water".

He did ask "Will you be made whole"? or "Do you want to be healed"?

Verse 7. The man stated when the water is troubled ....etc.

Verse 8. Jesus did not respond with "Wouldn't do you any good anyway, it is only a superstition and tradition.

He responded as always with healing.

Jn 5:6-8

6 When Jesus saw him lie, and knew that he had been now a long time in that case, he saith unto him, Wilt thou be made whole?

7 The impotent man answered him, Sir, I have no man, when the water is troubled, to put me into the pool : but while I am coming, another steppeth down before me.

8 Jesus saith unto him, Rise, take up thy bed, and walk.
KJV

The way I sometimes read the passage (if, indeed, verse 4 was in the original text) is that Jesus was confronting the man’s false belief in superstition and dependence on others than on simply trusting in God.

Jesus dialogued with the man before He healed him. He asked him, “Do you really want to get well?” And when the man began to say that not only was he relying on a superstitious, fallacious manner of receiving healing (by beating all those other poor sufferers to the pool) but he was also looking to others to get him healed ("I have no one to help me into the pool.&#8221

In that sense he was like a lot of people seeking healing who practice superstitious methods for healing (witch doctors, voodoo, amulets, healing cloths, healing lines, healing rooms, healing donations, etc.) or depend on other people (Benny Hinn, John G Lake, Smith Wigglesworth, Kathryn Kuhlman, TBN, Lakeland, or the Next Big Revival, etc.) for healing.

The lesson for me is: Trust Jesus only for your healing, not voodoo or men.

~Bjorn Free

A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.​

 

[Yekcidmij]

strange that people would try and discredit the Word of God to fit there way of thinking, goes to show there is something wrong with that thinking.

The people gathered around there because people actually got healed, just like the Word says.

And God said, "It pays to be a winner".