Mark 1:41

Moved with compassion, ¹  Jesus ²  stretched out his hand and touched ³  him, saying, “I am willing. Be clean!”

Filled with compassion, Jesus reached out his hand and touched the man. "I am willing," he said. "Be clean!"

Moved with compassion, Jesus stretched out His hand and touched him, and *said to him, "I am willing; be cleansed."

Moved with pity, Jesus touched him. "I want to," he said. "Be healed!"

Deeply moved, Jesus put out his hand, touched him, and said, "I want to. Be clean."

And being moved with pity, he put out his hand, and touching him said to him, It is my pleasure; be made clean.

Moved with pity, Jesus stretched out his hand and touched him, and said to him, "I do choose. Be made clean!"

Then Jesus, moved with compassion, stretched out His hand and touched him, and said to him, "I am willing; be cleansed."

Moved with compassion, ¹  Jesus ²  stretched out his hand and touched ³  him, saying, “I am willing. Be clean!”

¹ tc The reading found in almost the entire NT ms tradition is σπλαγχνισθείς (splancnisqei", “moved with compassion”). Codex Bezae (D), {1358}, and a few Latin mss (a ff² r^1*) here read ὀργισθείς (ojrgisqei", “moved with anger”). 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). 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 mss supporting “moved with compassion,” and at least a plausible explanation for ὀργισθείς as arising from the other reading, it is perhaps best to adopt σπλαγχνισθείς as the original reading. Nevertheless, a decision in this case is not easy. For the best arguments for ὀργισθείς, however, see M. A. Proctor, “The ‘Western’ Text of Mark 1:41: A Case for the Angry Jesus” (Ph.D. diss., Baylor University, 1999).

² tn Grk “he”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

³ sn Touched. This touch would have rendered Jesus ceremonially unclean (Lev 14:46; also Mishnah, m. Nega’im 3.1; 11.1; 12.1; 13.6-12).