Why was one woman called “daughter” instead of “woman”?
Question:
Good morning, brother.
I have been reading Luke 7 about the woman who was a sinner and brought an alabaster flask of fragment oil. She stood at Jesus' feet, washed His feet with her tears, and wiped them with the hair of her head. Jesus refers to her in Luke 7:44 as "woman."
In the same book, in Luke 8, there is a woman who had bled for 12 years. Jesus refers to her as "daughter."
- What is the significance of this title of daughter?
- After healing the bleeding woman, Jesus demanded to know who had touched Him. If Jesus knew the power was leaving Him, did he genuinely not know who had touched Him, or was there a message He wanted to pass to the crowd about the healing?
- As a woman, l concluded that the bleeding was not heavy. If it was, she would have suffered from anemia and had been pale. Can you support my conclusion?
Thank you. l am looking forward to hearing your thoughts.
Answer:
Jesus commonly referred to females as "women" (Matthew 15:28; Luke 13:12; John 2:4; 4:21; 8:10; 19:26; 20:13.15), which is basically the same as how we use "Madam" today. Luke 7:44 is not an example of this. Jesus is pointing out a person who happens to be female. "Turning toward the woman, He said to Simon, 'Do you see this woman? I entered your house; you gave Me no water for My feet, but she has wet My feet with her tears and wiped them with her hair'" (Luke 7:44).
"Man" is also used similarly (Luke 7:14; 12:14; 22:58, 60). In similar situations, we would tend to say "sir." Thus, the use is not derogatory.
However, as you noted, Jesus once called a woman "daughter" (Matthew 9:22; Mark 5:34; Luke 8:48). He chose to do so for a few reasons.
This woman had been bleeding for twelve years. By Moses' Law, she would be unclean during this time.
"Now if a woman has a discharge of her blood many days, not at the period of her menstrual impurity, or if she has a discharge beyond that period, all the days of her impure discharge she shall continue as though in her menstrual impurity; she is unclean. Any bed on which she lies all the days of her discharge shall be to her like her bed at menstruation; and every thing on which she sits shall be unclean, like her uncleanness at that time. Likewise, whoever touches them shall be unclean and shall wash his clothes and bathe in water and be unclean until evening" (Leviticus 15:25-27).
Yes, the bleeding likely made the woman pale. It would have marked her as unclean. Consider what her life would have been like. No one would invite her over because anything she touched would be unclean. She would not be welcomed in the markets. No one would be willing to give her a hug. For twelve years, she lived in society but was isolated from everyone. By calling her "daughter," Jesus gave her acceptance that had been missing from her life. She was no longer unclean. She was back in the family of mankind.
When she touched the hem of Jesus' garment, Jesus knew the power had gone from him, but if he had left it at that point, no one else would have known what had happened. Miracles are done to be signs and to verify teaching (Hebrews 2:3-4). This miracle would have served no purpose if no one knew it. Thus, Jesus stopped and asked who touched him. It isn't that he didn't know. He allowed the woman to identify herself, which she did voluntarily.
This miracle occurred when Jesus went to Jarius' house to heal his daughter. The healing reinforced Jarius' faith that Jesus had the power to heal. There are interesting parallels between the two events. The woman bled for twelve years, the same age as Jarius' daughter. Jesus called her "daughter," which emphasizes the connection between this daughter of Israel and Jarius' daughter. For both the woman and Jarias' daughter, no one else could help except for Jesus.
Response:
Thank you, Brother Jeff, for the detailed answer. Be blessed.
