Wednesday, August 15, 2012

Week 3: Extra Credity Symbols, Teaching/Preaching/Healing/parables


 Quiz Part 2 (Extra Credit)……………Name ___________________________________



11 _____
12______
13______
14______
15______
16______
                                                                                                                                                   17___  18 __  19__ 20__


                   






a) Excluded Middle: Between Faith/Heaven/Supernatural zone and Science/Earth/Natural zone, there is the realm where the two interact.  Often neglected in the West. realm of angels, powers etc

b) hemistiche/ellipsis: when the last section of a well-known phrase is omitted for emphasis:  Matthew says "My house shall be a house of prayer......," intentionally leaving out the "...for all nations" clause.

c) configurational nature of knowledge..if we look at a text (or anything), we can see it take on new shapes and meanings that can even become the primary meaning, without necessarily negating what we saw before. 

d) double paste:  Often, two Scriptures/texts are combined into a new one.  Ex. : Jesus says “My house shall be a house of prayer for all nations, but you have made it a den of thieves.”  The first clause (before the comma) is from Isaiah 56:6-8, and the second is from Jeremioah 7”11


e) Kingdom: in Jesus, in large part, the “age to come” has come. The Future has visited the present.

f)Social networking/6 degrees of separation: people/themes are more related/interconnected than it would seem
g)The “Contemporary” Contemporary world: It’s one thing to interpret a text as the ancient “contemporary world” /original readers did. But another to also apply it correctly to our contemporary “contemporary world”
h)particularization: a. general statement is particularized.  Ex. In Matt 3, Jesus at his baptism  is revealed to be the “Son of God” (general statement).  So, in chapter 4, he is tempted by the devil in particular ways” “What kind of Son will you then be?”
i)intercalation  (Sandwiching); a literary technique in which one story/narrative is inserted into the middle of another story/narrative.  Example.  The temple tantrum is inserted in the middle of the fig tree episode in Mark 11.
j)Multiple fulfillment:  Ex.  Israel and Jesus experienced different versions of the three core temptations.
-------------------
he configurational nature of knowledge

 See this




15)Excluded Middle
Video here or below:












Thanks to Mike Heiser, this classic essay is finally online!


:
  • Here is the complete original article from MISSIOLOGY.
PS: Here's the Wikipedia article on "excluded middle"
----------------------

 
10)KINGDOM:.. OF GOD/heaven:
We did this above)


11)Fuzzy set
We introduced the third (and final) "set" of "set theory:
.
Here below is some help on Fuzzy Sets (these readings will help, but if you missed class today, you may want to talk to a classmate about some of the biblical and other examples to get a handle on this):





-


12)Hemistiche:
Biblical verses of two or more parallel hemistiches will very often omit a word, a term or an idea already found in a previous hemistich (less common is the omission of content in the first hemistich).  The reader is of course supposed to fill in the blank on her own.  In other words, the first hemistich (or the fuller hemistich) is integral to one’s understanding of the deficient hemistiches in the same verse. This drawing of syllogisms or analogies between parallel hemistiches is of course one of the basic tools used in the analysis of biblical poetry-one used unconsciously by most readers of the Bible.  From "From the verse to the complete work"

I have always felt that Mark's fuller quotation of Jesus ( "house of prayer for all nations")
was an intentional emphasis for many and multiplex reasons, and that (thus) the mere quotation of "house of prayer" (without for all nations) in Matthew and Luke (compare all four gospel accounts here) made it all the more emphasized and underlined... conspicuous by its absence.

Of course in Matthew's overarching Jewish context and audience, all the more need to emphasize
the inclusivity of the invitation.


--
13)DOUBLE PASTE: 


This represents hitting the "CONTROL V" button, "pasting" two scriptures together, or "splicing" two scriptures into one new one.  Classic example is Jesus in the temple tantrum.
ISAIAH 56:6-8 + JEREMIAH 7:11=MARK 11:16


Maybe read this short article I wrote on the topic for Salt Fresno Magazine:

“Temple Tantrums For All Nations"




15)Six Degrees of separation:
"A documentary on networks, social and otherwise" (part 1):
 

Parts 2, 3,  4 , 5, (not 6)  are also online
-------------------


Kraybill, in BIB 300's "Upside Down Kingdom," book, says,
"The Kingdom of God is acollectivity--a network of persons....more than a series of
individualized email connectionslinking the King to each subject...[It] infuses the web of relationships, binding King and citizens togeter" -Kraybill (emphases mine)









--------------
Check out  New Testament Social Networks
by clicking here.  To see chart below, click it, then click again to enlarge:

---

See also a preview of the book.

"Thy Kingdom Connected: What the Church Can Learn from Facebook, the Internet, and Other Networks," by Dwight J. Friesen




Do you and I have any surprising common Facebook friends?  Click here to find out

--
SYMBOL #10)KINGDOM:.. OF GOD/heaven:


See definition/background:  Hauer and Young pp.
Why does Matthew  use "KIngdom of HEAVEN" (unlike Mark, Luke, John..and Paul)?

  • not realm, but reign
  • not place , but person
  • not race, but grace
  • not just "then and there," but 'here and now" (Matt. 4:17, 6:10) 






We noted that the 'direction" in which the Kingdom originates is "both ways":  from thefuture, and from the past.










>>How does the Kingdom "come" from the "future"?:

Many Jews of Jesus' day (and actually, the Greeks) thought of the Kingdom of God as largely a  future identity/reality/location.
So when Jesus, in Matthew 4:17 announces that he, as King, is ALREADY bringing in the Kingdom,

this not only subverted expectations, but sounded crazy....and like he was claiming to bring the future into the present.

The Jews talked often about "this age" (earth/now) and "the age to come." (heaven/future).
"Age to come" was used in a way that it was virtually synonymous with "The Kingdom."

Scripture suggests that:

The "age to come"  (the Kingdom) 
has in large part already come (from the future/heaven)

into "this age"
 (in the present/on the earth




by means of the earthy ministry of Jesus: King of the Kingdom.



Thus, Hebrews 6:4-8 offers that disciples ("tamidim") of Jesus have
"already (in this age) tasted the powers of the age to come."


In Jesus, in large part, the age to come has come.
The Future has visited the present,

symbol #10-KINGDOM



















"The presence of the Kingdom of God was seen as God’s dynamic reign invading the present age without (completely) transforming it into the age to come ” (George Eldon Ladd, p.149, The Presence of the Future.)





Here are some articles that may help:




ntercalation  (Sandwiching)



'Intercalation" is a "sandwiching" technique. where a story/theme is told/repeated at the beginning and ened of a section, suggesting that if a different story appears in between, it too is related thematically.  We looked at  this outline of Mark 11:

 A)CURSING OF FIG FREE
B)CLEANSING OF THE TEMPLE
A)CURSING OF THE FIG TREE
#8) Subversion of Empire:
This picture calls to mind Herod (as a representative and agent of the Roman Empirw)'s Herodian fortress (left) and Jesus' manger (right), as per the "Shadow of Herod" video we watched on, and you can re-watch here).  We'll find Jesus subversion of empire as an ongoing theme in Matthew .




#13: Double Paste:
This represents hitting the "CONTROL V" button, "pasting" two scriptures together, or "splicing" two scriptures into one new one.  Classic example is Jesus in the temple tantrum.
ISAIAH 56:6-8 + JEREMIAH 7:11=MARK 11:16
Tony Campolo: "Birthday Parties for Prostitutes":


After debriefing last class's "historical world" field trip, we agreed that "GEOGRAPHY MATTERS."
So before beginning our journey through Matthew 1 and 2, we followed up on that theme with a VanDer Laan video which gave a graphic example of how Jesus was intentional in WHERE he taught WHAT , taking the disciples far out of his way (not) just so he could have the right backdrop or  object lesson.


The video took us to the "gates of hell" at Caserea Phillip. the video is not online, but  a 5-page summary slideshow of it is here.

TEACHING/PREACHING/HEALING/
  to go more in depth into Matt 8-10, we noted yet another literary structural outline:



Twice, Matthew makes almost identical statements, which might lead us to draw an inclusio around them:

And he went throughout all Galilee,
teaching            in their synagogues and
preaching         the gospel of the kingdom and
healing             every disease and every affliction among the people.
(Matt. 4:23)


AND

And Jesus went through all the towns and villages,
teaching            in their synagogues,
preaching          the good news of the kingdom and
healing              every disease and sickness. 
(Matt 9:35)

Maybe Jesus only did three things in this section.
 Q>Who is Jesus in Matthew?  
              A>The one who teaches, preaches and heals.



Since this threefold ministry is so intentionally signaled, might it not mean that in other places in Matthew
that when one or two of the three is mentioned, the third is implied, hidden somewhere, or conspicuous by its absence?

How about 11:1?:

"After Jesus had finished instructing his twelve disciples, he went on from there to
teach and


preach
in the towns of Galilee "

Where is the healing?
-
How about  15: 29-30:
Jesus left there and went along the Sea of Galilee. Then he
went up on a mountainside and sat down (implies teaching ).
Great crowds came to him (so now you expect to see him teaching, but he is healing instead...or is healing a firm of teaching here?)
bringing the lame, the blind, the crippled, the mute and many others, and laid them at his feet; and he healed them.
--





For some helpful commentary on the "literary world" implications of Jesus' three activities...
teaching
preaching        
healing 

.....click to read these sections of David Bauer's commentary.
--------
One writer comments:
  • These three activities were his chief occupations in public ministry. Think of what Jesus did:
  • He was teaching in their synagogues. What was a synagogue service like? We have some insight in two New Testament passages: Luke 4:16-21, where Jesus began to teach about his own ministry. We also have Acts 13:15ff, where Paul used the invitation to speak as an opportunity to preach the gospel based upon the history of Israel. In the service, a reading from the Law and the Prophets, which followed prayers, would be followed by a distinguished Rabbi, either resident or visiting, being invited to teach concerning a point of the Law or the Prophets. He would read a text and explain and apply it. This is what Jesus evidently did. And the traditions of the synagogue required that the teacher be attractive in his appearance and presentation, as well as intelligent and godly. Interestingly enough, such a teacher did not have to be ordained. And his message was to be tactful and not too personal. That Jesus taught often in the synagogues of the land, tells us that he was a welcome teacher and respected. No wonder he was referred to as "Rabbi."
  • The text tells us that he also was actively preaching the Gospel/good news of the Kingdom. You are of course aware that the word, gospel, means good news. And the substance of the gospel is given in verse 22, to wit that the Kingdom of Heaven was near. It is referred to elsewhere as the gospel of peace (Rom 10:15), the gospel of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 9:13), and its message was simply that the Kingdom of Heaven had come. To the Jews this would be good news, as it would mean that the Lord was announcing the reign of Messiah (Isa 9:6,7) and peace between Himself and Israel (Isa 52:7). God had come to rule and thus to show his love and concern for his people. And that is the essence of the gospel.
  • We want to be careful not to distinguish too closely between teaching and preaching, though, because he did both at the same time, cf. the next three chapters. Teaching would emphasize a systematic presentation of the truth. Preaching or proclamation would emphasize declaration of the truth, as opposed to giving a systematic presentation of it. In his teaching he gave the details of what the Kingdom of Heaven is like.
  • Finally, and this is what usually catches our attention most in this passage, he healed the sick. The text says, he healed (literally) all chronic diseases and all occasional sicknesses among the people. The word, all, would place him in different category from other healers that were also going about the land. Perhaps the word would best be translated as the NIV does, every, because not all in the nation were healed. These other healers did not heal every case. They had their successes and their failures, but Jesus healed every disease he came into contact with, with no failures. The question needs to be asked, though, why? ..
  • Notice how these three ministries are tied together. What ties them together is the Kingdom of Heaven. The public teaching of Jesus focused upon the grace of God in coming to rule over his people and show his love and concern for them as their King. The healings were a tangible, easy to understand demonstration of the truth and power of the Kingdom. Jesus did not simply heal for the sake of making people feel better or improve their quality of life. Rather, those who were healed had an obligation to worship and serve the Lord, even to repent-cf. John 5:1-14. That is why, when Jesus preached he proclaimed the message that he did, Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is near. This is an important point, one that is missed by some in the healing movement in Pentecostal Church circles. We are mistaken if we separate healing from the gospel's message and focus on it or any other miraculous part of the gospel instead of on the Kingdom of God.  -Link
---
 Titles
We haven't looked much at the "titles" of Jesus yet.  See Hauer and Young pages 251ff.
And we note that some of these titles really kick in in this chapters 8-10 section: Son of Man and Son of God particularly.   It would seem obvions that these two titles are opposite in meaning: Jesus as human and God, respectively....but a study of the literary/historical world reveals that "Son of Man" was often used as a messianic connotations (and in a sense could mean "God"..see especially Daniel 7:

Check out this chart ,and note re: each title:
  • where in the gospel 
  • how often  
  • and on whose lips
  • where they cluster
  • inclusios etc.
click chart(and then click again once on a new page) to enlarge


-Son of God                         (7x..or 8, if you count 3:17)
-Son of the Living God         (once, hmm)
-Son of Man                         (29x.....and all by one person!)
-Son of David                      (9x)


>>Click to read the context of each time each title occurs:



To get more info on the titles, and a sense of how they are used in other biblical books, see this.

-

PARABLES:
"Parables are the most striking feature of Jesus’ teaching. They are what he is most famous for and what he seems to use most frequently. Parables are not unique to Jesus (other teachers of the day and others in Scripture use them, e.g. Nathan to David in 2 Sam 12), but he uses them so effectively and frequently they are characteristic of his teaching. The article explains that 1/3 of Jesus’ spoken words in the Synoptics are parables. The word parable (Greek parabole) refers essentially to a comparison. A look at the way the term is used both in the OT and by Jesus reveals a wide range of meanings, including proverbs, similes, metaphors, similitudes, story parables (most familiar to us perhaps), example parables, and allegories. The thing to remember is that they make a comparison.

Why Jesus teaches in parables?
The common answer (to illustrate his teaching) doesn’t go quite deep enough. Arguably, many of the parables don’t make things clearer, but more confusing. Even the disciples need to have them explained.   Read Matt 13:10-13.  There is no getting around the fact that this passage states the parables are not self-evident illustrations. The parables are provocative, often they include a surprising twist. The parables have a way of disarming hearer, drawing hearer in, and then evoking a response (e.g. Mark 12 parable of vineyard, good Samaritan has this effect too, Luke 10.)"
-Robert Stein, and article in Oxford Bible 

--
Remember the "Teenage Affluenza" video that we watched, for
which you used
terms like:

  • subversive
  • satirical
  • spoof
  • sarcastic
  • ironic
  • inductive
  • interactive
  • intuitive
  • earthy
  • earthly
  • juxtaposing
  • convicting
  • comedic
  • abductive
  • pointed
  • prophetic
  • sneaky
  • back door
  • non sequitur
  • cheesy
  • you're not sure whether you're supposed to laugh
  • feel uncomfortable laughing at funny parts near the end
  • tweaking
  • nonlinear
  • risky
  • "over the top"
  • maddening
  • convicting
  • offensive (to some)
in describing?  These are all great sub-definitions of a parable.

See also: Ignatius the Ultimate Youth Pastor::





1)"Parable"  literally means a "comparison," "a setting beside each other two things that have littlle in common,a nd asking what they have in common.

2)Parable are often earthly, earthy illustrations.  "an earthly story making a heavenly point."

God in the Bathroom?
The ancient Hebrew language didn’t have a world for “spirituality.” Apparently that category didn’t exist in ancient Hebrew thought because they believed that all of life had the potential to be “spiritual.” This is very different from our dualistic worldview that separates the world into two categories: the spiritual (sacred) and the material (secular). In this worldview, God inhabits the spiritual realm, but he leaves the material realm to us. In order for a dualist to experience God’s presence, he has to transcend the secular realm and tap into the sacred where he will find God. The Hebrew worldview rejects this dualism. Lawrence Kushner puts it this way:

Judaism sees only one world, which is material and spiritual at the same time. The material world is always potentially spiritual. All things– including and especially, such apparently non-spiritual things and grossly material things as garbage, sweat, dirt, and bushes–are not impediments to but dimensions of spirituality.

That means it’s possible to encounter God’s presence anywhere, including the bathroom. Here’s a prayer taken from the Babylonian Talmud that was meant to be prayed while the pray-er was relieving himself:

"Blessed is he who has formed man in wisdom in wisdom and created in him many orifices and cavities. Is is fully know before the Throne of Thy glory that if one of them should be improperly opened or one of them closed it would be impossible for a man to stand before Thee."

If this prayer makes you uncomfortable because you think the bathroom is off limits to God, then you are a dualist.
-Wade Hodges


see: "God loves donkeys, sweat, entrails and menstruation


3)Parables are multifaceted, they can be entered anywhere.  They are more "open" than a straight simile.

4)The one primary point of a parable is that a parable has one primary point.  (they may sometimes be allegorical, but pus for the one primary point.

"the one primary point 
                                        of a parable
is that
                                          a parable has
      one primary point"
(Note that is a chiasm!).

5)Parable, like metaphor," is a "loud fart in the salon of spirituality":
(Eugene Peterson)
"the parables sizzle into the minds of the religious heavyweights: 
your attitude is the opposite of God's" , Kraybill, from your Upside Down Kingdom textbook p. 158

6)Parables are signs of the Kingdom 

7)Parables often have a God (or Jesus) figure, but watch out, it might be a surprising, subversive, "unobvious" character

8)Context: What happens before/after the parable?  Who is addressed?  What is addressed?
Bounded set, centered set, fuzzy set?

9)Why did Jesus tell parables?

Stein:

a       To conceal his teaching from those “outside”
b      To illustrate and reveal his message to his followers
c       To disarm his listeners—they force a response somehow, leave you wrestling, are provocative


10)Parables provoke a practical repentance and a radical response.


11)Watch for the "literary world" devices we have studied (particularly chiasm, intercalation) for cues and clues
(see chiasm section at bottom of today's post)

12You will usually have to do some "historical world" research to get the punch and
punchline.

13)Parables subvert empire, and knock gnosticism:
"gnostics delight in secrecy. They are prototypical insiders. They think that access to the eternal is by password and that they know the password. They love insider talk and esoteric lore. They elaborate complex myths that account for the descent of our spiritual selves into this messy world of materiality, and then map the complicated return route. They are fond of diagrams and the enlightened teachers who explain them. Their sensitive spirits are grieved by having to live surrounded by common people with their sexual leers and stupid banana-peel jokes and vulgar groveling in the pigsty of animal appetite. Gnostics who go to church involuntarily pinch their noses on entering the pew, nervously apprehensive that an insensitive usher will seat a greasy sinner next to them. They are however enabled to endure by the considerable compensation of being ‘in the know’ (gnostic means ‘the one who knows’). It is a good feeling to know that you are a cut above the common herd, superior to almost everyone you meet on the street or sit beside in church.
It is inevitable that gnostics will boycott the creation theater and avoid its language as much as possible, for metaphor is an affront to their gossamer immaterialities and inner-ring whispers, a loud fart in the salon of spirituality.” (Eugene Peterson,Answering God, 75-76)
---
Suggested Chiasms related to Matthew 13/Parables:

1)in a small subset of Matthew 13 (which may well be the very center of the whole book, thematically and chiastically (Below from Thomas Clarke)


"I first noted  chiasm by looking at the footnotes regarding Isaiah 6:10 in  NIV Study Bible. In the parallel verses from Matthew 13:15, see if you can identify the levels:

For this people’s heart has become calloused;
they hardly hear with their ears,
and they have closed their eyes.
Otherwise they might see with their eyes,
hear with their ears,
understand with their hearts …

Let us identify the nouns. They are as follows:
•
People
•
Heart
•
Ears
•
Eyes
•
Eyes
•
Ears
•
Hearts

Did you see the three levels of the chiasm? With the exception of the word “people,” they all have pairs. Did you see the center point? I sense that this verse is speaking about spiritual blindness. What about you?

Here then is the presentation of this first example of chiasm,
on chart on p. 7 here"
         (Thomas Clarke)

2)A chapter-wide chiasm:
  (Mark Bailey):
Sower and the Soils (vv. 1-9)
            Question by Disciples/Answer by Jesus (Understanding) (vv. 10-
                        17)
                        Interpretation of the Sower and the Soils (vv. 18—23)
                                    Tares (vv. 24—30)
                                    Mustard Seed (vv. 31—32)
                                    Leavening Process (v. 33)
                                                Fulfillment of Prophecy (vv. 34—35)
                                                Interpretation of the Tares (vv. 36—43)
                                    Hidden Treasure (v. 44)
                                    Pearl Merchant (vv. 45—46)
                                    Dragnet (vv. 47—48)
                        Interpretation of the Dragnet (vv. 49—50)
            Question by Jesus/Answer by the Disciples (Understanding) (v. 51)
Householder (v. 52)6

            Verses 13-17, a subsection of the entire structure, can be ar-
ranged as follows.
Therefore I speak to them in parables
A. Because while seeing they do not see, and while hearing they do
     not hear, nor do they understand
            B. And in their case the prophecy of Isaiah is being fulfilled,
                 which says,
                        C. You will keep on hearing, but will not understand,
                                    D. And you will keep on seeing, but will not perceive;
                                                E. For the heart of this people has become dull,
                                                            F. And with their ears they scarcely hear,
                                                                        G. And they have closed their eyes
                                                                        G.' Lest they should see with their eyes,
                                                            F.' And hear with their ears
                                                E.' And understand with their heart and return,
                                                     and I should heal them.
                                    D.' But blessed are your eyes, because they see;
                        C.' And your ears, because they hear.
            B.' For truly I say to you, that many prophets and righteous men
A.' Desired to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what
      you hear, and did not hear it.7
-
3)SUGGESTED BOOK-WIDE CHIASM OF MATTHEW,see page 9 here,  (or below) a chiasm making chapter 13 the center of book:



A. Demonstration of Jesus' Qualifications as King (chaps. 1—4)
 B. Sermon on the Mount: Who Can Enter His Kingdom (chaps. 5—7)
    C. Miracles and Instruction (chaps 8—9)
        D. Instruction to 12: Authority/Message for Israel     (ch. 10)
           E. Opposition: Nation Rejects King        (ch 11—12)

                     F.  Kingdom Parables (chap. 13)

           E.' Opposition: Nation's Rejects King (chaps. 14—17)
        D.' Instruction to 12: Authority/ Message for  Church (c.18)
   C.' Miracles and Instruction (chaps. 19—23)
 B.' Olivet Discourse: When Kingdom Will Come (chaps. 24—25)
 A.' Demonstration of Jesus' Qualifications as King (chaps. 26—28)"32

--


"Acted Parables":


Example: Cursing of the FigTree/Temple tantrum



see:

see p, 513 here, and p. 32 here

-



The Friend at Midnight, Luke 11:1-13, see whole chapter for context here

FRIEND AT MIDNIGHT:
That the God figure is a crabby old guy, it reminds us that parable have ONE point, and not to trip up when God characters act...well, ungodly.  Press for the ONE main point

More:



photo on facebook
For the last fifteen minutes , discuss and prepare to act out (in NO MORE THAN 3 MINUTES) a modern-day version of the parable: a modern-day situation, modern-day characters. In other words, if Jesus were telling this parable to us today, how might he get his point across to our world?  [NOTE: there is a difference between simply changing a few elements to set the same story in modern terms, and using a different story to communicate the same message.  The point of this activity is the latter.]


Remember, Stein offers these three possible reasons Jesus teaches in parables:

1.       To conceal his teaching from those “outside”
2.       To illustrate and reveal his message to his followers
3.       To disarm his listeners—they force a response somehow, leave you wrestling, are provocative


,,
>\
Pharisees: GOOD SAMARITAN:
-See p, 161-167 of Upside Down book to get the "historical world" of Samaritans
-Who is the surprising Jesus figure in this story?  Of course, the Samaritan is one, but the surprising one is that guy left for dead (as Jesus was).
We so often  miss ( see "Parables and Misundertaking") 
the point and punch of parables..
Good article in the new Biblical Archaeology by Amy-Jill Levine (emphasis mine):
In the parable, the priest and Levite signal not a concern for ritual purity; rather, in good storytelling fashion, these first two figures anticipate the third: the hero. Jews in the first century (and today) typically are either priests or Levites or Israelites. Thus the expected third figure, the hero, would be an Israelite. The parable shocks us when the third figure is not an Israelite, but a Samaritan.
But numerous interpreters, missing the full import of the shock, describe the Samaritan as the outcast. This approach, while prompting compelling sermons, is the fourth anachronism. Samaritans were not outcasts at the time of Jesus; they were enemies.
In the chapter before the parable (Luke 9:51–56) Luke depicts Samaritans as refusing Jesus hospitality; the apostles James and John suggest retaliation: “Lord, do you want us to command fire to come down from heaven and consume them?” (Luke 9:54). John 4:9 states, “Jews do not share things in common with Samaritans.” The Jewish historian Josephus reports that during the governorship of Cumanus, Samaritans killed “a great many” Galilean pilgrims traveling to Jerusalem (Antiquities 20.118–136). The first-century Jewish person hearing this parable might well think: There is no such thing as a “good Samaritan.” But unless that acknowledgment is made, and help from the Samaritan is accepted, the person in the ditch will die.
The parable offers another vision, a vision of life rather than death. It evokes 2 Chronicles 28, which recounts how the prophet Oded convinced the Samaritans to aid their Judean captives. It insists that enemies can prove to be neighbors, that compassion has no boundaries, and that judging people on the basis of their religion or ethnicity will leave us dying in a ditch.  link


See also this article:

Levine: Good Samaritan parable teaches compassion for the enemy 

And this video version:


Amy-Jill Levine: Dangers on the Road to Jericho from Chautauqua Institution on FORA.tv
----
See a great, hilarious  section by Capon:\


The defining character – the one to whom the other three respond by being non-neighbour or neighbour – is the man who fell among thieves. The actual Christ-figure in the story, therefore, is yet another loser, yet another down-and-outer who, by just lying there in his lostness and proximity to death, is in fact the closest thing to Jesus in the parable.

That runs counter, of course, to the better part of two thousand years’ worth of interpretation, but I shall insist on it. This parable, like so many of Jesus’ most telling ones, has been egregiously misnamed. It is not primarily about the Samaritan but about the man on the ground. This means, incidentally, that Good Samaritan Hospitals have been likewise misnamed. It is the suffering, dying patients in such institutions who look most like Jesus in his redeeming work, not the doctors with their authoritarian stethoscopes around their necks. Accordingly, it would have been much less misleading to have named them Man-Who-Fell-Among-Thieves Hospitals...{as if the doctors would stand for that} (p. 210ff, Kingdom, grace, judgment: paradox, outrage, and vindication in the parables of Jesus)



----

Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)