It has been said that the remarks of Jesus to this Syrophoenician Woman, specifically his indirect reference to her as a dog, was more along the lines of her being a cute cuddly puppy...this article offers some interesting comments concerning this.
In agreement with all but a few commentators, my discussion assumes the priority of Mark and the two source hypothesis (which is to say that Mark's gospel was written first and later redacted by Matthew and Luke). We should also keep in mind that the Syrophoenician woman pericope floated around in the oral tradition long before Mark wrote his gospel and continued to thrive well into the second century. Matthew certainly knew Mark's version of the story, but he may also have known of the same (or a modified) version of the story in the oral tradition. Matthew probably took over Mark's version as the basis for his own redaction, modifying it for his own community's theological needs. Perhaps a different version of the story from the oral tradition influenced Matthew as well. I shall first outline the story in its context within Mark's gospel and then discuss Matthew's parallel passage. An analysis of the story will follow.
|
1 comment:
I question if you attach too much importance to the things of man over the things of God. Nothing is sinful or wrong that you write about it makes sense and is a preferred way of living but in this time when 50% of all life will be destroyed your preoccupation with the minutia of existence reminds me of a Pharisee claiming that dragging a chair across a sand floor in a house was plowing a field was wrong On the Sabbath .Of course maybe I am just too focused on the death of half of all life to see things your way.
Post a Comment