I’ve been thinking of a woman who came to Jesus for help (Matthew 15: 21-28). Here is someone in trouble. Her daughter is tormented by a demon. But the problem is she is a Gentile, specifically Syrophoenician in origin… a Caananite. This story presents Jesus as somewhat ethnocentric. His world is narrow, focused only on the Jews. His mission appears clear to him: “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.” He will not help her. “The food belongs to the children,” Jesus says, “and not the dogs!”
I admire the woman for her tenacity. Or maybe it is just desperation. Her daughter needs help and she won’t leave without a fight. She’s the persistent mother. While she shows him respect, calling him “Lord“, she argues with him: “Yes, but even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table!” She is not intimidated, but instead shows a rather presumptuous self-confidence that I find refreshing. This passage has been of interest among many New Testament scholars because it shows Jesus possibly being outwitted by a foreign woman. Does this passage advance the Gentile mission or embarrass it? What does this mean for women in the early church?
I don’t believe it’s helpful to explain the obvious difficulty of this passage with explanations such as, “He didn’t mean ‘dog’ but ‘puppy’.” Or that he was knowingly leading the woman to a deeper expression of faith with his apparent indifference and even rudeness. Rather, I think this sheds light on Jesus learning obedience (Hebrews 5:8). The story begins with him possessing a rather fundamentalist mindset, but ends with him perhaps surprised that faith can be found in other than the people of God as he understood it (“Woman, great is your faith!“). I love this story because it exhibits his humanity… a man forced to come to terms with truth foreign to what he is already certain of. He has to adjust, or amend, his theology because of the arguments of this woman. Here, many scholars agree, is the seed of the early church’s mission to the Gentiles.
I believe that the problem today is not the different things we believe as much as it is the fundamentalist mindset that sets ourselves apart in an elitist fashion and excludes others. When we, even with sincerity and a sense of call, establish ourselves as right and refuse to admit others, this is what causes hatred, division and war. If we really want to be like Jesus, perhaps it means being less fundamental, less certain, less elitist, and a little more open and vulnerable. It might mean being willing to listen to the many ways truth may present itself to us.
The fine art photograph is the creation of my UK friend Howard Nowlan
Contributions to nakedpastor are greatly appreciated.
David Hayward is a pastor artistically stripping to the essential.
You’ve got an interesting idea of who Jesus was if you think he had to improve his teachings as he went along.
um. God was ethnocentric, that’s the whole point of the Old Testament.
well i’m not sure what my “idea” of jesus is, but i was careful to avoid using the terms “improve” or “correct”… “Learning” means to gain or acquire knowledge or skill in something… i think this story illuminates that somewhat.
I don’t think that Jesus responded that way because he was ‘learning’ but rather because he was ‘teaching’ a point. Jesus asked people questions throughout the New Testament, not because he didn’t know, but because he already knew the answer and was trying to make a point.
nakedpastor – you’re splitting a nonexistent hair. If Jesus taught one thing, learned something new, and then adjusted his teachings to a better/fuller teaching, then that’s an improvement to a more correct teaching.
If you think God incarnate needed to modify his teachings because He learned something new, then there is something really odd with how you think of Jesus.
Obviously he taught different things according to the audience and the issues he was dealing with. Telling lepers asking for healing the same thing as what he told hypocrites would be nonsensical. But, (if I’m understanding you correctly) that’s not what you’re meaning.
You’re saying Jesus held a set of ideas that he was teaching, and then after talking with the woman, realized that he had been teaching something very incomplete, very wrongly incomplete.
If one says that God, as Jesus, had to come to a lightbulb-moment of realization that he shouldn’t just be extending grace to the Jews, but also to the rest of the 99% of the world, then there is something very off about one’s view of who Jesus was.
Reply courtesy of facebook:
I honestly think this guy is out to lunch in what he thinks about Jesus. Jesus was God incarnate, and although I am sure He was subject to many of the same temptations as we are (if not then He would not have been fully human) He was also fully God, and knew what His mission was and what He was up to. Jesus always knew how to make a point when He was talking to various persons, and very often was testing them, not Him learning something new.
My estimation, this guy has some serious problems with how he thinks of Jesus.
My own point:
You might want to be clear on your view of who Jesus is, for your own – assurance? – I think.
It’s a dangerous point to be unclear on. Think about it.
Sorry nakedpastor, I didn’t intend to start up flamming.
go for it. might as well. i’ve got some skin left. disagreement’s healthy if it leads to dialog.
semety: as soon as i’m clear he goes and fogs up my clarity!!!
…good post David,but it appears,for some, that the Christ of faith trumps the Jesus of history….too bad
Sir,
Would it be appropriate to bring into this context the statement that Jesus made about the parousia in Mt 24.36: “But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone?” (NAS) Do we deny Jesus who is God if we consider that Jesus the Man in some ways was limited in His knowledge? Cannot those who are humble and obedient, as Jesus was, continue to learn humility and obedience without implying incompletion and sinfulness? Or this: did Jesus never need to learn anything in His humanity? For example, was He born with perfect carpentry skills? And if Joseph had to teach Him how to use a hammer or measure a board, does that mean that Jesus was ‘less than . . .?’ I think I am uncomfortable with the phrase that in this encounter Jesus had to ‘amend His theology.’ Jesus encountered more knowledgeable people than this woman who challenged His theology to which He amended nothing. But neither am I uncomfortable with considering that Jesus – in His humanity – was humble enough to know that He did not know everything – in His humanity (cf. Mt. 24.36).
Now I am uncomfortable because my head hurts. Thanks for the food for thought.
Yours,
Lee
Lee, I should probably clarify that I tend to agree with what you’re saying. There most certainly are things which Jesus doesn’t/didn’t know. You gave great examples.
I’m a bit uncomfortable with the level of change that is suggested here though – this is a change in Christ’s basic orientation. Before this point, he knew he was going to die and rise again. He also knew he was there to die for non-Jews as well as Jews. He had already healed non-Jews and even praised their faith (the Centurion of Matt 8).
I’m just not seeing Christ’s interaction with this woman as any sort of a sudden revelation that there can be faith outside of the Jews (again Matt
or that he ought to be reaching outside strictly Jewish circles. He had already been performing miracles and praising the faith of non-Jews, and he already knew he was going to save more than just the Jews. Given that, it doesn’t make sense that this was a ‘eureka’ moment for Jesus.
That Jesus didn’t know everything – definitely.
That Jesus had some sort of deep revelation here about who he was and why he was here on earth – I really can’t see it.
Oh bother. Those smiley faces are supposed to be and eight and a parenthesis. Matt 8
I really like the idea of Jesus adapting to the woman as he converses with her. Just goes to show me how much love he has. Love accepts and embraces, which is what I see Jesus doing here.
WebMonk,
Thank you for your response. As I think through my fingertips, so to speak, I agree with you. Even at 12, Jesus knew He had to be about His Father’s business (Lk. 2.41ff). As He ‘continued to grow and become strong, increasing in wisdom; and the grace of God was upon Him’ (Lk. 2.40), I believe that means He matured into His human understanding of His Christological and soteriological purposes that did not need further illumination from a Gentile. That’s why, in my earlier post, I wrote that I would be uncomfortable agreeing with our gracious host’s suggestion of the encounter leading to Jesus amending His theology. But I continue to be fascinated with the ‘Christ of faith and the Jesus of history’ (thanks to faithlessinfatima), which is how I understood the primary direction of Rev. Nakedpastor’s post to take. Certainly at face value, the encounter with the Syrophoenician woman implies a debate with Jesus that ended with Jesus ‘capitulating’ to her request. It is reminiscent of Abraham bargaining with God over the doom of Sodom (Ge. 18.22-33) and Moses speaking to the LORD in a way that God ‘changed His mind about the harm which He said He would do to His people.’ – Ex. 32.14 (NAS) My Reformed Theology friends really have difficulty with that one.
And, God as my witness, I’ve never figured out how to use emoticons.
Yours,
Lee
David: ouch – I suppose He does that. But He is God, right? He is God? please?
….it may be helpful to consider the theological motives of the gospel writer,and his intended audience which David has alluded to…
….it may be helpful to consider the theological motives of the gospel writer,and his intended audience which David has alluded to…
I might add….rather than the Christological anxieties that were,in one sense,centuries away and in another,continue to plague many modern readers
Wow nakedpastor…great thoughts. Outside of the Canaanite genocides in the OT, this has been one of the hardest texts for me especially since adopting a more missional hermeneutic. But I think this reading reinforces a healthy way of viewing Christ and his mission and how conversion works.
I think you are completely within the bounds of orthodoxy and church history.
Again, great reflection.
This is one of my favourite gospel stories because it is perhaps the only conversation Jesus has with a human who exhibits the ability to converse in and expand metaphor. (Nicodemus did alright but needed patient explanation). This woman has a high IQ and I believe Jesus truly enjoyed this banter and pushed her to see how far she would take it. How frustrated he became with his disciples who were forever “not getting it” and requiring extended explanation of every parable and metaphor he offered to explain the abstract kingdom of God. This is the rare story of someone who ‘got it’ and he gave them even more scope to play with the idea. No coincidence she is a woman.
I think NP is spot on here.
It seems people agree that Jesus had to learn things as he grew up, as that is part and parcel of our humanity. Yet Jesus shows us what true humanity looks like, what it really means to be a human and how to live a life that expresses a full and abundant life.
I don’t see why it is so hard to comprehend that this encounter that Jesus has with this women could be seen as Jesus learning something new and having his outlook changed through this encounter.
Even on the night of his betrayal he searched his Father for another way than the cross. He was learning on the spot what it meant to follow his Father’s will. He didn’t just say those prayers in Gethsemane as an act of humility, he said it because he was actually asking if there was another way out of this, and in asking, learnt obedience to his Father. So Jesus learnt throughout his life new things about his calling. Because that’s what humans do, we learn day by day.
Jesus learnt something new through the encounter with this women. I think what this also shows us is that God is speaking through what we would see as surprising places. Yet they are not surprising to God.
I don’t believe this was Jesus testing the woman, there is nothing in the text that suggests that. We have the women teaching Jesus. I think this is what some are having trouble with, that a women is teaching Jesus.
I have no doubt Jesus was learning things through his entire life, I just don’t think that “Oh, maybe I’m supposed to be reaching out to gentiles too!” was one of the things he learned here. Obviously, as he grew he learned, and I really have no idea when he realized he was God incarnate or even if there ever was a specific moment of realization, maybe that was something he always knew. Who knows! Maybe Mary and Joseph told him. He certainly seemed to know who he was by the time he was twelve. As he grew there were periods where I’m sure he learned more and more about what he was going to be doing.
I don’t think this was the moment, though. Like what has been said above, Jesus ran with parables and extended metaphor all the time – testing and stretching people all around him. I see this as another instance, and like gracie mentions – I can certainly see Jesus very much enjoying a conversation with a person who responds back with understanding.
If there was a moment of realization for Jesus, I would suggest that a much more likely place it would have happened was a good while earlier in Matthew 8 when he talked with the Roman centurion and exclaimed with surprise at the guy’s faith. Immediately upon exclaiming about the centurion’s faith, he speaks of how many from all over the world will come to be one with the Jews in salvation.
In between Matthew 8 and Matthew 15 there are a couple other remarks that certainly indicate Jesus continued to have more than just the Jews on his mind when he was talking. If Jesus wasn’t doing his common sort of pushing and challenging at this point with the woman, I think Jesus would had to have sort of forgotten about the centurion and his other statements he had made before.
I guess I’ve always liked this passage because I was once very much like the Canaanite woman. I too was a pagan, and an outcast; and like the Canaanite woman, found myself driven to kneel at the feet of Christ, crying out for mercy….
When Jesus saw that Canaanite woman, and heard the words of her heart trickle over her tongue, I think his own heart must have swelled with tenderness. So much so, that Jesus forgot that this woman was a pagan, and an ancient enemy of the Jews. Instead, Jesus saw only a person in love and a person in need. Jesus put the law aside and acknowledged the great faith he saw in the woman, and even though she wasn’t a part of the family (Jewish) by law, she became a part through love.
Thus, the Canaanite woman’s story becomes my story. I would even dare to say, it is our story.
In a world where we are constantly grabbing for the whole loaf, we would do well to revisit this story and learn that even crumbs from the most high God are enough to nourish, to heal and to save. We have much to learn from the Canaanite woman’s humility, her persistance, as well as her faith.