hdd.1a. As there were many men named Jesus (Joshua) in ancient Palestine, it was necessary for the early churchmen to draw distinctions, even though common people in that period (and later) ordinarily only had one name. Some neighbors might have known him as Jesus bar [son of] Joseph. The early missionaries settled on Jesus' longtime hometown, Nazareth, as an identifier when they did not wish to use the title Christ (Messiah, Anointed One). Now it may be that the devil said, "Jesus of Nazareth." But it is also possible it did not add "of Nazareth." Writers of that period could not easily specify a verbatim quote as opposed to a good paraphrase.
hdd.1. It is unlikely this healing took place in a synagogue, as some have thought. Lepers were not permitted inside. Further, the leper was required to stay at least six feet away from another person. Obviously, six feet is no impediment for someone who wished to bow low to Jesus.
hdd.2. Some mss. have "moved with anger." There has been much scholarly discussion of this point. My take is that this story was somehow mixed with another one in which Jesus looks around with anger at congregants because of their lack of compassion (Mark 3:5). Though Mark is our source of both stories, we may suppose that old manuscript sources were shuffled.
hdd.2a. Another possibility is that, once on the roof, they lowered the man down into an unroofed courtyard, which was walled off and attached to the house. At night, it was customarily used for a barn. The courtyard opened onto the sheltered part of the residence.
hdd.3. Jesus referred to himself as "the son of man." This description could be taken to mean that he was just another man, as "son of man" was an idiom for "human." Or it might be taken to refer to the "son of man" in the book Daniel who looked human and who was appointed to deliver the Jews from oppression (the Messiah). Even though we in retrospect know that Jesus is the son of God, he in his humility usually did not refer to himself that way. Some of his hearers, though concerned about blasphemy, did not see him as anything more than a man. His words might be interpreted by some to have meant, "In this case, a human can forgive sins."
Daniel 7:13
hdd.4. This tax collector is called Matthew in the book of Matthew. People have guessed that this difference from Mark implies that the author of Matthew was named Matthew. But, as Matthew adds no other detail to Mark's account, that supposition seems unlikely. It was not customary for ordinary people of that era to have more than one name. On the other hand, we have the name changes of Simon to Peter and Saul to Paul. The new names reflected their real status in God's eyes. A man named Levi (suggesting descent from the priestly tribe of Levi and meaning "attached') becomes a disciple. Might he not have adopted a new name, Matthew, which means "gift of Jehovah" or "God's gift"?
hdd.5.
Hosea 6:6
hdd.6. Abiathar seems to have been the high priest Ahimelech's son. But ancient scribes were not unanimous. 2 Samuel 8:17 has been read as "Ahimelech, son of Abiathar." In any case, the names are not all that important. What counts is the point that Jesus was making: The Sabbath was meant to give people a break, not to lay inhuman burdens on them. Further, if David, as God's servant, was right to break a rule about food, shouldn't another servant of God, Jesus, have that right? The Pharisees were well aware of Jesus' miracles and should have seen that he was a greater servant of God than was David.
hdd.7. The Old Testament Scripture is unclear on whether David was alone or had some men with him. Mark includes in Jesus' quote the clause "and those who were with him," which strikes me as an interpolation by the writer or an editor. We notice that Mark specifies that only the disciples were rolling grain and eating. I have to wonder whether the evangelist was averse to having Jesus break a Sabbath rule in a way that benefited himself directly. In any case, the point that Jesus was making is not about numbers but about God's compassion and care for his servants. After all, shouldn't God see to it that his men and women are fed?
1 Samuel 21:1-6
hdd.8. The name Jehovah and the name Jesus are intimately intertwined.
hdd.1. It is unlikely this healing took place in a synagogue, as some have thought. Lepers were not permitted inside. Further, the leper was required to stay at least six feet away from another person. Obviously, six feet is no impediment for someone who wished to bow low to Jesus.
hdd.2. Some mss. have "moved with anger." There has been much scholarly discussion of this point. My take is that this story was somehow mixed with another one in which Jesus looks around with anger at congregants because of their lack of compassion (Mark 3:5). Though Mark is our source of both stories, we may suppose that old manuscript sources were shuffled.
hdd.2a. Another possibility is that, once on the roof, they lowered the man down into an unroofed courtyard, which was walled off and attached to the house. At night, it was customarily used for a barn. The courtyard opened onto the sheltered part of the residence.
hdd.3. Jesus referred to himself as "the son of man." This description could be taken to mean that he was just another man, as "son of man" was an idiom for "human." Or it might be taken to refer to the "son of man" in the book Daniel who looked human and who was appointed to deliver the Jews from oppression (the Messiah). Even though we in retrospect know that Jesus is the son of God, he in his humility usually did not refer to himself that way. Some of his hearers, though concerned about blasphemy, did not see him as anything more than a man. His words might be interpreted by some to have meant, "In this case, a human can forgive sins."
Daniel 7:13
I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.
hdd.4. This tax collector is called Matthew in the book of Matthew. People have guessed that this difference from Mark implies that the author of Matthew was named Matthew. But, as Matthew adds no other detail to Mark's account, that supposition seems unlikely. It was not customary for ordinary people of that era to have more than one name. On the other hand, we have the name changes of Simon to Peter and Saul to Paul. The new names reflected their real status in God's eyes. A man named Levi (suggesting descent from the priestly tribe of Levi and meaning "attached') becomes a disciple. Might he not have adopted a new name, Matthew, which means "gift of Jehovah" or "God's gift"?
hdd.5.
Hosea 6:6
For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.
hdd.6. Abiathar seems to have been the high priest Ahimelech's son. But ancient scribes were not unanimous. 2 Samuel 8:17 has been read as "Ahimelech, son of Abiathar." In any case, the names are not all that important. What counts is the point that Jesus was making: The Sabbath was meant to give people a break, not to lay inhuman burdens on them. Further, if David, as God's servant, was right to break a rule about food, shouldn't another servant of God, Jesus, have that right? The Pharisees were well aware of Jesus' miracles and should have seen that he was a greater servant of God than was David.
hdd.7. The Old Testament Scripture is unclear on whether David was alone or had some men with him. Mark includes in Jesus' quote the clause "and those who were with him," which strikes me as an interpolation by the writer or an editor. We notice that Mark specifies that only the disciples were rolling grain and eating. I have to wonder whether the evangelist was averse to having Jesus break a Sabbath rule in a way that benefited himself directly. In any case, the point that Jesus was making is not about numbers but about God's compassion and care for his servants. After all, shouldn't God see to it that his men and women are fed?
1 Samuel 21:1-6
1 Then came David to Nob to Ahimelech the priest: and Ahimelech was afraid at the meeting of David, and said unto him, Why art thou alone, and no man with thee?
2 And David said unto Ahimelech the priest, The king hath commanded me a business, and hath said unto me, Let no man know any thing of the business whereabout I send thee, and what I have commanded thee: and I have appointed my servants to such and such a place.
3 Now therefore what is under thine hand? give me five loaves of bread in mine hand, or what there is present.
4 And the priest answered David, and said, There is no common bread under mine hand, but there is hallowed bread; if the young men have kept themselves at least from women.
5 And David answered the priest, and said unto him, Of a truth women have been kept from us about these three days, since I came out, and the vessels of the young men are holy, and the bread is in a manner common, yea, though it were sanctified this day in the vessel.
6 So the priest gave him hallowed bread: for there was no bread there but the shewbread, that was taken from before the Lord, to put hot bread in the day when it was taken away.
hdd.8. The name Jehovah and the name Jesus are intimately intertwined.
No comments:
Post a Comment