Sometimes the structure of things throws off what is being said. And sometimes, the order of things confuses the mind just enough not to make connections. Deceptive people use both of these ideas to hide information so that people cannot easily see what is being said or done.
When a person tries to understand the organizational patterns or the order of things in a culture long departed from the scene of present time, the result is the same as for deceptive people in modern culture. The intention of the ancient writers and storytellers was not, however, to confuse and thwart understanding. The organization was just different, one that matched the expectations of the people of that time.
Ancient literature typically had a design to it so that its recitation by those who would be telling it later could easily recall the contents. Sometimes, the structure was like modern poetry where part of the design was a rhyme scheme. But, more often it was some other feature. Sometimes people remembered a list by stringing the items together with participles, sometimes with relative pronouns, sometimes with conditional correlatives, and sometimes with a parody of a former work.
Since the words of Jesus appear to have been orally transmitted before they were written in the form we see them today, they follow the accepted cultural design for remembering the contents of something in order to perpetuate the message. The words of Jesus at the outset of his early public appearances as recorded in Matthew 5.21-48 do have a design to them. As one looks at the design it becomes immediately apparent that Jesus directly set himself up as someone in opposition with and totally unaccountable to the Jewish religious authorities and the system of worship and law keeping they had established. In effect, Jesus deliberately started the clock ticking toward the ultimate showdown from the very beginning of his teaching.
Introductions to the main message were necessary in oral transmission. One had to give a general setting in which to couch the words to follow. That's what Jesus did on this occasion. The following is his introduction. The English text has been translated to reflect the use of the contrastive phrasing found in the Greek text.
Matthew 5.17:
Don't think that I have come to make the Law and the Prophets fall into disuse.
I have not come to make them fall into disuse,
but to make them have fuller meaning.
Matthew 5.18:
Even if earth and sky vanish, not one of the Law's smallest nuances of meaning
will vanish until all of it
has happened.
Matthew 5.19:but to make them have fuller meaning.
Matthew 5.18:
Even if earth and sky vanish, not one of the Law's smallest nuances of meaning
will vanish until all of it
has happened.
Whoever dismisses what he considers to be an insignificant rule and teaches that to someone
Whoever acts on this rule and teaches it
will himself be considered insignificant in the realm where God lives.
will himself be considered great in the realm where God lives.
The structure makes it easy to see the contrasts Jesus included. And, it is these contrasts, these statements of opposition to each other, that set up his own very clear opposition and non-accountability to the established religious system. His last statement of introduction highlights Jesus's opposition to the establishment's view of keeping the rules of the Law.
λεγω γαρ υμιν οτι εαν μη περισσευση υμων
δικαιοσυνη πλειον των γραμματεων και φαρισαιων ου μη εισελθητε εισ την βασιλειαν
των ουρανων (Matthew 5.20)
(I'm telling you that if the quality of your actions is not more evident than those schooled in the Law and the Pharisees, you won't have a chance at entering the realm where God lives.)
Jesus's opposition appears at the very beginning of this day of teaching. He wanted there to be no mistake about the difference between the Son of Man and the two well known groups who were the well-known rule keepers among the Jewish population. The rule keepers had missed the point of the Law and the Prophets, so Jesus wanted to clear up what the rules were really about, that there were intentions in the minds of people before they acted. Rules were for keeping people's actions above board while intentions were for keeping people's spirits (their attitudes) cheerful and willing while living decently.
So, in his introduction to his message Jesus singled out the two groups of people most responsible for instilling the erroneous idea that rules were much more important than intentions. The first group were the γραμματεων, (grammateon) the men schooled in the finest nuances of rule keeping based on the Talmud. The English word grammarian comes from this word. People generally have as much respect for the role of grammarians in our modern society as the Jews did for their "Law grammarians." The second group was the φαρισαιων (Pharisees), generally upper class people and very proud of the way they knew and were able to follow all of the oral traditions of the Talmud.
One apparent contrast in this statement to the people on the hillside came in the form of a comparison between what Jesus taught and what he did and what the two groups identified by him taught and did. He used two words to show this comparison, περισσευση and πλειον. The first word means to do better than, surpass, or exceed. The second means more in quantity or in quality. One can see right away that Jesus made the conscious decision to take on the two most recognized groups known for their piety and precision in rule keeping. Jesus wanted to establish immediately that the Son of Man, the messiah, didn't rely on rules but intentions, attitudes from the heart, and he didn't need the tedious research, memorization, and finger-pointing in order to know if he himself or others were living decently. So, he drove his stake in the ground on a principle he repeated throughout his public teaching career: one's actions needed to come from good intentions, more than was evident from the scholars and Pharisees if he or she was planning to set foot in the realm where God is living.
The structure of the teaching that follows further shows a contrast of thought and a design for easy recollection. Jesus uses a parody of what the two groups have used for years and years - the structure of the Talmud.
You have heard that it was said... (then explaining the verse, then quoting footnotes of famous scholars and rabbis).
Jesus started the "correct and formal" way of teaching (You have heard that it was said), but he differentiated his teaching in the second part, the explanation part. That's the area in which he substituted the intention of the rules for the parsing of the rules by all the famous scholars and rabbis. People noticed. They understood he was both critiquing the current method and giving the messiah's insight to the most important part of Jewish life - acting out the Law and Prophets.
Eating a tasty morsel enters at this point. The six points that Jesus used in his parody are divided into two groups of three - murder, divorce, adultery (group 1); vows, injustice, and enemies (group 2). But the two groups are not six random laws. They are 3 laws that are paired with 3 intentions found in other laws. Scholars and rule keepers saw laws as being separate from each other. Jesus saw laws as being interconnected, thus showing that they were related to an intention. This relationship or interconnection is shown below.
murder > loving enemies adultery > bearing injustice divorce > vows
v. 21 v.43 v.27 v.38 v. 31 v.33
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. 21 You have heard it said... You must not murder anyone.
V. 43 I'm telling you that if you're angry with someone leave your gift for God at the
altar and make the matter right. Then return to offer your gift.
V. 27 You have heard it said... You must not have an affair in your marriage.
V. 38 I'm telling you if you study a woman to want her for yourself, you have already
had an affair with her in your heart.
V.31 You have heard it said... A man should not send his wife away, but should give
her a certificate of divorce.
V. 33 I'm telling you that if a man divorces his wife he forces her to have an affair in her
marriage unless she is unfaithful to him, and a man who marries a divorced
woman is having an affair.
Modern readers are more aware of correlations in the above format, but in the Jewish culture one of the formats for correlating material was called chiasm. There are many examples of this in the Old Testament. It's a literary device used as a mnemonic, or easy design from which to recall details. The structure of a chiasm is the ABCBA reasoning in the lines. The two statements of A and B are parallel to each other. In the following case, A gives a premise; B gives another thought to further develop the same idea; C names the main idea of the premise. The following idea comes back to the developmental thought B; A restates the premise. Psalms 8.1-10 serves as a good example of chiasm.
A Psalms 8.2-3 Oh Lord, our Lord, how awesome is your name in all the earth.
B Psalms 8.4 When I see your heavens, your handiwork, the moon and stars.
C Psalms 8.5 What are humans that you are mindful of them?
B Psalms 8.6-9 All sheep and oxen, even the beasts of the field.
A Psalms 8.10 Oh Lord, our Lord, how awesome is your name in all the earth.
This chiastic structure is found in stories, like the story of Noah, and poetry, like Psalms 8, and in many other places.
The Jews were very familiar with the framework. So when Jesus spoke about laws and intentions, he carefully wove his ideas into a structure easy to understand, remember, and retell. Jesus couched his remarks in parallel chiastic statements, two parallel thoughts of A, two of B, two of C. C was the crux of the matter which was the integrity of the person involved. And Jesus ended this portion of his teaching in just this way: have the same integrity as your father (v. 48).
A Verse 21 Oral tradition plus explanation - murder
B Verse 27 Oral tradition plus explanation - adultery
C Verse 31 Oral tradition plus explanation - divorce
C Verse 33 Oral tradition plus explanation - vows
B Verse 38 Oral tradition plus explanation - bearing injustice
A Verse 43 Oral tradition plus explanation - revenge
Jesus's listeners that afternoon on the hillside received a number of messages as Jesus spoke. The content was, of course, the main message. But on top of that, they received his message in a format that they could easily recall; they heard a parody of the style used by those schooled in the Law, thus showing a certain amount of disdain, maybe only disagreement with what the Law had been reduced to; and they heard Jesus call out two groups of people for their lack of understanding of what the Law should produce, that is, people of decent living, not people burdened by rule-keeping.
Followers in the beginning understood that Jesus had set himself apart from the rest of religion. Followers today understand the very same thing. Since the time of Jesus, other religions have sprung up around the world. But, like Jesus did from the very start of his pubic life, followers have learned to differentiate their living from all of the rest of the groups.
No comments:
Post a Comment