|
Gospel reading October 19 - Matthew 22:15-22
|
The Pharisees went and plotted to entrap him in what he said.
So they sent their disciples to him,
along with the Herodians, saying,
“Teacher, we know that you are sincere,
and teach the way of God in accordance with truth,
and show deference to no one;
for you do not regard people with partiality.
Tell us, then, what you think.
Is it lawful to pay taxes to the emperor, or not?”
But Jesus, aware of their malice, said,
“Why are you putting me to the test, you hypocrites?
Show me the coin used for the tax.”
And they brought him a denarius.
Then he said to them,
“Whose head is this, and whose title?”
They answered,
“The emperor’s.”
Then he said to them,
“Give therefore to the emperor
the things that are the emperor’s,
and to God the things that are God’s.”
When they heard this, they were amazed;
and they left him and went away.
|
On Oct 19 2008, Jaye Harris Wrote:
Richard,
the words of R. Dass.."Be Here Now"..keep ringing in my ears..How often does the kingdom become embroiled in contests for daily wages..I constantly ..miss the mark, chasing after dollars personally. The discussion about sabbath with Dr. Wright could not have come to us at a better time.
On Oct 16 2008, Richard Smith Wrote:
Jay,
I am not familiar with Maria Janna.
Crossan's point is that as Mark portrays the exchange, the Pharisees have lost the argument simply by having Caesar's coin.
Jesus turns the question from should you pay taxes, but should you participate in the Roman economy. Should you use Roman coin.
Jesus does not have a Roman coin. There is a different economy that we should participate - God's kingdom.
On Oct 15 2008, Jaye Harris Wrote:
Richard,
If I might suggest Maria Janna has some very good criticism in the area. I understand Domatian's reign falls in that era. We cannot mistake the time of authorship and its compilation though..
On Oct 15 2008, Richard Smith Wrote:
Jay,
Not sure how the dating of the passage impacts your thought that the statement could not come from a rabbi. The time frame that you offer for the passage dating is a quite wide one – from Domitian to Constantine. How to square such a late date with the apparent priority of Mark?
Domitian is not so difficult as it is right inline with most critical scholarship for the date of Matthew, but I still do not understand how the dating of the passage influences the concern that such a discussion is not likely among rabbis (or more appropriately among Pharisees).
JD Crossan seems to think the core phrasing is pre Marcan and was put in the context of the conflict stories. He offers the comparative text from GT to show that the core logion did not necessarily take place in a controversy.
On Oct 15 2008, Jaye Harris Wrote:
Richard,
If the pharisees wanted to undo or entrap jesus would they use this device ? You know the evidence for Jesus being a pharisee is pretty convincing ? I am doubtful this passage appeared before say "Constantine", or at the earliest Domitian's reign. Why would a jewish rabbi ..even a special one have a conversation like this ?
On Oct 12 2008, Richard Smith Wrote:
This is a text that is in the three synoptic gospels. It is interesting to look at the three together and to consider the phrasing differences. Read Mk 12.13-17 and Lk 20.20-26. What are the differences? Do the differences make any significant change in the meanings? Most critical scholars consider Mark to have been the base text that both Matthew and Luke used for their versions. Compare the Gospel of Thomas logion 100.
They showed Jesus a gold coin and said to him, "The Roman emperor’s people demand taxes from us." He said to them, "Give Caesar what belongs to Caesar, give God what belongs to God, and give me what is mine." Are there differences between the base Markan version and the Thomas version? What are they?
|
