|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Physician heal thyself
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
(Luke 4: 14ff)
How does 23 1/2 follow from what goes before? How does 23 2/2?
How does 28-30?
It's like what follows the beatitudes. It doesn't follow! To the modern mind. Typical of the writers AND the culture AND Jesus.
Jesus rejected at Nazareth (NIVUK)
14 Jesus returned to Galilee in the power of the Spirit, and news about him spread through the whole countryside. 15 He was teaching in their synagogues, and everyone praised him.
16 He went to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, and on the Sabbath day he went into the synagogue, as was his custom. He stood up to read, 17 and the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was handed to him. Unrolling it, he found the place where it is written:
18 ‘The Spirit of the Lord is on me,
because he has anointed me
to proclaim good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners
and recovery of sight for the blind,
to set the oppressed free,
19 to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favour.’
20 Then he rolled up the scroll, gave it back to the attendant and sat down. The eyes of everyone in the synagogue were fastened on him. 21 He began by saying to them, ‘Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing.’
22 All spoke well of him and were amazed at the gracious words that came from his lips. ‘Isn’t this Joseph’s son?’ they asked.
23 Jesus said to them, ‘Surely you will quote this proverb to me: “Physician, heal yourself!” And you will tell me, “Do here in your home town what we have heard that you did in Capernaum.”’
24 ‘Truly I tell you,’ he continued, ‘no prophet is accepted in his home town. 25 I assure you that there were many widows in Israel in Elijah’s time, when the sky was shut for three and a half years and there was a severe famine throughout the land. 26 Yet Elijah was not sent to any of them, but to a widow in Zarephath in the region of Sidon. 27 And there were many in Israel with leprosy[g] in the time of Elisha the prophet, yet not one of them was cleansed – only Naaman the Syrian.’
28 All the people in the synagogue were furious when they heard this. 29 They got up, drove him out of the town, and took him to the brow of the hill on which the town was built, in order to throw him off the cliff. 30 But he walked right through the crowd and went on his way.
[Chapter added for clarity. Mamacita, Host]
[ 31. January 2015, 16:22: Message edited by: Mamacita ]
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mamacita
Lakefront liberal
# 3659
|
Posted
Luke has chosen to place this story earlier (than did Mark, see Mark 6:1-6), so that Jesus' public, earthly ministry begins in his home town. And it's very dramatic, certainly opens with a bang! The difficulty is that it refers to healing and teaching that Jesus had already done (in Capernaum) -- and then Luke goes and places the Capernaum story after the Nazareth episode. So that causes a bit of cognitive dissonance.
The link I inserted at the top of the OP includes the rest of Luke's chapter 4, and how the Nazareth/Capernaum stories are placed.
The passage is certainly packed with things to consider! I will leave it at that for now!
[ 31. January 2015, 16:31: Message edited by: Mamacita ]
--------------------
Do not be daunted by the enormity of the world’s grief. Do justly, now. Love mercy, now. Walk humbly, now. You are not obligated to complete the work, but neither are you free to abandon it.
Posts: 20761 | From: where the purple line ends | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Thank you Mamacita.
What a ridiculous oversight on my part.
Can't it all be true? He actually started His ministry in Capernaum, popped up to Nazareth and skedaddled sharpish back? Not that it matters.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
BroJames
Shipmate
# 9636
|
Posted
Actually, Nazareth via Cana, Tiberias and Capernaum to the possible site of Bethsaida could all be covered in a comfortable day's journey (it's between 25 and 30 miles), so the idea that in the region of Galilee Jesus might pop up in any of those places is not far-fetched.
I know there are all sorts of problems with harmonising, but if Jesus went from his baptism to Bethsaida via Cana, then his appearance at Nazareth could easily follow things that were done in Capernaum which make sense of what Luke has him say - even if Luke hasn't bothered to report them in any detail.
Posts: 3374 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
My question is not about the contextual walked itinerary (and walking 25 miles in a day and stopping off is pushing it), it's about the spoken one.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hedgehog
Ship's Shortstop
# 14125
|
Posted
There does seem to be part of the story that we are missing. As you state, we go from the people being "amazed" and asking if this is Joe's boy to Jesus being defensive and/or dismissive of them. Why?
I think verse 23 holds together reasonably well, but not perfectly so. Asking a doctor to practice his healing arts on himself is roughly akin to asking a miracle worker to do party tricks on demand. A more accurate comparison would be for the miracle worker to work miracles for his own benefit, but I am willing to give a little leeway on that. Why? Well, as I say, we seem to be missing a bit of the story, but let's assume somebody (or somebodies) said things that got Jesus annoyed. He could then blurt out the physician bit without really thinking it through. It isn't quite the cool and collected Jesus we are used to, but he is back home among the people he grew up with (post-Egypt). It would be a very human reaction for Jesus to be a little overly sensitive to their criticism compared to similar comments made by complete strangers. The harsh words of childhood friends sting far more than those same words from a stranger.
My suspicion is that the people were falling into the same mistake that Herod would make later: wanting Jesus to perform party tricks. They missed the instructional aspect of Jesus' teaching and wanted the special effects instead. And Jesus' response was essentially "Screw it. No. I am not your trained monkey."
Admittedly, throwing him off the cliff seems rather an over-reaction to this. But we don't know how tall the cliff was. Maybe they were just going to push him into the rubbish tip, rather like they used to do when he was a child? (If one assumes that Jesus was bullied as a child. There really is no reason to think this.)
But, bottom line, I agree with you, Martin60, that something is missing in this story.
--------------------
"We must regain the conviction that we need one another, that we have a shared responsibility for others and the world, and that being good and decent are worth it."--Pope Francis, Laudato Si'
Posts: 2740 | From: Delaware, USA | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
BroJames
Shipmate
# 9636
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
My question is not about the contextual walked itinerary (and walking 25 miles in a day and stopping off is pushing it), it's about the spoken one.
Actually, I see I was wrong about the distance - it's only about 20 miles.
I agree that there isn't on the face of the passage an explanation for change in tone that occurs.
I think you can argue for the beginning of a ministry in Galilee (Luke 4.14-15), as part of which Jesus comes to Nazareth - so the people there already have 'something to go on'. That is why Jesus is invited to read the scripture. He's a bit of a celebrity - local boy made good. In context, I think he would also be expected to comment - which he does.
It is clear that this is only the beginning of what he had to say ("He began by saying to them") - undoubtedly there was more than that one sentence which Luke quotes in v. 20.
The people marvel/ wonder at (a better translation, I think, than were amazed) his gracious speech.
The response that Jesus then makes seems rather provocative just on its own. Maybe that suggests there was something negative in the “Is not this Joseph’s son?”. Maybe we should read it more as, "How come? This is just Joseph's son". And the thing escalates from there.
It's a bit hard to be clear what's going on, because even if they don't like what he says, it seems a bit extreme to try and throw him off a cliff (v.29).
Posts: 3374 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Adam.
Like as the
# 4991
|
Posted
I haven't had a lot to say on this thread, and I'm about to do somewhat of a post-and-run, but it seems you're interested in what literary critics call 'under narration.' You might find what Bruce Longenecker has to say about that.
--------------------
Ave Crux, Spes Unica!
Preaching blog
Posts: 8164 | From: Notre Dame, IN | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
