Aramaic Thoughts
Week of June 3 - 9, 2007
Idioms in the Bible - Part 8
I may have written on this one before, but there is so much misinformation out there about it that it’s worth addressing again. Matt 19:24 reads, "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle." Lamsa, on the basis of the Peshitta, translates it "for a rope to go through the eye of a needle." The Greek text reads kamelos (camel), though a few texts of minor importance read kamilos (rope). The Syriac reads lgm (rope), while the Syriac word for camel is gml. The reader can easily see how, given the subject matter, someone could think "rope" was intended instead of "camel." Thus Lamsa explains this as an idiom meaning "with great difficulty (The rich man must give up something.)." However, the point is not that this is something accomplished only with difficulty, but something impossible. Jesus makes it clear with his statement recorded in vs 26, "With man this is impossible, but with God all things are impossible." If the word were "rope," one could see how with a big enough needle or a small enough rope it could be done. But with a camel, it is flat impossible. Jesus is engaging in the common Semitic practice of engaging in hyperbole (deliberate overstatement) to make a point in a forceful manner.
Mark 5:25-34 tells the story of the healing of the woman with the issue of blood. In that story, the woman has heard about Jesus, and determines that she might be able to be healed if she can only touch his garment. Lamsa considers this expression an idiom that means "an urgent need." It is true that, "Seizing the edge of someone’s robe was a gesture of fervent entreaty in Biblical and Near Eastern tradition" (Keener, Matthew, 303), and this may be all that Lamsa means. But the matter of literal touching is essential to the story. The woman would have been made unclean by her irregular flow of blood (see Lev 15:25-30). Thus her touching of anyone would have made that person unclean as well. She would have been a social outcast, and her act here is an act of sheer desperation, and an apparent certainty that Jesus not only can but will help.
The centrality of a literal touching continues, however, when her touch effects what she has hoped for, Jesus sensed that power had gone out from him. He then asks who touched him. To this question the disciples respond with astonishment. What does Jesus mean, asking who touched him? The crowd was pressing so close that it was impossible to avoid being touched. Thus there is a play on the sense of "touch," both the physical touch originally intended by the woman and the "psychical" touch Jesus felt as her faith drew upon his supply. In all this, the reality of touching is central, and without that reality, the story loses its power.
'Aramaic Thoughts' Copyright 2002-2007 © Benjamin Shaw. http://www.studylight.org/col/at/
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment