|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: You Will Always Have the Poor | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jon Inactive Member |
quote: What is the purpose of this verse? It is hard to reconcile it with Jesus' general position of placing the poor on the top of the list of priorities. There's an obvious conflict in this scene of course. Jesus has to be anointed. But many readers might ask "why not sell the oil and give the money to the poor like Jesus suggests the rich man do in Mt 19:21?" And, indeed, the disciples foil out that very question. Is the verse in question the only answer the Gospel authors could think of or does it have some deeper meaning? And what does it say of the Jesus character?Love your enemies!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jon Inactive Member
|
There will always be poor people and we can feed them anytime we dare. Like after they've already starved to death?
Jesus is simply telling Judas...who hoarded the valuables...to quit whining about spent money. Who said anything about Judas? And no one is whining about "spent money". The complaint from the disciples is that the ointment could have been sold and the money given to the poor just like Jesus preached earlier. Jesus seems to go against his earlier teaching to excuse the woman's exaltation of him, which paints Jesus as a little more selfish than usual. What's the point of this?Love your enemies!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jon Inactive Member |
Isn't this about the same as "don't look a gift horse in the mouth". The woman was generous and well intentioned. This was the wrong time to criticize her. That explains "Why do you trouble the woman? She has performed a good service for me.", but it doesn't really explain Jesus' comment about the poor.Love your enemies!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jon Inactive Member |
But am I?
The statement is rather unusual for Jesus. It's repeated in three gospels and has held some good weight in circles of Christians who believe it can be used to relieve them of the burdensome charge of helping the poor:
quote: And if you do a Google search for this phrase, you will find countless websites attempting to explain this scene to a population of Christians hellbent on excusing themselves from the daunting responsibility of being Christians. That Christians might interpret these words as divine support for laziness should be no surprise; such an interpretation apparently developed pretty quickly in the gospel communities. In Mark, the first written telling of the story, the contradiction between Jesus' words at the anointing and his usual teachings is tempered with a follow-up reminder that the poor still need help:
quote: In Matthew this reminder gets dropped. By the time the story is told in John, the ethical situation of the whole scene has changed with Judas asking the question not for the sake of the poor but because he wants to fatten his own wallet:
quote: The scene arguably no longer has anything to do with the disciples' genuine concern for the poor, and so any controversy or perceived disagreement originally present in the scene has been eliminated with John's redaction. Since the gospel writers were so keen on lessening the reference to Christian duty, it's no surprise the passage got 'upgraded' at every turn. What is a surprise is that the whole conversation takes place at all. It seems as though our bumbling disciples finally think they've gotten one right only to see a 180 from their holy friend and be left further confused than before. On this note, and this goes to the faith/belief side of the coin, I think it's worth a good discussion as to:
Love your enemies!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jon Inactive Member |
Jesus preached to help the poor, but I don't recall Him every saying that the goal was to eliminate their existence. That seems like a copout.
I think the scene has more to do with glorifying God than it does with the poor, with a reminder that Jesus is God. Jesus isn't God in Mark, so I'm not sure how much that interpretation can explain the scene as a whole.Love your enemies!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jon Inactive Member |
That's hard to say. Nobody was taking notes of everything said. What we have, instead, is a somewhat mythologized account. It's more a record of what the early believers thought important. Sure. But we still have a complex Jesus character worth discussing. Whether the things reported are true or not doesn't take away our power to discuss the way the scenes fit into the overall narrative and accompanying belief system.Love your enemies!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jon Inactive Member |
The poor were not at the top of the list of priorities. What gave you that idea? What exactly do you think topped his list?Love your enemies!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jon Inactive Member |
The disciples said "What about the poor?" and Jesus replied, "don't worry about them now, this is important too". What do you suppose Matthew's purpose was in removing Mark's "you can show kindness to them whenever you wish" line?Love your enemies!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jon Inactive Member |
And if you do a Google search for this phrase, you will find countless websites attempting to explain this scene to a population of Christians hellbent on excusing themselves from the daunting responsibility of being Christians. That's horrible slander. Prove it. Did you bother doing the Google search, Faith?
"The Poor You Will Always Have:" It's Not A Prediction! That's one; I'll leave you to find the others on your own.
You might be interested in this: I'm not.Love your enemies!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jon Inactive Member |
To make it more about Jesus and less about the poor. But the author has no real reason to do that; by the time he begins writing Jesus has been long dead. The only way Matthew's audience could make it more about Jesus and less about the poor would be to spend more time and/or money on their secretive worshiping and less on alleviating poverty. By removing the reminder that the poor will still need to be helped, Matthew makes Jesus' charge to focus on him over the poor for that one night an eternal commandment. Sounds like a good excuse for getting new seats in the church while the folks on the street sleep in boxes. Love your enemies!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jon Inactive Member |
Did you miss the link to the Washington Post article on Rick Perry?
Love your enemies!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jon Inactive Member |
From where do you think Matthew sourced this particular scene?
Love your enemies!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jon Inactive Member |
How does it make it an eternal commandment? Mark's Jesus reminds the disciples that after the coming events, they will still need to help the poor. Matthew's Jesus does not remind the disciples of this and so Jesus never leads center stage.
Sounds to me like you're trying to make it that way. Not at all. I'm pointing out that it is a possible way to interpret Matthew's omission. That this scene was and has been perplexing to Christians is supported by the discussion Christians have around the issue and the fact that early gospel writers saw it necessary to edit this story in each of their retellings.Love your enemies!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jon Inactive Member |
In fact, the Catholic Church is urging that we not interpret Jesus words in exactly the way that you are doing in the OP. I have no favored interpretation. But there is a discussion among Christians surrounding this and it's probably because folks realize the scene causes some difficulty with Jesus' general attitude toward the poor.Love your enemies!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jon Inactive Member |
That still doesn't answer the question.
Love your enemies!
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024