Research Digest

Mark’s (Mark 8:2-26) account of the use of spittle by Jesus in his healing of the blind man is interesting because it is atypical of his recording of Jesus’ usual practice.

Parallels between this account and a similar healing (using spittle) by the Roman Emperor Vespasian have been known for a long time. However, an article in New Testament Studies 54 (1). 2008. 1-17., suggests that the two may be linked. Eric Eve argues that the reports of Vespasian’s miraculous healings (Tactitus, Histories 4.81; Suetonius, Vespasian 7.2; and Cassius Dio Roman Histories LXV.8), one of which involves his use of spittle to heal a blind man, appear to be designed to create a close association between (perhaps even a direct identification with) the Emperor and the god Sarapis and was intended to legitimate his claim to the throne during a politically turbulent period. The worship of Sarapis was a syncretistic cult formed principally from Egyptian and Greek religious images and practice promoted within Ptolemaic Egypt.

Eric sets the reports of Vespasian’s healing within the wider context of a propaganda campaign mounted on his behalf to secure the imperial throne (around 69 CE). He concludes by suggesting that, through portents, prophecies and miraculous works, these efforts to equate Vespasian with divine favour would appear to the Jewish nation (already under considerable pressure from Rome) as quasi-messianic and a “usurpation of Jewish messianic hopes.”

While conceding that Mark’s account functions on a number of levels, Eric argues that it could also act as a response to this propaganda. Looking at the passage in greater detail, he observes that the “spitting is curiously redundant”; the man only asks to be touched, Jesus uncharacteristically spits (the only other time is Mark 7:33), after the initial partial healing, Jesus then heals through his touch without using spittle. Eric contends that the inclusion of spittle is an editorial device to create an association with Vespasian’s miracle. Just as Vespasian’s supporters used the story to heighten his claim to divine favour, Mark leads from this story straight into Peter’s confession of Jesus as the messiah (Mark 8:27-30), an explanation that ‘messiah’ should be understood in terms very different from that styled by Vespasian (8:31-38) and then the divine endorsement of the Transfiguration (9:1-9).

Eric notes that even if any similarities between the two healing stories were purely coincidental, it would be more than likely that “Mark’s audience would hear one story in terms of the other.”

Want to Know More About Vespasian?

To read Tacitus' account of Vespasian - click here

To read Suetonius' account of Vespasian - click here

Does Proverbs really equate some types of women with ‘pigs’? In an article in Vetus Testamentum 58 (1). 2008. 13-27., Knut Heim from the Queen’s Foundation, Birmingham re-examines this interpretation and suggests an alternative. He notes that, although more recent commentators are becoming sensitive to issues of imagery and gender, most modern commentaries of Proverbs 11:22 still tend to draw a simple correspondence between physical beauty with the gold ring and the representation of the woman with that of a pig. Accordingly, the proverb tends (although not exclusively) to be read as an “emblematic parallelism”; where the first line presents an image (like a cartoon) and the second functions as its caption.

Knut approaches 11:22 through the wider context of Proverbs. He notes that the intended target readers of the text were young males who were being prepared for leadership roles within ancient Israelite society. Instruction in gender relations, as well as marriage and family roles were therefore highly important. He also points out the editors of Proverbs have utilised the tendency within Hebrew grammar to render abstract nouns (such as ‘wisdom’) in the feminine gender which helps to “create a range of appealing female figures that hold the (male) readers’ interest.”

Knut offers a literal translation of 11:22 to illustrate an alternative reading where the figure of the woman is not represented by the pig:

A golden ring in the snout of a pig;
a beautiful woman who has turned from discretion.

In this way, the value of the ring (gold) is devalued by its context (snout of a pig). Likewise the value of the woman (her beauty) is also devalued by her context (behaviour which lacks discretion). The woman is therefore represented, not as a pig, but as a ring. Knut observes that there is a sense in which beauty is presented here as a commodity which draws parallels with Proverbs 12:4, where a bride is seen as the adornment of the husband. Linking the two proverbs, he suggests that the pig might even be seen to refer to the husband! Knut concludes with presenting two images that 11:22 evokes. (1) The husband who tries to display his wife as evidence of his social worth or status. (2) The man who chooses outward beauty over inward qualities will be seen for what he is – “a pig whose beautiful but indiscrete wife leads him by the nose.”

For those who have read about Hikmat Kachouh’s research, featured in our Research Profile section, might be interested in his article published in Novum Testamentum 50 (1). 2008. 28-57., Hikmat argues that contrary to the perception that Arabic New Testament manuscripts have little to offer those interested in studying the early forms these texts took, they actually have much to contribute to our understanding of “the history of the transmission of the text, as well as to enhancing our knowledge of the biblical tradition.”

Hikmat supports his argument with an examination of a fascinating, but little known, eighth/ninth century manuscript Codex Sinaiticus Arabicus (CSA) found at St Catherine’s Monastery. CSA is one of the oldest surviving Arabic Gospel manuscripts and includes all four Gospels, a sermon (In natalem Christi diem) by St John Chrysostom, a canon of the Apostles and a sermon for monks. The codex is a palimpsest document where the parchment has already been used and its previous writing erased. In many places the original writing in Greek, Latin and Arabic can still be read. What makes the codex unique is that many of its folios are made up of small pieces of parchment – sometimes as many as four or five pieces - painstakingly sewn together which, at times, creates a patchwork effect. Hikmat notes that this must have been an endeavour which required hard work and perseverance.

The codex presents a number of variant readings, some of which suggest an agreement with very early versions. For example, the CSA at Luke 16:19 (the parable of the rich man and Lazarus) includes the name of the rich man (Nineveh) which can also be found in the third century papyrus manuscript P⁷⁵. Following a textual analysis of two hundred and thirty readings from the Gospel of Luke, Hikmat demonstrates how at many places the text of CSA differs from the Majority Text and “agrees with some of the earliest Greek traditions as well as ancient versions.”

Recent archaeological finds in Philistia might help to answer a number of (probably unspoken) questions raised in the listener’s mind when hearing the account of Israel ’s war against the Philistines in 1 Samuel. Aren Maeir, from Bar-llan University Israel, suggests that discoveries from Iron Age Philistine cities might hold the key to the mysterious affliction experienced by Israel’s enemies in the Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 32 (1). 2007. 23-40. Samuel’s account describes the Philistines, having captured the Ark of the Covenant, being struck by ‘opalim, (lit. ‘high’, ‘raised’ or ‘tower’) translated in the NRSV as ‘tumours’ and generally understood to mean ‘haemorrhoids’ (1 Sam 5:6). In an attempt to appease the wrath of Israel ’s God, the Philistines placed five gold representations of these ‘opalim, together with five gold mice, in the Ark (1 Sam 6:4-5). However, the questions that this raises are, why haemorrhoids and how does one represent a haemorrhoid in gold?

Taking the two central motifs in the ‘Ark Narrative’ - religion and sickness – Aren connects these with some intriguing archaeological finds. Aren observes that recent excavations have helped to bring to light hitherto unknown aspects to Philistine religious practice. Among the artefacts recovered are a number of bronze and ceramic phalli which, as Aren notes, although fairly common within Egyptian religious iconography, is relatively rare in ancient Semitic iconography. If Aren is correct in making this connection, one can begin to understand the different levels on which this account works. The affliction literally (as Aren suggests) ‘hit the Philistines below the belt.’ However it was not only humiliating and humorous (to the reader), it subverted elements within the Philistine cultic system of belief. Furthermore, the forced offering of these gold phalli (which are now unproblematic as representational items) also re-enforced the dominancy of YHWH over the Philistines’ gods; a cultic expression of Philistine culture would become a caricature of their humiliating defeat.

If you would like to see a photograph of one of these Philistine artefacts, one can be seen by clicking onto Aren Maeir's blog - click here

Almost anyone who has attended Sunday School or regularly listens to sermons will be aware of Paul's instruction to put on the armour of God (Eph 6:13-17). One of the items to which Paul refers is the 'breastplate of righteousness' (v.14). However, it is unclear if Paul means that it is God's righteousness or our own righteousness which will act as a breastplate.

[10] Finally, be strong in the Lord and in the strength of his power.
[11] Put on the whole armour of God, so that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil.
[12] For our struggle is not against enemies of blood and flesh, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers of this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places.
[13] Therefore take up the whole armour of God, so that you may be able to withstand on that evil day, and having done everything, to stand firm.
[14] Stand therefore, and fasten the belt of truth around your waist, and put on the breastplate of righteousness.
[15] As shoes for your feet put on whatever will make you ready to proclaim the gospel of peace.
[16] With all these, take the shield of faith, with which you will be able to quench all the flaming arrows of the evil one.
[17] Take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God.
         
(NRSV - used with permission)

Writing in the Tyndale Bulletin. 58 (2). 2007. 275-287., David Wenkel seeks to answer this question which has exercised theologians for centuries. David notes that as far back as 1643 Paul Bayne was discussing three possible interpretations of this phrase: (1) A righteousness imputed by faith, (2) A righteousness which was inherent in the believer and (3) A righteousness of "course, or conversation or worke").

David examines the use of the armour/weaponry metaphor in Paul's writing (Rom 6:13, 13:12; 2 Cor 6:4 and 7b, 10:4; 1 Thess 5:8). Here he notes that, although there is a certain flexibility in the use of specific armour, there is a general consistency in how it relates to the inherent (rather than imputed) virtues of the believer. David then explores the direct source of the 'breastplate metaphor'; Is 59:17. Here again, David suggests that the righteousness relates to the virtue of the wearer (YHWH).

David argues that in order to understand what Paul meant in this passage it is important to understand how the entire armour functions. The key to this, he claims, is found in Paul's exhortation to the believer to the "be strong in the Lord" (v.10). The Greek construction suggests that it can be read as a passive - in other words: "be strengthened in the power of the Lord." David concludes that, whilst the righteousness that acts as a protection is the internal virtue of the believer, Paul understands that such righteousness is made possible by the strength of the Lord.

Research Digest

Page 2