Apostolic and teaching comments on Matthew 15 and Mark 7, a Canaanite woman

Prior Audio Wrap-up Comments Are Replaced with Written Notes Below

Looking at the gospel accounts of casting out demons, I did not see prior instances when this occurred without someone nearby physically being involved. So, the Lord’s words that he was not sent except to lost sheep of house of Israel, seems to give notice that he was not going into the region where the Canaanite woman’s house was located. But it seems to also be an intentional comment to connect with his next statement. After she came and bowed, he said “it’s not good to take the children’s bread and throw it to the little puppies”. As I re-read that I asked, “where do puppies eat their food”, and in response I thought “on the ground”. What’s on the ground is not in a place of restricted access or reserved for children in the house. And the woman understood that crumbs fall from tables when and where the food/bread is located. Her answer showed she had faith that whatever fell off the bread had the same quality of the children’s bread, though smaller in size, could do what the bread does. He did not need to take what was for the children and throw it somewhere else. Some access was already available.

As I re-read and studied these verses in the two different chapters, it seems the words bread and little puppies were key in how the help the woman requested was made accessible. There were probably other regional cultural factors that played a part in the narrative. But just re-reading it from a current cultural view some things are clear. The wording is such that the Lord intentionally came to the border of Tyre and Sidon. The woman had heard of him. She approached the Lord respectfully and addressed him as Son of David, a well-known historical king in that region. She was loud in calling out to him, and close enough in physical proximity that there seemed to be a protocol in place, such that the disciples were NOT authorized to give an answer for the Lord or to send her away on their own. She understood when the Lord answered it was favorable. (He had no obligation to listen to her), but when a king or dignitary speaks in response to something you are asking as a needed favor, it’s probably NOT just to say go away. She came and bowed down before him and asked him to help her. His second statement followed. I think it provided the help she needed.

February 2024       Grace to you.

The Lord knows not only what was written, but why. Was recently prompted by the Holy spirit to take a look at the Greek word “aner”, to see how it was used in the Bible. I went online to biblehub.com and Strong’s concordance listed 216 occurrences. So, I started going thru the list. Some interesting patterns were noticed. The table shows a summary of what I noticed.

There was no use of the word “aner” in the general context of ‘adult males as a group’ in any of Paul’s letters (nor in Peter’s). It appears that in the language communities to which Paul was writing, the Greek word aner was primarily used in pairing with gune to specify the context of the word gune as wife, and not woman in the general sense.  And unlike the use in James, the Gospels and Book of Acts where the term is used in a general reference to people, Paul only uses it in this manner twice, both in the Book of Romans.  And both usages are as quotes from the Old Testament.  Instead, Paul and Sosthenes in 1 Corinthians use the term “Anthropos”, when the reference is to men in the context of adult males as a group. This in seen in 1 Corinthians 7:2 when it says it is good for an Anthropos(man) not to touch a gune (woman). Using this term clarifies that it refers to men as a group, but not as husbands. The context key pairing aner with gune specifies a husband-wife context. And it is translated into English as such in the New Testament, EXCEPT in the passages used by some to restrict women’s participation in the church assembly. But the original recipients of the letters did not read a translation. They read it in the context of their normal language usage. In this usage, based upon all other times it occurs in the New Testament letters, aner and gune paired to specify husband and wife. Aner was never paired with gune to specify men and women, generically in any of Paul’s letters, (nor James or Peter).

Comment: The scholars translating these words into men and women, instead of husband and wives, may not have noticed this context pattern. But it looks suspicious as a deliberate choice for reasons other than clarity of the text. From what I have read, there were times in history when translation of the Bible into English was not allowed. But God uncovers stuff, and apostles and prophets work in revelation. Something that was known got covered up, but the Holy Spirit prompted. And I smiled and followed the prompt.

Audio notes on this post.

April 2022