Did the Syro-Phoenician Woman Change Jesus's Mind?
I’m sure many of you know the story of Jesus and the Syro-Phoenician woman in Mk 7:24-30:
24 Jesus left that place and went to the vicinity of Tyre. He entered a house and did not want anyone to know it; yet he could not keep his presence secret. 25 In fact, as soon as she heard about him, a woman whose little daughter was possessed by an impure spirit came and fell at his feet. 26 The woman was a Greek, born in Syrian Phoenicia. She begged Jesus to drive the demon out of her daughter.
27 “First let the children eat all they want,” he told her, “for it is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs.”
28 “Lord,” she replied, “even the dogs under the table eat the children’s crumbs.”
29 Then he told her, “For such a reply, you may go; the demon has left your daughter.”
30 She went home and found her child lying on the bed, and the demon gone (NIV)
This passage raises all sorts of questions, like was Jesus xenophobic towards a foreigner, was he misogynistic towards a woman in calling her a “dog,” and more.
What do we make of this?
To read further, consider taking out a paid subscription, only $7 per month or $75 per year, supports me in my ministry and scholarship, and gets you 3-4 posts per week on biblical studies, Christianity and gender relationships, cultural commentary, previews of my books, and some cool videos.
In a fair and rank analysis of the passage, there is no way spin it. Jesus’s answer to her desperate request appears merciless as he refuses to help her and he is derogatory in that to label or compare someone to a dog, in nearly any culture, is an insult.
To imagine that Jesus’s harsh words are blunted by the use of the diminutive Greek word for dog, kynarion, i.e., puppy, does not dull the sense of offense for the reason that to label her a “little bitch” is hardly an improvement on “bitch.” In fact, Joseph Klausner notes that the statement is “so brusque and chauvinistic that if any other Jewish teacher of the time had said such a thing Christians would never have forgiven Judaism for it.”
What happens next, however, is indeed striking. The Syro-Phoenician woman neither protests the unfairness of Jesus’s stinging reply nor shrinks away in defeat, instead, she dares to play the word game with Jesus … and wins!
She doesn’t rebuff the derisive designation of a “dog,” but plays on it to turn the tables on Jesus. She does not deny her outsider status as a Gentile “dog,” but takes the imagery in a new direction. Instead of dogs being unclean scavengers who are a cipher for Gentiles, she presents dogs as supplicants in a lower place in the hierarchy of power, yet they are still deserving of compassion.
In other words, she acknowledges her lower place as a “dog” before Jesus or the Jews, but pivots towards the picture of a household dog who is inferior, yet also dependent, one who is part of the household, and who eats the same bread as the children.
The fact that Jesus grants her request because of her answer shows that in the game of words she has won. The woman maybe “other,” even a regional rival to the Galileans, an idolator in Jewish metrics, but her expression of faith through wit makes her deserve an act of mercy for her sick daughter. She is clever and shrewd and persuades Jesus into granting her request. Susanna Asikainen notes that, “The Syrophoenician woman is an exceptional figure, because she is the only person in the Synoptic Gospels to best Jesus in a dispute.”
Very good.
However, have you answered your question?
Was Jesus initiating a word game, or did she expand Jesus' own understanding of his ministry and calling? It seems that if she changed his mind then he was sincere in what he had said to her, but the only way that we can see him as not being so crass as to address this woman with insult would be if he had not been fully sincere when he answered her plea with an insulting explanation of his refusal.
I’ve read elsewhere that Jesus was deliberately voicing the opinion of the disciples, so they could hear their own thoughts revealed to them. That even though His particular mission was to Israel, He was already looking ahead to when God’s glory would be revealed to the whole world.