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 don't think she changed his mind, I think Jesus parroted the Galilean view of Syro-Phoenicians as "dogs," inviting her reply, to which he warmly responded. The fact that he agrees to heal her daughter means he has no animus or prejudice against her.
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.
I have always felt that this conversation seems like one where we've come into the room half-way through and therefore don't fully understand what's going on. Maybe the author(s) of the gospels assumed certain things that we actually need to have spelled out to us?
Firstly, after the experience of having to serve on a jury panel, I understand the importance of weighing up the evidence of all the witnesses involved. So the Markan narrative says :
“ Then he told her, “For such a reply, you may go; the demon has left your daughter.” “
But the Matthean witness further discloses:
“ Then Jesus answered her: O Woman, great is your faith! Be it done for you as you desire “
.. and so there are two things I see here ( Mathew 15:28 ESV ):
1) γενηθήτω ( become ) is an imperative .. and so according to Mathew, Jesus commanded the child’s deliverance ..
2) IN Both witnesses, the Syro-Phoenician woman is VERY OBJECTIVE in her approach to Jesus. In all her recorded discussion or discourse with Jesus, she addresses Him in complete deference : “ κύριε “ and in Mathew’s report “ κύριε, υἱὲ Δαβίδ “.. And her request is straight to the point “ Ἐλέησόν με !!” .. This is an imperative also and in other words she is really desperate to make such a demand on Jesus. Now the LXX often translates the noun form for the verb “ ἐλεέω “ which is “ἔλεος “ for HESED .. and so she is crying out for compassion. Further the Matthean witness discloses: “ But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us. ( KJV) “ and so the disciples are in on this as well. But Mathew goes even further still “ Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me. ( “ Κύριε βοήθει μοι – Lord Help Me “ which is another imperative ).. And so her objectivity in the person of Jesus as Her Lord, is very full on..
But the interesting and very important point is her declaration of an important truth that discloses Jesus as her LORD and MASTER, as being the object of HER FAITH: “ And she said, Truth, Lord (κύριε ): yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters' ( κυρίων ) table .. (KJV) “.. So in essence Jesus could not deny Himself because she had Him cornered and the reality is that the Syro-Phoenician woman had won His Compassion (HESED) ..
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 don't think she changed his mind, I think Jesus parroted the Galilean view of Syro-Phoenicians as "dogs," inviting her reply, to which he warmly responded. The fact that he agrees to heal her daughter means he has no animus or prejudice against her.
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.
Lori, I've heard similar things. I wonder if Jesus was voicing the standard denunciation of Syro-Phoenicians.
I have always felt that this conversation seems like one where we've come into the room half-way through and therefore don't fully understand what's going on. Maybe the author(s) of the gospels assumed certain things that we actually need to have spelled out to us?
Firstly, after the experience of having to serve on a jury panel, I understand the importance of weighing up the evidence of all the witnesses involved. So the Markan narrative says :
“ Then he told her, “For such a reply, you may go; the demon has left your daughter.” “
But the Matthean witness further discloses:
“ Then Jesus answered her: O Woman, great is your faith! Be it done for you as you desire “
.. and so there are two things I see here ( Mathew 15:28 ESV ):
1) γενηθήτω ( become ) is an imperative .. and so according to Mathew, Jesus commanded the child’s deliverance ..
2) IN Both witnesses, the Syro-Phoenician woman is VERY OBJECTIVE in her approach to Jesus. In all her recorded discussion or discourse with Jesus, she addresses Him in complete deference : “ κύριε “ and in Mathew’s report “ κύριε, υἱὲ Δαβίδ “.. And her request is straight to the point “ Ἐλέησόν με !!” .. This is an imperative also and in other words she is really desperate to make such a demand on Jesus. Now the LXX often translates the noun form for the verb “ ἐλεέω “ which is “ἔλεος “ for HESED .. and so she is crying out for compassion. Further the Matthean witness discloses: “ But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us. ( KJV) “ and so the disciples are in on this as well. But Mathew goes even further still “ Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me. ( “ Κύριε βοήθει μοι – Lord Help Me “ which is another imperative ).. And so her objectivity in the person of Jesus as Her Lord, is very full on..
But the interesting and very important point is her declaration of an important truth that discloses Jesus as her LORD and MASTER, as being the object of HER FAITH: “ And she said, Truth, Lord (κύριε ): yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters' ( κυρίων ) table .. (KJV) “.. So in essence Jesus could not deny Himself because she had Him cornered and the reality is that the Syro-Phoenician woman had won His Compassion (HESED) ..