The subject of how to pray is a different topic.
But if we are pursuing it then I don't think we should shoehorn the different gospels into one perspective. Matthew and Luke are writing to communities with very different needs. This excerpt provides much illumination IMHO.
Matthew was writing to a Jewish-Christian community whose members were heirs of the rich devotional tradition of Israel and who had learned to pray when they were children. He therefore does not feel the need to encourage his people to pray. They prayed often, and they enjoyed praying (Matt 6:5-8) https://bible.oremus.org/?ql=457710835.
(p237)
.........
..by Luke's time many (gentiles) had flocked to the church. As time went by, however, and the second coming of Jesus did not happen, many of them began to be discouraged. The Gentile believers in these churches did not have a long tradition prayer and worship, and many lacked sustaining power for the long haul through history. It is not surprising, then, that Luke shows considerably more interest in prayer than do the other Evangelists. He wishes his people to experience the riches of the heritage of Israel, to keep on praying, and not to lose heart (Luke 18:1)https://bible.oremus.org/?ql=457711076. Thus, when the Son of Man returns, he will find many faithful believers on the earth.
(p247)
Yes, but not that much of a different topic, since the Syro-Phœnician woman is petitioning God (Jesus) to perform a miracle for her (i.e. "praying" in any meaningful sense of the term).
The Gentile believers in these churches did not have a long tradition prayer and worship, and many lacked sustaining power for the long haul through history.
This seems just wrong. Without getting too bogged down in a tangent, every Roman household had its Lares and Penates, and the Parthenon wasn't built simply as a tourist attraction. Claiming that no one in the Mediterranean world other than Jews had "a long tradition prayer and worship" seems to depend on defining everything other than Judaism as something other than "prayer" or "worship". In other words, semantic trickery rather than serious analysis.
The Gentile believers in these churches did not have a long tradition prayer and worship, and many lacked sustaining power for the long haul through history.
This seems just wrong. Without getting too bogged down in a tangent, every Roman household had its Lares and Penates, and the Parthenon wasn't built simply as a tourist attraction. Claiming that no one in the Mediterranean world other than Jews had "a long tradition prayer and worship" seems to depend on defining everything other than Judaism as something other than "prayer" or "worship". In other words, semantic trickery rather than serious analysis.
Prof Gill has made a value judgment there, and your value judgment differs.
The Matthean narrative does allow that the gentiles had a tradition of prayer, but it sees it as rather lacking, and in the discourse of Matt 6-8 Jesus tells the crowds:
Matt 6: 7-8
7 ‘When you are praying, do not heap up empty phrases as the Gentiles do; for they think that they will be heard because of their many words. 8Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him.
And there is no question that the Matthean Christians know how to pray as they are also told to avoid ostentatious praying:
Matt 6: 5-6
5 ‘And whenever you pray, do not be like the hypocrites; for they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, so that they may be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward. 6But whenever you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you.
So Matthew then gives what I call the KISS (Keep it Short and Sweet) version of the Lord's Prayer/Our Father.
This "tone down your prayer" approach is very different from the context in Luke 11 where his disciples do not appear to know how to pray and ask Jesus to teach them.
Luke 11
1He was praying in a certain place, and after he had finished, one of his disciples said to him, ‘Lord, teach us to pray, as John taught his disciples.’ 2He said to them, ‘When you pray, say:
Father, hallowed be your name.
Your kingdom come.
3 Give us each day our daily bread.
4 And forgive us our sins,
for we ourselves forgive everyone indebted to us.
And do not bring us to the time of trial.’
This indicates to me that the Lukan Christians did need to learn how to pray.
Luke also provides many examples of Jesus praying as a model for the audience of Luke's Gospel.
And immediately after the Lord's Prayer, Luke provides two stories to encourage his audience to persist in praying:
5 And he said to them, ‘Suppose one of you has a friend, and you go to him at midnight and say to him, “Friend, lend me three loaves of bread; 6for a friend of mine has arrived, and I have nothing to set before him.” 7And he answers from within, “Do not bother me; the door has already been locked, and my children are with me in bed; I cannot get up and give you anything.” 8I tell you, even though he will not get up and give him anything because he is his friend, at least because of his persistence he will get up and give him whatever he needs.
9 ‘So I say to you, Ask, and it will be given to you; search, and you will find; knock, and the door will be opened for you. 10For everyone who asks receives, and everyone who searches finds, and for everyone who knocks, the door will be opened. 11Is there anyone among you who, if your child asks for a fish, will give a snake instead of a fish? 12Or if the child asks for an egg, will give a scorpion? 13If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will the heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!’
Luke also provides the parable of the importunate widow as an encouragement for his audience to keep praying, keep faith, and not lose heart:
Luke 18: 1-8
1Then Jesus told them a parable about their need to pray always and not to lose heart. 2He said, ‘In a certain city there was a judge who neither feared God nor had respect for people. 3In that city there was a widow who kept coming to him and saying, “Grant me justice against my opponent.” 4For a while he refused; but later he said to himself, “Though I have no fear of God and no respect for anyone, 5yet because this widow keeps bothering me, I will grant her justice, so that she may not wear me out by continually coming.” ’ 6And the Lord said, ‘Listen to what the unjust judge says. 7And will not God grant justice to his chosen ones who cry to him day and night? Will he delay long in helping them? 8I tell you, he will quickly grant justice to them. And yet, when the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on earth?’
So perhaps the style of prayer that the gentiles had inherited was regarded as deficient by the redactors of Matthew and Luke. In any case, both thought that their audiences needed some education in the correct way to pray, though the education was different for each audience.
I take this passage to be a prediction of Islam. Mohammed picked up whatever scraps of Christianity and Judaism that he could find and molded them into a new religion.
I further see Mohammed a type of Moses for the Ishmaelites as he brought them the Law and monotheism. But whereas Moses was privileged to speak to YHWH face to face, Mohammed had to make do with the "scraps from the table."
I'm not sure any passage of Scripture predicts events centuries in the future, rather they all address points of relevance to the people who were the first audience. In this case, the passage was recorded for the benefit of the growing number of Christians who were not Jews in the first century church. The response of Jesus (eventually) is quite clearly that Gentiles get to eat at the table along with Jews, the Gentiles may have seen an attitude among Jews that the Jewish heritage gave them a privileged position (maybe even some Jewish Christians treated Gentile Christians as though they were little better than dogs under the table picking up the scraps) - it's almost certain that Jews at the time the story took place would, at best, treat Gentiles as that. The Syro-Phoenician woman is repeating what she may well have heard (if not necessarily so bluntly*), the same that some Gentile Christians may have heard, and Jesus eventually comes round to answering her plea exactly as He'd been answering the pleas of Jews.
I'm not sure there's much that can be said here about an extrapolation of the text to Islamophobia. I'm sure that Muslims would say that receiving the authoritative and uncorrupted text of the Quran means they're eating the best, and it's those of us who have the imperfect and corrupted Hebrew and Christian Bible (as they'd probably see it) that are eating the scraps from the table.
* a contemporary example of messages that are clear but not blunt might include black people who have lived all their lives knowing that the police and politicians don't consider them to have as much value as white, who then stand up and say "black lives matter" hear the response "all lives matter", which simply repeats what they've always heard no matter how many times those saying "all lives matter" claim they're not being racist. I could easily see a situation in the early church where the Gentiles were seen as inferior to Jews because they don't have that heritage of the Law and Moses, for whom "all Christians matter" still has a tone of "but Gentiles are like dogs eating the scraps".
I take this passage to be a prediction of Islam. Mohammed picked up whatever scraps of Christianity and Judaism that he could find and molded them into a new religion.
I further see Mohammed a type of Moses for the Ishmaelites as he brought them the Law and monotheism. But whereas Moses was privileged to speak to YHWH face to face, Mohammed had to make do with the "scraps from the table."
Nobody else does. Where else do third class citizens benefit from trickle down? Apart from everywhere.
Some time ago I read a book on the Islamic Jesus. the writer pointed out that at the of Mohammed, there was a thriving Jewish Christian Community in the land we know as Saudi Arabia. This community likely followed the three Synoptic Gospels but knew nothing about the writings of Paul, followers of Islam have little problem with the synoptic Gospels. It appears Mohammed borrowed much of his teachings of Jesus from this Jewish Christian community
That's very interesting. I wonder who their founder was? One or 2 of the 11, who'd wandered away from the troubles in Jerusalem and found their mission there? Were their descendants the founders of St Catherine's Monastery?
I think it's probably more complex than that. There seem to have been a number of Jewish diaspora communities in that part of the world - there was one in what we now know as Yemen. It is quite feasible that as Christianity started to spread, Jewish believers visited these communities. The destruction of Jerusalem would also have caused a fresh wave of dispersal, especially along the well established trade routes.
If you want to discuss something related to a thread which has not been posted on for eight months, it is much better to start a new thread, especially if the relationship is tenuous. There is a gap between the question of whether Jesus was wrong, which was the original thread topic and the possible origin of Islam.
Comments
But if we are pursuing it then I don't think we should shoehorn the different gospels into one perspective. Matthew and Luke are writing to communities with very different needs. This excerpt provides much illumination IMHO.
Matthew was writing to a Jewish-Christian community whose members were heirs of the rich devotional tradition of Israel and who had learned to pray when they were children. He therefore does not feel the need to encourage his people to pray. They prayed often, and they enjoyed praying (Matt 6:5-8) https://bible.oremus.org/?ql=457710835.
(p237)
.........
..by Luke's time many (gentiles) had flocked to the church. As time went by, however, and the second coming of Jesus did not happen, many of them began to be discouraged. The Gentile believers in these churches did not have a long tradition prayer and worship, and many lacked sustaining power for the long haul through history. It is not surprising, then, that Luke shows considerably more interest in prayer than do the other Evangelists. He wishes his people to experience the riches of the heritage of Israel, to keep on praying, and not to lose heart (Luke 18:1)https://bible.oremus.org/?ql=457711076. Thus, when the Son of Man returns, he will find many faithful believers on the earth.
(p247)
Athol Gill, Life On The Road, Herald Press, 1992
And Mark has much less to say about prayer e.g Mark 9:29 https://bible.oremus.org/?ql=457710556
Yes, but not that much of a different topic, since the Syro-Phœnician woman is petitioning God (Jesus) to perform a miracle for her (i.e. "praying" in any meaningful sense of the term).
This seems just wrong. Without getting too bogged down in a tangent, every Roman household had its Lares and Penates, and the Parthenon wasn't built simply as a tourist attraction. Claiming that no one in the Mediterranean world other than Jews had "a long tradition prayer and worship" seems to depend on defining everything other than Judaism as something other than "prayer" or "worship". In other words, semantic trickery rather than serious analysis.
Prof Gill has made a value judgment there, and your value judgment differs.
The Matthean narrative does allow that the gentiles had a tradition of prayer, but it sees it as rather lacking, and in the discourse of Matt 6-8 Jesus tells the crowds:
And there is no question that the Matthean Christians know how to pray as they are also told to avoid ostentatious praying:
So Matthew then gives what I call the KISS (Keep it Short and Sweet) version of the Lord's Prayer/Our Father.
This "tone down your prayer" approach is very different from the context in Luke 11 where his disciples do not appear to know how to pray and ask Jesus to teach them.
This indicates to me that the Lukan Christians did need to learn how to pray.
Luke also provides many examples of Jesus praying as a model for the audience of Luke's Gospel.
And immediately after the Lord's Prayer, Luke provides two stories to encourage his audience to persist in praying: Luke also provides the parable of the importunate widow as an encouragement for his audience to keep praying, keep faith, and not lose heart:
So perhaps the style of prayer that the gentiles had inherited was regarded as deficient by the redactors of Matthew and Luke. In any case, both thought that their audiences needed some education in the correct way to pray, though the education was different for each audience.
I further see Mohammed a type of Moses for the Ishmaelites as he brought them the Law and monotheism. But whereas Moses was privileged to speak to YHWH face to face, Mohammed had to make do with the "scraps from the table."
I'm not sure there's much that can be said here about an extrapolation of the text to Islamophobia. I'm sure that Muslims would say that receiving the authoritative and uncorrupted text of the Quran means they're eating the best, and it's those of us who have the imperfect and corrupted Hebrew and Christian Bible (as they'd probably see it) that are eating the scraps from the table.
* a contemporary example of messages that are clear but not blunt might include black people who have lived all their lives knowing that the police and politicians don't consider them to have as much value as white, who then stand up and say "black lives matter" hear the response "all lives matter", which simply repeats what they've always heard no matter how many times those saying "all lives matter" claim they're not being racist. I could easily see a situation in the early church where the Gentiles were seen as inferior to Jews because they don't have that heritage of the Law and Moses, for whom "all Christians matter" still has a tone of "but Gentiles are like dogs eating the scraps".
Nobody else does. Where else do third class citizens benefit from trickle down? Apart from everywhere.
If you want to discuss something related to a thread which has not been posted on for eight months, it is much better to start a new thread, especially if the relationship is tenuous. There is a gap between the question of whether Jesus was wrong, which was the original thread topic and the possible origin of Islam.
Host hat off