Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Evangelical
Politics and Religion
Jesus and the Syrophoenician Woman Revisited

Jesus and the Syrophoenician Woman Revisited

Last updated on: April 20, 2024 at 2:47 pm by John San Nicolas

0 Comments

Jesus and the Syrophoenician Woman Revisited 2024-04-20T14:47:25-06:00 John San Nicolas

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Was Jesus a racist?

In the Gospel of Mark, there is a story where a Syrophoenician woman comes to Jesus. She asks for her daughter to be exorcised, for her daughter was possessed by a demon. After passing a test of faith, Jesus heals the Syrophoenician woman’s daughter without even having to pay the young girl a visit. The story is an exaltation of the woman’s faith, and it speaks to the racial/ethnic tensions in first century Judea.

In 2021, a progressive pastor, Brandan Robertson, posted a video claiming that Jesus used a racial slur against the woman. Here is Robertson’s take:

Her boldness and bravery to speak truth to power actually changes Jesus’s mind. Jesus repents of his racism and extends healing to this woman’s daughter. I love this story because it’s a reminder that Jesus is human. He had prejudices and biases, and when confronted with it, he was willing to do his work. And this woman was willing to stand up and speak truth.

Just a quick note, before Robertson made this take, Rachel Held Evans did. Michael Bird here on Patheos also shares about some biblical scholars who see Jesus’s conversation with the Syrophoenician woman as racialized or racist.

As we’ll see, the “slur” that Jesus used was not a slur at all. But contrary to the usual apologetical responses to Robertson, Jesus is doing much more than not using a slur. He takes an ethnic prejudice and renders it not only wrong, but absurd and childish.

Exploring the Story of the Syrophoenician Woman

Map of First Century Iudaea (Judea). Made by Andrew C. / Wikimedia Commons

The story of Jesus and the Syrophoenician woman takes place in Mark 7. At the time, Jesus was in the region of Tyre and Sidon. These coastal towns were in northern Judea, some distance west of Mt. Hermon.

Though he wanted to go unnoticed (throughout Mark, Jesus is very reclusive and put off by receiving attention or recognition), the Syrophoenician woman heard of his visit. Mark makes it purposefully clear that this woman is a Gentile. Many pastors will exaggerate the amount of prejudice that Jews had for Gentiles (non-Jews), but to varying extents, Jews did have tense relations with Gentiles.

When the woman makes her request to Jesus to exorcise the demon out of her daughter, Jesus responds, “Let the children be fed first, for it is not right to take the children’s bread and throw it to the dogs” (Mk. 7:27, ESV). Quickly, the woman answers on Jesus’s terms: “Yes, Lord; yet even the dogs under the table eat the children’s crumbs” (v. 28). At this, Jesus appears to be satisfied with her response, and he heals her daughter.

Is “Dog” a Racial Slur?

It is verse 27 that Robertson centers on in his video. Robertson claims that “dog” is a racial slur. Robertson seems to share an assumption with many pastors and theologians, both progressive or evangelical, that first century Jews referred to Gentiles as “dogs.”

Bible scholar Mark Nanos, however, has shown that “dog” is not always a slur. In the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament, as well as in some noncanonical texts such as Judith or Tobit, “dog” refers to actual dogs, enemies, lowliness, and an insult. Of the eighteen instances that Nanos cites, only two use “dog” as an insult. But none of those sources suggest that “dog” was an ethnic insult. In fact, in 2 Samuel 16:9 and Isaiah 56:10-11, “dog” refers negatively to other Israelites. Even in rabbinic literature, such as the oft-cited Midrash Tanchuma Terumah 3, “dog” is simply an insult that has no ethno-racial prejudices behind it.

But Jesus does not even use “dog” in an insulting way towards the woman in Mark 7. According to Bible scholar Ryan D. Collman in his paper, “Beware the Dogs! The Phallic Epithet in Phil 3.2,”

Jesus uses the term in an ontological manner to distinguish gentiles from Jews, but he uses it in the context of a household illustration to explain his present mission to Israel, not to belittle the woman for her ethnic or moral status. Additionally, he does not directly call her a ‘dog’, but compares her to one as it pertains to her position within the hierarchy of his mission.

In other words, Collman is saying that Jesus only uses “children” and “dogs” in Mark 7:27 as a means to differentiate Jews from Gentiles. In Matthew’s version of this story, it becomes clearer that Jesus is merely trying to make an ethnic differentiation as Jesus refers to Jews as sheep, and Gentiles as dogs (cf. Matt. 15:21-28). So Jesus is trying to communicate that His priority is to preach the Gospel of the Kingdom first to the Jews before extending that message to all.

Was Jesus Racist? Or, What Did Jesus Really Mean?

So, it has been demonstrated that Jesus could not have been using a racial slur. As Collman and Nanos have found, the common claim that “dog” was a slur used to describe non-Jews has no data to support it. Although it is true that calling someone a “dog” is not necessarily nice.

But what did Jesus really mean? Surely it was not nice to refer to Gentiles as dogs, and Jews as children. But this is where things get especially interesting.

In Mark 7:27, the Greek word that Mark uses for Jesus’s usage of “dog” is kynariois, or kunariois. This word refers to puppies, not dogs! And it is interesting that Jesus refers to the Jewish people as children, not as adults.

So it seems that Jesus is appropriating a common insult, but infantilizing it. Whereas proud men would say, “We are men, but you are dogs!”, Jesus is saying that we are all, despite our aspirations, baby creatures. In this world, there are not men and dogs, but children and pups.

But to really understand this, we should turn to another passage. In Luke 7, Jesus is answering the Pharisees’s accusations of Him being a glutton and drunk, while they accused John the Baptist of being an ascetic who ate and drank nothing. Jesus said that his accusers were like “children,” singing,

We played the flute for you, and you did not dance;
we sang a dirge, and you did not weep (Lk. 7:32).

The Pharisees were not authority figures looking down on Jesus and John for not following objective and holy rules. No! They were children who didn’t get their way. They were kids throwing a tantrum because no one wanted to play their games.

The Importance of Infantilization in Jesus’s Teachings

These two instances, one with the Syrophoenician woman, and the other with the Pharisees, show that Jesus is doing something very important. He is taking adult concepts, like ethnic differences or stringent commands and rules. These adult things can seem so important. They can consume our lives.

We set our hearts on moving out of our hometown to pursue a grand, fulfilling career. We grow apprehensive when we think of how people may perceive us or our interests. We grow prideful in winning accomplishments. But all of this is childish. Wishing to be free is something that children want to do. They want to grow up and make their own decisions. Caring about how others view us is also a childish thing to do. And winning accomplishments is likewise a childish delight, such as winning spellingbees or getting green stickers on your progress report in elementary.

So too is Jesus trying to show us that ethnic differences and strict religious laws are childish things. But don’t get Jesus wrong. There is nothing wrong with being like children. Remember, Jesus says that “Truly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child shall not enter it” (Mk. 10:15).

Perhaps it is good and righteous to know that our inner children are still with us today. Perhaps we get it wrong when we pretend that we are grown up. Because when we neglect our inner child, that is when we abuse it. We can become abusive towards ourselves.

Conclusion

Jesus, it seems to me, is telling us that our tribalism, greed, prejudice, and pride, are all false ways that we try to heal our inner child. But what Jesus calls us to do is to acknowledge who we really are. We are children who need our Father.

Our heavenly Father is the one to whom our hearts belong. And I think that is why Jesus talks of God as a Father, and why He compares us to children. He knows that just like the Pharisees, and just like the Syrophoenician woman, you and I need to be healed and made whole.

Maybe that’s why Jesus says,

What father among you, if his son asks for a fish, will instead of a fish give him a serpent; or if he asks for an egg, will give him a scorpion? If 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! (Lk. 11:11-13).

Sources

Collman, RD. “Beware the Dogs! The Phallic Epithet in Phil 3.2.” New Testament Studies 67, no. 1 (2021):105-120. doi:10.1017/S0028688520000107.

Nanos, M. D. ‘Paul’s Reversal of Jews Calling Gentiles “Dogs” (Philippians 3.2): 1600 Years of an Ideological Tale Wagging an Exegetical Dog?’ BibInt 17 (2009), 448-482.

Previous Post

April 17, 2024

The Stabbing of Bishop Mar Mari Emmanuel

Next Post

April 28, 2024 Observing Passover: Naomi Klein and the Exodus from Zionism

What was the primary material for writing in biblical times?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Parchment Papyrus Clay tablets Stone