Now as they went on their way, he entered a village; and a woman named Martha received him into her house.
And she had a sister called Mary, who sat at the Lords feet and listened to his teaching.
But Martha was distracted with much serving; and she went to him and said, Lord, do you not care that my sister has left me to serve alone?Tell her then to help me.But the Lord answered her, Martha, Martha, you are anxious and troubled about many things; one thing is needful.
Mary has chosen the good portion, which shall not be taken away from her.Luke 10:38-42 (page 177)
Marys good portion is criticalIs Jesus speaking metaphorically here, or can his words be taken literally, [as shown] in the expression fishers of men?[O]nce again, those who see spiritual meaning in Jesus words are being played for a fool.Though a character named Mary who has a fine portion that is not taken away from her is quite rare in literature, a character with the same name and attributes is also found in Wars of the Jews, contained in the passage that describes the Mary who ate her son [p. 55 ->] [in] an exceptionally grisly event caused by the famine that occurred during the Roman siege of Jerusalem. (pages 178-179, plus p. 55)
There was a certain woman that dwelt beyond Jordan, her name was Mary; it was now impossible for her any way to find any more food, while the famine pierced through her very bowels and marrow. She then attempted a most unnatural thing:and snatching up her sonshe said, Come on; be thou by foodand a myth to the world, which is all that is now wanting to complete the calamities of us Jews.As soon as she had said this, she slew her son, and then roasted him, ate the one half of him, and kept the other half by her concealed.Upon this the seditious came in presently, and smelling the horrid scent of this food,(pages 56-57)[p. 179 ->] they threatened her that they would cut her throat immediately if she [Mary] did not show them what food she had gotten ready.She replied that she had saved a very fine portion of it for them, and withal uncovered what was left of her son.
After which those men went outandleft the rest of that meat to the mother.106
Josephus passage has a conceptual parallel in Luke 10:42.But the reader must make more than a linguistic connection in order to be able to see the parallels between the two passages.
[T]he conceptual parallels between the New Testament and the Wars of the Jewscannot be seen through the literal method of analysis that scholars have always applied to the works.The relationship was created not by linguistic or grammatical parallels but by conceptual parallels.The authors use different words and even different languages to create their typological relationships and require that the reader possess the mental capacity to recognize the parallel conceptsthat the different words create.
[T]he eating of a sons flesh who was to become a byword to the world; and Jerusalem as the location of the incident.
Adding the good portion that was not taken away to the previously mentioned parallels with the New Testaments Passover lamb, puts to rest the question of whether Josephus son of Mary whose flesh was eaten passage and the New Testaments Passover Lamb are part of a dark comedic system.Lightning may strike twice in the same place, but it does not strike nine times in a passage of less than two pages a passage written by a member of a family with so many connections to Christianity.
Read intertextually, the passages indicate that the good portion that was not taken away from Mary in the New Testament was the same good portion that was not taken away from the Mary in the passage from Josephus.
It is not just Jesus overt prophecies that come to pass in Wars of the Jews, but everything that the New Testament states shall occur. (pages 179-180)
Jesus prophesies that Marys fine portion shallnot be taken away and, indeed, Josephus records that this prophecy cameto pass.
Of course, such miraculous fulfillments are to be expected.Jesus specifically stated that every letter and grammatical dot of the law would be fulfilled. Matt. 5:17-18(page 181)
In Hebrew literature, these typological relationships are a source of open-ended speculation and debate.To the Romans this perhaps seemed part of the barbarous mysticism that provoked the Jewish Zealots to revolt.So they improved the nature of their parallels in the New Testament, from the open-ended types found within the Hebrew canon to ones that were very precise in their logical and chronological relationships, and in the identities that they reveal.
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
