The Story of the Sinful Woman (Luke 7:36-50)
Luke’s Gospel emphasizes the centrality of God’s plan of salvation for all and portrays Jesus as a prophet, the Messiah, and the fulfillment of God’s promise to Israel. From 4:14-9:50, the emphasis is on the Galilean ministry of Jesus manifested through his words of proclamation, deeds of miraculous activities, and authority for forgiving sins. Throughout his ministry, Jesus takes the side of the marginalized and excluded people, defending them against those who hold authority in social and religious positions. Jesus also convinces them that they are included in God’s plan of salvation. The story of the sinful woman is one among them, through which Luke highlights God’s plentiful mercy and hospitality, but also the human response that is needed to God’s initiative. This story is a unique story as it is only found in Luke’s account. Indeed, the settings, locations, structures, themes, characters, and purposes are distinct from the story of the anointing found in other gospels. Luke has located this story earlier in Jesus’ Galilean ministry aiming to portray God’s mercy and hospitality, which is manifest through the forgiveness of sins.
Luke recounts that Jesus has been invited to a banquet hosted by Simon the Pharisee. This re-echoes the earlier passage when Luke has just declared that the Pharisees have rejected God’s plan (Luke-7:30). In this pericope, a Pharisee invited Jesus to dine with him in his home. Furthermore, the Pharisees will continue to invite Jesus again in 11:37-54 and 14:1-24. The reason of their invitation remains unexplained for us as readers. Perhaps, they want to hear more about Jesus and his proclamation. Levine and Witherington III argue that Luke also does not mention any indication relating to their pernicious motives. Green insists that Simon has not yet formed a malicious opinion of Jesus at this stage.
This is the first of the three meals to which Jesus has been invited by the Pharisees (Luke-7:36-50;-11:37-52;-14:1-24). In each banquet, Jesus is depicted as the chief guest of the dinner hosts. Moreover, conflict relating to the different religious, social, and communal opinions between host and guest occur on each occasion. Henceforth, Jesus takes these occasions to teach. Green describes that Luke has frequently settled banquets in the form of Greco-Roman symposia, wherein discussion follows the meal. Thus, Jesus’ discourse is appropriate.
In the Jewish world in the time of Jesus, people tended to structure their symbolic world by categorizing people, places, and things. Sharing meals signified to which social group one belongs. It often became a means of contracts or reciprocity. Sharing meals were significant for them but they usually dined with those who belonged to the same social ranking in order to make social or economic transactions.
In contrast, Jesus dines with people from different social or religious positions. For instance, he eats with those who considered themselves as culturally holy (Luke-7:36-50;-11:37-52;-14:1-24), but also with those whom people labelled as sinners or outcasts (Luke-5:29-32;-15:1-2;-19:5-7). Neyrey gives a description of how Jesus turned his world upside down in many ways in Luke’s Gospel. He then introduced a new symbolic world which was an inclusive symbolic world and it extended to all people.
The presence of a sinful woman at this banquet appears unusual for present readers in regards to the privacy and security system of the residence. Carroll, however, explains that the ability of the woman to enter the banquet room did not puzzle ancient readers because they were acquainted with the physical structures of Palestinian houses. Mullins further illuminates that a dinner banquet involved reclining, so their feet were away from the table and facing the central food table. Thus, it opened a space for this woman to gain access and tend to Jesus’ feet.
However, the big source of astonishment is the woman’s action. Her conduct can be designated as inappropriate in the Greco-Roman world because of the concern with ritual cleanliness since she was identified as a public sinner. Luke does not mention her past nor any particular kinds of sin. Carroll claims that the image of the woman is often stereotyped as indicating her status as a prostitute by readers. Levine and Witherington III argue that commentators making a quick judgment on her sinful status as a prostitute might not be making an accurate interpretation. Moreover, Luke, throughout the Gospel, refers to prostitutes only once in the parable of the prodigal son (Luke-15:30). Indeed, she is not a prostitute but she is a publicly known sinner according to Simon.
The story of a sinful woman forgiven is a part of Jesus’ proclamation of the year of God’s mercy. He manifests this through healing the sick (Luke-7:1-10), raising the dead (Luke-7:11-17), and forgiving sins (Luke-7:36-50). Luke ends this chapter just as he does at its opening with the reference to Jesus restoring life. In this pericope, Jesus illustrates the concept that God’s hospitality is available for all and that it includes everyone even this sinful woman.
The story of a sinful woman forgiven is often confused with the story of the anointing in Bethany in Matthew, Mark, and John. Johnson illustrates four elements in Luke that are similar to the other three Gospels: “a woman, perfumed oil, anointing, and rebuke.”
Despite some similarities in details, many scholars contend that this story is unique to Luke. Johnson demonstrates the differences in chronology and locality of the events. Bock further argues that although the hosts’ names are the same, they are not necessarily the same persons. He concludes that since lepers cannot be Pharisees, Simon the leper in Matthew and Mark, therefore, is not the same Simon the Pharisee in Luke.
Luke describes the interactions of the participants toward the event differently. Matthew, Mark, and John record that their complaint is concerning waste while Luke reports the criticism as relating to sin and purity. Next, the woman in Matthew and Mark anoints Jesus’ head, but Luke reports she anoints the feet and she is designated as a public sinner. It is only in Luke where Jesus narrates the parable of the debts. Green claims that this parable exemplifies Jesus’ proclamation of God’s year of mercy in 4:18-19. Lastly, Luke also concludes differently from Matthew and Mark. Luke concludes by pronouncing the forgiveness of sin, whereas Matthew and Mark recount that Jesus says the woman’s act will be memorialized throughout the whole world. Thus, these differences affirm that Luke tells another sort of story from the other evangelists.
‘sinner’ was only used in Luke to identify the woman’s status. Luke does not mention the nature of her sinfulness. Luke’s Gospel often recounts Jesus showing his concern and gentleness to those who are designated as sinners. Luke further elaborates on the reason why Jesus shows concern for sinners in the parables of the lost sheep, the lost coin, and the prodigal son in chapter 15. It presents a coherent view of God’s symbolic universe. It includes all people. Neyrey insists that Luke pictures Jesus introducing a new symbolic world by including all people.
‘kissing’ is an expression of profound reverence in the Greco-Roman world. It is a sign of an act of hospitality. Bock explains that the word ‘kiss’ is used similarly when Luke describes the father’s kiss of the returning son in the parable of the prodigal son (Luke-15:20), and the kissing of the elderly by Paul in his farewell to the Ephesians (Acts-20:37). Johnson describes that what the woman has done is what Simon has failed to do as a host. He failed to give hospitality to his guest. Green disputes that the woman’s actions should not simply be viewed as a substitute for Simon’s ignorance, but rather as a lavishness of honor.
‘prophet’ was used by Simon to question Jesus’ prophetic credentials. It re-echoes the earlier passage when people affirmed Jesus as a prophet sent by God (Luke 7:16). The Old Testament pictures a prophet as one who can read and see people’s hearts, for example, the prophet Elijah and Elisha. Nolland remarks that “the Pharisee’s view of prophetic perception is similar to that found in 22:64.” In this case, Simon doubts Jesus’ authority. Mullins states Jesus’ ability is not only to know the woman’s heart but also Simon’s thoughts. This has fulfilled the earlier passage of Simeon’s prophecy: “the inner thoughts of many will be revealed” (Luke 2:35). Thus, Jesus is not merely a prophet, but the son of God.
‘your sins are forgiven’ has a resemblance to the previous passage, when Jesus declares to a paralytic man in Capernaum: “your sins are forgiven” (Luke 5:17-26). This time, Luke depicts a woman whose sins have been forgiven. Mullins points out that “Luke regularly parallels a story about a man with a story about a woman.” This corresponds to God’s symbolic universe, in which everyone qualifies whether male or female. Byrne further explains that this phrase is “a public assurance of the forgiveness already imparted.” This becomes controversial for the Jewish people because God alone can forgive sin. In this regard, the Pharisees and the scribes consider Jesus as blaspheming (Luke 5:21).
‘go in peace’ serves as a farewell greeting. Mullins contends that this is not a normal farewell greeting. It has a link to “the salvation being proclaimed to faith and the gift of peace.” The relationship between salvation and forgiveness has been already formed in 1:77, in which they are connected with the term ‘peace’ in 1:79. This farewell formula will occur again in 8:48 when Jesus gives a farewell greeting to the woman who suffered from hemorrhages. Nolland also shares this perspective stating that this farewell formula “takes on a deeper significance in the context of the coming of eschatological salvation.”
Luke builds the scenario by describing how Jesus was invited to a banquet by a Pharisee. At this stage, it seems likely that Simon, the Pharisee is showing his hospitality because the banquet invitation is ostensibly a sign of showing hospitality. Luke also does not mention any malicious intention behind inviting Jesus to a meal. Johnson argues that the motive of this Pharisee is to show that he does not admit that Jesus is a prophet. He acts as a dinner host, but he “violates all rules of hospitality.” Since Simon knew this woman was a sinner, his intention of inviting Jesus is to shame him. Neyrey also has a similar viewpoint by insisting that the Pharisee invites Jesus to a meal in order to insult and dishonor him. This reflects a strong resemblance to the previous passage, where the Pharisees and the lawyers refuse God’s plan in 7:30. It has a link to the other two meals which are hosted by the Pharisees. For instance, the Pharisee invites Jesus again to dine with him and then insults him by being “amazed to see that he did not first wash before dinner” (Luke 11:37-44).
The appearance of a sinful woman becomes an astonishment for both ancient and present readers. The narrator designates her as a public sinner. Johnson specifies that this sinful woman is similar to the other poor people in Luke’s Gospel. She is being labelled and rejected by the social and religious elite. They designate her as an outcast of the Jewish symbolic world. However, her conduct stands in contrast to Simon the Pharisee, the banquet host. She gives extraordinary honor to Jesus by bathing his feet with tears, drying them with her hair, kissing, and anointing them with the ointment whereas, the host has failed to offer his guest any of the usual gestures. Mullins describes her extraordinary gestures as a sign of recognition of outstanding hospitality to an honored guest. Carroll asserts that Simon ignores the gestures of a hospitable host to Jesus while this woman offers extravagant honours to him.
Jesus narrates a parable of creditors in order to illustrate God’s hospitality towards human beings. In the Greco-Roman world, the remission of debts is essential to debtors who are not able to pay back their creditors. Nolland explains that the purpose of posing this parable is “to confront the unforgiving Pharisee with the limitlessness of God’s readiness to forgive.” Jesus then turns to the woman and pronounces that her many sins are forgiven. Neyrey suggests that Jesus’ pronouncement specifies an installation of a new status for the woman. Green also has the same view by pointing out that Jesus restored the woman to the wholeness of life. She has been excluded from the Jewish symbolic world, but she is now included in the community of God’s people. However, Simon is not aware of her new status. He still doubts the authority of Jesus. Bock further notes that this story illustrates “how those outside Israel may be more receptive to him.” Thus, God’s new symbolic world is ruled by mercy and hospitality. It extends to those who are labelled as outsiders, unclean, and sinners.
By reflecting on the story of this sinful woman, the writer realizes that our world today still shares some cultural viewpoints which are similar to those common in the days of Luke. This is obvious when it comes to sharing meals with strangers. We sometimes can be identified ourselves to Simon. We tend to build our social ranking and classify other people who do not share our notions of rank and status. For instance, we do not share the same table meal with people whom we do not know. In the story of the sinful woman, Luke portrays to his ancient audience as well as to the present readers the concept that God’s hospitality is provided for all. God’s symbolic world is not ruled by laws about status but by mercy and hospitality. This new symbolic world of Jesus is available for all and extends to those who have been rejected and excluded by the old symbolic world order.
Nonetheless, God’s mercy and hospitality also require a human response. This sinful woman gives us a great paradigm of a forgiven person. Her mysterious name will remain forever, so we, who have a desire to change and transform ourselves from sinners into ones who are forgiven, can identify with her.
Bibliography
Aune, David E. Luke 1-9:20. Word biblical commentary. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1998.
Bock, Darrell L. Luke 1:1-9:50. Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1999.
*________*, A Theology of Luke and Acts. God’s Promised Program, Realized for All Nations. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2012.
Byrne, Brendan. The Hospitality of God: a Reading of Luke’s Gospel. Strathfield, N.S.W.: St Pauls Publications, 2000.
Carroll, John T. Luke: a Commentary. Louisville, Kentucky: WJK, 2012.
Green, Joel B. The Gospel of Luke. The New international commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 1997.
Johnson, Luke T. The Gospel of Luke. Sacra Pagina 3. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1991.
LaVerdiere, Eugene. Luke. New Testament message. Dublin: Veritas, 1980.
Levine, Amy-Jill and Witherington III, Ben. The Gospel of Luke. New Cambridge Bible Commentary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018.
McBride, Alfred. The Human Face of Jesus. Meditation and commentary on the Gospel of Luke. Huntington, Indiana: Our Sunday Visitor Inc., 1992.
Mullins, Michael. The Gospel of Luke: A Commentary. Blackrock, Dublin: Columba, 2010.
Nolland, John. World Biblical Commentary. Luke 1:1-9:20. MI: Grand Rapids, 2000.
Orchard, John Bernard. Ed. A Synopsis of the Four Gospels in New Translation. USA: Mercer University Press, 1982.
Tannehill, Robert C. The Narrative Unity of Luke-Acts. Vol. 1, Luke. Philadelphia, PA: Fortress, 1986.
โฆษณา
- ดาวน์โหลดแอปพลิเคชัน
- © 2024 Blockdit
