Delphi Complete Works of George Eliot (Illustrated) (785 page)
Read Delphi Complete Works of George Eliot (Illustrated) Online
Authors: George Eliot
BOOK: Delphi Complete Works of George Eliot (Illustrated)
7.26Mb size Format: txt, pdf, ePub
It is true that according to correct principles of interpretation, one evangelist ought not to be explained immediately by another, and in the present case it is very possible that while the synoptical writers ascribe to Jesus the common opinion of his age, the more highly cultivated author of the fourth gospel may make him reject it: but that he also confined the rejection of the current opinion on the part of Jesus to that single case, is proved by the manner in which he represents Jesus as speaking on another occasion. When, namely, Jesus says to the man who had been lame thirty-eight years (John v.) and had just been cured, firjtcKTi, dfj-dprave, ‘iva pfj x&pov rl aoi yevij-ai (v. 14), /Sin no more, lest a icorse t/dng come unto thee; this is equivalent to his saying to the paralytic whom he was about to cure, d(f>KUvrai aoi al d/j.apriai aov, t/ty sins are forgiven thee: in the one case disease is removed, in the other threatened, as a punishment of sin. But here again the expositors, to whom it is not agreeable that Jesus should hold an opinion which they reject, find a means of evading the direct sense of the words. Jesus, say they, perceived that the particular disease of this man was a natural consequence of certain excesses, and warned him from a repetition of these as calculated to bring on a more dangerous relapse.* But an insight into the natural connexion between certain excesses and certain diseases as their consequence, is far more removed from the mode of thinking of the age in which Jesus lived, than the notion of a positive connexion between sin in general and disease as its punishment; hence, if we are nevertheless to ascribe the former sense to the words of Jesus, it must be very distinctly conveyed in the text. But the fact is that in the whole narrative there is no intimation of any particular excess on the part of the man; the 9THE LIFE OF JESUS.
MIKACLES OF JESUS-CURES OF PARALYTICS.words pr)Ken dfidprave, relate only to sin in general, and to supply a conversation of Jesus with the sick man, in which he is supposed to have acquainted the former with the connexion between his sufferings and a particular sin,* is the most arbitrary fiction. What exposition 1 for the sake of evading a result which is dogmatically unwelcome, to extend the one passage (John ix.) to a generality of meaning not really belonging to it, to elude the other (Matt, ix.) by the hypothesis of accommodation, and forcibly to affix to a third (John v.) a modern idea; whereas if the first passage be only permitted to say no more than it actually says, the direct meaning of the other two may remain uiiviolated!
But another passage, and that a synoptical one, is adduced in vindication of the superiority of Jesus to the popular opinion in question. This passage is Luke xiii. 1 ff., where Jesus is told of the Galileans whom Pilate had caused to be slain while they were in the act of sacrificing, and of others who were killed by the falling of a tower.
From what follows, we must suppose the informants to have intimated their opinion that these calamities were to be regarded as a divine visitation for the peculiar wickedness of the parties so signally destroyed. Jesus replied that they must not suppose those meu to have been especially sinful; they themselves were in 110 degree better, and unless they repented would meet with a similar destruction. Truly it is not clear how in these expressions of Jesus a repudiation of the popular notion can be found. If Jesus wished to give his voice in opposition to this, he must either have said: you are equally great
sinners, though you may not perish bodily in the same manner; or:
do you
believe that those men perished on account of their sins ? No! the contrary may be seen in you, who, notwithstanding your wickednesss, are not thus smitten with death.On the contrary, the expressions of Jesus as given by Luke can only have the following sense: that those men have already met with such calamities is no evidence of their peculiar wickedness, any more than the fact that you have been hitherto spared the like, is an evidence of your greater worth; on the contrary, earlier or later, similar judgments falling on you will attest your equal guilt:-whereby the supposed law of the connexion between tlic sin and misfortune of every individual is continued, not overthrown. This vulgar Hebrew opinion concerning sickness and evil, is indeed in contradiction with that esoteric view, partly Essenc, partly Ebionitc, which we have found in the introduction to the sermon on the mount, the parable of the rich man, and elsewhere, and according to which the righteous in this generation are the suffering, the poor and the sick; but both opinions are clearly to be seen in the discourses of Jesus by an unprejudiced exegesis, and the contradiction which we find between them authorizes us neither to put a forced construction on the one class of expressions, nor to deny them to have really come from Jesus, since we cannot calculate how he may have solved for himself the opposition between two ideas of the world, presented to him by different sides of the Jewish culture of that age. »
From what follows, we must suppose the informants to have intimated their opinion that these calamities were to be regarded as a divine visitation for the peculiar wickedness of the parties so signally destroyed. Jesus replied that they must not suppose those meu to have been especially sinful; they themselves were in 110 degree better, and unless they repented would meet with a similar destruction. Truly it is not clear how in these expressions of Jesus a repudiation of the popular notion can be found. If Jesus wished to give his voice in opposition to this, he must either have said: you are equally great
sinners, though you may not perish bodily in the same manner; or:
do you
believe that those men perished on account of their sins ? No! the contrary may be seen in you, who, notwithstanding your wickednesss, are not thus smitten with death.On the contrary, the expressions of Jesus as given by Luke can only have the following sense: that those men have already met with such calamities is no evidence of their peculiar wickedness, any more than the fact that you have been hitherto spared the like, is an evidence of your greater worth; on the contrary, earlier or later, similar judgments falling on you will attest your equal guilt:-whereby the supposed law of the connexion between tlic sin and misfortune of every individual is continued, not overthrown. This vulgar Hebrew opinion concerning sickness and evil, is indeed in contradiction with that esoteric view, partly Essenc, partly Ebionitc, which we have found in the introduction to the sermon on the mount, the parable of the rich man, and elsewhere, and according to which the righteous in this generation are the suffering, the poor and the sick; but both opinions are clearly to be seen in the discourses of Jesus by an unprejudiced exegesis, and the contradiction which we find between them authorizes us neither to put a forced construction on the one class of expressions, nor to deny them to have really come from Jesus, since we cannot calculate how he may have solved for himself the opposition between two ideas of the world, presented to him by different sides of the Jewish culture of that age. »
As regards the above-mentioned cure, the synoptical writers make Jesus in his reply to the messengers of the Baptist, appeal to the fact that the lame walked (Matt. xi. 5), and at another time the people wonder when, among other miracles, they sec the maimed to be whole and the lame to walk (Matt. xv. 31). In the place of the lane, %wAot, paralytics irapaX.vnK.ol, are elsewhere brought forward (Matt. iv. 24), and especially in the detailed histories of cures relating to this kind of sufferers, (as Matt. ix. 1 ff. parall. viii. 5, parall.) -xapakuTiKol, and not %w/loi, are named. The sick man at the pool of Bethesda (John v. 5) belongs probably to the X^olf spoken of in v. 3; there also ^fjpol, withered, are mentioned, and in Matt. xii. 9 ff. parall. we find the cure of a man who had a withered hand. As however the three last named cures will return to us under different heads, all that remains here for our examination is the cure of the paralytic Matt. ix. 1 ff. parall.
As the definitions which the ancient physicians give of paralysis, though they all show it to have been a species of lameness, yet leave it undecided whether the lameness was total or pxrtial;* and as, besides, no strict adherence to medical technicalities is to be expected from the evangelists, we must gather what they understand by paralytics from their own descriptions of such patient?. In the present passage, we read of the paralytic that he was bone on a bed tcMvi], and that to enable him to arise and carry his bed was an unprecedented wonder niipddo^ov, whence we must conclude that he was lame, at least in the feet. While here there is no mention of pains, or of an acute character of disease, in another narrative (Matt. viii. 6) these are evidently presupposed when the centurion says that his servant is sick of the pcdsy., grievously twnanted, /3e^A?/Tat-rrapa-AvTi/cof, duvCx; J3aaauifrpei.a$ ; so that under paralytics in the gospels we have at one time to understand a lameness without pain, at another a painful, gouty, disease of the limbs,t In the description of the scene in whlcn tlfe paralytic, (Matt. ix. 1 ft. parall.) is brought to Jesus, there is a remarkable gradation in the three accounts. Matthew says simply, that as Jesus, after an excursion to the opposite shore, returned to Capernaum, there was brought to him a paralytic, stretched on a bed. Luke describes particularly how Jesus, surrounded by a great multitude, chiefly Pharisees and scribes, taught and healed in a certain house, and how the bearers, because on account of the press they could not reach Jesus, let the sick man down to him through the roof. If we call to mind the structure of oriental houses, which had a flat roof, to which an opening led from the upper story ;J and if we add to this the rabbinical manner of speaking, in which to the via per portam (i-nnns * See the examples in Wetstein. K. T.. 1. S. 284, and in Wahl’s Clavis. \ ConipTHE LIFE OP JESUS.
I’ll) was opposed the via per tectum (~\M -it) as a no less ordinary way for reaching the iwepaiov upper story or chamber,* we cannot under the expression Kadi&vat &a TGJI> KEpdjuwv, £
If we ask here also in which direction, upwards or downwards, the climax may most probably have been formed, the narrative of Mark, which stands at the summit, has so many difficulties that it can scarcely be regarded as nearest the truth. For not only have opponents asked, how could the roof be broken open without injury to those beneath ?t but Olshausen himself admits that the disturbance of the roof, covered with tiles, partakes of the extravagant.^ To avoid this, many expositors suppose that Jesus taught either in the inner court,§ or in the open air in front of the house,)! and that the bearers only broke down a part of the parapet in order to let down the sick man more conveniently. But both the phrase, 8ia T&V nepdjMv, in Luke, and the expressions of Mark, render this conception of the thing impossible, since here neither can ariyr] mean parapet, nor d^oareyd^u the breaking of the parapet, while i^opvrrd) can only mean the breaking of a hole. Thus the disturbance of the roof subsists, but this .is fiaihex rendered improbable on the ground that it was altogether superfluous, inasmuch as there was a door in every roof. Hence Ivelp lias been’sought in the supposition that the bearers indeed used, the .door previously tlwijc, but because this was too narrow for the bed of f he patient, they widened it by the removal of the surrounding tiles.fStill, however, there remains the danger to those below, and the words imply an opening actually made, not merely widened.
But dangerous and superfluous as such a proceeding would be in reality, it is easy to explain how Mark, wishing further to elaborate the narrative of Luke, might be led to add such a feature. Luke had said that the sick man was let down, so that he descended in the midst before Jesus, Kfi-rrpoaOev rov ‘Irjaov. How could the people precisely hit upon Ihis place, unless Jesus accidentally stood under the door of the roof, except by breaking open the roof above the spot * T i,rv.tfnnt. n. 601.
t Woolston, Disc. 4.
J 1, S. 310 f.
g Ktister, Immanuel, MIEAGLES OF JESUS^-CUKES OF PARALYTICS.where they knew him to })Q,(dma-eydmv rfp a-syr]v unov ijiv)?* This trait Mark the more gladly seized because it was adapted to place in the strongest light* the zeal which confidence in Jesus infused into the people, and which was to be daunted by no labour. This last interest seems to be the key also to Luke’s departure from Matthew. In Matthew, who makes the bearers bring the paralytic to Jesustin the ordinary way, doubtless regarding the laborious conveyance of the sick man on his bed as itself a proof of their faith, it is yet less evident wherein Jesus sees their faith. If the original form of the history was that in which it appears in the first gospel, the temptation might easily arise to make the bearers devise a more conspicuous means of evincing their faith, which, since the scene was already described as happening in a great crowd, might appear to be most suitably found in the uncommon way in which they contrived to bring their sick man to Jesus.
t Woolston, Disc. 4.
J 1, S. 310 f.
g Ktister, Immanuel, MIEAGLES OF JESUS^-CUKES OF PARALYTICS.where they knew him to })Q,(dma-eydmv rfp a-syr]v unov ijiv)?* This trait Mark the more gladly seized because it was adapted to place in the strongest light* the zeal which confidence in Jesus infused into the people, and which was to be daunted by no labour. This last interest seems to be the key also to Luke’s departure from Matthew. In Matthew, who makes the bearers bring the paralytic to Jesustin the ordinary way, doubtless regarding the laborious conveyance of the sick man on his bed as itself a proof of their faith, it is yet less evident wherein Jesus sees their faith. If the original form of the history was that in which it appears in the first gospel, the temptation might easily arise to make the bearers devise a more conspicuous means of evincing their faith, which, since the scene was already described as happening in a great crowd, might appear to be most suitably found in the uncommon way in which they contrived to bring their sick man to Jesus.
But even the account of Matthew we cannot regard as a true narrative of a fact. It has indeed been attempted to represent the result as a natural one, by explaining the state of the man to be a nervous weakness, the worst symptom of which was the idea of the sick man that his disease must continue as a punishment of his sin;t reference has been made to analogous cases of a rapid psychical cure of lameness:| and a subsequent use of long-continued curative means has been supposed. § But the first and last expedients are purely arbitrary ; and if in the alleged analogies there may be some truth, yet it is always incomparably more probable that histories of cures of the lame and paralytic in accordance with messianic expectation, should be formed by the legend, than that they should really have happened. In the passage of Isaiah already quoted (xxxv. 6), it was promised in relation to the messianic time : then shall the lame man leap as a hart, TOTS a^elrai w? lXa
§97.
INVOLUNTARY CUBES.
INVOLUNTARY CUBES.
OCCASIONALLY in their general statements concerning the curative power of Jesus, the synoptical writers remark, that all kinds of sick^people only sought to touch Jesus, or to lay hold on the hem ot his garment, in order to be healed, and that immediately on this slight contact, a cure actually followed (Matt. xiv. 36 ; Mark iii. 10, iv. 06; Luke vi. 19). In these cases Jesus operated, not, as we * Vid. Fritzsche, in
Marc. p. 52.f Pauliis, exeg. Handbuch,
1. B. S. 498, 501.
Marc. p. 52.f Pauliis, exeg. Handbuch,
1. B. S. 498, 501.
t
Bengel, Gnomon, 1, 245, ed. 2. I’aulus, S. 502, attain takes an obvinua falilo in T ;,nr ii. :ii; A..... ,...’’.-’THE LIFE OF JESUS.
Bengel, Gnomon, 1, 245, ed. 2. I’aulus, S. 502, attain takes an obvinua falilo in T ;,nr ii. :ii; A..... ,...’’.-’THE LIFE OF JESUS.
Other books
Wreath of Deception by Mary Ellen Hughes
The End of All Things: The Third Instalment by John Scalzi
Sympathy for the Devil by Tim Pratt; Kelly Link
Bloody Heretic by Emily Barker
Hadrian by Grace Burrowes
Becoming Mr. October (9780385533126) by Jackson, Reggie; Baker, Kevin
Stalkers by Paul Finch
Where the Heart Leads by Jillian Hart
Starting Fires by Makenzie Smith
Highland Christmas by Coulter, J. Lee