What Would a Good Jewish Girl Do?

[RedEye]

I want to pose a hypothetical scenario. Imagine a young Jewish girl a couple of thousand years ago. She is pledged to be married but the marriage has not been consummated yet. This girl is a devout follower of Judaism like her parents and husband-to-be. She attends her local Synagogue with them and listens earnestly to the Rabbi reciting Jewish scripture and teachings. Judaism teaches that there is only one true God (Yahweh). There are no other gods or demi-gods.

The region in which she lives is occupied by the Romans and she is aware that they worship a pantheon of gods and demi-gods. (Demi-gods are produced by a male god mating with a human female or a human male mating with a female god). They even worship their emperor in Rome like a god. She has no doubt had some contact with Greeks (gentiles) in her town too and come to know that they also have a pantheon of their own gods and demi-gods. Her Rabbi warns her against such pagan beliefs and constantly stresses that all these other gods are false. There is one and only one true God and his name is Yahweh.

Then one day an apparition appears to our Jewish girl. It tells her that God wants to inseminate her so that she can give him a son. Now, what would a good Jewish girl do in these circumstances?

A. Run immediately to her parents and tell them that a pagan god wants to inseminate her before she is married. (It has to be a pagan god because Yahweh would never ask for such a thing).
B. Run to her future husband and ask for help so that she does not end up committing adultery against her will.
C. Run to her Rabbi, tell him of this blasphemous request and get advice on how to deal with this demon that approached her.
D. Acquiesce meekly despite it going against everything she has ever been taught as a devout Jew.

Which course of action makes the least sense given the cultural context?

[tam]

Peace to you,

With all due respect, I am snipping out most of your last post as it is mostly ground which has already been covered. I have nothing to add to my previous comments.

No problem. I did the same in my previous post.

I did a little more research into the Centurian and discovered something interesting. The Centurian had asked some of the Jewish elders (of Capernaum) to ask Christ on his behalf, to heal the servant.

When [Jesus] had finished saying all this to the people who were listening, he entered Capernaum. There a centurions servant, whom his master valued highly, was sick and about to die. The centurion heard of [Jesus] and sent some elders of the Jews to him, asking him to come and heal his servant. When they came to [Jesus], they pleaded earnestly with him, This man deserves to have you do this, because he loves our nation and has built our synagogue. So [Jesus] went with them.

Two points on this version from Luke. Firstly, note that the centurion has just heard of Jesus. There goes your entire case regarding him having faith in someone he has only just heard about.

I do not know what case you are referring to, sorry.

I simply said that the Centurion had faith in Christ.

Secondly, the Jews in this town were trying to curry favour with the centurion (a powerful man) and would say whatever was necessary to get Jesus on board.

Supposition, no evidence.

Even if the hearsay about the centurion were true, so what? He might have had affection for Galilee and provided labour to build a synagogue to keep the townspeople happy (good relations and all that) but that has nothing to do with personal faith in someone he had never met.

Agreed. But this would explain the willingness of those Jewish elders to ask Christ on his behalf, and to believe (and so state) that the Centurion deserved to have his request granted. Which was my point.

He was not far from the house when the centurion sent friends to say to him: Lord, dont trouble yourself, for I do not deserve to have you come under my roof. That is why I did not even consider myself worthy to come to you. But say the word, and my servant will be healed. For I myself am a man under authority, with soldiers under me. I tell this one, Go, and he goes; and that one, Come, and he comes. I say to my servant, Do this, and he does it.

Once again this backs up my version of events.

This contradicts your version of events.

The centurion realizes that he doesn't want Jesus seeing his boy lover in person (having probably been briefed in the interim on who Jesus was and what reputation he had) so he sets out to cut him off.

Supposition. All sorts of supposition in fact. Supposition on what the centurion fears, that he has this fear at all, supposition on his motives (contradicted by the story itself); and supposition on this supposed 'reputation'...

What is curious here in this account from Luke is that the centurion does not meet and speak to Jesus himself (directly contradicting Matthew). Now, why would someone refuse to even plead his case in person if they had such respect and faith?

He answers that question himself in the story. If you do not accept that, I have no idea why you do not just disregard the story completely rather than making up your own version of the story (without evidence).

(Also, did you not recently admit in another thread that you believe [Jesus] is a myth? What does that do to your theory here? People made up this story, but they made it up wrong and you're going to tell us what they meant to make up? What?!?)

That makes no sense.

If the Centurion did indeed believe that he did not deserve to have Christ come under his roof, then of course it makes sense. Perhaps not to you, but it does to me.

I mean, even Peter said to Christ upon meeting Him, and falling to his knees, "Go away from me Lord, for I am a sinful man". (Luke 5:8)

In fact if I were Jesus I would have considered it an insult to receive a bizarre request for healing secondhand.

Well you are not "Jesus". What you would consider an insult has no bearing on what He (or anyone else) considers an insult. I would consider that an act of faith (and humility).


People who look for insult often find it... even when no insult was given.

When [Jesus] heard this, he was amazed at him, and turning to the crowd following him, he said, I tell you, I have not found such great faith even in Israel. Then the men who had been sent returned to the house and found the servant well.

I don't see any argument here so there is nothing really to respond to. That Jesus fell for the centurion's ploy hook, line and sinker has no relevance to whether the centurion actually did have great faith or not. All it demonstrates is that Jesus was gullible enough to be persuaded by a few flattering words. So what?

You have yet to establish that there was a ploy. Besides, Christ was already on his way to the house to do the healing; so it is not as if there was any need for flattery or further persuasion.

You don't require faith for either a) or b). You need hope for a) (arising from desperation) and you put b) to Jesus on the off-chance that he might rise to the challenge. The centurion did not need to believe that Jesus could heal from afar (an alien concept as already mentioned). He only needed to put it out there in a situation where he had nothing to lose by trying.

The story does not demonstrate only hope; the story also demonstrates faith, especially considering the review that some of the Jews gave on his behalf. The Centurion also called Christ "Lord".

No. That is you once again believing everything you read to be literally true.

As opposed to what? Believing the story that you have made up out of thin air?

Firstly, this was a relayed message and the two friends could have used any mealy-mouthed language they liked to persuade Jesus to do something as preposterous as healing from a distance.

Once again, He was already going to heal the boy; that He could do this from a distance just further demonstrates His power.

Secondly, no centurion would have called a common Jew "Lord".

Unless he thought of Christ as something more than a common Jew. Nor can you possibly know the nature of every centurion from two thousand years ago. There are exceptions among most (if not all) groups and people; and this man showed himself to be an exception.



Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[RedEye]

Supposition, no evidence.

This is where we have a problem. I'm arguing what is true given the balance of probabilities and the cultural context of the times. It is possible though unlikely that this centurion was different to every other Roman centurion. It is possible though extremely unlikely that a centurion could have faith in someone he has never met and in fact not even heard of before the day in question. It is possible but exceedingly dubious that this centurion would believe that a healer could cure someone he never sees in person or touches (does he send out "healing waves" in all directions?). It is possible though totally unconvincing that a centurion would feel unworthy of having a Jew under his roof. It is possible but only remotely imaginable that a healer would accept a second-hand request to fix a sick unseen patient that he can't lay hands on.

Your only response to this series of absurd premises which we must swallow to convince ourselves that something like this really happened without any ulterior motives is to call it "supposition". I call it common sense, deciding what is plausible and what isn't. You see, I want to discuss the meaning of the text and what conclusions can be drawn when reading it. You want to take every word literally and that's it, end of story. I'm wondering why you bother participating in such discussions? I'm never going to be a Bible literalist and you are never going to be swayed but what is plausible and reasonable in the arguments that I make. What is the point?