Decapolis News (collage, 2009)
All three Synoptic Gospel accounts relate this story, but since Matthew's account is much shorter we will only concentrate on the other two. The wording between Mark and Luke is fairly similar, and the major difference between them is in the order of the events. Since both accounts contain flashbacks, here is the strictly chronological order:
Man lived alone in the tombs
He is engaged in self-destructive behavior
He approaches Jesus as boat docks
Jesus commands the spirit to come out of him
The man cries out for Jesus not to torment him
Jesus asks him for his name
The unclean spirit replies, “Legion”
The spirit begs to be allowed to enter swine
Jesus gives him permission
The swine run into the water and are drowned
Swineherds tell everyone
People see the man clothed and in his right mind
They beg Jesus to leave the area
Jesus enters boat
Man wants to stay with Jesus
Jesus tells him to go home and tell his friends what happened
Jesus returned to Galilee
Mark narrates the events in this order: #3, 1, 2, 3, 5, 4, 6-16, and omits 17.
Luke's account is given even more out of chronological order: #3, 1, 5, 4, 2, 6-14, 17, 15, 16. But by doing so, he has created the completely symmetrical literary organization shown below:
Figure 1: Literary Structure of Luke 8:26-39
A. Jesus arrives in boat from Galilee (#3a)
B. Possessed man meets him (#3b)
C. Man had no home (#1)
D. Man requests Jesus to leave him alone (#5)
E. Jesus commanded spirit to come out of him (#4)
F. Man's self-destructive behavior (#2)
G. Spirit tells Jesus his name (#6-7)
E'. Jesus lets them enter the swineherds (#8-9)
F'. Swine's self-destructive behavior (#10)
D'. People ask Jesus to leave them (#11-13)
A'. Jesus enters boat and returns home (#14,17)
B'. Healed man meets him (#15)
C'. Jesus tells man to go home (#16)
This chiastic organization explains why there is the total non sequitur in B’ of the healed man meeting Jesus after he has already departed in the boat.
The parallel between C and C' is stronger in Luke's account than in Mark since the specific word “house” now appears in both sections.
E' continues the exorcism begun in E in that Jesus grants the spirits' request that they not be left without a body to inhabit, to their resulting doom.
Most commentators feel that Luke's account was based on that of Mark, which came earlier. Thus, Marshall says, “There was no need for Luke to make extensive alterations to his source in order to underline the message...he has merely improved the narrative stylistically...Luke develops the flash-back [of Mark] by incorporating the details [i.e. Section F] about the man's madness which he had earlier omitted...By this alteration Luke perhaps emphasizes the compassionate reason why Jesus acted to exorcise the man from the demon.”
Marshall may perhaps be correct regarding the placement of Section F above, but the literary reason as providing a perfect parallel to F' appears to be a much stronger motif. Both units demonstrate the irrational need for the evil spirits to destroy God's creations, even at the risk of losing their own abodes. As Marcus says, “This gruesomely funny conclusion [i.e. F'] emphasizes the destructiveness of the demons as well as their shortsightedness; incapable of restraining their brutal rage, they unintentionally destroy their new lodgings and so thwart their own desire to stay on Gerasene soil.”
Then there are scholars such as Mann who feel that Luke's was the earlier version of the two. But even he has to admit: “It must be said that proponents of Markan priority would reply that Luke (as a far more elegant prose writer) improved on the text before him.”
And in analyzing the logic of Mark's account, H. Anderson sees nothing but awkward verses pieced together from several sources with interruptions added by Mark himself. Whether or not one agrees with his reasoning, it must be admitted that Luke presents a much more polished version of the narrative.
Interestingly, some commentators (such as Marshall and Fitzmyer) and translators (such as KJV, RSV, NRSV, TEV) treat the notice that Jesus had commanded the evil spirits to vacate the man (Unit E above) as a parenthetical comment that is not really necessary to the story, whether in Mark or Luke's account. By contrast, note that Figure 1 shows that it is vital for providing a perfect parallel to E'.
In Mark's Gospel, this comment appears at 5:8. Lane has this to say about this placement: “In the act of kneeling, the defensive use of the divine name and the violent invocation of God to strengthen the plea that Jesus would not torment him, there is the full recognition of Jesus' superior power on the part of the demon. On this understanding verse 8 is in its original position...Other suggestions have been made concerning the position of verse 8, the most noteworthy conjecture being that the verse originally stood before verse 7, and perhaps in place of verse 6...Such conjectures, however, are unnecessary if verse 8 is seen as an explanatory insertion by Mark similar to Ch. 6:62.”
Translating those “noteworthy conjectures” to Luke's structure in Figure 1 would mean moving Section E to a position before D or in place of B, both destroying entirely the symmetry of the arrangement.
Section G is the center point of Figure 1. Swift notes, “Two explanations have been given of the question, what is you name? First, the ancient belief that knowledge of the name gave power over an adversary. Alternatively, and more probably, it was to recall the man to a sense of his own personality apart from the demon.” Short agrees with the second of these explanations, but either one provides an apt turning point in the narrative.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments