Appropriate Silence

16“To what can I compare this generation? They are like children sitting in the marketplaces and calling out to others:

17“ ‘We played the pipe for you,

and you did not dance;

we sang a dirge,

and you did not mourn.’

- Matthew 11 NIV

I settled on this title because I have appropriated this saying of Jesus. I can't say that I will stick with what he meant.

As written, the generation is likened to the children, but, in context, the children are John and Jesus not being heeded by the market place crowds.

I would suggest that we re-interpret this to be appropriate for our own generation and time.

We are the children and we are the crowds in the market place. We have at times both mourning and joy. Not at the same time and not in the same manner and not about the same things. Sometimes we respond outwardly, sometimes not.

Sometimes being silent and listening to other children is the appropriate response.

a reply to: FullHeathen

A Greek-speaking Jew, writing in the pagan city of Antioch, had been at pains to reassure the Roman authorities that his particular faith posed no threat to the imperium. The writer had fled ‘fundamentalist’ Jerusalem for the relative enlightenment of the pagan city of Antioch. He had with him an early version of ‘Mark’ and used this as the basis for his own story. His creation would eventually become known as ‘Matthew.’ He wrote for a Jewish audience,
Matthew is not what you would make us think!

Faking the prophecy of a Virgin Birth: Famously, Matthew maintains that ‘Isaiah’ had prophesied that Jesus would be born of a virgin:

“Behold, a virgin will be with child, and will bring forth a son, and they will call his name Emmanuel,“
– Matthew 1.23.

Matthew’s source is the Septuagint (Isaiah 7.14). But the Greek-speaking translators of this version of Hebrew scripture (prepared in 3rd century BC Alexandria) had slipped up and had translated ‘almah’ (young woman) into the Greek ‘parthenos’ (virgin).

The Hebrew original says: ‘Hinneh ha-almah harah ve-yeldeth ben ve-karath shem-o immanuel.’

Honestly translated, the verse reads: ‘Behold, the young woman has conceived — and bears a son and calls his name Immanuel.’

a reply to: Radchad

I have silently read your post.
I even silently contemplated, which was eventually interrupted with chuckling, albeit subdued chuckling.

Here is an idea that a novelist may pursue: loosely based upon Q source Hypothesis, but exploding it.

Title: We Are Q

The unknown author of Luke, in his search for stories and confirmations, runs into the unknown author of Matthew. Perhaps they meet in a tavern. Matthew author has a copy of Mark (unknown). Luke has collected some stories not in Mark, and Matthew has also.

They decide amongst the two of them which stories not in Mark are worth writing down for posterity.

They are Q. There is no allusive separate source Q.

----------
That's just a fiction plot. Critical scholars may or may not be interested in it.

a reply to: FullHeathen
Almost all the story elements, phrases and words used by Mark – about ninety-five per cent of them – are regurgitated in Matthew. But the Markan core has been refined by the later writer with extra detail, explanatory clauses and improved adjectives. The gospel has gained an extra eight thousand words. “Difficult” passages have been improved upon. Thus, for example, where Mark tells briefly of a freshly baptized Jesus, tempted in the wilderness by Satan, Matthew illustrates that temptation with three examples: taunts of bread from stones, falling from the temple pinnacle, and a gift of the world. Each example is drawn – not from history! – but from Jewish scripture (Deuteronomy and Psalms).

But why rewrite Mark at all?

Matthew is writing later. The Second Coming has not materialized, the Jews have suffered a second catastrophic defeat at the hands of Rome, and the Marcionites were already circulating an early version of Luke, diluting the Jewishness of the divine mission. Matthew will put the Jesus train back onto its Jewish tracks

a reply to: Radchad

Matthew is writing later. The Second Coming has not materialized, the Jews have suffered a second catastrophic defeat at the hands of Rome, and the Marcionites were already circulating an early version of Luke, diluting the Jewishness of the divine mission. Matthew will put the Jesus train back onto its Jewish tracks

Bar Kokhba revolt was AD132 - 136. Marcionism took off c AD144. Putting the writing of Matthew some time after 144.

An alternative hypothesis could be that Matthew was written during the lead up to Bar Kokhba revolt. Bar Kokhba was considered by very many Judeans to be the Messiah. Rabbi Akiva even supported him. If I remember correctly, Rabbi Akiva was in Rome, or on his way to Rome, with the purpose of having Bar Kokhba recognized by Rome as King of Judea, the title once held by Herod the Great, when hostilities broke out. He returned to Judea and was martyred.

had been at pains to reassure the Roman authorities that his particular faith posed no threat to the imperium.

Say rather than writing for Roman audience, he wrote for a Judean audience: "No! No! My brothers, don't follow this rebellion and false Messiah. Jesus is the Messiah. I have the scripture proof. Be peaceful and await his return. Surely, it can't be so very far off." Or something to that effect.

The Bar Kokhba revolt also had philosophical and religious ramifications; Jewish belief in the Messiah was abstracted and spiritualized, and rabbinical political thought became deeply cautious and conservative. The rebellion was also among the events that helped differentiate Early Christianity from Judaism.
Bar_Kokhba_revolt