"Jesus Through Middle Eastern Eyes" - Book Review

 

What difference would it make to our understanding of Jesus’ message if we could view it through the eyes of a first-century Middle Easterner? How would it affect the way we read the Bible? Kenneth E. Bailey addresses these questions in Jesus Through Middle Eastern Eyes: Cultural Studies in the Gospels.

Kenneth Bailey was ordained by the Presbyterian Church (USA) and is presently Canon Theologian of the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh. From childhood to the present, he has lived sixty years of his life in the Middle East. He taught for twenty years at Near East School of Theology in Beirut. He spent the last ten years of his teaching career (1985-1995) at Tantur Ecumenical Institute for Theological Studies in Jerusalem. He has degrees in Arabic language and literature, systematic theology, and a doctorate in New Testament. He presently lives in New Wilmington, Pennsylvania, near Pittsburgh.

Scholars agree that the scriptures relate to historical and cultural contexts. We need to understand the meaning of scriptures in their context if we are to relate them to our present circumstances appropriately. Jesus’ world was first-century Palestine, but much of the New Testament is concerned with relating Jesus’ message to people in the Greco-Roman world. Much of our knowledge of Jesus and his teaching has been processed through the lens of the Greco-Roman world, considerably different from life in rural Palestine. So how might we understand what life was like in Jesus' context?

Bailey’s thesis is that Arabic culture, at least in rural villages, has not changed radically over the past 2,000 years. Furthermore, Arabic is a sister language to the Aramaic spoken by Jesus and his contemporaries. Therefore, by examining how Arabic Christians have interpreted scripture over the millennia, both in terms of language and assumptions about cultural norms, we might find a lens through which to view the scriptures more closely approximates the culture of Jesus' day than our Western lenses. Bailey maintains that the witness of Arabic Christianity (separating from the Western church in the fifth century) has been all but ignored in Western Christianity.

Literary analysis is central to Bailey’s work. Bailey writes:

Very early in the life of the Church outsiders saw Christians drawing their faith from parables. One of these witnesses was Galen, the most famous medical doctor of the second century. He was the first pagan to say positive things about Christians. Around A.D. 140 he wrote:

Most people are unable to follow a demonstrative argument consecutively; hence they need parables, and benefit from them … just as now we see the people called Christians drawing their faith from parables [and miracles] and yet sometimes acting in the same way [as those who philosophize] … and in their keen pursuit of justice, have attained a pitch not inferior to that of genuine philosophers.

In later centuries parables became a source for Christian life (ethics) but not Christian faith (theology). It is instructive to note that in the second century Galen saw Christians building their faith on parables. How did parables lose their status as a source of Christian faith?

Today, Jesus is naturally seen by Christians as the Son of God and Savior of the world. The New Testament also presents him as perfect example of love and an effective storyteller for simple folk. But have we thought of him as a serious theologian?

Jesus was a metaphorical theologian. That is, his primary method of creating meaning was trough metaphor, simile, parable and dramatic action rather than through logic and reasoning. He created meaning like a dramatis and a poet rather than like a philosopher. (279)

Jesus was interacting with an illiterate oral culture. Teaching in these cultures was through storytelling that used various linguistic tools to make the stories easier to memorize and preserve. Using chiasms was commonly employed in Jesus’ parables and other teachings. (It is also used in Old Testament literature.) A chiasm is an arrangement of teaching into stanzas that might flow something like this:

A

   B

      C

A’

   B’

      C’

or

A

   B

      C

   B’

A’

A’ is thematically related to A, B’ to B, etc. Furthermore, the Arabic churches have translations that translated the New Testament Greek into Arabic and Syriac, sister languages to Aramaic. Using these tools and other linguistic tools, Bailey sometimes translates Greek versions of Jesus’ teaching back into Aramaic, where the linguistic structure becomes more apparent.

Another Middle Eastern pre-literate tradition Bailey learned of is that local communities tend to preserve and pass on a set of “stock stories.” These stories preserve the gathered wisdom of the community over the centuries. As new teachers come along, they may create new stories, but they frequently borrow from the stock stories and formulate new tales that teach the truths they wish to convey. Bailey believes Jesus was deeply embedded in this tradition, and thus Bailey is frequently reflecting on how Jesus’ metaphorical teachings may connect with the stock stories of the Jews.

This book is a fascinating compendium of his work over the years. It draws on some previously published materials and information from his extensive lecture library. It has 32 chapters broken into six parts:

Part 1: The Birth of Jesus

Part 2: The Beatitudes

Part 3: The Lord’s Prayer

Part 4: Dramatic Actions of Jesus

Part 5: Jesus and Women

Part 6: Parables of Jesus

Bailey is not without his critics. Some are critical that he uses Arabic and Syriac translations of scripture in his analysis that are centuries older than the earlier, more reliable texts known to us. Furthermore, he brings Arabic Christian scholars into his analysis that lived in the tenth century or later. I think some of this critique fails to fully appreciate his purpose in consulting these sources. He is trying to enter the Arabic-speaking mind and culture and see what assumptions and knowledge it has brought to the text that might differ from our Western traditions. These learnings aren’t determinative, but we should not dismiss these voices closer in language and culture (and time) to biblical Palestine than we are.

More than one critic of Bailey’s work has been dismissive of his literary analysis and attempts to link Jesus’ teachings with earlier thematic stories. Some question his frequent identification of chiasms throughout scripture. He finds these chiasms throughout Jesus’ teachings in the synoptic gospels, and he suspects that 1 Corinthians may be one elaborate chiasm. But to my knowledge, he does not find this device used in much else of the New Testament. What I find interesting is that my friends who live in the Middle East find Bailey very insightful, but he seems to get only a small hearing in the West. 

Personally, I find Bailey’s work fascinating and very helpful. He is trying to explore interpretive approaches that are somewhat novel. I would expect there may be some overly speculative analysis that may not stand the test of time. But the meat of what he has to say is very compelling. If you’re looking for a challenging and fresh perspective on some very familiar stories, then I would highly recommend this book. It is lengthy but written in engaging and accessible prose.

 

 

 

Comments

[David Ker]

Did he say anything about Luke 16? That shrewd manager parable is a beast.

[VanSkaamper]

IMHO, Bailey is doing--from the perspective of ancient arabic culture-- what what other scholars have been doing from the perspective of Hebraic culture and second temple Judaism...and that is restoring the Middle Eastern and Jewish context of Jesus' teaching that has been largely ignored since Christian/Jewish split centuries ago. His cultural insights are often extremely enriching and illuminating. His exposition of the story of the Prodigal is a prime example of what a good background in Middle Eastern culture can do to reveal the depth and power of Jesus' teaching. Both Bailey and the authors affiliated with the Jerusalem School should be on the reading list of anyone wanting a more accurate, less Westernized view of Jesus and his teachings.

[Bruce Reyes-Chow]

Thanks for the review. I think this would be a great book for our book group at church. I'll add it to the list. Take care!

[Rebeccat]

I love Kenneth Bailey's work, but I didn't realize that he had a new book out. I'm going to have to scrounge together some change to get it.
I think you're spot on about Bailey's critics. We seem to have a real problem in seeing the ways in which our cultural assumptions color our reading of scriptures. Often, the best way to begin to break out of that is to see what the same thing looks like from someone else's perspective. Bailey helps us to do that so well.
Thanks for the review!

[Michael W. Kruse]

David

Funny you should mention that parable. Bailey calls it the "knuckle buster of them all." I thinking of doing a two or three part post (which always means four or five) on that parable.

Van

I'm with you. Whether Bailey has got it all just right I think his voice, and those doing this kind of work, needs to be heard.

Bruce

Bailey is very readable. I think most church groups could handle him.

Rebecca

I think the purchase will be well worth it. In defense of Bailey's critics, Bailey himself admits he is being speculative in places. I think his work has mostly been more about restoring an ignored set of lenses and opening up new avenues for consideration.

[Ivy]

Michael, thank you for this review. I lived in Bethlehem for 6 1/2 years and found that much of the rural village life of friends did add a depth of meaning and understanding to scripture. Also I lived quite close to Tantur and had friends there. Blessings.

[Molly]

This looks fascinating! Thanks for the heads-up.