This coming Sunday the gospel is the parable of the Pharisee and the Tax Collector. We hear this parable differently than the first century listener. We know how the parable ends and we also know how Luke has been describing the Pharisees, thus even at the words one was a Pharisee we know how this will end. Won’t it be that the Pharisee will represent the one who trusts himself and his own righteousness rather than God and the one who judges others and holds them in contempt? But let’s consider how the first century listener might have heard this narrative.
These two parables are connected linguistically by a number of words with the Greek root –dik– = generally referring to “what is right”.
| Parable of the Persistent Widow | Parable of the Pharisee and Tax Collector |
| ek-dik-eo – render a just decision (18:3, 5)anti-dik-os – adversary (18:3)a-dik-ia – dishonest (18:6)ek-dik-esis – grant justice (18:7, 8) | dik-aios – righteousness (18:9)a-dik-os – dishonest (18:11)dik-aioo – justified (18:14) |
According to the Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Based on Semantic Domains by Louw & Nida: dikaios can mean “pertaining to being in accordance with what God requires,” and thus “righteous” by doing what God requires. Wouldn’t the first century people assume this meaning applied to the Pharisee and not to the “sinful” tax collector? Didn’t the Pharisee do what God required and the tax collector not?
dikaios also has a more secular meaning: “pertaining to being proper or right in the sense of being fully justified.” The tax collectors (and sinners of all stripes) have ways of justifying their actions – convincing themselves that what they have done is proper and right (regardless of what God or others might think).
It is likely that the first century hearers had opposite impressions of the characters. Pharisees often prayed, went to the temple, placed themselves under the Law, were exemplars of right behavior – so they certainly must be trusting God not themselves. Yes? Tax collectors were considered traitors to their fellow Jews. The collected exorbitant levies for the Romans and for their own profits. How could they do such a thing unless they despise their own people. Clearly their actions placed them outside the “chosen ones” – as if lepers to any “right believing” Jew.
However, within the gospel, Luke has already reversed the picture of Pharisees and tax collectors. Tax collectors are baptized (by John – 3:12; 7:29); one, Levi, will follow him (5:27); Jesus eats with them and is called their friend (5:29-30; 7:34); they listen to Jesus (15:1).
In contrast, Pharisees (sometimes with others), question and criticize Jesus (5:21, 30; 6:2, 7; 7:39; 11:38; 11:53; 15:2; 16:14; 17:20); they refuse John’s baptism and reject God’s gift (7:30); yet, Jesus eats with Pharisees (7:36; 11:37; 14:1), but pronounces woes on them (11:42-43).
Image credit: The Pharisee and the Publican | Tissot, 1886 | Brooklyn Museum | PD-US
Discover more from friarmusings
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
friarmusings 
Did the Pharisees reject John’s baptism? I thought John was baptizing whoever wanted it. He certainly offered baptism to his fellow Jews.
At first I wondered why this question arose with this post, but I found the passage that was probably the source for the question. That passage also had a scriptural reference – Luke 7:30, which reads: “All the people who listened, including the tax collectors, and who were baptized with the baptism of John, acknowledged the righteousness of God; but the Pharisees and scholars of the law, who were not baptized by him, rejected the plan of God for themselves.” Take a look at Luke 3, note the language and then take a look at Matthew 3 and note the language to whom it is directed. Also note Matt 3:9, then take jump over the John 8:31 and following. I think it is safe to say, the Pharisee rejected the baptismal action of John at the Jordan.