On a recent
Jude 3 Project podcast, a panelist wondered if Christ was racist, perhaps even misogynist, for how He treated the woman from Tyre—a coastal Phoenician town well-known for trade. As recorded in Matthew 15, a woman from the coastal area begs Him to exorcise demons from her daughter. He ignores her. The disciples plead with Him to send her away because she’s annoying. He finally speaks to her but denying her request: “I’ve been sent to help the lost sheep—the people of Israel.” Mark’s gospel—though not recording the cold-shoulder treatment—has Christ comment that it’s not right to take food from the children’s plates and feed it to the dogs. And is this where He has debased her with a racist or misogynist comment? Has Christ sinned?
 |
| Artwork by Nicole Kutil (c) 2019 |
She replies that even dogs are allowed to eat the crumbs that fall from the master’s table. With this expression of...Humility? Humiliation? Minimal expectations and hope? Christ acknowledges her great faith and relieves her daughter of the demonic torment.
Let’s try and evaluate the racist/misogynist charge with context. People from Tyre and Sidon were so astounded with Christ’s power that they traveled to Galilee to see Him—along with many others from other regions. It seems He did not shun them within His own home region. But when He travels to the Phoenician territory, He seems to operate with a different principle. Healing this woman’s daughter may be the only miracle recorded in along the coast. (A blind man may have been healed as recorded in Mark 7 depending on how you read the sequence of events in the verses 31-32: the miracle may have taken place in Sidon or back in Galilee or the Decapolis on the eastern shore of the Sea of Galilee.) He clearly doesn’t have a problem healing Gentiles. He healed this blind man. He healed the Gentile possessed by the demon(s) known as Legion.
Tyre at the time of King David and King Solomon was an ally (“a loyal friend” in the form of King Hiram). The relationship may have soured a bit when Solomon gave Hiram control over 20 towns in Galilee that Hiram called worthless and the area became known as Cabul/Kabul (
kebel sterile). In a Psalm written by a clan of Levitical (priestly) gatekeepers, Egypt and Babylon and Tyre/Sidon are considered citizens of Jerusalem (Ps. 87). The Phoenicians were considered brethren (Amos 1.9). Later in the rebuilding of Jerusalem—after a concurrent 70-year period of divine discipline? (Is. 23; Jer. 47)— merchants from the coastal cities violated a commandment but obeyed the rebuke from Nehemiah and stopped selling on the Sabbath. Destruction or loss of autonomy came because they broke the treaty of brotherhood, were unfriendly towards Jerusalem and allied closely with Philistia (Amos 1; Jer. 47; Ezek. 26-28). Yet the Lord promised restoration. In Christ’s time, could the Phoenicians also be considered lost sheep? A part of the people of Israel? Or, at worst, a mongrel dog allowed to wander into the household (
oikos, koinania) and share the scraps? Because of the souring of attitude by Hiram, the later disregard and traitorous alliance with Philistia, Tyre and Sidon lost their family status. Christ was called to reach out to the Gentiles also; He charged His disciples with the same mission after His ascension.
My guess is that Christ’s initial reluctance to offer the Phoenician woman help was not because it didn’t fit His mission—He was traveling through the area—nor that she wasn’t worthy because of her race, ethnicity or sex. (Also remember He was very welcoming of the Samaritan woman, whose heritage was one of directly rejecting the some of the teachings of Moses.) His reluctance was a test of faith. Did she want to be part of the household of God’s people or remain in the alliance opposed to Him and only desired a tidbit of divine assistance without committing to anything further?
And that is the question for all of us today. Are we with Him or against Him?
